Arctic sea ice loss due to global warming

from NSIDC

 

Proof of what show me. Polar population is not declining because of global warming. You have shown nothing to prove that

 

1st you claim populations are not declining and they are... now you claim it's not tied to global warming which it is...warming environment results in a loss of habitat, loss of habitat equals fewer bears, that's absolute there is no debating it, the bears are protected from over hunting but numbers are still declining...bears need sea cover to feed and sea ice cover is disappearing due to longer warmer summers, no ice=no food=fewer bears...

there is only one scientific group the IUCN/SSC PBSG from Norway, Denmark, Russia, USA and Canada who's data has any relevance... you misunderstanding the data posted by some anonymous internet poster who also didn't comprehend it does not counter the data, nor do your claims of conspiracy cover-up...

http://pbsg.npolar.no/en/status/status-table.html

 

Sun activity more closely corresponds to global temperature increase.

 

No it doesn't. That's just one of the myths of your cult of reality denial.

 

yet if you looked at the temp buoys in the Arctic they are all above 32F...just weird

 

so you claim the sun has nothing to do with Earths climate....and you call skeptics deniers...that is just bizarre

 

Your acticles show that there have been some Climate change scientists that have been disingenuous. This does not mean that all Climate change science has been refuted.

If you have evidence that shows the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) is a fraudlent organization then present it.

Presenting an article on one scientist somewhere on the planet that is a fraud does not help your case against the NSIDC.

I agree that Climate change politics is misguided but not because the science does not show that the planet is warming. The earth has warmed many times in the past and we do not know why the earth is warming now.

The real problem I have with Climate change politics is that it is not the main environmental threat.

The worst environmental threat is not Global warming yet it gets all the attention. The worst threat is Persistant Organic and Inorganic pollutants being dumped into the Oceans.

More than two cans of Tuna a week puts on over the mercury limit for pregnant women.

The ocean is not a garbage can and produces most of the oxygen.

Increasing global population and industrialization increasing from 1 Billion to 5 Billion people over a short period of time is exacerbating the pollution problem.

If this trend keeps up we will face environmental consequences far more serious than global warming in the very near future yet this issue hardly is mentioned.

 

thank you, I totally agree

 

Trying to put words in other people's mouths and then arguing against your straw man looks really retarded when the whole line of debate is so obvious. So no, obviously I didn't "claim the sun has nothing to do with Earths climate". I said the sun's activity does not "more closely correspond to global temperature increase" than the increase in CO2 levels.


Global temperature (red, NASA GISS) and Total solar irradiance (blue, 1880 to 1978 from Solanki, 1979 to 2009 from PMOD).



BTW, I don't call 'skeptics' 'deniers', I call 'deniers' 'deniers'.

Skeptics, Contrarians, or Deniers?


***

 

you are getting closer, Co2 follows temperature

don't believe me make up a chart using the Mauna Loa data like this guy did

http://kenskingdom.wordpress.com/2011/04/12/co2-and-temperature/

learn to think for yourself

 

saw this over at NASA this morning, seems the wind has a lot to do with the sea ice. BTW the leveling of last week or so has resumed it's downward trend which should continue into September but I doubt the anomaly of 2007

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/lookingatearth/quikscat-20071001.html

 

Your denial of reality is old news. The greenhouse effect is a very well established scientific fact. CO2 is a powerful greenhouse gas. The increase in atmospheric CO2 levels is what is driving the current trend of abrupt warming and climate changes. Scientists are not in doubt on these points. It is only very confused and very ignorant denier cultists who dispute the facts about the effects of CO2.

Your admonition to "think for myself" is indeed ironic since you appear to be far too brainwashed by the fossil fuel industry propaganda to ever manage to think for your self, no matter how much evidence you're shown that you're mistaken and sadly misinformed about all this.

 

no reason for you libs to get your panties in a knot over the arctic ice. From the University of Copenhagen.

 

Both indisputably true. But it goes downhill from there...

That is a hypothesis that some people subscribe to.

That is a bald fabrication. There is considerable question about the extent to which recent global temperature trends are driven by increased atmospheric CO2 rather than all the many other factors that influence temperature.

Your claimed fact has not been established, and is indisputably in doubt by many if not most scientists.

 

Those are your denier cult delusions but your claims are simply wrong. Scientists are quite clear that it is the increased atmospheric CO2 levels that are driving the current abrupt warming trend and the agreement on that in the world scientific community is close to unanimous. You seem far too brainwashed to know what "most scientists" actually think about AGW so here's a good reflection of the actual and very real world scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming/climate change.

Scientific opinion on climate change
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(excerpts)

Scientific opinion on climate change is given by synthesis reports, scientific bodies of national or international standing, and surveys of opinion among climate scientists. Individual scientists, universities, and laboratories contribute to the overall scientific opinion via their peer reviewed publications, and the areas of collective agreement and relative certainty are summarised in these high level reports and surveys. Self-selected lists of individuals' opinions, such as petitions, are not normally considered to be part of the scientific process.

National and international science academies and scientific societies have assessed the current scientific opinion, in particular on recent global warming. These assessments have largely followed or endorsed the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) position of January 2001 which states:

An increasing body of observations gives a collective picture of a warming world and other changes in the climate system... There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities.[1]​

No scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion

***

American Association for the Advancement of Science
As the world's largest general scientific society, the American Association for the Advancement of Science adopted an official statement on climate change in 2006:

The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society....The pace of change and the evidence of harm have increased markedly over the last five years. The time to control greenhouse gas emissions is now.[32]


American Chemical Society
The American Chemical Society stated:

Careful and comprehensive scientific assessments have clearly demonstrated that the Earth’s climate system is changing rapidly in response to growing atmospheric burdens of greenhouse gases and absorbing aerosol particles (IPCC, 2007). There is very little room for doubt that observed climate trends are due to human activities. The threats are serious and action is urgently needed to mitigate the risks of climate change.

The reality of global warming, its current serious and potentially disastrous impacts on Earth system properties, and the key role emissions from human activities play in driving these phenomena have been recognized by earlier versions of this ACS policy statement (ACS, 2004), by other major scientific societies, including the American Geophysical Union (AGU, 2003), the American Meteorological Society (AMS, 2007) and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS, 2007), and by the U. S. National Academies and ten other leading national academies of science (NA, 2005).[33]


American Physical Society
In November 2007, the American Physical Society (APS) adopted an official statement on climate change:

Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide as well as methane, nitrous oxide and other gases. They are emitted from fossil fuel combustion and a range of industrial and agricultural processes.

The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.

Because the complexity of the climate makes accurate prediction difficult, the APS urges an enhanced effort to understand the effects of human activity on the Earth’s climate, and to provide the technological options for meeting the climate challenge in the near and longer terms. The APS also urges governments, universities, national laboratories and its membership to support policies and actions that will reduce the emission of greenhouse gases.[35]


American Geophysical Union
The American Geophysical Union (AGU) statement,[41] adopted by the society in 2003 and revised in 2007, affirms that rising levels of greenhouse gases have caused and will continue to cause the global surface temperature to be warmer:

The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming. Many components of the climate system—including the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons—are now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century. Global average surface temperatures increased on average by about 0.6°C over the period 1956–2006. As of 2006, eleven of the previous twelve years were warmer than any others since 1850. The observed rapid retreat of Arctic sea ice is expected to continue and lead to the disappearance of summertime ice within this century. Evidence from most oceans and all continents except Antarctica shows warming attributable to human activities. Recent changes in many physical and biological systems are linked with this regional climate change. A sustained research effort, involving many AGU members and summarized in the 2007 assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, continues to improve our scientific understanding of the climate.


Geological Society of America
In 2006, the Geological Society of America adopted a position statement on global climate change. It amended this position on April 20, 2010 with more explicit comments on need for CO2 reduction.

Decades of scientific research have shown that climate can change from both natural and anthropogenic causes. The Geological Society of America (GSA) concurs with assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2006), and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) that global climate has warmed and that human activities (mainly greenhouse‐gas emissions) account for most of the warming since the middle 1900s. If current trends continue, the projected increase in global temperature by the end of the twentyfirst century will result in large impacts on humans and other species. Addressing the challenges posed by climate change will require a combination of adaptation to the changes that are likely to occur and global reductions of CO2 emissions from anthropogenic sources.[46]


American Meteorological Society
The American Meteorological Society (AMS) statement adopted by their council in 2003 said:

There is now clear evidence that the mean annual temperature at the Earth's surface, averaged over the entire globe, has been increasing in the past 200 years. There is also clear evidence that the abundance of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has increased over the same period. In the past decade, significant progress has been made toward a better understanding of the climate system and toward improved projections of long-term climate change... Human activities have become a major source of environmental change. Of great urgency are the climate consequences of the increasing atmospheric abundance of greenhouse gases... Because greenhouse gases continue to increase, we are, in effect, conducting a global climate experiment, neither planned nor controlled, the results of which may present unprecedented challenges to our wisdom and foresight as well as have significant impacts on our natural and societal systems.[52]

 

large fonts and outdated quotes using appeals to authority from wikipedia quotes - wow that is scholarly.....not. got any science that shows that there is anything unprecedented going on ? and my eyes are 20/20 without glasses BTW so unless you are posting for the vision impaired

arctic warming 1920 - 1940

 

The quotes are quite current and not at all "outdated". Most are within the last 5 years and the Geological Society of America is from April 20, 2010. All of the scientific organizations listed still have the same position. The evidence has just gotten stronger over time.

Maybe not in your denier cult bizarro-world, but in the real world, using the testimony of the best experts in the world is very "scholarly" and is done by all intelligent people. Let's see you show us that the information in that Wiki article is false instead of lamely dissing the accuracy of wikipedia.

Yes. Lots and lots of it. It gets posted all the time but you are too brainwashed and bamboozled to acknowledge or comprehend it.

Actually I'm posting for the mentally impaired and the deliberately self blinded ideologues. What's your excuse for not being able to understand the evidence?

Did the Arctic in the 20's and 30's experience a loss of about 50% of the sea ice cover it has had for the last 5000 years or so, like it is now? Were temperatures there 9 or 10 degrees warmer than average then? Was the permafrost melting over millions of acres of the Arctic then? Was the Northeast Passage open to shipping then? LOLOLOL. You are soooo gullible and easily duped by the FFI propaganda.

 

try reading the link in post 64 regarding the studies from the University of Copenhagen. 5000 years would cover the MWP 900- 1300 AD, the Roman warm period 250 BC - 100 AD, and the Minoan warm period of 1400 BC - 1200BC.


average temperature? what is the average temperature of Earth? was it average when NY City was under a glacier? Was it average when Antarctica had a forest ?

 

They are objectively correct.

There is no current warming trend, let alone an abrupt one, and there is no agreement (other than politically manipulated "consensus") that the warming trend observed over the up-phase of the PDO from the early 1970s to 1998 was was primarily caused by increased atmospheric CO2.

IOW, sources subject to warmist political control...?

LOL! No, dumpling. Scientific opinion on ANY subject is the exclusive province of each individual scientist. Period.

Except the peer-reviewed publications for which warmist ideologues do not control the peer review process, of course....

Nope. Science is not a matter of "collective agreement," "summaries" or politically controlled, "high-level reports and surveys."

IOW, only lists selected by warmist ideologues are permitted...

What a load of dishonest, anti-scientific tripe.

 

seems as if even Andy Revkin of the NY Times is starting to doubt the doom and gloom. Careful Andy or you will be branded a skeptic by the high priests of the cult.

 

I proved they are not declining you will not accept facts instead you believe anything that promotes global warming even if it is alie

 

Of course the heat source has no affect on temp. lol

 

We do know why. The same reason that climate has changed since the beginning of time. Natural climate change

 

I am waiting for you to use the language of your leader

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/60890.html