NOAA - Arctic Report Card -warming temperatures and melting ice

[Into the Night]

Yes, the long term net when covering a full cycle is zero. hard to determine what a full cycle is to be able to determine a trend by other factors.

We are talking about the full cycle, however long it is.

 

[Jack Hays]

[h=2]Arctic Ice Volume Shames Climate Experts …Antarctic Stations Show Cooling, Not Warming[/h]By P Gosselin on 28. December 2018

 

[Into the Night]

Yes, the long term net when covering a full cycle is zero. hard to determine what a full cycle is to be able to determine a trend by other factors.

Nope. The full cycle IS the full cycle. It is easily determined. Evaporation of seawater causes precipitation on land and rivers to flow. Rivers and glaciers can only flow by taking water out of the sea to begin with.

 

[Decomposed]

Excellent article, Jack. One image really grabbed me. Although I don't know whether AGW is real or not, things like this make it difficult to avoid considering that AGW may be the world's biggest scam.

 

[Quaestio]

Excellent article, Jack. One image really grabbed me. Although I don't know whether AGW is real or not, things like this make it difficult to avoid considering that AGW may be the world's biggest scam.

Oh great you love Jack's pseudoscience conspiracy blog post. What a surprise. But you've already proven in such a short time you only un-skeptically swallow conspiracy theories and pseudoscience and don't accept facts or science.

Did you run into Into The Night or IBdaMann on Reddit?

 

[longview]

Oh great you love Jack's pseudoscience conspiracy blog post. What a surprise. But you've already proven in such a short time you only un-skeptically swallow conspiracy theories and pseudoscience and don't accept facts or science.

Did you run into Into The Night or IBdaMann on Reddit?

You can call things pseudoscience if you wish, but the findings are withing the error bars of the GISS zone temperatures for the zone including Antarctica.
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/ZonAnn.Ts+dSST.txt
With the entire zone only showing .081 C of warming over the last decade.

 

[Into the Night]

Oh great you love Jack's pseudoscience conspiracy blog post. What a surprise. But you've already proven in such a short time you only un-skeptically swallow conspiracy theories and pseudoscience and don't accept facts or science.

Inversion fallacy. It is YOU that denies science. BTW, did you know that conspiracies are real? One of the most popular ones these days is Marxism.

Did you run into Into The Night or IBdaMann on Reddit?

You won't find me there. I don't think IBdaMann ever spent much time there either. Reddit is a heavily biased forum and badly organized. Not worth the wasted time.

 

[flogger]

You can call things pseudoscience if you wish, but the findings are withing the error bars of the GISS zone temperatures for the zone including Antarctica.
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/ZonAnn.Ts+dSST.txt
With the entire zone only showing .081 C of warming over the last decade.

Therefore basically normal natural background variation then ...illustrating there is absolutely nothing wrong with todays climate :thumbs:

 

[Threegoofs]

Therefore basically normal natural background variation then ...illustrating there is absolutely nothing wrong with todays climate :thumbs:

Yeah.

I can’t see anything different.

LOL

 

[Quaestio]

Inversion fallacy. It is YOU that denies science.

There is No such thing as an "Inversion" fallacy. You made it up in place of using the term "projection". Your sock-like buddy gfm7175 keeps making the same mistake too from parroting you. He got it it mixed up with a real logical fallacy - the Inverse fallacy aka Denying the Antecedent

If you believe it's a logical fallacy, then you should be able to easily show the logical form and give an example, and/or give a link to a standard reference.

eg this is the logical form amd an example for the Inverse fallacy- aka Denying the Antecedent:

If P, then Q
Not P,
Therefore, not Q

An example is

If it's raining, I must be wet (If P, then Q)
Its not raining (Not P)
Therefore I am not wet. (Therefore, not Q)

This is a logical fallacy because it doesn't need to be raining for the person to be wet. eg the person could be swimming

 

[flogger]

Yeah.

I can’t see anything different.

LOL

Until they are able to establish the empirically accurate climate sensitivity of CO2 and clouds/water vapour you might have a point but until then they can do this then 98% of greenhouse gases cannot be modelled ergo its all just subjective agenda driven guesswork. This has been explained to you dozens of times over the last decade :lol:

 

[Threegoofs]

Until they are able to establish the empirically accurate climate sensitivity of CO2 and clouds/water vapour you might have a point but until then they can do this then 98% of greenhouse gases cannot be modelled ergo its all just subjective agenda driven guesswork. This has been explained to you dozens of times over the last decade :lol:

WTF?

Why would cloud modeling have any impact upon paleoclimate data?

You’re really just a walking joke around here, although you have a lot of denier competition.

 

[flogger]

WTF?

Why would cloud modeling have any impact upon paleoclimate data?

You’re really just a walking joke around here, although you have a lot of denier competition.

Irony to you is just something with a lot of ferrous metal in it isn't it ? :lol:

 

[longview]

Yeah.

I can’t see anything different.

LOL

Please show your graph with the -60 degrees to -90 degrees zone only, since that is what the discussion is about.

 

[Into the Night]

Yeah.

I can’t see anything different.

LOL

...deleted Holy Chart...

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth.

 

[Into the Night]

There is No such thing as an "Inversion" fallacy.

Yes there is. It is a type of contextomy fallacy.

You made it up in place of using the term "projection".

If you want to use that term, fine.

Your sock-like buddy gfm7175 keeps making the same mistake too from parroting you.

Not a mistake.

He got it it mixed up with a real logical fallacy - the Inverse fallacy aka Denying the Antecedent

Contextomy fallacy.

If you believe it's a logical fallacy, then you should be able to easily show the logical form and give an example, and/or give a link to a standard reference.
...deleted irrelevance...

Certainly. A&B=A&C. This is False, and attempting it's use is a fallacy.

 

[Quaestio]

Yes there is. It is a type of contextomy fallacy.

Wrong. No there isn't. You made it up. "Projection" has nothing to do with contextomy (taking someone's words out of context to change the meaning). Absolutely zero.

If you want to use that term, fine.

And if you want to use that the term "projection" that's fine. People will at least understand what you are accusing them of instead of a made up 'Inversion' fallacy that can't be found in any reference source. So it's completely illogical to use it. You might as well tell them they are using the Third Flush of the Porcelain Throne fallacy as it makes no sense either and can't be found in any standard reference text.

Not a mistake.

Yes, it is.

Contextomy fallacy.

No it's not, as I can give complete quotes from him showing that's what he thought it was.

Certainly. A&B=A&C. This is False, and attempting it's use is a fallacy.

That isn't a logical form that makes any sense and it certainly can't be applied to the concept of 'projection'. You were also unable to give an example or a standard reference.

If you want to learn how to construct logical arguments, take a couple of classes in logic instead of using a list of logical fallacies and using them incorrectly. Especially your overuse of them as a blunt instrument to bash everyone on the head all the time, instead of actually presenting a valid argument or having a discussion. It's pretty clear you've never studied logic at an academic level.

 

[Jack Hays]

Scam? Ice Isn’t Melting As Predicted At The Poles, Yet Big Insurance Hikes On Coastal Properties Loom!

By P Gosselin on 2. January 2019

A recent chart shows that late summer Arctic sea ice volume has GROWN over the past 12 years, and not plummeted as the alarmists once warned:
​

Note how predictions made back in 2007 by “leading experts” were completely wrong, and sea ice volume instead has been rising modestly, thus totally surprising and shaming the doomsday prophets.”
​

 

[jimbo]

They know millions of things that are going on, but collating the scale of the data is the problem. I view the Earth as a living organism, just like us, except on a scale and timeline that we have difficulty comprehending. The Earth strives for wet and green and tolerates its' parasites. We are one of the parasites. The human ego has some resistance to absorbing that fact. The Planet's harmonius parasites maintain a symbiotic relationship with the Planet, but contemproary humans are destructive. Symbiosis is out the window and hubris reigns supreme. The Planet will respond and cleanse the problem. Probably violently for humans but just volcanic and Earth shaking for the Planet.
/

The bottom line though is over its life the earth has had at least 6 major climate reversals. Miles deep ice has extended as far south as Colorado. Warm water coral was once common in lake Michigan. All 6 reversals before humans existed. So a half degree short term climate change is now human caused?

Must be something else going on.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Scam? Ice Isn’t Melting As Predicted At The Poles, Yet Big Insurance Hikes On Coastal Properties Loom!

By P Gosselin on 2. January 2019

A recent chart shows that late summer Arctic sea ice volume has GROWN over the past 12 years, and not plummeted as the alarmists once warned:
​

Note how predictions made back in 2007 by “leading experts” were completely wrong, and sea ice volume instead has been rising modestly, thus totally surprising and shaming the doomsday prophets.”
​

I would be curious to see the DMI source material, but I didn't see it linked. I do believe the overall trend of Arctic sea ice volume has declines, but that isn't what drives sea level changes. Sheet ice melting and thermal expansion are the primary causes, and dust falling into the oceans displacing them is likely the third cause in my opinion. But I could be wrong. Displacement might be the first or second cause, and ice sheets melting might be the third.

Oh... Arctic ice has nothing to do with sea level rise, so it is a poor article to use.

 

[Lord of Planar]

The bottom line though is over its life the earth has had at least 6 major climate reversals. Miles deep ice has extended as far south as Colorado. Warm water coral was once common in lake Michigan. All 6 reversals before humans existed. So a half degree short term climate change is now human caused?

Must be something else going on.

It's spelled A-G-E-N-D-A...

 

[Jack Hays]

I would be curious to see the DMI source material, but I didn't see it linked. I do believe the overall trend of Arctic sea ice volume has declines, but that isn't what drives sea level changes. Sheet ice melting and thermal expansion are the primary causes, and dust falling into the oceans displacing them is likely the third cause in my opinion. But I could be wrong. Displacement might be the first or second cause, and ice sheets melting might be the third.

Oh... Arctic ice has nothing to do with sea level rise, so it is a poor article to use.

I'm not discussing sea level here. Sorry if I was not clear.

[h=3]Danish Meteorological Institute - Ocean and Ice Services | Danmarks ...[/h]
ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icecover.uk.php

Total sea ice extent on the northern hemisphere during the past years, including climate mean; plus/minus 2 standard deviations. The ice extent values are ...

 

[jimbo]

It's spelled A-G-E-N-D-A...

That it is. I've asked this question dozens of times. So far not an answer, plausible or otherwise, from any CC advocate

If just one believer could come up with a remotely plausible answer, I might take a new look at the issue.

 

[Threegoofs]

I'm not discussing sea level here. Sorry if I was not clear.

[h=3]Danish Meteorological Institute - Ocean and Ice Services | Danmarks ...[/h]
ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icecover.uk.php

Total sea ice extent on the northern hemisphere during the past years, including climate mean; plus/minus 2 standard deviations. The ice extent values are ...

You’re not discussing ANYTHING. You’re just vomiting up denier blog posts.

 

[Threegoofs]

Scam? Ice Isn’t Melting As Predicted At The Poles, Yet Big Insurance Hikes On Coastal Properties Loom!

By P Gosselin on 2. January 2019

A recent chart shows that late summer Arctic sea ice volume has GROWN over the past 12 years, and not plummeted as the alarmists once warned:
​

Note how predictions made back in 2007 by “leading experts” were completely wrong, and sea ice volume instead has been rising modestly, thus totally surprising and shaming the doomsday prophets.”
​