Reply With Quote
I'll bet they came with a different view of the ice than what they started with...
I'll bet they came with a different view of the ice than what they started with...
a single event signifies nothing, to serious people
It's funny cause they thought there would be no ice, but there was still ice, so they's stupid.
I wonder how many of them left the IPCC bible on the frozen ship.
lol
ICE-STRANDED EXPLORERS' MESSAGE:
A statement from the Australasian Antarctic
Expedition:
We're stuck in our own experiment. We came to Antarctica to
study how one of the biggest icebergs in the world has altered the system by
trapping ice. We followed Sir Douglas Mawson's footsteps into Commonwealth Bay,
and are now ourselves trapped by ice surrounding our ship.
Sea ice is disappearing due to climate change, but here ice
is building up. We have found this has changed the system on many levels. The
increase in sea ice has freshened the seawater below, so much so that you can
almost drink it. This change will have impacts on the deep ocean circulation.
Underwater, forests of algae are dying as sea-ice blocks
the light. Who can say what effects the regional circulation changes may have on
the ice sheet of the Antarctic plateau, or whether the low number of seals
suggests changes to their population.
Yeah, I'm glad the global warming crowd doesn't try to use single events to make their argument.
note the article says hurricaneS, not single hurricane.Yeah, I'm glad the global warming crowd doesn't try to use single events to make their argument.
you AGW deniers are shilling, duped by or complicit with, Kock Bros, BigCarbon.
LOL...
Reading into the cover of a magazine, that is designed to sell their product.
LOL...
Asking if HurricaneS are getting worse is pretty much the opposite of using a single event. But really, Time isn't science.Yeah, I'm glad the global warming crowd doesn't try to use single events to make their argument.
P.S. The answer to the question is a very very easy yes. Unless anyone disputes that sea level rise is not caused by warming the earth. Higher sea level equals higher storm surge relative to our structures - for EVERY storm.
So since you always immediately back pedal when you do this, let me just ask you for your position. Since you put disappearing in quotes, are you of the opinion that the East Antarctic Ice Sheet isn't losing mass?
"It's 20 degrees outside! Global warming my ass!"
"Dodo birds aren't going extinct; I saw one just the other day."
-some guy on Mauritius in the mid 17th Century.
A trailside sign notes that since 1901, Sperry Glacier has shrunk from more than 800 acres (320 hectares) to 300 acres (120 hectares). "That's out of date," re says, stopping to catch his breath. "It's now less than 250 acres (100 hectares)."
Everywhere on Earth ice is changing. The famed snows of Kilimanjaro have melted more than 80 percent since 1912. Glaciers in the Garhwal Himalaya in India are retreating so fast that researchers believe that most central and eastern Himalayan glaciers could virtually disappear by 2035. Arctic sea ice has thinned significantly over the past half century, and its extent has declined by about 10 percent in the past 30 years. NASA's repeated laser altimeter readings show the edges of Greenland's ice sheet shrinking.
Spring freshwater ice breakup in the Northern Hemisphere now occurs nine days earlier than it did 150 years ago, and autumn freeze-up ten days later. Thawing permafrost has caused the ground to subside more than 15 feet (4.6 meters) in parts of Alaska. From the Arctic to Peru, from Switzerland to the equatorial glaciers of Man Jaya in Indonesia, massive ice fields, monstrous glaciers, and sea ice are disappearing, fast.
http://environment.nationalgeographi...ming/big-thaw/
etc, etc, etc, etc,
Miami, Chesapeake Bay areas, Corpus, Galveston, much of the Gulf Coast will be ed over by rising seas.
The increase in sea ice isn't an isolated event around Antarctica. It has not been declining the way sea ice in the arctic has. So then the question obviously becomes why are they behaving differently? For starters, it is important to recognize the differences in the system. There are vastly different salinity levels in the Arctic and Southern Oceans and both areas of sea ice occur at different la udes (the south pole isn't open ocean).
First of all, we know that Antarctic Ice Sheets are losing volume. So its not like Antarctica isn't showing signs of reacting to a warmer climate. Despite quotes around the word in the le of this thread, the ice on Antarctica is indeed disappearing. This water then runs off into the oceans around the continent, where the ocean remains somewhat stratified due to the higher densities found in slightly warmer more saline water when compared to fresh water. The result is a colder less dense layer of water (water density starts to decrease below 4 degrees C - basically this is why ice floats) at the surface which freezes easier and actually acts to insulate the warmer water below.
There are several papers out within the decade that demonstrate how this and a couple of other factors (ozone and circulation related) have provided the conditions to where sea ice in around Antarctica has actually increased in extent. The volume of ice increase here is not even close to the volume of ice melted on the land surface, though.
it's useless to bombard these AGW deniers with facts, they deny them all already, but anyway
http://nsidc.org/greenland-today/
BTW, this is the state of climate change denialism. Focus on individual cir stances where something is acting as you wouldn't generally expect it to. The problem is that no climate change denier can ever explain the rising air temperatures, loss of snow and ice mass, increase in sea level, increase in oceanic heat content, increase in global evaporation and rain fall rates etc etc. You can point to individual small individual situations or arbitrary short term periods of temperatures in order to try to make a point but the next time a climate change denier puts forth an explanation that would explain how the radiative properties of GH gasses are not responsible for observed increases in energy within the earth systems will be the first time.
Mass Gains of the Antarctic Ice Sheet Exceed Losses
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20120013495
I just thought it was funny that these guys were cursed by the Al Gore effect. And I just knew that a few of you hard-core green s would be easily trolled.
The only people that are in denial of climate change are you warmers. Those of us skeptical of the coming AGW enviro-apocalypse believe climate change is quite normal.
lol This is following Katrina and they aren't asking a question anymore than fox is just asking question when they put out a headline like Is Obama really an American citizen?
The global warming crowd has constantly tried to natural weather events to make their point, no different than the other side. In fact you've done it yourself.
The answer to the question is no because the warming we've seen has been natural...I got that info from you lol.
You certainly didn't get that info from me. But if you'd like to point a link to where I said that then feel free.
As for the question being asked, judging by the journal articles on the subject the question is still being asked and studied quite a bit. Like I said, Time isn't science. Its obvious the general public is going to have their interests piqued when big events like Katrina happen. There were probably more articles of that sort after Sandy, FYI. I don't care about either set, as science isn't conducted within the pages of time or any other magazine. Trying to act as if scientific opinion is reflected by a weekly magazine is something you should know better than to do.
LOLL...
millimeter by millimeter...
Do you really buy your own BS?
LOL were you at that conference so much in that you feel comfortable linking the abstract or did you simply do a google search to find something that you think fits your story?
What did I say above about arbitrary short term periods?During 2003 to 2008
You think posting incorrect items and making yourself like a fool is trolling me? Well, that explains years of you being an idiot. Much like climate change, I don't think you understand how trolling works. Carry on.
I don't know if I should laugh at Manny, or pity him. He believes the dogma of the AGW priests, but man of man... How much money is he wasting in an education that will later all be proved wrong?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
