Arctic Warms Twice as Fast as The Globe

[Ivorytickler]

Originally Posted by sanspeur

What does "breakneck speed" mean to you?

The planet is undergoing one of the largest changes in climate since the dinosaurs went extinct. But what might be even more troubling for humans, plants and animals is the speed of the change. Stanford climate scientists warn that the likely rate of change over the next century will be at least 10 times quicker than any climate shift in the past 65 million years. Stanford scientists: Climate change on pace to occur 10 times faster than any change recorded in past 65 million years

Still we are talking about changes happening by the end of this century, not next year. They will not even effect you all that much, but for the next generations it may be a different story.

None of this really affects us because we won't be here to see it come to fruition. However, even if it is our fault, I doubt there is much we can do about it. Maybe we could mimic snow cover (and reflect light) with foam on the ocean or something but that would probably mess with wild life. Maybe we should take all our waste Styrofoam and float it in the artic, lol. It floats and it's white but it won't hold a polar bear up. It's also insulating to keep the water colder. Maybe we could make little polar bear islands out of it?

Between the climate change and the shifting of the poles the future looks quite different for our great, great, great grandchildren.

[Wapasha]

Originally Posted by Ceist

Why not answer your own questions by educating yourself at least about the basics of climate science?

Then you might understand why your questions make no sense.



As a suggestion, you could start with this on the American Institute of Physics website:

Introduction - Summary

then read through each of the topics:

The Discovery of Global Warming - A History

Typical, oh so typical. you guys claim humans are warming the planet, and it's up to us to disprove your claims. Coming up with a theory, and claiming if it cannot be disproven, then it must be true? Sorry, that is not how science works.

[sanspeur]

Originally Posted by Wapasha

what a joke, we are talking about a few decades of warming, and this is being hyped into a joke by you people. We are currently way below normal temperatures for the last 10,000 years.

Let me guess....The cooked chart was made by Don Easterbrook... Most of the last 10,000 years were warmer

[sanspeur]

Last month, Arctic sea ice covered 630,000 square kilometres less ocean than the 30-year average. Sea ice extent is shrinking about 5 per cent a decade.

And the frozen ocean is not only smaller, it’s thinner. David Barber, who holds the Canada Research Chair in Arctic System Science at the University of Manitoba, says sea ice has lost, on average, about 40 per cent of its total volume. Ice-free Arctic could be just six years away | Toronto Star

[ChrisC]

Originally Posted by Ceist

The current science deniers like you and others in this thread couldn't be bothered to learn the basics to even know what to question or understand what the real world evidence is - they just deny and mock the science and the evidence they don't understand, and flap their arms around squawking that the scientists are incompetent or liars and frauds. Putting yourself and the other close-minded completely incurious science deniers on the 'side' of people like Copernicus, Bruno, Galileo, Einstein is a complete joke and a huge insult to them.

Interesting take... since I have a degree in "the sciences." I know the way it is supposed to work (the scientific method). And I know the way it is not supposed to work. If I didn't know that, I'd probably be more like you.

[ChrisC]

Originally Posted by Wapasha

what a joke, we are talking about a few decades of warming, and this is being hyped into a joke by you people. We are currently way below normal temperatures for the last 10,000 years.

There is no use bringing that up. You can find a similar graph on the NOAA website. But it doesn't matter to them.

The reason they talk themselves (or at least "the masses") into believing it is irrelevant is that they don't consider the actual absolute temperature means (which of course makes perfect sense when discussing change in temperature means ), they use this spectre, black helicopter statistic called an "anomaly," which of course is what some clever statistician conjured up from all the possible statistical measures of average that would make the most favorable impression on a number-phobic society. A simpler case of the same sort of bias would be an auto manufacturer using a median rather than a mean from a sample data set simply because it was a greater measure of average for the new Super Dooper Enviromobile car that is being advertised as the next big thing to fight global warming.