Polar ice cap expanding. Global warming called off. ?

a reply to: liejunkie01

Again, increasing Antarctic sea ice is not a good thing, it's not a sign of cooling it is sign that something is heating up the Antarctic enough to cause melting. That ice is not forming on the ocean, it is coming from the land in pieces.

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: beezzer

It was religion that trapped humanity in that thinking and science that proved otherwise.

Is it a settled science?

Do we, in fact, know everything?

Or is this simple hubris and arrogance on the part of humanity.

If it is settled, then all the scientists can just go home, paint water colors. Do some gardening. Become a chef.

Fact is, Ms. Kali, we don't know everything. Not by a long shot.

It is not settled, that's why I posted the NASA link re the Antarctic ice, it is also NASA that notes the US average is cooler than other areas than expected, they're working on that too.

a reply to: Kali74

But, if you apply it to the Man Made Global Warming theory since the earth is actually getting hotter that Antarctic sea ice shouldn't have even been able to form.

originally posted by: liejunkie01
a reply to: lostbook

How can you say that?

The warming crowd has been using polar ice data to "prove" warming from the beginning.

This is the reason for the alarm.

Now evidence is showing otherwise and the warming crowd wants to spin it a totally different way, or totally ignore the evidence.

If you actually read the reports there is a lot more than just polar ice caps that enter into the equation.

Also, LOL, by warming crowd, do you mean every scientist on earth..or well over 90% of them?

a reply to: Timing

It didn't form that's what I'm saying. It's coming from the land in chunks.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: beezzer

It was religion that trapped humanity in that thinking and science that proved otherwise.

Religion didnt "trap" anything. People did.
And Science, like Religion, is a control tool.

a reply to: Kali74

But the ice would have had to melt.... that's what I'm saying. Huge pieces of ice just don't melt and then reform into the ocean.

Huge chunks of ice might have broken off for natural reasons, but not because they melted. If it was hot enough to melt the ice then it simultaneously can't be cold enough to have the ice reform.

originally posted by: Timing
a reply to: Kali74

But the ice would have had to melt.... that's what I'm saying. Huge pieces of ice just don't melt and then reform into the ocean.

Huge chunks of ice might have broken off for natural reasons, but not because they melted. If it was hot enough to melt the ice then it simultaneously can't be cold enough to have the ice reform.

It doesn't melt and reform... It melts enough to snap off and fall in. Just like icicles falling from your house after winter, in the spring.

a reply to: Timing

Please try to understand there is a HUGE difference between ice sheets (that ice on land), and sea ice (that ice in the sea). I think Kali have tried to tell you this a few times

Skeptic arguments that Antarctica is gaining ice frequently hinge on an error of omission, namely ignoring the difference between land ice and sea ice.

...snip...

All the sea ice talk aside, it is quite clear that really when it comes to Antarctic ice and sea levels, sea ice is not the most important thing to measure. In Antarctica, the largest and most important ice mass is the land ice of the West Antarctic and East Antarctic ice sheets.

Therefore, how is Antarctic land ice doing?

Estimates of total Antarctic land ice changes and approximate sea level contributions using a combination of different measurement techniques (Shepherd, 2012). Shaded areas represent the estimate uncertainty (1-sigma).

Estimates of recent changes in Antarctic land ice (Figure 2, bottom panel) show an increasing contribution to sea level with time, although not as fast a rate or acceleration as Greenland. Between 1992 and 2011, the Antarctic Ice Sheets overall lost 1350 giga-tonnes (Gt) or 1,350,000,000,000 tonnes into the oceans, at an average rate of 70 Gt per year (Gt/yr). Because a reduction in mass of 360 Gt/year represents an annual global-average sea level rise of 1 mm, these estimates equate to an increase in global-average sea levels by 0.19 mm/yr.

There is variation between regions within Antarctica (Figure 2, top panel), with the West Antarctic Ice Sheet and the Antarctic Peninsula Ice Sheet losing ice mass, and with an increasing rate. The East Antarctic Ice Sheet is growing slightly over this period but not enough to offset the other losses. There are of course uncertainties in the estimation methods but independent data from multiple measurement techniques (explained here) all show the same thing, Antarctica is losing land ice as a whole, and these losses are accelerating quickly.

You can read the entire article here
www.skepticalscience.com...

Edit to add: And if you look to the left on that site, this thread is about myth #10.

a reply to: WP4YT

Of course, or so much ice forms on it and causes it to break off because there is too much weight for it to hold.

Either way that has been happening for thousands of years. They would have to prove that those are breaking off because of Man Made Global Warming.

a reply to: kloejen

But wouldn't it stand to reason that ice forming and melting is a natural occurrence that has been happening for thousands of years and the only difference is that we are in a climate cycle where a lot of ice doesn't form?

originally posted by: Timing
a reply to: kloejen

But wouldn't it stand to reason that ice forming and melting is a natural occurrence that has been happening for thousands of years and the only difference is that we are in a climate cycle where a lot of ice doesn't form?

Yes but no.
The only difference is that this time around we are here and we are bunch of homicidal maniacs with a bloodthirsty appetite for world domination and total control of everyone's mind and spirit.

a reply to: FinalCountdown

You mean this time around we have humans with a bunch of high tech scientific equipment that can mislead them into thinking correlation = causation with a limited data set?

Let's just blame all the melting on the Higgs Boson they are now saying that our universe shouldn't exist because the Higgs exists.

a reply to: FinalCountdown
Sea ice fluctuates every year, and for some reason they do not understand, the sea ice is increasing yearly. Its the land ice that we have to worry about. That is decreasing at alarming rates for the first time in known history. This land ice is the ice that has been packed up going back to prehistoric times, its where we get our ice cores from. It's also the land ice that increases the sea levels. The decease in land ice may be what is contributing to the increase in sea ice btw, we don't really fully understand the whole relationship yet.

Anyway, when someone from the “climate denial” crowd attempts to disprove global warming, they always trot out these sea ice increases. The fact is though, they are intentionally giving you misleading information by not including the land ice.

a reply to: defcon5

But for sea ice to increase the air temperature in that area has to get cold enough to freeze the sea into ice. That is what is so hard to understand.

For there to be a global increase in temperature then not even sea ice should be forming.

As the decline in land ice could certainly be due to low precipitation and not allowing land ice to form.

news.nationalgeographic.com...

A newly discovered volcano found buried beneath a thick layer of ice in Antarctica could speed up ice loss and raise global sea levels when it erupts, scientists say.

My biggest gripe with the GW crowd is news like this... or I read several years ago about more methane coming up from the sea floor than was expected, could all be playing a part in the climate flux and all I see on TV anymore is man-made global warming hysteria..

I have no doubt we are having an effect on the climate... I doubt we are 100% the cause like many people like to claim.

the article is from Nov 2013

originally posted by: Timing
a reply to: defcon5
But for sea ice to increase the air temperature in that area has to get cold enough to freeze the sea into ice. That is what is so hard to understand.

Its vastly more complex than that, so much so that I don't even know if scientists have everything factored in. As an example, as the land ice melts, you get massive amounts of fresh water intrusion that offsets the salinity that drives the Gulf Stream. The Gulf Stream has immense effects on the climate, as a matter of fact, if the Gulf Stream ever completely collapsed they believe UK would turn into a sheet of ice. You also have issues with the amount of sunlight that is absorbed or refracted according to the amount of snow and ice coverage that you have.

So the gulf stream and the absorption/refraction of sunlight are just two factors you haven't taken into account. There are most likely many more, some we might not even understand yet.

originally posted by: FinalCountdown
Yes but no.
The only difference is that this time around we are here and we are bunch of homicidal maniacs with a bloodthirsty appetite for world domination and total control of everyone's mind and spirit.

Now you see, you are going the other way, I liked the Moon thread, but this is a different application.
Sure enough there are the homicidal maniacs in power who would do/do exactly as you say, they ain't gonna make much difference to assist global warming though. Thing is all the changes in the past, continents breaking away, plate tectonics, ice ages blah blah are huge in comparison to what a bunch of smelly farters can do. There is no way we can compare, even if we all got blow torches out and beavered away at all the ice in the world it would still thousands of years. Now who the feck is gonna do that. We do have that magical number of '5000 years' to melt all the world's ice just by doing what we do now without the blowtorches though, even if you go with that drift there would still be plenty somewhere to not get your backside wet. Oh yes! I forgot about the Sahara being lush, ahem, 5000 years ago, WTF happened there, divine intervention? a fat Elvis from outer space?
No, this whole thing is about introspection philosophy being imparted to the plebs, by elitists, "what know better" whose carbon fartprint is just the same, if not worse.

a reply to: Irishhaf
I think that it was a very precisely balanced system. Once we nudged it just enough out of whack, we go over the cliff where the natural processes speed and increase the problem. Just like the sun I mentioned above, as the ice melts more light is absorbed, increasing the heat, and causing even more ice to melt. It becomes a snowballing catch 22 cycle.

originally posted by: Timing
a reply to: defcon5

As the decline in land ice could certainly be due to low precipitation and not allowing land ice to form.

Sorry, just caught this bit.
The land ice never had an significant decreases before, again that is why we can drill core samples from it dating back to prehistoric times. While lack of precipitation may decrease its yearly growth, it still shouldn't be declining like it is.

BTW, some seem to think that “global warming” means that it get hotter everywhere. That is not the case. Some areas may get colder (such as the UK I mentioned above due to the Gulf Stream), some will get drier, others will get increased precipitation.