Ice melting at a faster rate

[Chris]

(CNN) -- Between 1.5 trillion and 2 trillion tons of ice in Greenland, Antarctica and Alaska has melted at an accelerating rate since 2003, according to NASA scientists, in the latest signs of what they say is global warming.

Using new satellite technology that measures changes in mass in mountain glaciers and ice sheets, NASA geophysicist Scott Luthcke concluded that the losses amounted to enough water to fill the Chesapeake Bay 21 times.

"The ice tells us in a very real way how the climate is changing," said Luthcke, who will present his findings this week at the American Geophysical Union conference in San Francisco, California.

NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment, or GRACE, mission uses two orbiting satellites to measure the "mass balance" of a glacier, or the net annual difference between ice accumulation and ice loss.

"A few degrees of change [in temperature] can increase the amount of mass loss, and that contributes to sea level rise and changes in ocean current," Luthcke said.

The data reflects findings from NASA colleague Jay Zwally, who uses different satellite technology to observe changing ice volume in Greenland, the Arctic and Antarctica.

In the past five years, Greenland has lost between 150 gigatons and 160 gigatons each year, (one gigaton equals one billion tons) or enough to raise global sea levels about .5 mm per year, said Zwally, who will also present his findings at the conference this week.

Ice melting across globe at accelerating rate, NASA says - CNN.com

 

[Angel Heart]

The following are a few abbreviated quotes taken from the report, which contains the full quotes of the scientists as well as the names, biographies, and academic/institutional affiliation of international scientists who publicly dissent climate-change fear mongering:

“I am a skeptic.... Global warming has become a new religion.” — Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.

“Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp.... Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” — Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.

“The quantity of CO2 we produce is insignificant in terms of the natural circulation between air, water and soil.... I am doing a detailed assessment of the UN IPCC reports and the Summaries for Policy Makers, identifying the way in which the Summaries have distorted the science.” — South African Nuclear Physicist and Chemical Engineer Dr. Philip Lloyd, a UN IPCC co-coordinating lead author who has authored over 150 refereed publications.

“Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.” — Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh.

“All those urging action to curb global warming need to take off the blinkers and give some thought to what we should do if we are facing global cooling instead.” — Geophysicist Dr. Phil Chapman, an astronautical engineer and former NASA astronaut, served as staff physicist at MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology).

“Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense.... The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.” — Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.

“Earth has cooled since 1998 in defiance of the predictions by the UN-IPCC.... The global temperature for 2007 was the coldest in a decade and the coldest of the millennium ... which is why ‘global warming’ is now called ‘climate change.’” — Climatologist Dr. Richard Keen of the Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at the University of Colorado.

“I have yet to see credible proof of carbon dioxide driving climate change, yet alone man-made CO2 driving it. The atmospheric hot-spot is missing and the ice core data refute this. When will we collectively awake from this deceptive delusion?” — Dr. G LeBlanc Smith, a retired Principal Research Scientist with Australia’s CSIRO.

“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly.... As a scientist I remain skeptical.... The main basis of the claim that man’s release of greenhouse gases is the cause of the warming is based almost entirely upon climate models. We all know the frailty of models concerning the air-surface system.” — Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology, and formerly of NASA, who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.”


Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history.... When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” — UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.

“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds.... I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists.” — Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.
Additionally, more than 31,000 American scientists have signed onto the Global Warming Petition Project, a petition that urges “the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.”

More...

IPCC is as closed minded as you are.

 

[Lycurgus]

(CNN) -- Between 1.5 trillion and 2 trillion tons of ice in Greenland, Antarctica and Alaska has melted at an accelerating rate since


SNIP WORTHLESS INFORMATION

Ice melting across globe at accelerating rate, NASA says - CNN.com

Chris, I think you should email this breaking news to Al Gore right way. He is counting on you!

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Yup, And if we believe the doom and gloom crowd the North and South Pole should already be deserts, How many years in a row can the ice be melting even faster before someone asks, "wait, how much Ice is up there?"

Remind us Chris, was the North pole Ice free this last summer? I mean you all insisted it was gonna be. Explain why it is that Antarctica is GAINING ice cover when you all keep telling us it is melting?

 

[Lycurgus]

Yup, And if we believe the doom and gloom crowd the North and South Pole should already be deserts, How many years in a row can the ice be melting even faster before someone asks, "wait, how much Ice is up there?"

Remind us Chris, was the North pole Ice free this last summer? I mean you all insisted it was gonna be. Explain why it is that Antarctica is GAINING ice cover when you all keep telling us it is melting?

You know, I'm a nature freak. I really enjoy everything about nature, be it hunting or fishing, on down to simple bird watching. I really feel that we have an obligation to be good stewards of this planet, but, we also need to be logical, realistic and understand that there is a balance and moderation between advancement and properly caring for our world.

We also need to understand and be aware of the self serving BS which goes with many things, nature caving included. Be it about money, power or people simply wanting to feel overly important.

 

[editec]

Yup, And if we believe the doom and gloom crowd the North and South Pole should already be deserts, How many years in a row can the ice be melting even faster before someone asks, "wait, how much Ice is up there?"

A lot. And if we are to believ the scientists who measure it...a lot less than there used to be.

Remind us Chris, was the North pole Ice free this last summer? I mean you all insisted it was gonna be. Explain why it is that Antarctica is GAINING ice cover when you all keep telling us it is melting?

Is it?

 

[Old Rocks]

Yup, And if we believe the doom and gloom crowd the North and South Pole should already be deserts, How many years in a row can the ice be melting even faster before someone asks, "wait, how much Ice is up there?"

Remind us Chris, was the North pole Ice free this last summer? I mean you all insisted it was gonna be. Explain why it is that Antarctica is GAINING ice cover when you all keep telling us it is melting?

Sarge remind us why you keep repeating that Antarctica is gaining ice, when in fact it is losing ice.
NASA - Antarctic Ice Loss Speeds Up, Nearly Matches Greenland Loss

 

[user_name_guest]

This is a perfect time to capitalize on going "green." All you have to do is put a label on your product, pay big bucks to experts to say "I endorsed this product." Hell, if they capitalize on Christmas, let's capitalize on global warming. Especially when toddlers are programmed of the idea of cutting back pollution. We already have a strong market growing in this arena. Now if we have a problem with a competitor, we can use a government agency to tag those market share grabbers with a Swastika, i meant pollution tag.

 

[Skeptik]

A picture is worth a thousand words. Here are my first thousand words:

And, the ice being added to Antarctica has more to do with precipitation than melting. That continent is plenty cold enough for ice, and is also a desert in terms of average precipitation.

You can ignore global climate change if you want. It really doesn't matter, since there is little we could do, and even less that we will do.

 

[Missourian]

And had you stood in Dubuque, Iowa 14,000 years ago and watched those glaciers that formed the great plains recede, I'm sure you would have told us the sky was falling.

The environment is not static.
If it was, Missouri would still be at the bottom of a shallow ocean.

 

[alan1]

And had you stood in Dubuque, Iowa 14,000 years ago and watched those glaciers that formed the great plains recede, I'm sure you would have told us the sky was falling.

The environment is not static.
If it was, Missouri would still be at the bottom of a shallow ocean.

Those horrid dastardly men from 14,000 years ago caused global warming.
Damn them, damn them all to hell.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v238/vfile/libertyapes.jpg

 

[Angel Heart]

As arctic ice melts, South Pole ice grows | csmonitor.com

How is it that we where always taught the more you learn the more you realise you don't know but these idiots are finding to be the other way around? What makes us think we can have it all figured out by studying only the last 100-150 years? Be the planet 6000 yrs old or 6 billion years old, it's but a small bit of that time to say we have it all figured out. When there are 1000 year cycles and most likely 10,000 year cycles this planet goes through.

 

[Old Rocks]

As arctic ice melts, South Pole ice grows | csmonitor.com

How is it that we where always taught the more you learn the more you realise you don't know but these idiots are finding to be the other way around? What makes us think we can have it all figured out by studying only the last 100-150 years? Be the planet 6000 yrs old or 6 billion years old, it's but a small bit of that time to say we have it all figured out. When there are 1000 year cycles and most likely 10,000 year cycles this planet goes through.

The title of the Article;

As arctic ice melts, South Pole ice grows
Scientists are puzzled, but the phenomenon seems to fit the latest global-warming models.

Furthermore, the article was about sea ice, not the ice on the continent of Antarctica, which has been steadily losing ice mass.

 

[Old Rocks]

And had you stood in Dubuque, Iowa 14,000 years ago and watched those glaciers that formed the great plains recede, I'm sure you would have told us the sky was falling.

The environment is not static.
If it was, Missouri would still be at the bottom of a shallow ocean.

There was a far more rapid climate change a bit after than, called the Younger Dryas.

The Younger Dryas

And for the dominant culture of the time in North America, the Clovis Culture, the sky did fall. Also for a good many of the large mammals of that time, that was the end of the line. Rapid climate change, whether you are a few tens of thousands of hunter gatherers spread out over a continent, or a diverse society of 7 billion over the whole earth, is not a small matter.

 

[Missourian]

There was a far more rapid climate change a bit after than, called the Younger Dryas.

The Younger Dryas

And for the dominant culture of the time in North America, the Clovis Culture, the sky did fall. Also for a good many of the large mammals of that time, that was the end of the line. Rapid climate change, whether you are a few tens of thousands of hunter gatherers spread out over a continent, or a diverse society of 7 billion over the whole earth, is not a small matter.

But the point remains that climate change, and even rapid climate change is evident in the hirtorical record without the need for man.

 

[Old Rocks]

But the point remains that climate change, and even rapid climate change is evident in the hirtorical record without the need for man.

And how does that relate to the fact that we creating this climate change? I fail to see your logic here at all. A rapid increase in GHGs has in the past triggered vast changes in climate that resulted in major extinctions. Just because we are the cause of the rapid increase in GHGs, rather than trap volcanics, why should we expect the result to be any differant?

 

[Missourian]

And how does that relate to the fact that we creating this climate change? I fail to see your logic here at all. A rapid increase in GHGs has in the past triggered vast changes in climate that resulted in major extinctions. Just because we are the cause of the rapid increase in GHGs, rather than trap volcanics, why should we expect the result to be any different?

Did GHG's either cause (or reverse) the Younger Dryas?


The Earths average temperature has both decreased and increased without man being the cause.

Logically, if we have scientific proof that these climate shifts have occurred many times without the introduction of mankinds impact, then we can conclude that climate shifts have a root cause other than man.

 

[Chris]

Did GHG's either cause (or reverse) the Younger Dryas?


The Earths average temperature has both decreased and increased without man being the cause.

Logically, if we have scientific proof that these climate shifts have occurred many times without the introduction of mankinds impact, then we can conclude that climate shifts have a root cause other than man.

No, we can only conclude that climates change.

What is causing this warming is another question.

 

[chloe]

its not melting fast enough

 

[Lycurgus]

No, we can only conclude that climates change.

What is causing this warming is another question.

Yes Chris, the climate changes where I live, nearly everyday.

As for the warming, the solution is fairly simple in description, but, nearly impossible in practice.

The liberals need to stop talking so much!