Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Perspectives. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Scientists Blame ‘Climate Change’ For Thick Sea Ice That Halted Arctic Expedition; You just can't make this stuff up...
Topic Started: Jun 15 2017, 08:25 PM (2,995 Views)
nNeo

W A Mozart
Jun 19 2017, 12:34 PM
To anyone "rational" the use of 1979 as the "average" for Arctic sea ice is, ...ridiculous.

Good news then, since it isn't used as average.

It's the starting point of a specific set of instrumentation allowing apples-to-apples comparison. Reference is generally the average of a 20 year period, or the median of the entire set.

The DMI maps are interesting, but largely guesswork outside of a small area of actual measurements. Also, their definition of extent was different than the modern one, so comparing those maps to the satellite derived ones today is like comparing apples to coconuts.

Here's some good history on the DMI archives, and the actual maps which have mysteriously disappeared from Watts:
http://nsidc.org/data/docs/noaa/g10007-dmi-seaice/
https://nsidc.org/data/docs/noaa/g02203-dmi/
As usual, Watts aims to misinform, not enlighten.

No one has ever claimed that no part of the Arctic has melted before. What's new is that large parts of it are melting most years. We have 300 years of ship attempts to cross, and ~50 years worth of areal and satellite observation confirming that having changed radically over the past two decades, consistent with Arctic amplification of AGW.
Edited by nNeo, Jun 19 2017, 03:34 PM.
“Strong people don’t need strong leaders.”
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robertr2000
Member Avatar

nNeo
Jun 19 2017, 03:31 PM
W A Mozart
Jun 19 2017, 12:34 PM
To anyone "rational" the use of 1979 as the "average" for Arctic sea ice is, ...ridiculous.

Good news then, since it isn't used as average.

It's the starting point of a specific set of instrumentation allowing apples-to-apples comparison. Reference is generally the average of a 20 year period, or the median of the entire set.

The DMI maps are interesting, but largely guesswork outside of a small area of actual measurements. Also, their definition of extent was different than the modern one, so comparing those maps to the satellite derived ones today is like comparing apples to coconuts.

Here's some good history on the DMI archives, and the actual maps which have mysteriously disappeared from Watts:
http://nsidc.org/data/docs/noaa/g10007-dmi-seaice/
https://nsidc.org/data/docs/noaa/g02203-dmi/
As usual, Watts aims to misinform, not enlighten.

No one has ever claimed that no part of the Arctic has melted before. What's new is that large parts of it are melting most years. We have 300 years of ship attempts to cross, and ~50 years worth of areal and satellite observation confirming that having changed radically over the past two decades, consistent with Arctic amplification of AGW.


Posted Image
Edited by Robertr2000, Jun 19 2017, 05:43 PM.
"if that **** wins we'll all hang from nooses"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robertr2000
Member Avatar

Posted Image
"if that **** wins we'll all hang from nooses"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robertr2000
Member Avatar

Posted Image
"if that **** wins we'll all hang from nooses"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
W A Mozart
Member Avatar

nNeo
Jun 19 2017, 03:31 PM
W A Mozart
Jun 19 2017, 12:34 PM
To anyone "rational" the use of 1979 as the "average" for Arctic sea ice is, ...ridiculous.

Good news then, since it isn't used as average.

It's the starting point of a specific set of instrumentation allowing apples-to-apples comparison. Reference is generally the average of a 20 year period, or the median of the entire set.

The DMI maps are interesting, but largely guesswork outside of a small area of actual measurements. Also, their definition of extent was different than the modern one, so comparing those maps to the satellite derived ones today is like comparing apples to coconuts.

Here's some good history on the DMI archives, and the actual maps which have mysteriously disappeared from Watts:
http://nsidc.org/data/docs/noaa/g10007-dmi-seaice/
https://nsidc.org/data/docs/noaa/g02203-dmi/
As usual, Watts aims to misinform, not enlighten.

No one has ever claimed that no part of the Arctic has melted before. What's new is that large parts of it are melting most years. We have 300 years of ship attempts to cross, and ~50 years worth of areal and satellite observation confirming that having changed radically over the past two decades, consistent with Arctic amplification of AGW.
Point 1:
Quote:
 
Good news then, since it isn't used as average.

It's the starting point of a specific set of instrumentation allowing apples-to-apples comparison. Reference is generally the average of a 20 year period, or the median of the entire set.


Nonsense!

By using 1979 as your starting point, as you clearly do with the graph above, you're making the implicit statement that this should be the "normal" or "average" ice coverage for the Arctic. It t'aint. As you and I BOTH know, the year 1979 was at the end period of 4 to 5 previous years of very cold temperatures (at that time being advertised in the press as being the coming "Ice Age") and ice build-up was very much higher than normal. Anytime you use that comparison, you're scamming the casual observer. It's a ruse, a fraud of the highest order. Why not use, oh, say, 1923 as your starting point? No satellites? But, there were people who reported EXACTLY what was going-on in the Arctic. It's all there in numerous documents.

Point 2:
Quote:
 
The DMI maps are interesting, but largely guesswork outside of a small area of actual measurements. Also, their definition of extent was different than the modern one, so comparing those maps to the satellite derived ones today is like comparing apples to coconuts.


Nope! You're comparing apples with apple sauce.... :) . If the claims made by the above referenced post are accurate, and I have no doubt that they are, then your argument has been shot full of holes, and YOU know it! There was a considerable warm period in the Arctic from 1923 to 1938 to the point that the observers of said shrinkage of ice (who didn't need a satellite to verify what they were seeing... :lol: ) were astonished at the now navigable waters that opened-up in the Arctic. You can't tap dance around it. You can't hide that which is obvious. It's all right there for you to read. Are you saying that it didn't happen? That this is all made-up? Again, if it's true, your argument is dead-in-the-water. There was no great concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere during the early 20th century. So, like, how and why did this massive ice reduction occur? Hmmm? How?

Nope, you lost this argument hands down.... :biggrin:


Mozart
Edited by W A Mozart, Jun 19 2017, 06:08 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nNeo

1979 was used as the starting point, because that was the first year that system was operational. It happens to have been fairly near the 20th century average. It was not "at the end period of 4 to 5 previous years of very cold temperatures". You're simply wrong.

Posted Image

Sections of old DMI maps drawn based literally on guesses can't "prove" what was happening in areas that were not visited or observed. The areas that were visited periodically open and close, which no one has disputed, but they are open more often and longer now. Higher latitudes were usually solid, thick ice. That is no longer the case.

Natural variation certainly occurs, and will continue to occur. That doesn't negate what humans are adding to the equation.
“Strong people don’t need strong leaders.”
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robert Stout
Member Avatar

We should postpone funding research on sea ice melting until climate permits............ :biggrin:
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hughmac

W A Mozart
Jun 19 2017, 09:57 AM
W A Mozart
Jun 18 2017, 08:23 PM
Hughmac
Jun 18 2017, 02:15 AM
W A Mozart
Jun 15 2017, 08:27 PM

THE complete list of things caused by global warming...

http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm
:lol:


Mozart
Breaking! The Earth is not only 6,000 years old, Jesus didn't dance with dinosaurs and.... grip yourself here, Mozzie, this is going to shake you... the world isn't flat!!!

Oh yeah and global warming exists and is coming to bite your sorry arse - deal with it. ;-)

Cheers
Hughmac
Dear God in heaven, say it isn't so...!

We have a new global warmer on board!

Hughmac has drunk the Kool-Aid, passed-out in the bushes next to the serving table and is waiting for his 'warming' to begin.

The heat is on, ......!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiuBWPKHTPA&t=333s


Mozart
Quote:
 
Why can't god-bothering Americans get it into their heads that global warming will trigger an ice age? Clue: North West Scotland has palm trees which is on the same latitude as the north of Canada. Another clue: salt water is heavier than fresh water. Last clue: ocean whims.


One more time, "...global warming will trigger an ice age." ....?

Where's the liquor cabinet...?
Posted Image


Life is good....!
..Posted Image




Mozart
Even given three clues, you're still clueless - odd!

I'll keep it short for you: the Gulf Stream keeps the North West of Scotland with an enviable climate because of the route that it takes. If, the Arctic dumps billions of tonnes of fresh water into the North Atlantic it will push the denser Gulf Stream down, as freshwater is lighter than seawater. This will cause the Gulf Stream to alter its course leaving the North Sea and North Atlantic denied their warming element; in other words it will have a climate similar to the rest of the world on the same latitude - Think northern Canada.

Now if you would like to argue about water ice sheets are made of or the relative densities of fresh and salt water, for the matter why the Gulf Stream takes the course that it does. Then please go ahead.

Cheers
Hughmac
Edited by Hughmac, Jun 20 2017, 08:35 AM.
H4T wrote: lobal] nuclear annihilation is preferable to the pre-Trump immigration/refugee policies.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BuckFan

W A Mozart
Jun 18 2017, 08:44 PM
What, wait a minute here...

Could the Libs be pulling our legs again? Massive ice sheets in Greenland, and growing, and we're to believe the nonsense that the Arctic will be ice free by mid 2020? ..... :rotflmao:

https://www.iceagenow.info/greenland-ice-sheet-growing-record-rate/
Posted Image




Quote:
 
Already above average for the whole year … and it’s still March.“Look at those record numbers,” says reader. “It’s already above average for the whole year and it’s still March. Imagine what it’s going to be like at this rate in June? Or will there even be a melt season?”

“What makes this even more concerning in my eyes because we are probably witnessing the massive glaciation of Greenland and parts of Northern Canada again.”http://www.dmi.dk/en/groenland/maalinger/greenland-ice-sheet-surface-mass-budget/
Greenland is not the Arctic. One is a land mass and the other is water.

As we see in Antarctica, parts of Greenland may see higher snow falls as it warms and there is more moisture in the air. But also like Antarctica, we'll see that trend change as it continues to warm.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mr. Tik
Member Avatar

Robertr2000
Jun 19 2017, 12:01 PM
Adolph Hipster
Jun 19 2017, 12:18 AM
Robertr2000
Jun 18 2017, 10:54 PM
W A Mozart
Jun 15 2017, 08:25 PM
Quote:
 
Scientists who cancelled their Arctic expedition due to thick ice conditions haves an interesting excuse for why they had to abandon their research project — climate change.

“We’re doing a large-scale climate change study and before we can even get going on it, climate change is conspiring to force us to cancel that study,” David Barber, a University of Manitoba scientist who lead the expedition, told The Guardian Wednesday.

Barber’s expedition set out in late May after being caught in 25-foot thick ice off the northern coast of Newfoundland. The expedition was forced to turn back after spending hundreds of thousands of dollars for a four-year project to study the effects of global warming on Hudson Bay.

Now, Barber and fellow researchers are blaming their botched expedition on global warming, or climate change, as they call it.

Their evidence? Not much, except the opinions of some scientists involved — at least, The Guardian didn’t present any evidence otherwise. The paper just assumed climate change was the culprit.

Posted Image


http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/14/scientists-blame-climate-change-for-thick-sea-ice-that-halted-arctic-expedition/
:box:
That was three years ago..fail

Posted Image
"2017/06/14"


More like 3 days ago :lol:
I stand corrected..but here is the link that the dailycaller misrepresented

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/14/canada-hudson-bay-climate-change-study-warm-temperatures?CMP=share_btn_tw

Devil in the details

Barber, a climate change scientist at the University of Manitoba, and the other scientists did what they could to help the Coast Guard rescue the vessels and carved a path for the tankers. They also took the time to study the ice that surrounded them, discovering that much of it was the multiyear ice typically seen in the high Arctic.

It was an unexpected find, said Barber, given the time of year and how far south they were. “It’s not something you would expect to see there and not something we’ve seen there before,” he said. “In the high Arctic, climate change is causing the ice to get thinner and there to be less of it. What that does is that it increases the mobility of ice.”
You may be a conservative republican..if you are pro life until you get your mistress knocked up
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robert Stout
Member Avatar

BuckFan
Jun 20 2017, 12:10 PM
W A Mozart
Jun 18 2017, 08:44 PM
What, wait a minute here...

Could the Libs be pulling our legs again? Massive ice sheets in Greenland, and growing, and we're to believe the nonsense that the Arctic will be ice free by mid 2020? ..... :rotflmao:

https://www.iceagenow.info/greenland-ice-sheet-growing-record-rate/
Posted Image




Quote:
 
Already above average for the whole year … and it’s still March.“Look at those record numbers,” says reader. “It’s already above average for the whole year and it’s still March. Imagine what it’s going to be like at this rate in June? Or will there even be a melt season?”

“What makes this even more concerning in my eyes because we are probably witnessing the massive glaciation of Greenland and parts of Northern Canada again.”http://www.dmi.dk/en/groenland/maalinger/greenland-ice-sheet-surface-mass-budget/
Greenland is not the Arctic. One is a land mass and the other is water.

As we see in Antarctica, parts of Greenland may see higher snow falls as it warms and there is more moisture in the air. But also like Antarctica, we'll see that trend change as it continues to warm.
North America used to be part of a much larger continent....How long do you expect these trends to take effect ???............. :dunno:
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
W A Mozart
Member Avatar

Hughmac
Jun 20 2017, 08:32 AM
W A Mozart
Jun 19 2017, 09:57 AM
W A Mozart
Jun 18 2017, 08:23 PM
Hughmac
Jun 18 2017, 02:15 AM
W A Mozart
Jun 15 2017, 08:27 PM

THE complete list of things caused by global warming...

http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm
:lol:


Mozart
Breaking! The Earth is not only 6,000 years old, Jesus didn't dance with dinosaurs and.... grip yourself here, Mozzie, this is going to shake you... the world isn't flat!!!

Oh yeah and global warming exists and is coming to bite your sorry arse - deal with it. ;-)

Cheers
Hughmac
Dear God in heaven, say it isn't so...!

We have a new global warmer on board!

Hughmac has drunk the Kool-Aid, passed-out in the bushes next to the serving table and is waiting for his 'warming' to begin.

The heat is on, ......!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiuBWPKHTPA&t=333s


Mozart
Quote:
 
Why can't god-bothering Americans get it into their heads that global warming will trigger an ice age? Clue: North West Scotland has palm trees which is on the same latitude as the north of Canada. Another clue: salt water is heavier than fresh water. Last clue: ocean whims.


One more time, "...global warming will trigger an ice age." ....?

Where's the liquor cabinet...?
Posted Image


Life is good....!
..Posted Image




Mozart
Even given three clues, you're still clueless - odd!

I'll keep it short for you: the Gulf Stream keeps the North West of Scotland with an enviable climate because of the route that it takes. If, the Arctic dumps billions of tonnes of fresh water into the North Atlantic it will push the denser Gulf Stream down, as freshwater is lighter than seawater. This will cause the Gulf Stream to alter its course leaving the North Sea and North Atlantic denied their warming element; in other words it will have a climate similar to the rest of the world on the same latitude - Think northern Canada.

Now if you would like to argue about water ice sheets are made of or the relative densities of fresh and salt water, for the matter why the Gulf Stream takes the course that it does. Then please go ahead.

Cheers
Hughmac
The real point of this debate is the word 'if.' 'If' is a wonderful word filled with pretense and dread. 'If' the seas rise by a foot there are countless photoshops of Manhattan under 6 feet of water, sharks swimming around downtown Miami and liberals no longer able to dock their yachts on Martha's Vinyard. If, ....if, ....if.

Quote:
 
If, the Arctic dumps billions of tonnes of fresh water into the North Atlantic


'If' is a great word to use in this context, especially when there is no proof! ... :)


Mozart
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nNeo

Robert Stout
Jun 22 2017, 01:34 AM
North America used to be part of a much larger continent....How long do you expect these trends to take effect ?
LOL, you're comparing a process that took 80 million years to one that is being observed in a couple of human lifetimes.
“Strong people don’t need strong leaders.”
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robert Stout
Member Avatar

nNeo
Jun 22 2017, 06:39 AM
Robert Stout
Jun 22 2017, 01:34 AM
North America used to be part of a much larger continent....How long do you expect these trends to take effect ?
LOL, you're comparing a process that took 80 million years to one that is being observed in a couple of human lifetimes.
My grandfather, my father, and I denied the climate was changing......... :tongue:
Edited by Robert Stout, Jun 22 2017, 06:52 AM.
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nNeo

Robert Stout
Jun 22 2017, 06:49 AM
My grandfather, my father, and I denied the climate was changing.
Genetic defects can cause all sorts of problems.
“Strong people don’t need strong leaders.”
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hughmac

W A Mozart
Jun 22 2017, 05:42 AM
Hughmac
Jun 20 2017, 08:32 AM
W A Mozart
Jun 19 2017, 09:57 AM
W A Mozart
Jun 18 2017, 08:23 PM
Hughmac
Jun 18 2017, 02:15 AM

Quoting limited to 5 levels deephttp://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htmthe world isn't flat!!!

Oh yeah and global warming exists and is coming to bite your sorry arse - deal with it. ;-)

Cheers
Hughmac
Dear God in heaven, say it isn't so...!

We have a new global warmer on board!

Hughmac has drunk the Kool-Aid, passed-out in the bushes next to the serving table and is waiting for his 'warming' to begin.

The heat is on, ......!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiuBWPKHTPA&t=333s


Mozart
Quote:
 
Why can't god-bothering Americans get it into their heads that global warming will trigger an ice age? Clue: North West Scotland has palm trees which is on the same latitude as the north of Canada. Another clue: salt water is heavier than fresh water. Last clue: ocean whims.


One more time, "...global warming will trigger an ice age." ....?

Where's the liquor cabinet...?
Posted Image


Life is good....!
..Posted Image




Mozart
Even given three clues, you're still clueless - odd!

I'll keep it short for you: the Gulf Stream keeps the North West of Scotland with an enviable climate because of the route that it takes. If, the Arctic dumps billions of tonnes of fresh water into the North Atlantic it will push the denser Gulf Stream down, as freshwater is lighter than seawater. This will cause the Gulf Stream to alter its course leaving the North Sea and North Atlantic denied their warming element; in other words it will have a climate similar to the rest of the world on the same latitude - Think northern Canada.

Now if you would like to argue about water ice sheets are made of or the relative densities of fresh and salt water, for the matter why the Gulf Stream takes the course that it does. Then please go ahead.

Cheers
Hughmac
The real point of this debate is the word 'if.' 'If' is a wonderful word filled with pretense and dread. 'If' the seas rise by a foot there are countless photoshops of Manhattan under 6 feet of water, sharks swimming around downtown Miami and liberals no longer able to dock their yachts on Martha's Vinyard. If, ....if, ....if.

Quote:
 
If, the Arctic dumps billions of tonnes of fresh water into the North Atlantic


'If' is a great word to use in this context, especially when there is no proof! ... :)


Mozart
Look, I've tried to explain and I am not going to type it all out again for you, so do yourself a favour and read:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shutdown_of_thermohaline_circulation

Cheers
Hughmac
H4T wrote: lobal] nuclear annihilation is preferable to the pre-Trump immigration/refugee policies.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
W A Mozart
Member Avatar

Quote:
 
Look, I've tried to explain and I am not going to type it all out again for you, so do yourself a favour and read:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shutdown_of_thermohaline_circulation

Cheers
Hughmac


I did.

Not impressed.

First, there is this statement:
Quote:
 
Lohmann and Dima 2010 found a weakening of the AMOC since the late 1930s


So, this has nothing to do with global warming. Nada, bupkis. (CO2 rates dramatically increased in the 1950's)

Second, there is this:
Quote:
 
A study published in 2016 found further evidence for a considerable impact from sea level rise for the U.S. East Coast. The study confirms earlier research findings which identified the region as a hotspot for rising seas,


Complete gibberish. There has been NO global sea level rise outside of the very, very gradual sea level rise that has taken place for the past two or three centuries. We come back to the 'what if' nonsense.

Third, there is this:
Quote:
 
1)Climate scientists Michael Mann of Penn State and Stefan Rahmstorf from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (Mann of the now infamous "hockey stick" graph. 2) James Hansen and Makiko Sato stated.... (Hansen is the biggest loon out there on climate science, not even NASA wants this nutcase back)


These two guys? Really? When I read that both Hansen and Mann were behind this study, alarm bells go off. '0' credibility.

AMOC may in fact have some merit in the context that climate is ALWAYS changing, and that Gulf Stream circulations may have modified over the years (since 1930), but this has nothing to do with the global warming argument.

Scotland may be getting a bit chillier in the future, but that only means that the value of Scottish woolen sweaters will go up! :)

Mozart




Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Attaburnsinhell

Trump has already said global warming is a hoax

Since Trump is a reliable liar, we should take that as an affirmation that man made global warming is a fact
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nNeo

W A Mozart
Jun 22 2017, 06:12 PM
climate is ALWAYS changing
Yes, and always changing for a reason(s).

Sea level is most certainly rising, the rate of rise is accelerating, and the east coast of the US has increased more than some other areas, which is consistent with a slowing Gulf Stream.

Posted Image

Posted Image
Edited by nNeo, Jun 22 2017, 06:28 PM.
“Strong people don’t need strong leaders.”
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
W A Mozart
Member Avatar

Quote:
 
"Sea level is most certainly rising, the rate of rise is accelerating.."


Nonsense! Rubbish! A steaming Austrian cow pile wafting amidst the Edelweiss...!

I don't have time today to look-up all of the data, but this is total BS! (and would include non-Austrian cows and bulls...! :) )

Mozart
Edited by W A Mozart, Jun 23 2017, 04:21 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · UnitedStates.com FOREIGN* & DEFENSE · Next Topic »
Add Reply