Oftencold
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2008
- Messages
- 5,044
- Reaction score
- 2,202
- Location
- A small village in Alaska
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
"The ice is not melting."
Really? You bought that, did you?
He's didn't have to buy it. Simple facts are usually free. It's mind numbingly stupid self destructive self deceptions that you really have to work for. that mythical man made climate change should require that enormous personal political power be shifted to a ruling elite who live high carbon lifestyles to shame to oriental potentates of old, for instance.
But past its sell-by date. The study you cite refers to measurements from 2003 to 2010, the rebounds in ice at both poles are from this year.
Yes. Exactly. This year. One. One year of "rebound" after the previous year's record low. (in the arctic anyway) This year's "rebound" doesn't even make it back to the trend line. A statistician would laugh if you gave him that data plot and declared ice was not melting.
The ice has been melting in the North yet increasing in the south and again........... SO WHAT !
Agreed. And I predict that the ice will increase in the north and decrease in the south over the next six months. As it always does... :mrgreen:
The ice has been melting in the North yet increasing in the south and again........... SO WHAT !
Lets just say there wont be any ocean surfing done in Kansas any time soon
Yes. Exactly. This year. One. One year of "rebound" after the previous year's record low. (in the arctic anyway) This year's "rebound" doesn't even make it back to the trend line. A statistician would laugh if you gave him that data plot and declared ice was not melting.
Ice mass would be more related to precipitation. Especially in ANtarctica where there is ground under the ice for much of the continent. No water underneath to freeze like in the arctic where there is no large land mass. If the ice coverage area has increased, and if what you say is true regarding the ice mass and it has indeed decreased, than we should assume less precipitation, and colder temperatures...
Ice mass is indeed substantially related to precipitation. But also temperature.
But again, this isn't my thread. "Ice isn't melting, therefore climate something something" is somebody else's argument. I'm just pointing out that yes, actually, ice is melting.
The glacier Girl is an interesting story.
Exhuming the Glacier Girl • Damn Interesting
So in 46 years, 268 feet of Ice had accumulated.
That is over 6 feet of ice per year, that is a lot of ice.
Totally different magnitudes. The loss of arctic ice is rapid, antarctic hasn't been such a strong trend. Some studies even suggest a loss of mass. (note: mass and volume, not area.)
Overall, planetwide? Less ice. Which makes the premise of this thread incorrect, yes?
Yawn, indeed. Another regurgitated falsehood from the "skeptics."
The ice is not melting, yet still the scaremongers blunder on - Telegraph
The real global warming disaster: green taxes, a suicidal energy policy and wasting billions on useless windmills
eace:lamo
Yes. Exactly. This year. One. One year of "rebound" after the previous year's record low. (in the arctic anyway) This year's "rebound" doesn't even make it back to the trend line. A statistician would laugh if you gave him that data plot and declared ice was not melting.
I would go with...unlikely, but that is a good point.Is the bottom of the glacier melting away as the top accumulates 268 additional feet of snow and ice?
With countries like China, India and America operating underground water irrigation we are creating a water-based food bubble which is already taking place in the Middle East where the grain production is down due to lack of water. With the annual addition of 80,000,000 people per year we are approaching a world water catastrophe. More countries are switching to meat diets and meat needs grain. With every degree Celsius rise in temperature there is approximately a 10-15 % decrease in grain yield. With China doing little to reduce its CO2 emissions and other nations doing even less we may be on an unstoppable course. If this warming is not curtailed we will not be able to stop it from worsening every decade.
I do not see much I can disagree with you in this part of your statement,With countries like China, India and America operating underground water irrigation we are creating a water-based food bubble which is already taking place in the Middle East where the grain production is down due to lack of water. With the annual addition of 80,000,000 people per year we are approaching a world water catastrophe. More countries are switching to meat diets and meat needs grain.
the lack of fresh water could impact all of us soon.
This second statement is where I think you went off the tracks.With every degree Celsius rise in temperature there is approximately a 10-15 % decrease in grain yield. With China doing little to reduce its CO2 emissions and other nations doing even less we may be on an unstoppable course. If this warming is not curtailed we will not be able to stop it from worsening every decade.
An increase in temperature would move the planting zones north,
and create more arable land for farming.
Growing grain on virgin land, would vastly increase yields.
The single degrees rise may limit the use of some grains, but may just as well allow others.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?