Arctic Sea Ice Loss not caused by CO2 and Global Warming

[elektra]

I must give thanks where thanks is do before I get into the guts of this.
First I must thank mattpew's error in linking to the Alarmist headline of a Washington Post propagandist opinion piece based on the hard work of others.

Scientists are floored by what’s happening in the Arctic right now

Then of course there is maMOOT, who always posts, moot points, which challenged me to dig further. So I followed the link in the Washington Post story to the what the propaganda was based on,

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis | Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag

An honorable mention goes to Old Crock, who is always a hypocrite demanding of others what he does not provide, always projecting, calling others what Old Crock is, that is a Liar. Old Crock reminds me to always follow the links the Alarmist gives because the links and Science always prove the Global Warming Alarmist wrong.

This brings me to the reference at the end of the press announcement of the Science, which the Washington Post propagandist piece mis-represents.

References
Yeager, S. G., A. R. Karspeck, and G. Danabasoglu. 2015. Predicted slowdown in the rate of Atlantic sea ice loss. Geophysical Research Letters, 42, 10,704–10,713, doi:10.1002/2015GL065364.

As you can see the propaganda that mattpew used in his thread does not resemble the reference material above.

There is much in the actual material I am linking to, there are others here who are much better than I at taking this stuff further into the technical end, I will not pretend to be the expert in that department.

I am simply good at Analyzing what is presented and using common sense to see through the obfuscation of the Global Warming Alarmists.

The last thing I find at the very bottom of all this:

The researchers analyzed simulations from the Community Earth System Model, modeling both atmosphere and ocean circulation. They found that decadal-scale trends in Arctic winter sea ice extent are largely explained by changes in ocean circulation rather than by large-scale external factors like anthropogenic warming.

 

[gipper]

Don't be to hard on lil Mattie, he is just your typical nonthinking progressive. He can't help but accept the propaganda of the left.

This story is a good example of how easy it is for the elite left and their media to dupe the easily duped....like lil Mattie.

 

[Old Rocks]

Polar Sea Ice Cap and Snow - Cryosphere Today

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis | Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag

Arctic sea ice reaches record low after record hot January

My goodness. Record warm year in 2014, even warmer in 2015, and January, 2016 absolutely going off the charts, but that cannot have anything to do with the ice in the Arctic being at record low levels. No, absolutely not. Even though the air temperatures in the Arctic have been at record highs for the whole of the winter, just cannot have anything to do with the low extant of the Arctic Ice. LOL

 

[elektra]

Polar Sea Ice Cap and Snow - Cryosphere Today

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis | Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag

Arctic sea ice reaches record low after record hot January

My goodness. Record warm year in 2014, even warmer in 2015, and January, 2016 absolutely going off the charts, but that cannot have anything to do with the ice in the Arctic being at record low levels. No, absolutely not. Even though the air temperatures in the Arctic have been at record highs for the whole of the winter, just cannot have anything to do with the low extant of the Arctic Ice. LOL

Thank you Old Crock, for not reading again, the link you post, my link that the OP is based on concludes and explains that man does not cause the Sea Ice to melt.

These scientists, post what they find, and they found a month, that fits into confirms their conclusions, that the decade long trend is more sea ice and no influence of CO2.

The researchers analyzed simulations from the Community Earth System Model, modeling both atmosphere and ocean circulation. They found that decadal-scale trends in Arctic winter sea ice extent are largely explained by changes in ocean circulation rather than by large-scale external factors like anthropogenic warming.

 

[IanC]

CO2 has increased by mankind's burning of fossil fuels, cement making, etc.

A known physical process exists that states CO2 causes surface warming by retarding energy loss via radiation.

THIS IS THE SKEPTIC'S POSITION!

The amount of extra warming from increased CO2 is highly debatable. It could be next to nothing, it could be a lot.

The warmers claim that because CO2 makes some difference, no matter how big or small, then it is responsible for all change. This is where skeptics disagree.

Ice started melting long before mankind raised CO2. How much has the few extra tenths of a degree from CO2 increased the already present ice melting? Very difficult to quantify. But CO2 is not the only known or unknown factor.

If (a big if) Greenland and Antarctic ice shelves are going to collapse it was set in motion by events that led to the end of the last Ice Age, not the exhaust from your SUV.

The warmers have been wrong in all of their doomsday predictions. It's almost as if they WANT disaster. Reality has shown their forecasts to be wrong at every turn. We need a complete and more realistic version of CO2 theory.

 

[elektra]

CO2, which if you concentrate enough of it, we call it dry ice, is said to radiate heat, trap heat, raise the temperature of the earth. But there is zero evidence of C02 working in this manner. Do we use this claimed property of co2 anywhere? In science? In physics? In industry? In commercial applications?

No, but one physical properrty of co2 that we use, is the property to keep stuff cold, longer.

Dry Ice is pure co2.

 

[IanC]

CO2, which if you concentrate enough of it, we call it dry ice, is said to radiate heat, trap heat, raise the temperature of the earth. But there is zero evidence of C02 working in this manner. Do we use this claimed property of co2 anywhere? In science? In physics? In industry? In commercial applications?

No, but one physical properrty of co2 that we use, is the property to keep stuff cold, longer.

Dry Ice is pure co2.

CO2 absorbs certain bands of IR and stops them from escaping to space at the speed of light. There is no question about this. These bands are quenched in the first ten meters and added to the energy cohort of the atmosphere. The next step is how the warmer atmosphere returns energy to the surface by blackbody radiation. Without this mechanism the surface would be too cold for life as we know it. Of course H2O is the dominant GHG but CO2 stll plays a large part. There are a myriad of pathways for the energy to disperse and eventually leave. The warmists pick one pathway to concentrate on and make predictions that are not seen in reality. The Earth has existed with many different sets of conditions and never gone out of control. We won't this time either.

 

[elektra]

CO2, which if you concentrate enough of it, we call it dry ice, is said to radiate heat, trap heat, raise the temperature of the earth. But there is zero evidence of C02 working in this manner. Do we use this claimed property of co2 anywhere? In science? In physics? In industry? In commercial applications?

No, but one physical properrty of co2 that we use, is the property to keep stuff cold, longer.

Dry Ice is pure co2.

CO2 absorbs certain bands of IR and stops them from escaping to space at the speed of light. There is no question about this. These bands are quenched in the first ten meters and added to the energy cohort of the atmosphere. The next step is how the warmer atmosphere returns energy to the surface by blackbody radiation. Without this mechanism the surface would be too cold for life as we know it. Of course H2O is the dominant GHG but CO2 stll plays a large part. There are a myriad of pathways for the energy to disperse and eventually leave. The warmists pick one pathway to concentrate on and make predictions that are not seen in reality. The Earth has existed with many different sets of conditions and never gone out of control. We won't this time either.

If co2 were a mile long, you would travel 100,000 miles without seeing one? I know the theory, but it is hardly plausible.

Does co2 have a bond, an attraction to another co2 molecule at such a long distance? If so it would be some super-powerful molecule. If co2 attracted like molecules, if co2 had cohesion with other co2 molecules, they would concentrate, be found at in great concentrations here, not so much there.

I know it makes up a tiny fraction of our atmosphere, .04%. To claim that little contributes even a bit is far fetched.

Either way, I know of know test instrument measuring the IR absorbed in a co2 molecule in the atmosphere. It is a nice theory, but in reality it is a theory.

 

[Billy_Bob]

CO2 has increased by mankind's burning of fossil fuels, cement making, etc.

A known physical process exists that states CO2 causes surface warming by retarding energy loss via radiation.

THIS IS THE SKEPTIC'S POSITION!

The amount of extra warming from increased CO2 is highly debatable. It could be next to nothing, it could be a lot.

The warmers claim that because CO2 makes some difference, no matter how big or small, then it is responsible for all change. This is where skeptics disagree.

Ice started melting long before mankind raised CO2. How much has the few extra tenths of a degree from CO2 increased the already present ice melting? Very difficult to quantify. But CO2 is not the only known or unknown factor.

If (a big if) Greenland and Antarctic ice shelves are going to collapse it was set in motion by events that led to the end of the last Ice Age, not the exhaust from your SUV.

The warmers have been wrong in all of their doomsday predictions. It's almost as if they WANT disaster. Reality has shown their forecasts to be wrong at every turn. We need a complete and more realistic version of CO2 theory.

The fact that alarmists will not even look into water vapor and heat escape via convection should speak volumes..
Sadly reality is about to hit them in the chops real hard in very near future according to several new models. Even ERSL has the cooling happening very quickly and this year despite CO2 levels.

 

[Crick]

The fact that alarmists will not even look into water vapor and heat escape via convection should speak volumes..

Where the fuck did you get that stupid idea?

 

[flacaltenn]

Moderation Note:

Member contacted for modifications to the OP.
Will update the thread and re-post..