Arctic sea ice vanishing faster than 'our most pessimistic models': researcher

Do Cosmic Ray Changes Regulate Ice Ages? Global Warming Puzzler
By: Bradley Fikes — February 6th, 2010

According to a new paper by Gerald E. Marsh (PDF), they do. If true, this has great implications for the debate over whether humans are causing global warming, or whether it is a natural phenomenon. More about Marsh here.

Marsh says that changes in carbon dioxide levels simply can’t account for the differences in temperatures between interglacials, while changes in cloud cover caused by a change in galactic cosmic ray flux can.

www.nctimes.com...
arxiv.org...

[edit on 092828p://bSunday2010 by Stormdancer777]

i saw a report on TV last year from a group of international scientists who came to a completely different conclusion...

this whole subject is such a mess..

Gotta love those who don't care about the planet. (aka Republicans)

But enough of those clowns.

As for the climate change issue...it's going to happen if we weren't here. In fact, it's a cycle. The planet evolves like all the species that inhabit it do.

Are we helping the planet move to a direction that proves nothing but negative effects for us? Absolutely.

Are we the Main cause of the change though? No.

Arctic sea ice vanishing!!! I for one do not believe this BS.

Why do the alaskan crab boat captains say different.

These guys fish at the edges of the ice and some started out fishing as crew on crab boats 30+ years ago and say they don't see that much change long term.
I have my self heard from gold miners out of Nome Alaska that winter over that the ice has not decreased over time.
yes some years there is more or less ice but that has happened for the last hundred years since mining started there.

It sounds like these researchers don't expect anyone else to ever go to these waters and verify what they claim.

Have you ever wondered why all the rapidly vanishing ice is some place few go and is almost imposable for everyone else to verifie.

I wonder how many of these researcher were in these areas 20 to 30 years ago. and have seen for themselves to ice disappearing.

Or are they newcomers that never seen over time the changes.
and just replaying what they are told is happening.

Theory: NWO uses HAARP to drown most of us sheeple within a year or 2, then put everything back in reverse, freeze the artic again.

I dont know just a tought.

Originally posted by metamagic
reply to post by Stormdancer777

 

A alternate possible explanation does not change the empirical observations about the rate of loss of Arctic ice. The problem still exists irrespective of its cause. However it certainly does provide a possible contributing factor to the unexpected rapidity of melting.

Thank you for an intelligent post. You raise some excellent points.

What exactly are the empirical observations? The scientist conducted their study for only one winter. How did they measure the sea ice and with what data was it compared?

The article starts with Prof. Barber claiming the ice is melting faster than expected to Dr. Hanesiak claiming its all man made with no corollary between the two.

reply to post by lpowell0627

The only thing we do agree on is that the Earth's temperatures are a cycle and occurred before humans and will continue after humans. Humans have an impact, but I personally feel that it's negligible at best. Speeding up warming by 100, 200, even 500 years is really nothing when looking at a 250,000 - 750,000 or so year cycle.

Reasonable point, as far as it goes.

But what if we are speeding it up by 300,000 or so years in a 250,000 - 750,000 or so cycle?

Because that is what we are doing.

reply to post by SphinxMontreal


"Anyone who thinks man can control the temperature of the planet has been seriously drinking his bathwater. We are along for the ride and whatever the Earth, Sun, and Volcanoes decide to do is whats gonna happen and there is pretty much nothing we can do about it but attempt to survive."

There is a big difference between a claim of controlling the weather, and a claim that we are effecting the climate.
We can control the effect, if we are having one.
The OP has provided some very important research.
These finding are expected based on the effect scientist think we are having on climate. And what is significant is that it is appearing quicker than thought.

Scientist believe we are effecting climate. They research the areas that would indicate that. The arctic is one of those areas. This is what would be called negative feedback.

The Earth is NOT an invincible mechanism endowed with miraculous self healing powers.

The south is melting quicker too.

Published Sunday in Nature Geoscience, the same study shows that the smaller but less stable West Antarctic icesheet is also shedding significant mass.
Scientists worry that rising global temperatures could trigger a rapid disintegration of West Antarctica, which holds enough frozen water to push up the global ocean watermark by about five metres (16 feet).

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Anyone who thinks we cannot effect the earth, and its climate, I urger you to consider this:
[rant]Some people do not believe that we have no effect.
Homeostasis is a system that Usually Life relies on in maintaining a stable and constant environment( Internal mostlywhen we look at all of life).
Humanity and its activity is changing many of these constant factors that the Earths Homeostatic processes maintain.
We damming, redirecting or are changing water ways, we are altering massive tracts of terrain, its plant and animal life.
We are polluting the seas, changing the chemical constants of the soils and the seas with fertilizers and pesticides and herbicides.
We are altering the genetic structures of plants and now animals, that have been created in a stable and constant process of evolution.
We are pumping all sorts of gases into the atmosphere.
We are cutting and burning massive tracts of land annually.
Soil erosion and soil salinity is are ever increasing problem. As is desertification.
Regional weather system and precipitation is changing in regions that have had constant and stable Glacial Ice that is now melting.
Not to mention the same has happened in regions where deforestation has occurred, and where water systems have been altered.

Homeostasis is not an Infinite system that is impervious to change or age.
In ALL organisms, it is faults, changes or imbalances in the Homeostatic process that causes many diseases and even Death.
Change, imbalance, and age in homeostatic systems increase pressure on any homeostatic system, this pressure effects efficiency to cope and ultimately we see Negative feed back that in organisms will present as disease or illness or death.
So when you talk about Homeostasis, the Earth and life, look in the mirror.
You are an example of Homeostasis.
If you don't take care of yourself, you get Ill.
Your body gives you feed back. Like if you eat bad food, don't exercise and smoke, your negative feed back may be a heart attack due to the stress, pressure and inefficiency of your bodies ability to maintain a heathy stable and constant environment. Homeostasis.

If you think the Planet is any different, well sit back and ignore the chest pains because you think Homeostasis cures bad habits. [/rant]


S and F op.

reply to post by metamagic


Arctic Sea Ice Increases at Record Rate

Apparently the seriousness of the melt is a matter of interpretation! Here is a scientist that doesn't agree with the doom and gloom consensus.

Certainly the 30 year arctic trend in ice area is downward, even the most committed global warming scientist has to admit this happens regularly in climate along with regular 30 year uptrends. The questions are, did we cause it or not, and was CO2 the instigating factor. The rapid recovery of ice levels has to have some meaning regarding the severity of the problem. This goes directly in the face of accelerated global warming and the doom and gloom scenarios promoted by our politicians and polyscienticians.

Why are my conclusions different from the news reported records? I think it’s likely due to the fact that the scientists used the monthly data which is processed using a weighted filter of the daily data that incorporates a longer time frame than a single month. This means their use of the monthly data to establish a monthly trend was in error and the real record down trends were actually set in 1999, 2003 and 1984. While the record uptrends were in 2007, 2008 and 1996.