• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

2013 is at the all time record high ice extent in the antarctic

code1211

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
34,864
Reaction score
7,092
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Hmmm...

Just when we are being told that the world is ending because all of the ice of the world is melting and the coasts of all of the land on the planet will soon be submerged under the melted ice waters, we are told that the ice Extent in the Antarctic is at the all time record high ever recorded.

Once again, the real world is proven to be wrong by the models of the AGW Scientists. It could, I suppose, be the other way around.

Mother Nature must not be an AGW Scientist. I guess if she was, she'd be Doctor Nature.

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis | Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag
 
Last edited:

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,627
Reaction score
20,383
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Just to be clear, the ice buildup in the Antarctic is not nearly as great as the icecap loss in the northern pole. That said, these are simply changes that the earth goes through since it's existence.
 

code1211

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
34,864
Reaction score
7,092
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Just to be clear, the ice buildup in the Antarctic is not nearly as great as the icecap loss in the northern pole. That said, these are simply changes that the earth goes through since it's existence.


I'd agree with that.

This is one of the many things that makes me pretty sure that the CO2 is driving the climate notion is wrong. If CO2 was the cause of the warming, the warming would be nicely distributed as is the CO2.

The warming is much more centered on the Northern Hemisphere while the Southern Hemisphere is comparatively cooling.

CO2 is a very homogenized gas and the very slight variations globally result from the local temperatures. Again, CO2 concentration results from temperature. CO2 does not drive temperature. If CO2 was really the driving force of climate, the hemispheric effect would not be so distinctly different.
 

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I'd agree with that.

This is one of the many things that makes me pretty sure that the CO2 is driving the climate notion is wrong. If CO2 was the cause of the warming, the warming would be nicely distributed as is the CO2.

The warming is much more centered on the Northern Hemisphere while the Southern Hemisphere is comparatively cooling....
That's False.
Due to Air currents/weather etc, one would NOT expect warming to be even.
(ie. Ice areas could melt and Could cause decades of colder than avg winter in temperate zones like Northern Europe. Some scientists have postulated the Gulf Stream may be deflected/slowed by cold melt water)
It's AVERAGE temperature that has been rising and AVERAGE Ice volume that has been decreasing.

You oft post is Fallacious deduction or Fallacious request for overly specific 'proof'.

CO2 is a very homogenized gas and the very slight variations globally result from the local temperatures. Again, CO2 concentration results from temperature. CO2 does not drive temperature. If CO2 was really the driving force of climate, the hemispheric effect would not be so distinctly different.
There Is some interesting data that suggest CO2 is a trailing as much as a leading indicator IMO. Fellow greenhouse gas Methane could turn out to be just as important or more so in warming.
 
Last edited:

Fisher

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
17,002
Reaction score
6,913
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
It just just weather, not climate.
 

TiredOfLife

Banned
Joined
Jul 31, 2013
Messages
2,817
Reaction score
582
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
It just just weather, not climate.
We'll see, but it hardly matters either way. The damage is done, and the species, along with multitudes of others, is on the way out.
 

ksu_aviator

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2010
Messages
6,969
Reaction score
2,592
Location
Fort Worth Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
The glaciers in Glacier National Park in Alaska started melting in the 1700's. Jus' sayin'.
 

ksu_aviator

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2010
Messages
6,969
Reaction score
2,592
Location
Fort Worth Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Hmmm...

Just when we are being told that the world is ending because all of the ice of the world is melting and the coasts of all of the land on the planet will soon be submerged under the melted ice waters, we are told that the ice Extent in the Antarctic is at the all time record high ever recorded.

Once again, the real world is proven to be wrong by the models of the AGW Scientists. It could, I suppose, be the other way around.

Mother Nature must not be an AGW Scientist. I guess if she was, she'd be Doctor Nature.

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis | Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag
WTF? I replied to a different post and it ended up here!?
 

code1211

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
34,864
Reaction score
7,092
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
That's False.
Due to Air currents/weather etc, one would NOT expect warming to be even.
(ie. Ice areas could melt and Could cause decades of colder than avg winter in temperate zones like Northern Europe. Some scientists have postulated the Gulf Stream may be deflected/slowed by cold melt water)
It's AVERAGE temperature that has been rising and AVERAGE Ice volume that has been decreasing.

You oft post is Fallacious deduction or Fallacious request for overly specific 'proof'.

There Is some interesting data that suggest CO2 is a trailing as much as a leading indicator IMO. Fellow greenhouse gas Methane could turn out to be just as important or more so in warming.



Help me to understand this.

If we accept that CO2 warms some areas differently than it warms other areas, what does this mean about CO2 and its Green House Forcing strength?

Does CO2 behave differently as a GHG at different latitudes or is it just not that powerful in the first place and is routinely overpowered by any other forcing present?
 

code1211

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
34,864
Reaction score
7,092
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
The glaciers in Glacier National Park in Alaska started melting in the 1700's. Jus' sayin'.



That's the interesting thing about AGW science. Depending on the particular point that the proponent is trying to make at any particular moment, the facts change.

The glaciers have been melting for some time, but the sea level did not start to rise until about 1900. (?) If the Diehards are talking about whether or not we need to panic over the melting glaciers, that is the point and it's been going on for some time but has reached a point of crisis now.

If they are talking about sea level rise, the ice just started melting and the gradual acceptable rise of the sea level up to now is at a crisis rate and the coasts will be submerged under the vertical rise of the oceans by 5 feet in the next 87 years. At least that is the opinion of Scientific American. They should consider a change in the name of their rag.

The crisis with the glaciers melting is put forth like it's the end of the world, but the glaciers were melting and have been melting forever. In many years, after they melt, they refreeze and freeze some more. At about the 8000 years ago mark, it's reasonable to assume that the last Ice Age had melted off about as much as it was going to and then the glaciers that dot the land masses started to form up once again. Now they are melting once again.

At about the 5000 years ago mark, it seems like many of the glaciers were about right where they are now in terms of size. This means, of course, that we are only warming to the point at which we were 5000 years ago and are far from the warming of 8000 years ago.


View attachment 67153009
 
Last edited:

gslack

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2013
Messages
1,250
Reaction score
334
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Help me to understand this.

If we accept that CO2 warms some areas differently than it warms other areas, what does this mean about CO2 and its Green House Forcing strength?

Does CO2 behave differently as a GHG at different latitudes or is it just not that powerful in the first place and is routinely overpowered by any other forcing present?
It's even crazier than that.. Remember that a gases thermodynamic properties change with temperature. Regardles of whether it's CO2 or any gas, as the temperature rises and falls so will it's ability to either react to IR as GH gases do, or imsulate as other gases do. And then take into conideration convection, and it begs the question how can GH gases can all at once disperse heat away from the warmer surface, and re-heat it's warmer source, all the while it's abilities are effected drastically by temperature, and convection constantly recycling the air..

And that's what we currently know almost for certain, as certain as we can be anyway..

The problem is, it just can't possibly do and be all things at once, especially not to the level the warmers try and sell us... X amount of energy is still X amount of energy. When you use it to do a task you will have less usuable energy left. The warmers think that X amount of energy in can become X and Y amounts of energy because a trace gas cna react to IR... It's an insane hypothesis made over 150 years ago by the same scientists who believed in an incorrect idea on how a greenhouse worked, and was just stepping out of a belief in "ether", and fire being an element..
 

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Every Right Winger gets their Own Antarctic Ice growing/Record string,

There simply is no coherence in the section, No sanity. It's Partsian SPAMaganda.
 

gslack

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2013
Messages
1,250
Reaction score
334
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Every Right Winger gets their Own Antarctic Ice growing/Record string,

There simply is no coherence in the section, No sanity. It's Partsian SPAMaganda.
Thanks for the weak and belated attempt to redirect after the fact.. But really, you didn't address anything that was said, all you did was post a thinly veiled flame against republicans.. Which puts your claim of it being partisan in real perspective.. Careful your partisanship is showing..
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
75,593
Reaction score
33,220
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Thanks for the weak and belated attempt to redirect after the fact.. But really, you didn't address anything that was said, all you did was post a thinly veiled flame against republicans.. Which puts your claim of it being partisan in real perspective.. Careful your partisanship is showing..
What about if I point out for the 93rd time that area and volume aren't the same thing?
 

Visbek

Stuck In The Circle
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
17,924
Reaction score
11,557
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Just when we are being told that the world is ending because all of the ice of the world is melting and the coasts of all of the land on the planet will soon be submerged under the melted ice waters, we are told that the ice Extent in the Antarctic is at the all time record high ever recorded.
Ahem. From your own link. 6th lowest year on record, clear downward trend, for the Arctic.



Much of the ice is only a year old (as one might expect), which is thinner and less dense than multi-year ice (as one should also expect). I.e. ice volume, which is more important than area, is also still below earlier averages.


Once again, the real world is proven to be wrong by the models of the AGW Scientists.
Once again, climate change deniers cherry-pick the stats they like, and ignore or trash those same sources as soon as they provide data they don't like.
 

gslack

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2013
Messages
1,250
Reaction score
334
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
What about if I point out for the 93rd time that area and volume aren't the same thing?
Please do, and then I can point out that ice thickness, especially over land has more to do with precipitation than temperature and especially water temperature which it isn't resting on in Antarctica... And that would be about 93rd time I made the point.. And thanks for staying on topic, at least..
 

code1211

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
34,864
Reaction score
7,092
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Ahem. From your own link. 6th lowest year on record, clear downward trend, for the Arctic.



Much of the ice is only a year old (as one might expect), which is thinner and less dense than multi-year ice (as one should also expect). I.e. ice volume, which is more important than area, is also still below earlier averages.



Once again, climate change deniers cherry-pick the stats they like, and ignore or trash those same sources as soon as they provide data they don't like.



I have posted before that the Arctic ice extent is at the highest level it's been at in six years and it is. If this is the greatest amount in six years, then it is.

The part of the post you responded to was in regard to the Antarctic which is at the all time record high Ice Mass since records have been kept.

Back to the arctic, the current ice amount is within one standard deviation of the average posted by the NSIDC.

The warming up there seems to not be as dramatic as experts who predicted it might be completely gone by now. Dr. James Hansen comes to mind. Perhaps the world will not end in a fireball while we all die of thirst from the drought.

You should be happy.

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis | Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
75,593
Reaction score
33,220
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Please do, and then I can point out that ice thickness, especially over land has more to do with precipitation than temperature and especially water temperature which it isn't resting on in Antarctica... And that would be about 93rd time I made the point.. And thanks for staying on topic, at least..
Yes, ice is not a direct measurement of temperature trends, especially on a short time frame. But I never claimed it was the best way to measure temperature...
 

gslack

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2013
Messages
1,250
Reaction score
334
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Yes, ice is not a direct measurement of temperature trends, especially on a short time frame. But I never claimed it was the best way to measure temperature...
LOL, you tried to make the implication that temps were warming and tried to use ice volume as evidence. You know it, we all know it. WHy else try and make the distinction dude? We said ice was growing in antarctica and you cried that it was coverage and not volume, which you then maintained was decreasing.

But hey, best to backpedal rather than admit an error...
 
Top Bottom