Global Warmers Stopped by Arctic Ice

[SSDD]

Does anyone out there have Arctic ice mass data that refutes PIOMAS? Extents data that refutes NSIDC?

The question was....what do you suppose the arctic ice looked like during the previous warm periods? Can't bring yourself to answer?

 

[Crick]

Here's some interesting discussion from Judith Curry. Historic Variations in Arctic sea ice. Part II: 1920-1950 Among a number of other things, it basically states that the ice extents data prior to the satellite record is shite.

Actually that's not what they say at all. Color me unsurprised that you lie about it.

And you posting April's data as yesterday's. Now THAT'S getting caught.

Ass.

 

[SSDD]

Here's some interesting discussion from Judith Curry. Historic Variations in Arctic sea ice. Part II: 1920-1950 Among a number of other things, it basically states that the ice extents data prior to the satellite record is shite.

Actually that's not what they say at all. Color me unsurprised that you lie about it.

And you posting April's data as yesterday's. Now THAT'S getting caught.

Ass.

Are you claiming that an ice free arctic is unprecedented?.....Now THAT'S just stupid.

Ass.

 

[jc456]

Besides which, you're in the wrong thread. This one concerns ice in the Arctic.

which reminds us that the FRAUD uses CHERRY PICKING, because Antarctic ice and sea ice are both GROWING....
which leads to the following question...
If Co2 is melting Arctic sea ice, why is Antarctic sea ice growing???

The classic explanation, given by Hansen back in 1980, was that increased global temperatures would increase global humidity and thus precipitation. Antartica, still a great long ways from melting in its interior, would collect that precipitation as snow. That increases the drive pushing glaciers off the coast. The simultaneous breakup of major ice sheets (Pine Island, Thwaites, Larson A and B, etc) thinned by upwelling warm water uncorked several massive glaciers whose flow rate increased roughly five-fold. That increased the supply of ice to the sheets and they expanded.

Now, THIS thread concerns ice in the Arctic, as I think I already told you. If you have some comment about THAT ice, do carry on.

This was yesterday. Looks like it's just a little bit below the 20 year average. Huh. It was supposed to be long gone by now....

so where did that ship go?

 

[LaDexter]

The classic explanation, given by Hansen back in 1980, was that increased global temperatures would increase global humidity and thus precipitation. Antartica, still a great long ways from melting in its interior, would collect that precipitation as snow. That increases the drive pushing glaciers off the coast. The simultaneous breakup of major ice sheets (Pine Island, Thwaites, Larson A and B, etc) thinned by upwelling warm water uncorked several massive glaciers whose flow rate increased roughly five-fold. That increased the supply of ice to the sheets and they expanded.

Now, THIS thread concerns ice in the Arctic, as I think I already told you. If you have some comment about THAT ice, do carry on.

Arctic Sea Ice is melting "because of" CO2.

Antarctic Sea Ice is GROWING "because" Crick is a hypocritical, cherry picking, fudgebaking, taxpayer funded left wing liar

 

[Crick]

Arctic sea ice is melting because the Arctic is getting dramatically warmer.

I agree with you that Antarctic sea ice extents have expanded for the last several years. However, you need to clarify what you're talking about. Zwally's work did NOT concern sea ice. His conclusions regarded the MASS OF ICE ON THE ANTARCTIC CONTINENT.

Now I'll let you step back and see if you've said what you intended to say.

 

[Crick]

 

[LaDexter]

Arctic sea ice is melting because the Arctic is getting dramatically warmer.

No, the Arctic is "warming" in the Arctic Ocean because the Arctic Ocean is growing, and has a live fault in Gakkel Ridge that throws off magma/lava/hot gasses periodically. Greenland is not warming, nope, just the opposite...


As for Antarctica, you can post all the colored fudge charts you want.... it grows every year, has for tens of millions of years...

 

[mamooth]

so where did that ship go?

About a day from passing Wrangel Island. Maybe 4 days from the international date line and Alaskan waters.

http://polarocean.co.uk/tracking/

You could have looked at that yourself, you know. It's not like the link hasn't been posted several times.

When they get to Alaska, they'll stop in Barrow to refuel. There's a tongue of scattered ice down near Barrow that may slow them down, but they'll get through it. From there, it's ice-free the rest of the way.

 

[jc456]

so where did that ship go?

About a day from passing Wrangel Island. Maybe 4 days from the international date line and Alaskan waters.

http://polarocean.co.uk/tracking/

You could have looked at that yourself, you know. It's not like the link hasn't been posted several times.

When they get to Alaska, they'll stop in Barrow to refuel. There's a tongue of scattered ice down near Barrow that may slow them down, but they'll get through it. From there, it's ice-free the rest of the way.

except for when it won't be right?

 

[Weatherman2020]

Arctic sea ice is melting because the Arctic is getting dramatically warmer.

I agree with you that Antarctic sea ice extents have expanded for the last several years. However, you need to clarify what you're talking about. Zwally's work did NOT concern sea ice. His conclusions regarded the MASS OF ICE ON THE ANTARCTIC CONTINENT.

Now I'll let you step back and see if you've said what you intended to say.

Call me when crocodiles and palm trees return to Alaska.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Great news. Millions will be saved since most weather related deaths are due to cold.

 

[SSDD]

You know that makes no sense correct? You have to have a reason to back up your personal opinions and bias. Now on the other hand, for you to discredit 97% of the scientific community based on your beliefs, which you have little to no factual backing, that... that isn't a fallacy, it's just a bad opinion.

Can you show us a single bit of observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence that supports the anthropogenic component of the AGW hypothesis....the answer is no...you can not...and why?....because none exists....now the question a thinking person asks is....if there is no observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence that supports the claim that mankind is altering the global climate with his CO2 emissions, upon what is that claimed 97% consensus based?....tell me...other than a veritable mountain of incontrovertible evidence...what else might bring about consensus among a group of naturally adversarial individuals?...and the answer to that is obvious....a big old bucket full of money....but if you don't believe it is money, what else might bring about the claimed consensus?...because it damned sure isn't the observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence that supports the hypothesis.

 

[SSDD]

How about you make your case, instead of asking people to look up the stuff you think will make your case?

The case isn't ours to make...it is you and yours claiming imminent disaster...and you have no actual evidence to back it up...if you are going to claim that disaster is on its way...and want trillions of dollars to try to avert it, and you want the world to alter the global economy, then you better be able to make a damned good case and present a veritable mountain of incontrovertible observed, measured, quantified, empirical data to support your claims...thus far, there doesn't exist the first bit of such evidence...

 

[Crick]

Arctic sea ice is melting because the Arctic is getting dramatically warmer.

No, the Arctic is "warming" in the Arctic Ocean because the Arctic Ocean is growing, and has a live fault in Gakkel Ridge that throws off magma/lava/hot gasses periodically. Greenland is not warming, nope, just the opposite...

As for Antarctica, you can post all the colored fudge charts you want.... it grows every year, has for tens of millions of years...

Gakkel Ridge? Bullshit. There's no such place. You just made that up, just like you make everything up. 100% shit.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Arctic sea ice is melting because the Arctic is getting dramatically warmer.

No, the Arctic is "warming" in the Arctic Ocean because the Arctic Ocean is growing, and has a live fault in Gakkel Ridge that throws off magma/lava/hot gasses periodically. Greenland is not warming, nope, just the opposite...

As for Antarctica, you can post all the colored fudge charts you want.... it grows every year, has for tens of millions of years...

Gakkel Ridge? Bullshit. There's no such place. You just made that up, just like you make everything up. 100% shit.

Gakkel Ridge - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There's a wiki page about Gakkel Ridge.

"The Gakkel Ridge (formerly known as the Nansen Cordillera and Arctic Mid-Ocean Ridge)"

 

[Crick]

It's all made up shite. There is no Gakkel Ridge. LaDexter just needed something to blame the warming on and he made it up. Now you're just parroting this nonsense. You need to learn to know when people are making shit up.

 

[SSDD]

It's all made up shite. There is no Gakkel Ridge. LaDexter just needed something to blame the warming on and he made it up. Now you're just parroting this nonsense. You need to learn to know when people are making shit up.

Is there no limit to your stupidity...

Gakkel Ridge: Expert Q&A — NOVA | PBS
Mystery of the Gakkel Ridge — NOVA | PBS
Dive and Discover : Expedition 11 : The Gakkel Ridge : Home
Global Volcanism Program | East Gakkel Ridge at 85°E
Polar Discovery :: Expedition 2: Arctic Seafloor
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7199/full/nature07075.html
Arctic News: M4.5 Earthquake hits Gakkel Ridge

And you just need to learn something.

 

[SSDD]

I went to university, I understand what it is to sit down and write something making your case.

You clearly didn't learn critical thinking skills at "university" if in fact you went.

My case is that there is no observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence supporting the claim that man is altering the global climate with his emissions of so called greenhouse gasses....since there is no such evidence in existence, exactly what do you suppose that I should write...beyond the fact that no such evidence exists?...and if I am to be proven wrong, then someone has to step up with such evidence.

You warmers, on the other hand claim that we are altering the climate in a dangerous way...and great sums of money must be put to the prevention of this dangerous climate change...and that we need to change the very way we live...the case is all yours to make....first off, you would need to produce some observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence that man is in fact altering the global climate with his so called greenhouse gas emissions...then you would need to demonstrate in some real way what the ideal temperature for life on planet earth is and whether the manmade climate change which has yet to be demonstrated will go beyond the unknown ideal temperature for life on planet earth.

You might not have managed to get out of primary school, I don't know, seeing as your "argument" often includes attacks and insults, I doubt you got much further.

Yes, I see the irony is what I've just said too, but you piss me off.

So you switch to insult as well...but you do it from frustration at not being able to make your argument...think about how stupid your argument is for a second...what if our legal system worked by your rules of argument...I could accuse you of killing someone and then you would have to prove that you didn't do it...If the person I accused you of killing were murdered at a time when you were alone, how might you prove that you did not commit the crime? You couldn't...it would just be your word against mine and you would be off to prison.

Lucky for us...in a rational system, the person making the claim is the one who must make the case to support the claim...I am making no claim...I am simply stating that there is no observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence supporting the claim that man is altering the global climate with his so called greenhouse gas emissions...you CLAIM that there is but apparently can produce no such evidence...thus proving me right.

 

[Crick]

It's all made up shite. There is no Gakkel Ridge. LaDexter just needed something to blame the warming on and he made it up. Now you're just parroting this nonsense. You need to learn to know when people are making shit up.

Is there no limit to your stupidity...

Gakkel Ridge: Expert Q&A — NOVA | PBS
Mystery of the Gakkel Ridge — NOVA | PBS
Dive and Discover : Expedition 11 : The Gakkel Ridge : Home
Global Volcanism Program | East Gakkel Ridge at 85°E
Polar Discovery :: Expedition 2: Arctic Seafloor
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7199/full/nature07075.html
Arctic News: M4.5 Earthquake hits Gakkel Ridge

And you just need to learn something.

All lies. All made up. Ask Dex. He knows.