The Case of the Alternating Ice Sheets
Nansen's ship Fram in the Arctic ice (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
There has been a wave of triumphal announcements by climate change proponents recently, almost giddy over the summer shrinkage of the Arctic ice sheet. “Lowest level ever!” they proclaim, thought that is not quite true. Nonetheless, The Arctic pack ice has been receding over the last decade or so, but that is only natural. You see, there is a well known, if poorly understood, linkage between the ice at the north pole and the ice in and around Antarctica—and the ice around Antarctica is doing quite well.
Satellite radar altimetry measurements indicate that the East Antarctic ice sheet interior increased in mass by 45±7 billion metric tons per year from 1992 to 2003. This trend continues today, reinforcing recent scientific investigations into this millennial scale oscillation between the poles. According to studies, this is how things have been for hundreds of thousands of years.
By now everyone who pays attention to climate matters has heard the news, the Nations Ice and Snow Data Center (NSIDC) has proclaimed a new record low for the Arctic ice sheet. The dweebs over at RealClimate are beside themselves with joy, smugly celebrating the impending ecological doom of all mankind. “Take to the lifeboats, the seas are a risin'.” Ok, maybe they are not quite that ecstatic, but this “record” is being used as a see-I-told-you-so to prop up anthropogenic global warming. Here is what the NSIDC had to say in their press release:
Arctic sea ice cover melted to its lowest extent in the satellite record yesterday, breaking the previous record low observed in 2007. Sea ice extent fell to 4.10 million square kilometers (1.58 million square miles) on August 26, 2012. This was 70,000 square kilometers (27,000 square miles) below the September 18, 2007 daily extent of 4.17 million square kilometers (1.61 million square miles).
NSIDC scientist Walt Meier commented, “By itself it's just a number, and occasionally records are going to get set. But in the context of what's happened in the last several years and throughout the satellite record, it's an indication that the Arctic sea ice cover is fundamentally changing.” Problem is the record is not all that meaningful. As I will explain, these folks are all missing the bigger picture.
Add comment
Before posting a comment, please read the Terms of Service (click here). Long links are shortened but still work.
PLEASE report all spam/inappropriate comments using the 'Report to administrator' link. If you find your post gone, it's because you violated the TOS.
Comments
Q2 How long has man been on the Earth?
Q3 When did records begin?
Q4 Has this happened before?
Don't all answer at once boy and girls.
Drewski, go and stand in the corner with this Dunces cap on!
I'm still waiting for something unprecedented, and so far, nothin'. Still looks like the same old planet, doing the same old thing, day in and day out. Ho hum. Guess we'll just wait for the next idiot to come by and exclaim that the sky is falling. Shouldn't be long... lots of registered dimocrats out there.
So, either you are a serial liar, stupid, or both.
No wonder you guys are losing the debate.
Thanks for scoring another one on your own goal little buddy.
drewski is simply hoping that if he repeats it enough times it will follow the "a lie repeated enough times becomes true" route. Seems to be his forte.
Yes only 75 out of 77 biased pseudo-scientists (97.4%)
All about it here.hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/search?q=97%25
What about the more than 30,000 scientists who say different.
lets add them in then
I get 30002/30077
So at least 99.75% of scientists say humans are not responsible for global warming.
True science is not done by consensus. Concensus is politics.
If you want to know about climate, why not ask the 97% of the PUBLISHING climate scientists what they think?
Maybe you could ask the NSA, the CIA, the Pentagon, the US Navy, the Vatican, the British Conservative Party, the Australian Labor Party, the European Union, Exxon, BP, Shell, the American Petroleum Institute, the World Meteorlogical Society, hundreds of international university earth science departments, 868 university presidents, and all (as in every single one) of the world's science academies.
Or you could believe Gator.
Quote:As I stated above, this is lie being spread by someone who knows it is a lie, and then he came back and doubled down on dishonesty and tripled down on stupidity.
99.999999999% of all Baptists world wide believe Jesus is Lord! Every one of their best bible scholars says so, and you cannot argue with them, because you are not a bible scholar. They have just as much scientific evidence that Jeseus is Lord, as the 97 percenters do that man is warming the planet. And their consensus was not dishonestly manufactured.
"We find that they originally contacted 10,257 scientists, of whom 3,146 responded, less than a 31% response rate. "Impending Planetary Doom" was obviously not uppermost in the minds of over two thirds of their target population. Of that number, only 5% described themselves as climate scientists, numbering 157. The authors reduce that by half by only counting those who they classed as "specialists".
So does this mean that 70% of scientists hate their children?
Maybe we should follow the Baptists since they love their families, unlike the evil scientists. Or, maybe this is all just a bunch of Cool Whip's favorite flavor of BS.
There were supposed to have been nine questions asked, but we are only given sight of two of them.
1. When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?
This is quite banal and shows the desperation of those involved in this "unbiased survey of a large and broad group of Earth scientists."
I would have answered 'yes" to that question as well, it is what is called climate chnage, and I am not a denier of natural variability, as are the "experts" listed in this most deceitful of manipulation of surveys. Do they have asnything else to offer? let's see...
77 out of 10,257 is .73%, so .73% of those surveyed said they know man is responsible for recent climate change.
Wow! Nearly one percent!
Funny, their survey size was about one third of the Oregon petition.
And 100% of the signers of that petition say that man is not responsible.
77 versus 31,487 (9029 PhD's)... so that's only .24% who say they know man is responsible. Where is that consensus again?
Let's explore that further below...
Let's start with the letter "A"...
AD 2000 Business Executives Consultation
Affiliation of Christian Geologists
Africa Inland Mission Canada
Africa Inland Mission International
Air Serve International
All Ethnos Communications Network
The Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals
American Baptist Church
The American Center for Law and Justice
American Family Association
American Scientific Affiliation
American Theological Library Association
American Tract Society
The Amy Foundation
Anglican Frontier Missions
Answers in Action
Antiochian Evangelical Orthodox Mission
Apologia
Artists for Israel
Asia Lutheran Hour Press Service
Asia Pacific Education Office
Asian Minorities Outreach
Assemblies of God Church (USA)
Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church
Association of Baptists for World Evangelism
The Association of Christian Schools International
Association of Christian Teachers (UK)
Association of Lutheran Church Musicians
Gee Wally, I'll bet they didn't have to fake a consensus with any of those folks.
In fact, if you send 10,257 surveys to those listed above, every single reply would say that Jesus is Lord. And remember, you are not a bible scholar, so you cannot argue with them. Jesus is Lord is a proven fact.
If you want the B-Z part of the list, it can be found on Google.
Cool Whip is a liar.
Care to triple down dummy?
'Pop ice' never seems to amaze me. His logic is illogical. Maybe he could help Gleick and Lew out with their methods of obtaining data for climatism.
Their credo is - 'Lets make it up as we go along and if we have to commit fraud who cares it is for the cause! No-one is more right than us'
The truth has no agenda.
4.55 Billion years old
Q2 How long has man been on the Earth?
200 to 400,000 years
Q3 When did records begin?
earliest temperature records
Instrament
Central England Series
1659
1872 NOAA Instrament data
Ice Core records 800,000 years
Sea bottom core records
about 100 million years
Geologic rock data
4.3 Billion years
Q4 Has this happened before?
YeS!!! at least six ice ages back
1.5 Billion Years
Don't all answer at once boy and girls.
Drewski, go and stand in the corner with this Dunces cap on!