Climate Change Deniers are Almost Extinct

[CrusaderFrank]

Let's get back to the point Frank is trying so hard to evade, which is that he and his crank denialist buddies are considered outright laughingstocks over most of planet earth, and are doing their Custer's Last Stand thing here in the USA.

Why is it that nearly every denialist is a right-wing nutball who constantly spouts retarded right-wing conspiracy theories on every topic imaginable? Why, it's because denialism is purely a right-wing political cult. In direct contrast, AGW scientists come from all facets of the political spectrum. And they don't spout deranged conspiracy theories, being they can simply point to the data.

Here's you

blah blah blah isolated weather event blah blah man made global warming blah blah blah blah
experiment? we have models! we don't need no stinking experiment blah blah denier!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Mild early September day here in NY, leaves already starting to turn, the hummingbirds probably headed back south today. Last year the hummingbirds didn't leave until the week of Sept 14 ....and I can only assume that AGW played some diabolical part in the unprecedented yellowing of the leaves this early, the mild weather and the hummingbird fleeing in terror at the approach of AGW!

One day, you Warmers are going to get booted to the curb at every real college and University on the planet.

You'll always have East Anglia

LOLOLOLOLOL......oh CrazyFruitcake, you are soooo funny.....bird migration timing is indeed changing due to global warming but once again you've managed to get it ass backwards.

You deluded denier cultists have already been kicked to the curb by every University, Scientific Society, National Academies of Science or other climate research organization on Earth.

But you'll always have Rush Limpdick.

Meanwhile, here's the facts.

Climate Change, Increasing Temperatures Alter Bird Migration Patterns
ScienceDaily
Feb. 23, 2012
(excerpts)
Birds in eastern North America are picking up the pace along their yearly migratory paths. The reason, according to University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill researchers, is rising temperatures due to climate change. Using migration information collected in eBird, a citizen science program database containing 10 years' worth of observations from amateur birdwatchers, assistant professor of biology Allen Hurlbert, Ph.D., and his team in the UNC College of Arts and Sciences analyzed when 18 different species of birds arrived at various points across their migration journeys. Since 2002, eBird has collected more than 48 million bird observations from roughly 35,000 contributors. The study results were published in the journal PLoS ONE on Feb. 22.

Hurlbert's team focused on bird species that occur over the entire breadth of the eastern U.S. By reviewing the recorded temperatures and the exact dates on which bird watchers first noticed certain species in their areas, the researchers determined how closely bird migration tracks year-to-year variation in temperature. On average, each species reached various stopping points 0.8 days earlier per degree Celsius of temperature increase. Some species' schedules accelerated by as much as three to six days for each rising degree. To date, the Northeast has experienced more relative warming than the Southeast.


Climate Adaptation Difficult for Europe's Birds
ScienceDaily
Jan. 17, 2012
(excerpts)
For the past 20 years, the climate in Europe has been getting warmer. Species of bird and butterfly which thrive in cool temperatures therefore need to move further north. However, they have difficulty adapting to the warmer climate quickly enough, as shown by new research published in the journal Nature Climate Change. Åke Lindström is Professor of Animal Ecology at Lund University, Sweden. Together with other European researchers he has looked at 20 years' worth of data on birds, butterflies and summer temperatures. During this period, Europe has become warmer and set temperatures have shifted northwards by 250 km. Bird and butterfly communities have not moved at the same rate. "Both butterflies and birds respond to climate change, but not fast enough to keep up with an increasingly warm climate. We don't know what the long-term ecological effects of this will be," says Åke Lindström.


Global Warming and Birds
The Audubon Society

It's warmer? wtf? really? It was cooler today, but I will let you know if the Hummingbirds read your report that AGW is making it warmer and had they stay longer

 

[mamooth]

Here's you

blah blah blah isolated weather event blah blah man made global warming blah blah blah blah
experiment? we have models! we don't need no stinking experiment blah blah denier!

I've never said anything resembling such things. Frank, you're just a liar.

I thank Frank for that example of how dishonesty is another trait that most in the denialist cult share, and another reason that the denialist cult is held in such contempt by most of the planet.

 

[Old Rocks]

Warmists will just make their affected areas ever smaller.

The Antarctic ice is melting. It's not. So it's the East Antarctic ice is growing, but it's melting in the West. Soon it will be "See this little ice berg here, it's melting."

Antarctic ice melts every year. It melts so much that it all but disappears. This is another perfectly normal occurrence that the warmist cult points to as evidence of warming.

Is Antarctica losing or gaining ice?

In glaciology and particularly with respect to Antarctic ice, not all things are created equal. Let us consider the following differences. Antarctic land ice is the ice which has accumulated over thousands of years on the Antarctica landmass itself through snowfall. This land ice therefore is actually stored ocean water that once fell as precipitation. Sea ice in Antarctica is quite different as it is generally considered to be ice which forms in salt water primarily during the winter months.

In Antarctica, sea ice grows quite extensively during winter but nearly completely melts away during the summer (Figure 1). That is where the important difference between antarctic and arctic sea ice exists. Arctic sea ice lasts all the year round, there are increases during the winter months and decreases during the summer months but an ice cover does in fact remain in the North which includes quite a bit of ice from previous years (Figure 1). Essentially Arctic sea ice is more important for the earth's energy balance because when it melts, more sunlight is absorbed by the oceans whereas Antarctic sea ice normally melts each summer leaving the earth's energy balance largely unchanged.[/QUOTE]

Very good. So, we are seeing a very significant change in the Earth's energy budget as the Arctic Sea Ice is on schedule to be nearly gone in September by 2015.

However, the melt of the Continental Antarctic ice is far more important to the sea level than is the Arctic Sea ice. Because the ice in the Arctic sea does not raise the level, whereas the melt of the Antarctic Continetal ice does.

Antarctic ice-sheet loss driven by basal melting of ice shelves : Nature : Nature Publishing Group

Antarctic ice-sheet loss driven by basal melting of ice shelves
H. D. Pritchard,
S. R. M. Ligtenberg,
H. A. Fricker,
D. G. Vaughan,
M. R. van den Broeke
& L. Padman
Affiliations
Contributions
Corresponding author
Nature 484,502–505(26 April 2012)doi:10.1038/nature10968Received 06 October 2011 Accepted 17 February 2012 Published online 25 April 2012


Accurate prediction of global sea-level rise requires that we understand the cause of recent, widespread and intensifying1, 2 glacier acceleration along Antarctic ice-sheet coastal margins3. Atmospheric and oceanic forcing have the potential to reduce the thickness and extent of floating ice shelves, potentially limiting their ability to buttress the flow of grounded tributary glaciers4. Indeed, recent ice-shelf collapse led to retreat and acceleration of several glaciers on the Antarctic Peninsula5. But the extent and magnitude of ice-shelf thickness change, the underlying causes of such change, and its link to glacier flow rate are so poorly understood that its future impact on the ice sheets cannot yet be predicted3. Here we use satellite laser altimetry and modelling of the surface firn layer to reveal the circum-Antarctic pattern of ice-shelf thinning through increased basal melt. We deduce that this increased melt is the primary control of Antarctic ice-sheet loss, through a reduction in buttressing of the adjacent ice sheet leading to accelerated glacier flow2. The highest thinning rates occur where warm water at depth can access thick ice shelves via submarine troughs crossing the continental shelf. Wind forcing could explain the dominant patterns of both basal melting and the surface melting and collapse of Antarctic ice shelves, through ocean upwelling in the Amundsen6 and Bellingshausen7 seas, and atmospheric warming on the Antarctic Peninsula8. This implies that climate forcing through changing winds influences Antarctic ice-sheet mass balance, and hence global sea level, on annual to decadal timescales

 

[westwall]

Warmists will just make their affected areas ever smaller.

The Antarctic ice is melting. It's not. So it's the East Antarctic ice is growing, but it's melting in the West. Soon it will be "See this little ice berg here, it's melting."

Antarctic ice melts every year. It melts so much that it all but disappears. This is another perfectly normal occurrence that the warmist cult points to as evidence of warming.

Is Antarctica losing or gaining ice?

In glaciology and particularly with respect to Antarctic ice, not all things are created equal. Let us consider the following differences. Antarctic land ice is the ice which has accumulated over thousands of years on the Antarctica landmass itself through snowfall. This land ice therefore is actually stored ocean water that once fell as precipitation. Sea ice in Antarctica is quite different as it is generally considered to be ice which forms in salt water primarily during the winter months.

In Antarctica, sea ice grows quite extensively during winter but nearly completely melts away during the summer (Figure 1). That is where the important difference between antarctic and arctic sea ice exists. Arctic sea ice lasts all the year round, there are increases during the winter months and decreases during the summer months but an ice cover does in fact remain in the North which includes quite a bit of ice from previous years (Figure 1). Essentially Arctic sea ice is more important for the earth's energy balance because when it melts, more sunlight is absorbed by the oceans whereas Antarctic sea ice normally melts each summer leaving the earth's energy balance largely unchanged.[/QUOTE]

Very good. So, we are seeing a very significant change in the Earth's energy budget as the Arctic Sea Ice is on schedule to be nearly gone in September by 2015.

However, the melt of the Continental Antarctic ice is far more important to the sea level than is the Arctic Sea ice. Because the ice in the Arctic sea does not raise the level, whereas the melt of the Antarctic Continetal ice does.

Antarctic ice-sheet loss driven by basal melting of ice shelves : Nature : Nature Publishing Group

Antarctic ice-sheet loss driven by basal melting of ice shelves
H. D. Pritchard,
S. R. M. Ligtenberg,
H. A. Fricker,
D. G. Vaughan,
M. R. van den Broeke
& L. Padman
Affiliations
Contributions
Corresponding author
Nature 484,502–505(26 April 2012)doi:10.1038/nature10968Received 06 October 2011 Accepted 17 February 2012 Published online 25 April 2012


Accurate prediction of global sea-level rise requires that we understand the cause of recent, widespread and intensifying1, 2 glacier acceleration along Antarctic ice-sheet coastal margins3. Atmospheric and oceanic forcing have the potential to reduce the thickness and extent of floating ice shelves, potentially limiting their ability to buttress the flow of grounded tributary glaciers4. Indeed, recent ice-shelf collapse led to retreat and acceleration of several glaciers on the Antarctic Peninsula5. But the extent and magnitude of ice-shelf thickness change, the underlying causes of such change, and its link to glacier flow rate are so poorly understood that its future impact on the ice sheets cannot yet be predicted3. Here we use satellite laser altimetry and modelling of the surface firn layer to reveal the circum-Antarctic pattern of ice-shelf thinning through increased basal melt. We deduce that this increased melt is the primary control of Antarctic ice-sheet loss, through a reduction in buttressing of the adjacent ice sheet leading to accelerated glacier flow2. The highest thinning rates occur where warm water at depth can access thick ice shelves via submarine troughs crossing the continental shelf. Wind forcing could explain the dominant patterns of both basal melting and the surface melting and collapse of Antarctic ice shelves, through ocean upwelling in the Amundsen6 and Bellingshausen7 seas, and atmospheric warming on the Antarctic Peninsula8. This implies that climate forcing through changing winds influences Antarctic ice-sheet mass balance, and hence global sea level, on annual to decadal timescales

The green and the blue are actually refreshing to see in a AGW paper, I wonder if you understand what they mean. However the red highlights demonstrate yet again the fundamental lack of on the ground research that led them astray in the first place. Remote Sensing is very useful if used correctly. However, the poor performance of every model they have ever created should give any person pause.

 

[RollingThunder]

Warmists will just make their affected areas ever smaller.

The Antarctic ice is melting. It's not. So it's the East Antarctic ice is growing, but it's melting in the West. Soon it will be "See this little ice berg here, it's melting."

Antarctic ice melts every year. It melts so much that it all but disappears. This is another perfectly normal occurrence that the warmist cult points to as evidence of warming.

Is Antarctica losing or gaining ice?

In glaciology and particularly with respect to Antarctic ice, not all things are created equal. Let us consider the following differences. Antarctic land ice is the ice which has accumulated over thousands of years on the Antarctica landmass itself through snowfall. This land ice therefore is actually stored ocean water that once fell as precipitation. Sea ice in Antarctica is quite different as it is generally considered to be ice which forms in salt water primarily during the winter months.

In Antarctica, sea ice grows quite extensively during winter but nearly completely melts away during the summer (Figure 1). That is where the important difference between antarctic and arctic sea ice exists. Arctic sea ice lasts all the year round, there are increases during the winter months and decreases during the summer months but an ice cover does in fact remain in the North which includes quite a bit of ice from previous years (Figure 1). Essentially Arctic sea ice is more important for the earth's energy balance because when it melts, more sunlight is absorbed by the oceans whereas Antarctic sea ice normally melts each summer leaving the earth's energy balance largely unchanged.

Very good. So, we are seeing a very significant change in the Earth's energy budget as the Arctic Sea Ice is on schedule to be nearly gone in September by 2015.

However, the melt of the Continental Antarctic ice is far more important to the sea level than is the Arctic Sea ice. Because the ice in the Arctic sea does not raise the level, whereas the melt of the Antarctic Continetal ice does.

Antarctic ice-sheet loss driven by basal melting of ice shelves : Nature : Nature Publishing Group

Antarctic ice-sheet loss driven by basal melting of ice shelves
H. D. Pritchard,
S. R. M. Ligtenberg,
H. A. Fricker,
D. G. Vaughan,
M. R. van den Broeke
& L. Padman
Affiliations
Contributions
Corresponding author
Nature 484,502–505(26 April 2012)doi:10.1038/nature10968Received 06 October 2011 Accepted 17 February 2012 Published online 25 April 2012


Accurate prediction of global sea-level rise requires that we understand the cause of recent, widespread and intensifying1, 2 glacier acceleration along Antarctic ice-sheet coastal margins3. Atmospheric and oceanic forcing have the potential to reduce the thickness and extent of floating ice shelves, potentially limiting their ability to buttress the flow of grounded tributary glaciers4. Indeed, recent ice-shelf collapse led to retreat and acceleration of several glaciers on the Antarctic Peninsula5. But the extent and magnitude of ice-shelf thickness change, the underlying causes of such change, and its link to glacier flow rate are so poorly understood that its future impact on the ice sheets cannot yet be predicted3. Here we use satellite laser altimetry and modelling of the surface firn layer to reveal the circum-Antarctic pattern of ice-shelf thinning through increased basal melt. We deduce that this increased melt is the primary control of Antarctic ice-sheet loss, through a reduction in buttressing of the adjacent ice sheet leading to accelerated glacier flow2. The highest thinning rates occur where warm water at depth can access thick ice shelves via submarine troughs crossing the continental shelf. Wind forcing could explain the dominant patterns of both basal melting and the surface melting and collapse of Antarctic ice shelves, through ocean upwelling in the Amundsen6 and Bellingshausen7 seas, and atmospheric warming on the Antarctic Peninsula8. This implies that climate forcing through changing winds influences Antarctic ice-sheet mass balance, and hence global sea level, on annual to decadal timescales

The green and the blue are actually refreshing to see in a AGW paper, I wonder if you understand what they mean. However the red highlights demonstrate yet again the fundamental lack of on the ground research that led them astray in the first place. Remote Sensing is very useful if used correctly. However, the poor performance of every model they have ever created should give any person pause.

Oh walleyed, you old deluded retard you, when a scientist makes deductions based on the evidence and data, that does not in any way imply a "fundamental lack of on the ground research". Once again, your post is nothing but your own delusions.

"Poor performance of every model"....LOLOLOLOLOL.....I see you're still wedded to that debunked denier cult myth that you like so much....it's really a shame you're such an imbecile.

Are the Models Untestable?
(excerpts)
Some global warming deniers assert that the global climate models (GCMs) used to analyze and predict climate change can be ignored because they are "untestable" or "have no predictive ability." Are the models, in fact, untestable? Are they unable to make valid predictions? Let's review the record. Global Climate Models have successfully predicted:

* That the globe would warm, and about how fast, and about how much.
* That the troposphere would warm and the stratosphere would cool.
* That nighttime temperatures would increase more than daytime temperatures.
* That winter temperatures would increase more than summer temperatures.
* Polar amplification (greater temperature increase as you move toward the poles).
* That the Arctic would warm faster than the Antarctic.
* The magnitude (0.3 K) and duration (two years) of the cooling from the Mt. Pinatubo eruption.
* They made a retrodiction for Last Glacial Maximum sea surface temperatures which was inconsistent with the paleo evidence, and better paleo evidence showed the models were right.
* They predicted a trend significantly different and differently signed from UAH satellite temperatures, and then a bug was found in the satellite data.
* The amount of water vapor feedback due to ENSO.
* The response of southern ocean winds to the ozone hole.
* The expansion of the Hadley cells.
* The poleward movement of storm tracks.
* The rising of the tropopause and the effective radiating altitude.
* The clear sky super greenhouse effect from increased water vapor in the tropics.
* The near constancy of relative humidity on global average.
* That coastal upwelling of ocean water would increase.​

Seventeen correct predictions? Looks like a pretty good track record to me.

Lots of people have asked me to document both the predictions and the confirmations. Here they are in a couple of tables. Read 'em and weep, Rush.

References for Predictions and Confirming Observations​

***

 

[Old Rocks]

Excellent source. Not that Walleyes will ever admit that his nonsense is just that. The melt this year in the Arctic has pretty well shown that the people like Walleyes and Flatulance haven't a leg to stand on. Both predicting cooling and more ice. Now we have another step in the death spiral of the summer arctic ice.