Antarctic Sea Ice At Record New High

Too bad you're sooooo delusional and/or misinformed. There has been an insignificant slight increase in the thin fringe of Antarctic sea ice (which melts away almost entirely in the summer) that is almost certainly a counter-intuitive effect of AGW, but meanwhile the giant ice sheets and ice shelves resting on the continent of Antarctica are losing large amounts of ice mass at increasing rates.

Measurements of Time-Variable Gravity Show Mass Loss in Antarctica
Science
24 March 2006:
Vol. 311 no. 5768 pp. 1754-1756 - DOI: 10.1126/science.1123785

Ice Sheet Loss at Both Poles Increasing, Study Finds | NASA
Nov 29, 2012

Grim picture of polar ice-sheet loss
Antarctica and Greenland are rapidly losing their ice sheets because of climate change, says a comprehensive review.
Nature
29 November 2012

ANTARCTICA AND GREENLAND LOSING ICE AT FASTEST RATE EVER RECORDED
YALE UNIVERSITY
21 AUG 2014:

BBC News - Esa's Cryosat mission sees Antarctic ice losses double
May 19, 2014

Antarctic Ice Melt Rate Has Doubled Since 2010, Study Finds
May 19, 2014

Antarctic ice mass loss accelerating according to GRACE reanalysis, Pine Island Glacier in sustained retreat
JANUARY 24, 2014

ICE CAPS MELTING: Antarctica, Greenland losing ice mass rapidly
New Observations Confirm Greenland, Antarctica Losing Land Ice Rapidly
Sept 2nd, 2014

Greenland and Antarctica 'have lost four trillion tonnes of ice' in 20 years
The Guardian
29 November 2012

New satellite maps show polar ice caps melting at 'unprecedented rate'
Scientists reveal Greenland and Antarctica losing 500 cubic kms of ice annually
The Guardian
1 September 2014

 

Again you repeat the nonsense that everything is known and you miss the fact that most of the ice loss is Greenland and that much of Antarctica is inaccessible by satellite and cannot account for land subsistence.

 

LOL. Just more clueless, ignorant, anti-science denier cult drivel. You have no idea what you're talking about. Your claim that "Greenland and much of Antarctica is inaccessible by satellite" which is ridiculous, absurd and really hilarious. Nowhere on Earth is inaccessible to satellite instrumentation, as almost anyone over the age of 12 knows.

 

Still have trouble reading I see. Much of central Antarctica is not reachable by the satellite measuring height. Also, the measurements are during a very very short time span. I suppose you think trying to ridicule people while showing your own ignorance is cool.

 

LOLOL.

Oh...really....why?.

C'mon, dude, explain just why you believe "central Antarctica is not reachable by the satellites measuring height", I dare you!

Satellites circle the Earth and pass over every part, including the poles.

You are clueless.

 

Cryosat-1 did not cover much of central Antarctica and Cryosat-2 covers closer to both poles but it was only launched in 2010. Look it up.

 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2014GL060111/abstract

Again, it is not central Antarctica that is loosing ice.

 

"This new data set provides near-continuous (96%) coverage of the entire continent"

LOLOL.....so pathetic....you refute yourself....LOL.....

 

If you lived 700 years ago, you would believe the world was flat too...

Science is all about being skeptical. To actually support a hypothesis or theory, it should completely stand up to the scrutiny of others. This doesn't happen in the climate sciences. There are several reputable scientists who disagree and show material that discounts the notion hat AGW is stronger than natural changes.

It should only take one valid study, but no. This has now become a political science, not a real science.

Once again, I will stand by my words and contentions, and let the future's history just how correct I am.

Impugn it without evidence? The basis of idea, no. The levels at which they claim... I don't know. To what accuracy did they claim? I don't recall reading that. Then, if they used "statistical probability" in their levels, then I will say it's outside probably their 95% range.

 

3 +/- 36...

Love it when the error range is nine times the data.

We can expect to see all of Western Antarctica and most of the peninsula to lose ice, but Eastern Antarctica is so much larger and far more stable.

 

By far, the least loss is at Antarctic,.

Isn't it fun coming out of the ice age?

When the governments of the world ban carbon dioxide, then they will be on the way to persuading me of their case.

In the meanwhile, they would use carbon dioxide scrubbers if it was serious to them. Actions over talking work very well. They are not taking the actions of the truly serious.

 

Almost exclusively limited to denialists like yourself.

 

Source on the ice warming effect please.

 

"Source"? Are you kidding? He makes it up as he goes along. "'We don't need no stinking sources', cause we can 'splain it "in our own words"", LOP cries desperately, rejecting evidence based debate.

 

I am not surprised you are not up on the Mann controversy, lies, and lawsuits but then, if you only read CAGW alarmist blogs, Mann is a God.

 

Only if you ignored scientists. People have known that the world was round since Eratosthenes measure its diameter in 230 BC, and probably even before that when ships began sailing over the horizon 7,000 years ago.

 

By "up on the Mann controversy", do you mean aware of the NAS and NRC reports that backed his findings, or the many independent temperature reconstructions that show the same results?

 

LOL, you mean the NAS using his findings as fact when in fact they have been falsified? Funny. At least the current lawsuit might make Mann present all of his data and computations instead of him hiding them, something that is not done in science if you want repeatability and checks on your science.

 

Are you joking?

Haven't you ever come across the soot on ice? Even the IPCC recognizes it. They have raised the levels from prior assessment.

Sorry, I'm not going to search for beginner class information.

Google "soot on ice."

 

You do know that Mann is the plaintiff in that lawsuit, not the defendant. If he was concerned about releasing any of his data and computations, do you really think he would have filed the lawsuit in the first place?

 

There are many kinds of atmospheric 'aerosols'', and 'soot' is only one of them and ONLY when it is suspended in the air, not when it has settled down on a surface and is out of the atmosphere. Dingo was referring to sulfate aerosols from fossil fuel burning, especially coal, that float high in the stratosphere and reflect back into space some of the energy in the incoming sunlight, causing a cooling effect that somewhat suppresses the warming effects of the increased CO2. These reflective aerosols cover the entire planet and have a cooling effect not only over the "regular land" but also over the oceans and the ice caps.

Black carbon soot from human activities can have a warming/melting effect, particularly when it settles out on ice. When it does settle on ice, it is not longer a suspended aerosol, so that warming effect is considered separately from the effect of reflective atmospheric aerosols that Dingo was referring to.

You said that "aerosols over regular land do have a net cooling effect" but that "only over ice that they have a much larger warming effect" but in reality aerosols "over" ice in the atmosphere still have a cooling effect. It is only when carbon soot has settled on the ice and is no longer an aerosol that it has a net warming effect.

 

He is suing to shut up any criticism of his work. He is also being counter sued. One of the things that will have to come out in court is his data and computations. You realize he falsely claimed he was a Nobel Laureate in his lawsuit don't you? He lost his last lawsuit in Canada.

 

Thanks for saving me the trouble. These folks have a problem with elementary distinctions, like the difference between air born sulfates and settled carbon soot. I guess it goes with the territory. lol

 

Just a little note; I checked the carbon soot bit on google and came up with this interesting piece of at least serious speculation. The early ice age may have been brought to an end at least in part due to carbon soot which was accumulating on glaciers during the 19th century.
http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2013/09/soot-melts-alps-glaciers-report

 

Accusing him of perpetuating fraud without evidence and comparing him to a child molester are not criticisms of his work.

Steyn lost his bid to have Mann's suit dismissed, now we'll see how Mann does with his SLAPP motion.

Red herring. The 2007 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to the IPCC for their work on climate change. As lead author of an IPCC report, he was presented with a certificate for contributing to the award. I doubt Mann was the only one to misstate his involvement before the IPCC issued a clarification letter.

His lawsuit against Tim Ball is still in discovery, so he's still far from losing it.