Holy COW! Antarctic sea ice is MASSIVE!

[westwall]

It appears the warmers claims of death to the Antarctic sea ice levels have been overblown as usual....

http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/...-smashes-record-for-antarctic-sea-ice-extent/

 

[mamooth]

But the rational side made no such claims, and predicted the Antarctic sea ice growth. So where did you get such a wild story?

For possibly the first time ever on this board, try backing up one of your fables, and point out this prediction of the end of Antarctic sea ice. Make sure you talk about seasonal sea ice, instead of switching the topic to land ice or ice shelves.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

But the rational side made no such claims, and predicted the Antarctic sea ice growth. So where did you get such a wild story?

For possibly the first time ever on this board, try backing up one of your fables, and point out this prediction of the end of Antarctic sea ice. Make sure you talk about seasonal sea ice, instead of switching the topic to land ice or ice shelves.

Oh brother.

You AGW Faithers can't really be this silly, can you?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The ice is growing.... as predicted by the AGW models

Yeah

That's the ticket

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[IanC]

But the rational side made no such claims, and predicted the Antarctic sea ice growth. So where did you get such a wild story?

For possibly the first time ever on this board, try backing up one of your fables, and point out this prediction of the end of Antarctic sea ice. Make sure you talk about seasonal sea ice, instead of switching the topic to land ice or ice shelves.

This again? Antarctic sea ice was predicted to decrease. It hasn't. Continental ice has been predicted to decrease but the evidence is equivocal at best. Every time an ice tongue breaks off it is called global warming but it has always happened. What do you think, should it grow forever?.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

The ice is growing.... as predicted by the AGW models

Yeah

That's the ticket

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Yeah. In fact, the warmer it gets, the deeper and THICKER the ice field gets. It's a PAR-A-DOX-I-CAL effect of all the warming. Yeah. Yeah. THAT'S the ticket. I was trained in this stuff by my lovely bride and GeoPhysical Scientist wife, Morgan Fairchild!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

But the rational side made no such claims, and predicted the Antarctic sea ice growth. So where did you get such a wild story?

For possibly the first time ever on this board, try backing up one of your fables, and point out this prediction of the end of Antarctic sea ice. Make sure you talk about seasonal sea ice, instead of switching the topic to land ice or ice shelves.

So the Global warming isn't global and isn't warming...and you call that rational?

LOL

 

[RollingThunder]

It appears the warmers claims of death to the Antarctic sea ice levels have been overblown as usual....

WOW! 9th Daily Record in 10 Days Smashes Record for Antarctic Sea Ice Extent | sunshine hours

LOLOLOLOLOL.....you're hilarious, walleyed.....your clueless drivel got shot down on that other thread so you start a new one with the very same meaningless drivel. Shall we go over it all again, numbnuts?

Ho, hum......

antarctic_sea_ice_extent_

Ho-hum indeed, you poor senile old fool. So what? What exactly do you imagine Antarctic sea ice extent has to do with the topic of this thread? Do you just throw up that graph every time you get stumped by the facts on any thread? The thin fringe of sea ice a couple of meters thick, around a continent covered in miles thick ice sheets, is increasing slightly in its maximum months but in its minimum months it has stayed fairly constant. Antarctic sea ice is increasing slightly now because of increased precipitation caused by increased atmospheric water content that is itself caused by global warming. As the southern ocean continues to warm, scientists expect this Antarctic sea ice to diminish. It has little bearing on global warming or global climate changes.

How does Arctic sea ice loss compare to Antarctic sea ice gain?
(excerpts)
Arctic sea ice loss is three times greater than Antarctic sea ice gain. The first point to clarify is that we are talking about floating sea ice, not to be confused with land ice. Land ice at both poles and in glaciers around the world is sliding into the ocean at an accelerating rate. This net loss of land ice is contributing to sea level rise.

Figure 1: Global sea ice extent since 1979. (Image source: Tamino. Data is from US National Snow and Ice Data Center.)

Figure 2: National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) Antarctic, Arctic, and global (sum of the two) sea ice extents with linear trends. The data is smoothed with a 12-month running average.

Sea ice grows and shrinks seasonally because polar latitudes have vastly more daylight hours in summer than in winter. When ice melts, it makes the surface less reflective and amplifies the warming (as is currently occurring in the Arctic), but this effect can only make a difference when the Sun is up. Thus the most important time of year for sea ice is its annual minimum which occurs at the end of the summer: September in the Arctic but February in the Antarctic. So how do the two compare?

Figure 3: Minimum sea ice extent since 1979 in the Arctic and Antarctic. (Image source: James Hansen. Data is from US National Snow and Ice Data Center.)

 

[mamooth]

Antarctic sea ice was predicted to increase. Vague handwaving and claims of "It's obvious!" are not evidence for claims to the contrary.

_This_ is evidence.

S. Manabe, R. J. Stouffer, M. J. Spelman and K. Bryane

A 1991 paper. See p. 795 for the prediction.
---
It is surprising, however, that the sea-ice thickness in the G integration increases significantly in the immediate vicinity of the Antarctic Continent despite the increase of atmospheric carbon dioxide.
---

So, I have a 1991 paper by one of the big names at the time specifically predicting Antarctic sea ice growth.

Denialists have ... not a single thing saying the opposite. Westwall knew about that paper, but he's making his unsupported claim again. We went through this once before. He finally ended it by moving the goalposts and demanding 3 sources from me, even though he couldn't produce one. Each time he pulls that trick (demanding ever more sources without providing any of his own), I correctly take it as his admission of surrender.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Yeah yeah.

Like I TOLD ya. It's a PARADOXICAL effect.

Why Antarctic Sea Ice Is Growing in a Warmer World

Uhm.

2010.

And only last year we were warned how the observations of MORE antarctic ice really doesn't disprove global warming (I mean MAN MADE global warming).

Record-High Antarctic Sea Ice Levels Don't Disprove Global Warming | Ice Cap Melting | LiveScience

 

[mamooth]

Sorry if planet earth keeps disagreeing with your political cult's dogma, but the world is what is it. The ice pays no heed to your political beliefs as to how it must act.

And again, kudos to the AGW scientists for correctly predicting it. That's why AGW science has such credibility, because it's been making such correct predictions for decades.

When the denialists come up with a similar record of success, they'll get similar credibility. As of now, denialists are demanding credibility for getting everything wrong for years running, and then proclaiming their victimhood when nobody regards them as credible.

 

[westwall]

But the rational side made no such claims, and predicted the Antarctic sea ice growth. So where did you get such a wild story?

For possibly the first time ever on this board, try backing up one of your fables, and point out this prediction of the end of Antarctic sea ice. Make sure you talk about seasonal sea ice, instead of switching the topic to land ice or ice shelves.

No you didn't. You guys predicted the exact opposite! Below is ONE example of THOUSANDS...

As a propagandist you are a pretty piss poor example....


"Antarctica's massive ice shelves are shrinking because they are being eaten away from below by warm water, a new study finds. That suggests future sea levels could rise faster than many scientists have been predicting.

The western chunk of Antarctica is losing seven metres of its floating ice sheet each year. Until now, scientists were not exactly sure how it was happening and whether or how man-made global warming might be a factor. The answer, according to a study published Wednesday in the journal Nature, is that climate change plays an indirect role – but one that has larger repercussions than if Antarctic ice merely were melting from warmer air."







Antarctic ice melting from below due to warming ocean - Technology & Science - CBC News

 

[westwall]

Sorry if planet earth keeps disagreeing with your political cult's dogma, but the world is what is it. The ice pays no heed to your political beliefs as to how it must act.

And again, kudos to the AGW scientists for correctly predicting it. That's why AGW science has such credibility, because it's been making such correct predictions for decades.

When the denialists come up with a similar record of success, they'll get similar credibility. As of now, denialists are demanding credibility for getting everything wrong for years running, and then proclaiming their victimhood when nobody regards them as credible.

One of THE most deluded posts EVER!

 

[rdean]

All-Time Heat Records Broken in . . . Alaska?

Scientists have always said in a world of climate change, some places get hotter and some colder. Weather patterns are changing. But the global temperature average is changing. And the deep ocean is warming.

These zany white zingers believe that science is a faith, evolution a lie and climate change a conspiracy. I bet you could tell one that if they drank Pepsi before sex, the girl won't get pregnant and they would believe it.

 

[westwall]

Antarctic sea ice was predicted to increase. Vague handwaving and claims of "It's obvious!" are not evidence for claims to the contrary.

_This_ is evidence.

S. Manabe, R. J. Stouffer, M. J. Spelman and K. Bryane

A 1991 paper. See p. 795 for the prediction.
---
It is surprising, however, that the sea-ice thickness in the G integration increases significantly in the immediate vicinity of the Antarctic Continent despite the increase of atmospheric carbon dioxide.
---

So, I have a 1991 paper by one of the big names at the time specifically predicting Antarctic sea ice growth.

Denialists have ... not a single thing saying the opposite. Westwall knew about that paper, but he's making his unsupported claim again. We went through this once before. He finally ended it by moving the goalposts and demanding 3 sources from me, even though he couldn't produce one. Each time he pulls that trick (demanding ever more sources without providing any of his own), I correctly take it as his admission of surrender.

Did you read your paper? I did, page 795, last paragraph they predict BOTH sides of the issue. One of their computer models, specifically the G integration (out of many) showed a rise in sea ice. When you claim opposite possible results you are not predicting anything.

Look up the definition of "untestable hypothesis", then look up "pseudo-science".

 

[westwall]

All-Time Heat Records Broken in . . . Alaska?

Scientists have always said in a world of climate change, some places get hotter and some colder. Weather patterns are changing. But the global temperature average is changing. And the deep ocean is warming.

These zany white zingers believe that science is a faith, evolution a lie and climate change a conspiracy. I bet you could tell one that if they drank Pepsi before sex, the girl won't get pregnant and they would believe it.

And in the real world the Nenana Classic witnessed the latest ice breakup in the 97 years that they have been keeping records....


Kenai couple claims $318,500 Nenana Ice Classic jackpot | Alaska Dispatch

 

[RollingThunder]

But the rational side made no such claims, and predicted the Antarctic sea ice growth. So where did you get such a wild story?

For possibly the first time ever on this board, try backing up one of your fables, and point out this prediction of the end of Antarctic sea ice. Make sure you talk about seasonal sea ice, instead of switching the topic to land ice or ice shelves.

This again? Antarctic sea ice was predicted to decrease. It hasn't. Continental ice has been predicted to decrease but the evidence is equivocal at best. Every time an ice tongue breaks off it is called global warming but it has always happened. What do you think, should it grow forever?.

So which one is it, numbnuts? Are you just a dumbass ignorant fool or a slimy intentional liar? Why are so many of your posts filled with misinformation and lies, you silly denier cult twit?

Here's the facts from a climate scientist who is a darling of the deniers, Dr. Judith Curry.

Judith Curry: On Antarctic sea ice
Houston Chronicle
August 18, 2010
Transcript
(excerpts)
*We’ve seen rapid melting in the Arctic, but not in the Antarctic. Is this something that has concerned climate scientists?*
It’s sort of a paradox. The paradox of why the Antarctic isn’t melting and the Arctic is has gotten a lot of attention, and it’s become one of the skeptics’ arguments. The climate models have generally matched the observations, so scientists have said that’s what the climate models predict, and people haven’t been too bothered by it. But trying to understand exactly what has been going on has not been intuitive. It’s not like there’s been a big debate in the climate community, or a lot of worry about this, because observations have agreed with the models. But that didn’t really explain anything. So in this paper we’ve tried to dig in and find out what really has been going on.
*What did you find?*
The answer is tied up in a combination of natural variability and global warming. But the most important part of the story is it’s not so much the direct heating from above, but how the precipitation modulates the heating both from below and above. The explanation we’ve found doesn’t translate into a simple sound bite.
*So give me a non-sound bite answer.*
Sea ice can melt from both above and below, either heating from the ocean below or the atmosphere above. In the case of the Arctic most of the melting is driven from the warmer atmosphere above. In the Antarctic most of the melting has been driven from the ocean below. What our study has identified is that there’s been increased precipitation over the last few decades that has freshened the upper ocean, which makes it more stable so the heat below doesn’t make it up to the sea ice to melt it.
*Freshens the upper ocean?*
It decreases the saltiness. When you have a fresh layer on top that’s less dense it acts as a barrier to prevent the mixing of warmer water from below. It insulates the ice to some extent. We’ve also seen a big role of natural variability, over the past 30 years or so the dominant climate signal has been from the Antarctic Oscillation rather than from global warming. The net effect of all this has been an increase in precipitation, mostly snow. This diminishes the melting both from below and above. It stops the melting from above because snow has a higher albedo and reflects more sunlight.
*At some point does this result in a net loss of ice rather than gains?*
What happens in the 21st century projections is that the global warming signal begins to dominate. We still have the freshening of the upper ocean, but the upper ocean is getting warmer because of a warmer atmosphere. And the precipitation starts to fall more as rain than snow. Rain falling on ice speeds the melting from above.

PNAS -Three different models show Antarctic ice beginning to recede around 2060.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)

 

[RollingThunder]

But the rational side made no such claims, and predicted the Antarctic sea ice growth. So where did you get such a wild story?

For possibly the first time ever on this board, try backing up one of your fables, and point out this prediction of the end of Antarctic sea ice. Make sure you talk about seasonal sea ice, instead of switching the topic to land ice or ice shelves.

No you didn't. You guys predicted the exact opposite! Below is ONE example of THOUSANDS...

As a propagandist you are a pretty piss poor example....

"Antarctica's massive ice shelves are shrinking because they are being eaten away from below by warm water, a new study finds. That suggests future sea levels could rise faster than many scientists have been predicting.

The western chunk of Antarctica is losing seven metres of its floating ice sheet each year. Until now, scientists were not exactly sure how it was happening and whether or how man-made global warming might be a factor. The answer, according to a study published Wednesday in the journal Nature, is that climate change plays an indirect role – but one that has larger repercussions than if Antarctic ice merely were melting from warmer air."
Antarctic ice melting from below due to warming ocean - Technology & Science - CBC News

ROTFLMAO......oh, walleyed, you are such a ridiculous little denier cult retard!!! And as a human being who supposedly has a brain, "you are a pretty piss poor example."

Mamooth had just dared you to "point out this prediction of the end of Antarctic sea ice" that you had previously and fallaciously claimed that climate scientists had been making in previous decades, but he also specifically told you to "make sure you talk about seasonal sea ice, instead of switching the topic to land ice or ice shelves". So what did you do, you funny old senile fart, you immediately came back, with what you seem to imagine is a rebuttal, with a quote from an article about a scientific study, that starts off by saying: "Antarctica's massive ice shelves are shrinking because they are being eaten away from below by warm water...". That's just roll-on-the-floor-laughing hilarious and soooo damn pathetic.

 

[SSDD]

Antarctic sea ice was predicted to increase. Vague handwaving and claims of "It's obvious!" are not evidence for claims to the contrary.

_This_ is evidence.

S. Manabe, R. J. Stouffer, M. J. Spelman and K. Bryane

A 1991 paper. See p. 795 for the prediction.
---
It is surprising, however, that the sea-ice thickness in the G integration increases significantly in the immediate vicinity of the Antarctic Continent despite the increase of atmospheric carbon dioxide.
---

So, I have a 1991 paper by one of the big names at the time specifically predicting Antarctic sea ice growth.

Denialists have ... not a single thing saying the opposite. Westwall knew about that paper, but he's making his unsupported claim again. We went through this once before. He finally ended it by moving the goalposts and demanding 3 sources from me, even though he couldn't produce one. Each time he pulls that trick (demanding ever more sources without providing any of his own), I correctly take it as his admission of surrender.

Stimpy...you idiot...he isn't predicting the growth of Antarctic ice, he is surprised by its growth in spite of increasing atmospheric CO2.

It is surprising, however, that the sea-ice thickness in the G integration increases significantly in the immediate vicinity of the Antarctic Continent despite the increase of atmospheric carbon dioxide.

Can't you read?

 

[westwall]

Antarctic sea ice was predicted to increase. Vague handwaving and claims of "It's obvious!" are not evidence for claims to the contrary.

_This_ is evidence.

S. Manabe, R. J. Stouffer, M. J. Spelman and K. Bryane

A 1991 paper. See p. 795 for the prediction.
---
It is surprising, however, that the sea-ice thickness in the G integration increases significantly in the immediate vicinity of the Antarctic Continent despite the increase of atmospheric carbon dioxide.
---

So, I have a 1991 paper by one of the big names at the time specifically predicting Antarctic sea ice growth.

Denialists have ... not a single thing saying the opposite. Westwall knew about that paper, but he's making his unsupported claim again. We went through this once before. He finally ended it by moving the goalposts and demanding 3 sources from me, even though he couldn't produce one. Each time he pulls that trick (demanding ever more sources without providing any of his own), I correctly take it as his admission of surrender.

Stimpy...you idiot...he isn't predicting the growth of Antarctic ice, he is surprised by its growth in spite of increasing atmospheric CO2.

It is surprising, however, that the sea-ice thickness in the G integration increases significantly in the immediate vicinity of the Antarctic Continent despite the increase of atmospheric carbon dioxide.

Can't you read?

Clearly the answer to that question is NO.