|
Post by principled on Apr 11, 2011 1:28:24 GMT 1
I wanted to add a comment about Artic ice on one of Marhesa's threads, but it appears to be closed. On Tuesday I flew from London to Vancouver. The flight path passes over Iceland and then the lower part of Greenland. Being April (meltiong season) and having read so much about the rapidly retreating ice sheet, I expected to see broken ice sheets intersposed with open sea. How wrong. In the approx 3 hrs we took to fly over the sea between Greenland and the northern reaches of Canada there was one unbroken sheet of sea ice and no water in sight. I know that this observation is not scientific and I have no way of measuring the thickness of the ice I saw, but it puts into prespective some of the doom and gloom that is being propogated by the AGW lobby, which seems to IMPLY that the ice has almost gone! After all, southern Greenland is quite a few miles from the North pole! P
|
|
|
Post by eamonnshute on Apr 11, 2011 8:41:36 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by nickcosmosonde on Apr 11, 2011 10:29:28 GMT 1
Well, it would be, wouldn't it? We've just reached the end of the 42-year warm cycle - a particular cycle that had the most active sun on record, moreover.
|
|
|
Post by nickrr on Apr 11, 2011 13:49:27 GMT 1
No it doesn't, because:
|
|
|
Post by mak2 on Apr 11, 2011 14:32:59 GMT 1
Ice is affected by many other factors as well as temperature.
It is not a reliable indicator of global warming.
|
|
|
Post by louise on May 2, 2011 15:48:38 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on May 19, 2011 19:49:40 GMT 1
One mans take on... Arctic Ice May 2011 - Update #1 By Patrick Lockerby | May 18th 2011 07:48 PM 'Chatterbox' www.science20.com/chatter_box/arctic_ice_may_2011_update_1-79030Well His arguments seem logical enough, until the last paragraph, where He says... "Human influences on climate have provoked a climbing temperature increase." That I see is a 'leap of faith', OK if you're preaching to the converted, but even if it can be agreed that "Human influences on climate have provoked a climbing temperature increase." then to what extent, and is it enough, or are seeing another 'Mother Nature' warming period? StuartG
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on May 20, 2011 16:33:17 GMT 1
Would Louise care to explain the basis on which she selected this particular graph of Northern hemisphere ice (from the Danish Meteorological Institute Centre for Ocean and Ice showing Sea ice extent 15% or greater) from the 17 images available on the WUWT Sea Ice reference page? here wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/sea-ice-page/
|
|
|
Post by louise on Jun 5, 2011 14:51:44 GMT 1
A newly published paper states that ice discharge from certain ice sheets (Greenland and Antarctic) is accelerating. from www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2011/2011GL047304.shtml [If Joanna would prefer to have this post under sea-level as that is part of the consequences then I am happy for it to be moved]
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jun 6, 2011 9:08:54 GMT 1
Th Truthpeddler says
None of this modeling or predicting or remote sensing matters one iota. All one has to do is measure the actual trend in rising sea levels. There is no acceleration. And sea levels are supposed to be rising. We are in an interglacial and they ALWAYS rise in an interglacial. If you don’t like rising sea levels you will certainly not like the alternative–much of the Northen Hemisphere covered with a half mile thick sheet of ice! Everyone enjoy the interglacial while it lasts.
|
|
|
Post by clh on Jun 16, 2011 22:00:29 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jun 17, 2011 10:13:46 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by Joanne Byers on Jun 17, 2011 11:56:02 GMT 1
I have amalgamated two threads dealing with the same topic to make referencing easier.
|
|
|
Post by nickrr on Jun 17, 2011 12:10:56 GMT 1
nsidc.org/icelights/To drop by 30% over a few decades seems unusual to me. Have you evidence that this sort of decline is normal? (By the way a few photos don't count as evidence). Unless it can be shown that this is normal behaviour for sea ice (which I know it hasn't) then the only prudent approach is to take it at face value. And the cause is only moot if you think that "virtually certain" and "moot" mean the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jun 17, 2011 12:25:06 GMT 1
I am afraid that informed historical eye witness reports are infinitely preferable to alarmist scare-mongering based on a mere three decades of figures. That's only half a PDO oscillation! That's only three sunspot cycles. Get a grip.
" seems unusual to me" - the history of climate is more than the sum of YOUR petty CO2 philosophy, horatio.
|
|