All Scientists are Sceptics ~Professor Bob Carter

Whenever someone asserts that a scientific question is “settled,” they tell me immediately that they don’t understand the first thing about science. Science is never settled. Dr David Deming

Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of the science of climate change is the lack of any real substance in attempts to justify the hypothesis ~Professor Stewart Franks

A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf

Monday, 1 October 2012

Record Antarctic Sea Ice: NOAA

Image: National Geographic
Sunshine Hours Blog (It's the Sun!!!) reports on NOAA's figures:
But I just found another data set, NOAA’s Sea Ice Extent here. (thanks to commenter HaroldW at the Blackboard)
And it turns out day 265 set an all time record, and then day 266 broke that record. Days 265 through 270 are now the 6 highest Antarctic Sea Ice Extent’s of all time!!!!
To see Sunshine Hours'  NOAA's  figures go to LINK.

Also, From Steve Goddard's Real Science:

Sea Ice Sets All Time Record High  (LINK)

Antarctica has broken the record for the greatest sea ice extent ever measured at either pole.


8 comments:

  1. No doubt John and his fellow travellers will find something 'scientifically' wrong with this. Perhaps 'Skeptical Science' could be a likely reference point.

    :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Michael, no I have given up on you, if you wish to make a comparison with the maximum winter derived Antarctic ice with the minimum summer derived Arctic ice then go for it.

      Tamino has an interesting comparison with sea ice insolation for both the Arctic and Antarctic

      Delete
    2. At least we publish your replies, John, unlike your nonsense speaking friend, who just magically loses comments.

      Delete
    3. Gee, John, your old mate Eyespiknonsense has non-published comments from me and two other who have emailed me.

      I have only non-published one post from the Eyespiknonsense galoot which contained unacceptable remarks.

      He has been proven to be a liar. But then, John, we have seen some of the opinion that you have posted.

      It seems that there is a theme - could we compare it to the theme of MWP, Roman Warming, Minoan Warming?

      Oh, NO! They were caused by SUVs running riot, weren't they, John.

      No, they really were.....weren't they John? Weren't they Eyespiknonsense? Weren't they Mike (WtFDeniers)?

      Delete
  2. Yep, your nonsense speaking comrade has again proven himself to be a liar by non publishing another comment.

    ReplyDelete
  3. thanks for sharing.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hello,

    I have a few questions or comments I'd like to add - I will split my comments into two posts so they fit. Sorry for the lengthy post. Maybe those who deny my facts and opinions can explain your reasoning. As, when I do research its critical to study both opposing views as you will only inevitably find information that fits your existing opinions otherwise. As, this site is one of the very few "skeptic" sites I've come across that try and use science and not just made up witchery. (Thanks for that.)

    I know that there are natural cycles. Natural weather patterns. But man is also very significant. We put a hole in the Ozone using the likes of hairspray. We also increased the severity of the Dust Bowl of the 1930s due to improper farming methods which created a more arid, drier soil mitigating evaporation – thus increasing the severity of the drought and increasing temperatures for 2/3 of the country.

    Moving on..
    As ice plays a pivotal role in reflecting those suns rays back to space. It would make logical sense that the less ice there is, the less sun rays are being reflected. Thus, making it warmer. Greenhouse effect - and chemistry. Carbon Atoms attract and absorb heat. More co2 in the atmosphere, the warmer it gets trapping in heat from the sun (just like adding feathers to a blanket makes it warmer, more co2 is making it warmer).

    The glacial/ice records going back approx. 1 million years. We see cyclical, natural co2 levels rise and fall..From lows of around 20 parts per million to average highs of around 150 parts per million of co2 in the atmosphere. This change of about 130ppm takes about 7,000 years.

    Which took nature roughly 7,000 years to see an increase of about 130ppm - In just the past 70 years, we see an increase of about 240ppm of co2 to this new peak of '390'ppm. An increase comprised of carbon12 atoms - plant, organic matter, ie fossil fuels. As opposed to it just being 'volcanoes' as the cause which emit carbon13 atoms. So, clearly 'man' is playing a very significant role to our atmosphere. Its hard to deny that this increase of co2 is not doing anything! And, hard to play it off as just some coincidence either.

    So, with more co2 - melting ice - all this seems very plausible to me, that man is or is partly the cause of global warming.

    ...Continued...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Continued...

    I will continue to say, that it is unfair and we should not enforce legislation or policies that are unfair to the American economy. Such as the Kyoto Treaty. Where all the other countries, such as China did not have to reduce emissions but the US did. Granted, the US should still try and remain as a leader in such areas.

    In saying that, I also believe Carbon Taxes will NOT hurt the economy. Taxes do play a role in the rise and fall of economies but they are not the driving force. Only propaganda and political talking points make taxes a driving force.

    So, who's controlling who - politicians who allow energy companies to continue their monopoly making billions weekly on dwindling oil resources? Or those looking to research, develop and improve existing alternative energy resources to make them cheaper and more effective?

    Infinite Growth of society can NOT be sustained with a finite amount of resources. Even with the most conservative estimates – leaves maybe 50-75 years of oil reserves remaining. With an additional 100 million people being born onto this planet every year, all requiring, all using more and more dwindling resources - it is critical and inevitable that we change to other alternative energies anyways!

    So, its a win-win with initiatives to reducing emissions as it will lead to cheaper, cleaner more effective forms of renewable energies. All I see is staying on fossil fuels as being a lose-lose!

    Anyways, think I wrote enough - I just didn't know where else to post this .. And, I'd be very eager to get a rebuttal to my claims or at the very least a response.

    I will add, the debate shall continue. Science can never be taken just for verbatem. Debates in science are critical as it may lead to newer technologies that may benefit all of us. But, we are also playing with fire. because, what science can not exactly tell us is what GW may or may not cause. Warmer temperatures don't bring fertile land, they bring drought and famine. Yes, of course some of this can be cyclical - but we just do not know.

    Every human civilization has collapsed in the past b/c of greed and an inability to compromise. Mostly out of political fear and desires. Never really a fear of what may happen to our planet or environment. And, we are no different today. And that very well can be where this is headed too.

    Ok, I just went onto babble some more. Apologies.

    Thanks for your time and allowing me to share! Have a Happy New Year!

    ReplyDelete





All serious comments published after moderation.
Comments should be polite, and respect all views.
No bad language. Spam never makes it!