Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ah, yes, that's some pretty neat timing on your part. Where were you and your ilk when the arctic ice was near normal a few months ago ? I'm not trying to partake in ridicule, but cherry-picking a current condition that is suitable to your own views is as bad as cherry-picking based on the ice extent a few months ago or claiming the climate is rapidly cooling based on the trend from 1998 to 2009 when the bigger picture doesn't show as much or any cooling. The trend from the record low ice extent in 2007 until now is very clearly upwards, and for what it's worth 2011 also had a bigger-than-2007 melt in summer but still managed to end up higher than 2007 in September and even had an early autumn recovery. It looks pretty bad now but we're not exactly doomed. Conversely 2007 didn't look too bad until a huge melt in July. There is also a new trend since 2007 of a thick, multi-year core of ice that has formed and remained stable in the Arctic. Consequently, even when the ice extent is low the ice coverage is typically very dense (near 100% coverage in the areas that do have ice, this occurred in 2011), and the raw thickness and "multi-year-ness" of the ice makes for a much stronger ice extent than what was there before. The previous regime of rotten ice looks to be a thing of the past.
I may also add it may behoove everyone involved to also check out the trends in the Antarctic sea ice, since that forms the other end of the polar regions. Also global temperatures and weather patterns are an even more important indicator of global climate (obviously).
climate change denial should be confined to the religion or political forums. Btw, I don't think there is thing we can do about best to adapt and move on I don't think we will end up like Venus or anything. In fact when enough ice melts the planet will cool. Of course we could all start using more coal... all the soot is very effective in cooling.
The debate should not be is climate change happening... The debate should be how do we handle it... I don't agree with UN mandated controls or government fixes. The private sector will keep up and we will adapt.
It appears that the current sea ice extent is so low that it is way more than 2 standard deviations away from 1979-2000 mean for this time of the year. The ice extent is even lower than in 2007 which marked the lowest ice extent on record (in September):
Yet the ice at the south pole is growing and extending.
Best way to explain this Glacier/Ice melt.. Earth is Warm..no doubt... Lets take a ton of ice cubes, place it on a table where the air temp is as follows.
Ah, yes, that's some pretty neat timing on your part. Where were you and your ilk when the arctic ice was near normal a few months ago ? I'm not trying to partake in ridicule, but cherry-picking a current condition that is suitable to your own views is as bad as cherry-picking based on the ice extent a few months ago or claiming the climate is rapidly cooling based on the trend from 1998 to 2009 when the bigger picture doesn't show as much or any cooling. The trend from the record low ice extent in 2007 until now is very clearly upwards, and for what it's worth 2011 also had a bigger-than-2007 melt in summer but still managed to end up higher than 2007 in September and even had an early autumn recovery. It looks pretty bad now but we're not exactly doomed. Conversely 2007 didn't look too bad until a huge melt in July. There is also a new trend since 2007 of a thick, multi-year core of ice that has formed and remained stable in the Arctic. Consequently, even when the ice extent is low the ice coverage is typically very dense (near 100% coverage in the areas that do have ice, this occurred in 2011), and the raw thickness and "multi-year-ness" of the ice makes for a much stronger ice extent than what was there before. The previous regime of rotten ice looks to be a thing of the past.
There's always going to some to year-to-year variation, an average or running mean would be helpful. 2007 was low, it went back up for a while, then down but not to 2007 levels, but mostly staying well below the prior decades mean, often by two or more standard deviations.
Antarctic ice has increased a bit, but the percent gain is small, unlike the change in Arctic ice.
NO. Ice reflect sunlight. Removing ice will lead to more sunlight being absorbed. Dunno how strong the effect is.
To a degree it makes the climate warmer but the melting is driven by warmer climate in the first place, so it's an unbroken chain that harkens back to the "chicken and egg". Another effect of ice melting is releasing more freshwater into the ocean, which could cause a Gulf Stream Shutdown or slowdown. I think that's what he was talking about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei
2007 was low, it went back up for a while, then down but not to 2007 levels, but mostly staying well below the prior decades mean, often by two or more standard deviations.
Yet the ice at the south pole is growing and extending.
If you mean Antarctic sea ice, the change is a much smaller fraction changed as I said above. Antarctic sea ice, unlike Arctic sea ice, melts away entirely summer. So the change is only winter sea ice, which is partially controlled by ocean current position.
Quote:
Even though the temperatures have been dropping since the 5th hour, its still too warm to keep the ice cubes frozen so they will continue to melt.
Same thing here, Earth is Warm but for the past 13 years it has not. Data doesnt lie. Thats the truth.
I'm not sure if that analogy works for a year-to-year time scale. After a few summers, the section of ice that are in too warm places will have melted already. The Arctic sea ice has a seasonal cycle, refreezing in the winter, so it's obviously responding on a month-to-month timescale.
Data doesn't lie. It shows no evidence of cooling:
NO. Ice reflect sunlight. Removing ice will lead to more sunlight being absorbed. Dunno how strong the effect is.
That is an interesting discussion to have for sure. I'm on the fence with that one because a lot of our weather comes from the oceans.. Sea ice can disrupt the conveyor belt by rapidly cooling it off so not sure how the sun will have an effect with ice cold waters..
Geesus guys, when debating this subject you need to let us know a time frame. You cant just throw out "THE PLANET IS WARMING"... WHEN?? 1000 years? 100 years? 10 years? 6 hours???
The planet is Warm - yes.
The planet has warmed - yes
The planet is warming over past 100 years- Yes
The planet has not warmed in past 13 years - Yes
The planet has leveled off in past 7 years - Yes
The planet has cooled in past 3 years - Yes
Not sure how much more proof you need. Its like having 4 aces in your hand but thinking someone else has another. Its right in front of you. Look at the data.
Let me ask it another way... When global temps are not higher than the previous "year", what does that mean? (not cherry picking a 12 month period)
Geesus guys, when debating this subject you need to let us know a time frame. You cant just throw out "THE PLANET IS WARMING"... WHEN?? 1000 years? 100 years? 10 years? 6 hours???
The planet is Warm - yes.
The planet has warmed - yes
The planet is warming over past 100 years- Yes The planet has not warmed in past 13 years - Yes The planet has leveled off in past 7 years - Yes
The planet has cooled in past 3 years - Yes
Not sure how much more proof you need. Its like having 4 aces in your hand but thinking someone else has another. Its right in front of you. Look at the data.
Let me ask it another way... When global temps are not higher than the previous "year", what does that mean? (not cherry picking a 12 month period)
Well I provided you a link that contradicted your statement.
I disagree with the first bolded statement (the prior 15 years or so have shown no discrepancy with prior warming since 1970). See the link I provided (there's a better link but I'd have to do some digging).
The second bolded statement is misleading. The global warming trend has averaged +0.018°C / year. That's tiny compared to year to year random variability. Subtracting the effects of changing in solar ouptut, El Niño, volcanic effects, etc. can be done and makes the pattern more clear (again, see link). Whether subtracting those effects counts as warming depends on what you're looking for.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
? I'm not trying to partake in ridicule, but cherry-picking a current condition that is suitable to your own views is as bad as cherry-picking based on the ice extent a few months ago or claiming the climate is rapidly cooling based on the trend from 1998 to 2009 when the bigger picture doesn't show as much or any cooling. The trend from the record low ice extent in 2007 until now is very clearly upwards, and for what it's worth 2011 also had a bigger-than-2007 melt in summer but still managed to end up higher than 2007 in September and even had an early autumn recovery. It looks pretty bad now but we're not exactly doomed. Conversely 2007 didn't look too bad until a huge melt in July. There is also a new trend since 2007 of a thick, multi-year core of ice that has formed and remained stable in the Arctic. Consequently, even when the ice extent is low the ice coverage is typically very dense (near 100% coverage in the areas that do have ice, this occurred in 2011), and the raw thickness and "multi-year-ness" of the ice makes for a much stronger ice extent than what was there before. The previous regime of rotten ice looks to be a thing of the past.
.
