ice sheet losses in Greenland and Antarctica reach new highs

Seen a lot of these charts lately. Arctic Ice growing to new recent records.
Because its an embedded twitter video I can't embed it on the forum..
https://twitter.com/KiryeNet/status/1000712106629517312
To scientists and of course me, measuring ice levels is ALL ABOUT VOLUME. You don't measure water or ICE from a single dimension. I thought everyone knew that, ice is not like a sheet of paper, it has depth, causing volume...
"ICE Extent" is for the alarmists.

https://video.twimg.com/tweet_video/DeM-VSYUQAIH7pG.mp4
DeM-VSYUQAIH7pG.gif


Or this one I saw
Arctic sea ice volume is just about to cross above the "normal" line - ending the longest lasting and most persistent claim of global warming scamsters.
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icethickness/images/FullSize_CICE_combine_thick_SM_EN_20180526.png
https://twitter.com/i/highlights?id=e103733dda6e471ebe40b68b7f7f2d0a
 
TheBeastie said:
Seen a lot of these charts lately. Arctic Ice growing to new recent records.
Because its an embedded twitter video I can't embed it on the forum..
https://twitter.com/KiryeNet/status/1000712106629517312

Or this one I saw
Arctic sea ice volume is just about to cross above the "normal" line - ending the longest lasting and most persistent claim of global warming scamsters.
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icethickness/images/FullSize_CICE_combine_thick_SM_EN_20180526.png
https://twitter.com/i/highlights?id=e103733dda6e471ebe40b68b7f7f2d0a
Click to expand...

You accept a Twitter post from a denier website as valid? Try checking the data from the agency that actually measures Arctic ice extent and you will find that both areal extent and volume of ice are well below average. Even the chart you linked to shows ice is below the 2006-2013 average which itself is below the longer term average). I can’t believe how gullible some people are.
 
Climate change increases bacterial resistance to antibiotics.
[youtube]p8fSayzfTdA[/youtube]
 
TheBeastie said:
Seen a lot of these charts lately. Arctic Ice growing to new recent records.
Click to expand...
Ah, so you are an adherent of the Kellyanne Conway school of "alternative facts", I see.
 
jimw1960 said:
TheBeastie said:
Seen a lot of these charts lately. Arctic Ice growing to new recent records.
Because its an embedded twitter video I can't embed it on the forum..
https://twitter.com/KiryeNet/status/1000712106629517312

Or this one I saw
Arctic sea ice volume is just about to cross above the "normal" line - ending the longest lasting and most persistent claim of global warming scamsters.
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icethickness/images/FullSize_CICE_combine_thick_SM_EN_20180526.png
https://twitter.com/i/highlights?id=e103733dda6e471ebe40b68b7f7f2d0a
Click to expand...

You accept a Twitter post from a denier website as valid? Try checking the data from the agency that actually measures Arctic ice extent and you will find that both areal extent and volume of ice are well below average. Even the chart you linked to shows ice is below the 2006-2013 average which itself is below the longer term average). I can’t believe how gullible some people are.
Click to expand...
I am, the charts, even the link, is directly from DMI which is "Denmark's Meteorological Institute", official government agency on monitoring ice. http://ocean.dmi.dk/
http://ocean.dmi.dk/english/
Quote from the website "
Welcome to DMI
Ocean and Ice Services
This DMI marine services homepage aims to provide information about the state of the sea at present, and for the near future.

DMIs core marine activities are storm surge warnings, ice charting, waves, ocean currents, satellite surveillance, ocean climate and marine data.

Marine focus areas are the North Sea, the Baltic, Greenland/Arctic and Faroese waters. The North Atlantic and other selected areas are also covered.

In addition to the free products on the web page, DMI offers consultancies on subjects like ocean data, user specified forecasts for ocean or ice, analysis and professional advising.."

The folks on Twitter just make it easier to summarize and also made a video/gif of the movements.. I dont think they are saying the ice has fully recovered by rather its returned the normal average, which is significant because most people a led to believe its all one way ticket to hell.
I worked out how to take the embedded mp4-gif and make it a plain gif.
DeM-VSYUQAIH7pG.gif

Also, there's been a lot of reports that the Polar Bear numbers are at record highs..
Even TheGuardian released an article saying so.. TheGuardian is famous for making its core bread and butter on climate change doom articles..
Polarbears 'They're everywhere'
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/24/canada-polar-bears-labrador-rigolet-seal-hunt?CMP=share_btn_tw

5120.jpg
 
Hehe... while all around us "The worst year", etc. :wink:
 
Here, I fixed it for you:

Hillhater said:
That is only obvious if you believe everything you are told by the actual scientists who have studied climate for decades, and ignore all the cherry picked junk science and data that is funded by petroleum interests and is continually cited by the same three or four "scientists" who have made a career of science denial, that makes it somewhat less obvious .!
Click to expand...
 
Voltron said:
It so exhausting trying to parse people's blather they use to justify not taking any action... Thanks for the assist.
Click to expand...

"It is hard to convey just how selective you have to be to dismiss the evidence for climate change. You must climb over a mountain of evidence to pick up a crumb: a crumb which then disintegrates in your palm. You must ignore an entire canon of science, the statements of the world’s most eminent scientific institutions, and thousands of papers published in the foremost scientific journals. You must embrace instead the claims of an eccentric former architect, which are based on what appears to be a non-existent data set. And you must do all this while calling yourself a scientist." - George Monbiot

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it." - Upton Sinclair
 
I live in South Wales we have a city called swansea that is on a dock that produced alot of copper tin and zinc back in the industrial revolution it got the name tinopolis for the ore that it extracted.
The mountains near by the operation had no vegetation and very little life at all for over 100 years after the works had gone from sulphur dioxide poisening of the environment. Now there's a windmill farm and over the past 20 years I've watched the mountains return to life as the pits left we have very little industry left other than a steel works that's struggling at low output so it's plain to see in my area how much a change we have already made but it's in third world nations we see the highest levels of corruption and pollution that normally is profiting for the scum of the earth humans.
 
Or alternatively....
jimw1960 said:
Here, I fixed it for you:

Hillhater said:
That is only obvious if you believe everything you are told by the scientists whos jobs and funding depend on perpetuating the AGW theory , and ignore all the independent science and data from those scientists that are not dependant on any specific outcome, and who are brave enough to risk their carrer by questioning unsupported theories and dubious data , that makes it somewhat less obvious .!
Click to expand...
But it doesnt matter....stick with your beliefs,..time will reveal the truth.
Click to expand...
 
The truth has already been revealed, in corporate documents from the 80's and 90's from Exxon and other oil companies, whos scientists had concluded fossil fuel burning would raise global temperatures. The studies were buried, and the industry of funding warming denialists to sow confusion was born.

It directly parallels Big Tobacco, which knew of the effects of smoking, but spent decades funding junk science showing smoking was the healthiest thing in the world. They also went before Congress and lied about knowing for so long, just as the oil companies have. And you're sucking up to their lies to defend your cozy lifestyle.
 
^^ Hehe... And Big Auto... watt knew of the effects of driving, but spent decades funding junk science showing driving was the healthiest thing in the world.

:lol:
 
Voltron said:
The truth has already been revealed, in corporate documents from the 80's and 90's from Exxon and other oil companies, whos scientists had concluded fossil fuel burning would raise global temperatures. The studies were buried, and the industry of funding warming denialists to sow confusion was born.

It directly parallels Big Tobacco, which knew of the effects of smoking, but spent decades funding junk science showing smoking was the healthiest thing in the world. They also went before Congress and lied about knowing for so long, just as the oil companies have. And you're sucking up to their lies to defend your cozy lifestyle.
Click to expand...
Not only does it directly parallel Big Tobacco, but the operatives who created the "smoking is good for you" and "the science on smoking and lung cancer ISN'T SETTLED!" strategies are actually the same people who created the most common climate change denier memes - Fred Singer and Fred Seitz. And they were paid handsomely for their work by right wing organizations like The Heritage Foundation, The Competitive Enterprise Institute and The George C. Marshall Institute.
 
Its nothing like the smoking /health debate.
With smoking you have actual real time outcomes from monitoring large sample groups.....AND the ability to compare to similar size "control" samples of non smokers. This has been repeated multiple times, giving a very high probability of certainty of causation
The Tobacco companies were attempting to avoid liability costs and protect their sales...A commercial based action.

With the AGW situation, all you have is a theory with a prediction, but no results as yet to show causation and no ability to perform or monitor "non AGW" control experiments, That is not sound science.
That is just green fanatisism. !
 
And that's a bunch of bullshit.

I guess all we need is a second Earth to be the control planet for the experiment.

Do you not think the oil companies profits make this a commercial consideration for them or that avoiding liability for continuing what they know are destructive actions as they continued to lie to the public isn't on their minds?
 
And to just excuse what Big Tobacco did as merely a commercial action is heinous. They had already done tests, and ran control groups, until it was plain to their own scientists tabacco was a deadly poison. They then continued to deny it for decades... Flat out lying and poisoning people for profit.

And that's exactly whet the oil companies are doing... Their own scientists have told them it's real... They know it for a fact. Their own leaked internal studies they quashed show it. Except their lies will end up harming the entire would, not just those that used their "product".
 
Hillhater said:
With smoking you have actual real time outcomes from monitoring large sample groups.....AND the ability to compare to similar size "control" samples of non smokers. This has been repeated multiple times, giving a very high probability of certainty of causation.
Click to expand...
Not according to Seitz and Singer. There was NO PROOF that cigarettes caused cancer, according to them. They even got "doctors" to go on TV and claim this. They used anecdotal examples of people smoking 2 packs a day and living to age 100. From a money perspective it was no contest - in 1981, the American Cancer Society and the American Lung Association together contributed $300,000 to research. Tobacco companies directed $6.3 million to researchers who, not surprisingly, found no evidence conclusively linking tobacco to serious medical problems. And they shouted this loudly and often.

By sowing confusion and doubt, they helped their benefactors reap more profit. At least for a while.

Nor was it limited to smoking and climate change. The toxicity of DDT and the existence of the ozone layer was also called into doubt, thus making money for their backers (CFC and pesticide manufacturers.) In all cases their tactics were the same - "discredit the science, disseminate false information, spread confusion, and promote doubt."

With the AGW situation, all you have is a theory with a prediction, but no results as yet to show causation and no ability to perform or monitor "non AGW" control experiments.
Click to expand...
We do have a theory that made a prediction. As far back as 1981, climate scientists were predicting what would happen to the climate if CO2 emissions continued to rise. They then put their predictions to the test. (This was repeated in 1990, 1995 and 2001.)

Now we have 37 years of data, and the actual data matches the predictions almost perfectly. Thus their work has been validated. That's how science works.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-well-have-climate-models-projected-global-warming
 
97% of Climate Scientists Really Do Agree:
[youtube]LnnDOMyZjbE[/youtube]
 
Global warming has melted over 3 trillion tons of ice in Antarctica since 1992, and it's only getting worse
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...lion-tons-antarctic-ice-since-1992/698291002/

Starts:
Global warming has caused over 3 trillion tons of ice to melt from Antarctica in the past quarter-century and tripled ice loss there in the past decade, a new study finds.

The total is equivalent to over 4 quintrillion gallons of water added to the world's oceans, making Antarctica's melting ice sheets one of the largest contributors to rising sea levels. That amount of water is enough to fill over a billion swimming pools and cover Texas to a depth of nearly 13 feet.
Click to expand...

:cry:
 
But the rise in sea level is not caused by melting ice, it's caused by rocks falling into the ocean. Just drop a rock into a glass of water and see what happens to the level.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018...r-rocks-tumbling-ocean-causing-sea-level-rise

Brooks then said that erosion plays a significant role in sea-level rise, which is not an idea embraced by mainstream climate researchers. He said the California coastline and the White Cliffs of Dover tumble into the sea every year, and that contributes to sea-level rise. He also said that silt washing into the ocean from the world's major rivers, including the Mississippi, the Amazon and the Nile, is contributing to sea-level rise.

"Every time you have that soil or rock or whatever it is that is deposited into the seas, that forces the sea levels to rise, because now you have less space in those oceans, because the bottom is moving up," Brooks said.

Brooks added that Antarctic ice is growing. That was true a few years ago, and scientists say it does not disprove the theory of global warming because different factors affect the Arctic and Antarctic rates of melting.
Click to expand...
 
That his idea is not embraced by other climate researchers is a kind way of saying that he's a fringe loon wanting in on some denial dollars. Are falling rocks making large swaths of the arctic bare of ice too?

When you drop the water from what used to be an ice cube before the freezer got turned off into the glass it goes up too...
 
fechter said:
But the rise in sea level is not caused by melting ice, it's caused by rocks falling into the ocean.
Click to expand...
I like it! It goes along with my new "kids throwing rocks in reservoirs causes floods" theory. Remember the Oroville dam? The Katrina flooding? Stupid kids.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top