Climate Change and Global Warming

Originally Posted by metatron

Ian thanks.

Where's all that ice going ? Is it evaporating faster than it's melting ??

How come Manhattan isn't under water ?

Some of it will go into the atmosphere in the form of water vapor while most will simply pour into the ocean.

Not nearly enough ice has melted to rise the water high enough to sink Manhattan. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Recen ... l_Rise.png

Originally Posted by WhiskeyandGunpowder

OMG I can't stop laughing at the stupidity! Here is a great article!

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

Just really have no clue.

"As we continue to clean up the air -- which we must do for the sake of human health -- the challenge of avoiding dangerous climate change through reductions in CO2 emissions will be even harder," said Peter Cox, a researcher at Britain's University of Exeter and a co-author of the Nature study.

REDUCING ATMOSPHERIC POLLUTION NOW CAUSES GLOBAL WARMING! OMG! How funny can it get! The times we live in!

I don't find this funny at all. I'm not sure what part you find stupid.

Originally Posted by WhiskeyandGunpowder

Originally Posted by IanD

Originally Posted by metatron

OK -

Kiefer, Christian,

Prove to me that the ice isn't melting.

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/featur ... inice.html

Originally Posted by IanD

It is to note though that there is some growth in antarctica but that has already been explained:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1 ... rming.html

So proof that Global Warming (so called) and its effects aren't universal in the form of expansion of the Antarctic Ice Sheet is in fact not proof but evidence from the same NASA that admitted they were wrong about the hottest five years on record by fifty years is valid???

Here's a little contradictory evidence for you my friend, your evidence is not accurate nor is it contemporary. This is the latest. Looking to Newscientist for facts is like looking to CNN or FOX for news.

http://www.dailytech.com/Arctic+Sees...ticle12851.htm

I was just showing that the entire earth does not warm linearly and in fact has variances. It only has a general warming trend when you average temperatures from all over the earth.

In reference to your article.... which i will note is factual but misleading. The key words here are "ice coverage". Which is substantially different from volume which is vastly more important.

Also note that that general trend still continues downward. (I'm using the source of your source actually)
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/imag ... _hires.png

And finally the fact that we're at second lowest 'volume', however theres a good chance it's a record.
http://nsidc.org/news/press/20081002_se ... lease.html

Remember this is the source of your source. Please stop telling half truths. You're hurting our planet.


edit:

Originally Posted by WhiskeyandGunpowder

Oh crap I forgot the expansion is actually the result of Pacific ocean cooling which is a side effect of global warming or something or other that is man made and the result of Hummers or SUV's.

And for the record Metatron, I have a lot of respect for you and the way you handle yourself on the forums but over the last two years - the ice isn't melting it is growing., on this one you are wrong.

I'm afraid these last 2 comments you edited in are just plain wrong as per the data i posted.

Originally Posted by WhiskeyandGunpowder

From sea to shiny sea the earth has been cooling since 2000-2002 and will continue to do so for the next twenty to thirty years then it will rise again with increased solar activity for twenty to thirty years just like it did during the last solar cycle that peaked in the late nineties.

Have you not been reading anything? The past 8 years have all been in the top 10 hottest years ever recorded. I have already refuted your claims.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Instr ... Record.png

Originally Posted by WhiskeyandGunpowder

Er yah so thousands of kilometers of additional Ice coverage is actually less Ice Volume. Great math. It's a lot wider but it's thinner, that is clearly absurd.

Once again you didn't read the article at all. THIS IS THE SOURCE OF YOUR SOURCES INFORMATION. Learn it. Know it. Keeping in mind of course that your great 'thousands of km of additional ice coverage' still makes it the 2nd lowest ice extent. 2nd lowest of all time does not mean a massive growth has happened.

"Arctic sea ice extent during the 2008 melt season dropped to the second-lowest level since satellite measurements began in 1979"

This isn't my math saying that the volume has decreased. It's right from YOUR SOURCE.It's in the title no less!
"Arctic Sea Ice Down to Second-Lowest Extent; Likely Record-Low Volume"

Straight from the article: http://nsidc.org/news/press/20081002_se ... lease.html

"thin ice is more prone to melting out during summer. So, the widespread thin ice of spring 2008 set the stage for extensive ice loss over the melt season."

Remember this is the interpretation from YOUR SOURCE where you got YOUR FACTS from. When your sources of information disagree with your conclusions you're in trouble. I don't know if you're being difficult or have a vast misunderstanding of science.

Originally Posted by WhiskeyandGunpowder

Yep somebody wrote an article in September that there was a "Massive" increase in Ice and when somebody in the agenda read it and complained they were quick two weeks later to publish an "it don't mean nothing" article to escape labelling as heretics. They wouldn't want to be accused of "hurting your planet" and suffer financially like any scientist stupid enough to oppose this agenda.

That is borderline insane. Your somebody is a random journalist who knows nothing about climate science and isn't even qualified to speak on the matter while interpreting data from the sources i listed here. Listen to the words that are coming out of your mouth. A random journalist who knows nothing or the people who actually did the research on it and know what they're talking about. If a doctor gives you information on an illness and the janitor listens in and gives his own advice who would you listen to?

Originally Posted by WhiskeyandGunpowder

I guess we'll see if 2009 is a lesser or greater volume in September, it's not far away, we can revisit this then, I'm sure this thread will still be on Chris' website. Of course even if it increases again which I thoroughly believe it will, you will not admit it means anything but if it shrinks I guarantee I will here publicly but I doubt heartily that will occur.

Even if it shrinks or grows in the long term it's a mute point. Climate happens over long periods of time and global climate is not local. I have refuted every claim you've come up with, sometimes using your own sources to do so.
I have proven that the amount of ice (notice how when you measure amounts you measure in either mass or volume) is decreasing.
Water levels are rising. (that happens when glaciers melt into the ocean)
The global average temperature is rising consistently over time.
Humans are increasing the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere by a measurable level. (we're up to 385ppm)
Every major scientific institute is on my side on this. I am tired of repeating myself. Come up with something new (somehow), or just realize your earlier assumptions were wrong. This isn't about one of us being right or wrong.