Antarctic Sea Ice At Record New High

Here some more of my facts, since 2008........................http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/01/22/surprise-theres-an-active-volcano-under-antarctic-ice/ thanks, WUWT.

"The volcano on the West Antarctic Ice Sheet began erupting some 2,000 years ago and remains active to this day. Using airborne ice-sounding radar, scientists discovered a layer of ash produced by a ‘subglacial’ volcano. It extends across an area larger than Wales. The volcano is located beneath the West Antarctic ice sheet in the Hudson Mountains at latitude 74.6°South, longitude 97°West."

 

here, explain this chart, see link.....http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.anom.south.jpg From the Cryoshpere Today page.

Hmmmmm.............

 

So if it was erupting for 2000 years, why did it only suddenly start melting massive amounts of ice now?

Someone with basic logic skills would have asked that instantly. Naturally, that excludes all deniers. Lacking even rudimentary common sense, deniers have no intellectual defenses against getting sucked into cults.

Why do deniers think "Look, a volcano!" isn't a moron argument? Volcanoes have always been around, so what magical force prevented them from melting ice until recently? If there was a sudden recent massive upswing in vulcanism, that could explain something, but there's not a bit of data inidicating such a thing. Therefore "Look, a volcano!" is an argument only clueless cultists would attempt to use.

 

yep. wasn't it your peers stating that the ice has been melting? What did I miss in all of the posts here? 160 billion tons of it. All blamed on GW. So, is it now you're stating it isn't melting?

 

livefree was speaking of ice sheets on the continent, and jc responds by pointing to seasonal sea ice. Dishonesty or stupidity, we'll let jc explain which it was.

The Antarctic sea ice increase, of course, was correctly predicted by AGW theory (Dr. Manabe) back in 1991. It's just another example of correct predictions from AGW science, which is why AGW science has such credibility.

 

wasn't it your peers stating that the ice has been melting? What did I miss in all of the posts here? 160 billion tons of it. All blamed on GW. So, is it now you're stating it isn't melting?

 

I can't make any sense of your raving. Your responses to me have nothing to do with what I wrote. You're babbling randomly, not making any sense to anyone.

 

The only way the ice sheets over the continent can be thinning would be if there was less snowfall, something that would be counter to AGW predictions. They always move downhill. They cannot melt since the summer temperature is well below zero (-10C/14F) in the summer.

 

It has indeed been warmer before today and there are indeed "natural cycles to the climate". So what? Neither of those facts means that mankind's activities and the consequent increased CO2 levels are not driving the current abrupt warming trend, or that the mere existence of natural climate cycles means that there is a natural cycle (unidentified by you and the other deniers) that is currently causing a temperature increase (there isn't - actually just the opposite - a natural cooling cycle has been happening for the last five thousand years).

The Earth Is Getting Hotter Faster Than It Ever Has Since Dawn Of Civilization
Business Insider
JENNIFER WELSH
MAR. 7, 2013
A new analysis of Earth's climate over the last 11,300 years indicates our global temperature is now higher than it has been for most of that period. The temperature is also rising faster than we've ever seen. By 2100, the Earth will be warmer than any time during this period no matter what we do, they project. "We already knew that on a global scale, Earth is warmer today than it was over much of the past 2,000 years," study researcher Shaun Marcott of Oregon State said in a statement. "Now we know that it is warmer than most of the past 11,300 years. This is of particular interest because the Holocene spans the entire period of human civilization."

The study was published Friday, March 8 in the journal Science. The researchers used data from 73 global sites to reconstruct Earth's temperatures back to the end of the last Ice Age. Their data came from the chemical and physical characteristics of fossils from ocean sediment cores and terrestrial archives. During the last 5,000 years, the Earth as a whole cooled about 1.3 degrees Fahrenheit – until the past 100 years, when it warmed about 1.3 degrees. The largest changes were in the northern hemisphere, where there are more land masses and greater human populations. "The last century stands out as the anomaly in this record of global temperatures since the end of the last ice age," said Candace Major, program director in the National Science Foundation's Division of Ocean Sciences. Predictions indicate this trend will continue, with the Earth warming between two and up to 11.5 degrees by 2100. We will really be seeing the effects of global climate change by then: In 2100, spring will come to New York in mid-February.

The so- called Little Ice Age had a beginning and an ending, caused by natural factors, and it was regional. It had ended by 1850. Climate scientists have concluded that the timing and areas affected by the LIA suggest several largely independent regional climate changes, rather than a globally synchronous period of cooling. At most there was some modest cooling of the Northern Hemisphere during the period.

The global warming over the last century has nothing to with the LIA, no matter what your fraudulent denier cult myths tell you.

Little Ice Age
Wikipedia - the free encyclopedia
Causes
Scientists have tentatively identified these possible causes of the Little Ice Age: orbital cycles; decreased solar activity; increased volcanic activity; altered ocean current flows;[65] the inherent variability of global climate; and reforestation following decreases in the human population.

The most recent study found that an especially massive tropical volcanic eruption in 1258, possibly of Mount Rinjani, followed by three smaller ones in 1268, 1275, and 1284 that did not allow the climate to recover, may have caused the initial cooling, and that the 1452–53 eruption of Kuwae in Vanuatu triggered a second pulse of cooling.[12][13] The cold summers can be maintained by sea-ice/ocean feedbacks long after volcanic aerosols are removed.

Orbital cycles
Orbital forcing due to cycles in the earth's orbit around the sun has, for the past 2,000 years, caused a long-term northern hemisphere cooling trend that continued through the Medieval period and the Little Ice Age. The rate of Arctic cooling is roughly 0.02 degrees Celsius per century.[66] This trend could be extrapolated to continue into the future, possibly leading to a full ice age, but the twentieth-century instrumental temperature record shows a sudden reversal of this trend, with a rise in global temperatures attributed to greenhouse gas emissions.[66]

Solar activity
There is still a very poor understanding of the correlation between low sunspot activity and cooling temperatures.[67][68] During the period 1645–1715, in the middle of the Little Ice Age, there was a period of low solar activity known as the Maunder Minimum. The Spörer Minimum has also been identified with a significant cooling period between 1460 and 1550.[69] Other indicators of low solar activity during this period are levels of the isotopes carbon-14 and beryllium-10.[70]

On the other hand, in a 2012 paper, Miller et al. link the Little Ice Age to an "unusual 50-year-long episode with four large sulfur-rich explosive eruptions, each with global sulfate loading >60 Tg," and notes that "large changes in solar irradiance are not required."[12]

Volcanic activity
Throughout the Little Ice Age, the world experienced heightened volcanic activity.[71] When a volcano erupts, its ash reaches high into the atmosphere and can spread to cover the whole earth. This ash cloud blocks out some of the incoming solar radiation, leading to worldwide cooling that can last up to two years after an eruption. Also emitted by eruptions is sulfur in the form of sulfur dioxide gas. When this gas reaches the stratosphere, it turns into sulfuric acid particles, which reflect the sun's rays, further reducing the amount of radiation reaching Earth's surface. The 1815 eruption of Tambora in Indonesia blanketed the atmosphere with ash; the following year, 1816, came to be known as the Year Without a Summer, when frost and snow were reported in June and July in both New England and Northern Europe. Other volcanoes that erupted during the era and may have contributed to the cooling include Billy Mitchell (ca. 1580), Mount Parker (1641), Long Island (Papua New Guinea) (ca. 1660), Laki (1783) and Huaynaputina (1600).[19]

Ocean conveyor slowdown
Another possibility is that there was a slowing of thermohaline circulation.[27][65][72][73] The circulation could have been interrupted by the introduction of a large amount of fresh water into the North Atlantic, possibly caused by a period of warming before the Little Ice Age known as the Medieval Warm Period.[33][74][75] There is some concern that a shutdown of thermohaline circulation could happen again as a result of the present warming period.[76][77]

Decreased human populations
Some researchers have proposed that human influences on climate began earlier than is normally supposed (see Early anthropocene for more details) and that major population declines in Eurasia and the Americas reduced this impact, leading to a cooling trend. William Ruddiman has proposed that somewhat reduced populations of Europe, East Asia, and the Middle East during and after the Black Death caused a decrease in agricultural activity. He suggests reforestation took place, allowing more carbon dioxide uptake from the atmosphere, which may have been a factor in the cooling noted during the Little Ice Age. Ruddiman further hypothesizes that a reduced population in the Americas after European contact in the early sixteenth century could have had a similar effect.[78][79] Faust, Gnecco, Mannstein and Stamm (2005)[80] and Nevle (2011)[81] supported depopulation in the Americas as a factor, asserting that humans had cleared considerable amounts of forests to support agriculture in the Americas before the arrival of Europeans brought on a population collapse. A 2008 study of sediment cores and soil samples further suggests that carbon dioxide uptake via reforestation in the Americas could have contributed to the Little Ice Age.[82] The depopulation is linked to a drop in carbon dioxide levels observed at Law Dome, Antarctica.[80]

Inherent variability of climate
Spontaneous fluctuations in global climate might explain past variability. It is very difficult to know what the true level of variability from only internal causes might be, since other forcings, as noted above, exist; and their magnitude may not be known either. One approach to evaluating internal variability is to use long integrations of coupled ocean-atmosphere global climate models. These have the advantage that the external forcing is known to be zero; but the disadvantage is that they may not fully reflect reality. These variations may result from chaos-driven changes in the oceans, the atmosphere, or interactions between the two.[83] Two studies have concluded that the demonstrated inherent variability is not great enough to account for the Little Ice Age.[83][84]

 

LOLOLOL....wordless random babbling. The last resort of the delusional denier cultist when their drivel is completely debunked, and their lies and lack of reason or logic are exposed.

 

Agree, it is hilarious, your inability to provide one singe piece of evidence over a sixth month timeframe. And beating a dead horse is a perfect analogy of what you're doing. Want some respect, then provide the answers to the questions you've been asked. Act like a punk get the responses you get. Act with respect, receive respect.

- - - Updated - - -

Useless drivel. And again, bolding your posts adds no value to drivel.

 

More random babbling devoid of any reality.

Every bit of lying fraudulent drivel that you've posted in this thread ( which means EVERYTHING you posted) has been debunked by the scientifically determined facts of the matter.

 

You wouldn't know scientific if it bit you. You have provided exactly zero, zip nada, nothing. Yep keep up the good work. I'm sure the warmer cult appreciates your punkish behavior.

 

So basically a lot of guesses but no one really knows for sure why the climate changes naturally. Same can be said for the failed CO2 centric models.

 

A magazine editor. Nice. Now that has to be factual right?

Now that is really scientific. hah, just as I stated earlier, you wouldn't know a scientific anything if it bit you.

 

Pure psychological projection on your part, as you have repeatedly demonstrated.

LOLOLOLOL....coming from someone like you who can never back up his fraudulent claims and absurd pseudo-science with any actual supporting evidence, that is hilarious.

Meanwhile, just to demonstrate how you lie, here is the scientific evidence I've provided, on just this thread:

Post #23

Post #29

Post#44

Post #48

Post #85

 

LOLOLOL.....noooo....the source is not a magazine editor....how absurd can you get???....the source of the information in this article is University scientists publishing research in the prestigious international science journal called 'Science'.....

All you're demonstrating here is your own inability to understand science and the fact that you can't seem to read or comprehend simple English.

 

yep you posted all of that. so what? what does it prove? did you see my post showing the ice gain in the antarctic? Post # 77---here let me give you the link again. http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.anom.south.jpg

So who is right?

What is the harm if you are?

 

Jennifer Welsh - Business Insider
www.businessinsider.com/author/jennifer-welshJennifer Welsh. Jennifer Welsh is the Science Editor at Business Insider, where she manages and writes content on businessinsider.com/science.

And so what you think you're smarter than I? so flippin what? I know I'm smarter than you. You know why, I don't believe everything everyone tells me about a subject. That makes you blind and tunnel focused. I'm ten times whatever you think you are.

 

LOL....well, first off, it proves that you are a liar when you fraudulently claimed that....

Yes, I saw that. You still seem to be unable to understand the difference between the relatively tiny fringe of SEA ICE around Antarctica and the much, much larger, miles thick ICE SHEETS that cover the continent of Antarctica.

I'm right and you're bamboozled and confused. The "harm" in the loss of Antarctic ice is that it raises sea levels, by quite a lot over the long term. As I explained before....

 

It is apparent that you are not widely read on the science.

 

Thanks for helping me prove my point. Keep beating that horse though!!!!

 

Yup, the Antarctic ice has long been getting deeper.

Note the photograph of a large crane.

http://www.iceagenow.com/Construction_Crane_Buried_in_Ice.htm

Well, i have this lovely photo and when able to shall post it for all to see,

More data can be located on
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_climatechange03.htm
http://www.iceagenow.com/Antarctic_Snowfall_Has_Doubled_Since_1850.htm

 

Another absurd and extremely silly claim from an anti-science denier cultist who can never back up his pseudo-science with any actual evidence. Meanwhile I've quoted and cited peer-reviewed science from major science journals all throughout this thread.