Arctic sea ice melting toward record

[westwall]

The oceans have zero problem adapting to anything in the atmosphere

What does that statement even mean?

Welcome back, who'd you piss off? And the statement means exactly what it says.

 

[westwall]

The oceans have zero problem adapting to anything in the atmosphere

What does that statement even mean?

Ol' walleyed is a troll so it really doesn't mean anything. He just makes up his drivel on the fly off the top of his head and hopes everyone else is as ignorant as he is and won't notice what asinine nonsense he posts. He is a pathetic tool of the fossil fuel industry and lower than a wart on a toad's asshole.

Coming from you this is a high compliment thanks!

 

[westwall]

No need to insult toads, or even warts.

I agree warty toads are some of my best friends!

 

[gslack]

Just a reminder... The thread title is; "Arctic sea ice melting toward record"..

The article the OP linked to actually said "could be" and possibly and things like that. Contradicting the claims of the title. I pointed this out and then in the attempts at posting the same claims by other sources, i did the same thing.. proving categorically this is a deliberate misleading claim to serve an agenda and act as a PR piece.

So what do you think the warmers try and do? They try and bury the thread in a mountain of the same already proven exaggerated claims from multiple sources all saying the exact same or similar things.. None of it anymore substantial than the original OP and none of it any more factual or accurate.

Got news for all of you clowns... The little white speck on chicken shit is chicken shit too.. Exaggerated and misleading claims, whether they come from the NOAA or the Huffington post, are still exaggerated and misleading claims...And all the reposting and attempts at confounding the topic will not change this fact.

You trolls think you can manufacture truth or consent by shouting down opposition or burying it under mountains of nonsense. Well got news for ya.. All the people who tried that in the past, eventually got busted. And your side has been busted. Your side is done on this now, even they know it... Their next hope is to ride on the oil spill and vilify oil drilling enough and dupe people into believing cap and trade will harm the oil companies.....

LOL, and you fucking tools will change your belief in CO2 as the culprit and start the "it doesn't matter" mantra. Just like it went from warming to climate change, and al gore went from the savior to the hypocrite who isn't a scientist, you will claim it doesn't matter if the planet isn't warming because oil is evil and the only way to stop them is to make it too expensive for them to do it...

Well better wake up tools... THe fact is some of the largest investors in cap and trade are the oil companies. And why not? They will be able to create a problem, either real or imagined, and then they can charge for the product and then make money from the cap and trade markets al gore helped create and invests in and get their money back for the problems their product caused. Its a win, win....

But hey you go right on ahead and be as ignorant as you want to be....LOL

 

[dab11999]

So, what exactly do you say to someone who is standing on the tracks and you've just told them a train is coming and they are giving you the finger for being a bagger whatever that really is?
Of course, the other non-baggers, whatever those are, will simply blame you for not saving him in more timely manner by providing irrefutable proof that the train existed beyond all reasonable doubt without his actually having to turn around and look for himself.
I like the way the Bible puts it; Let those who are foolish, be foolish still.

 

[RollingThunder]

Just a reminder... The thread title is; "Arctic sea ice melting toward record"..

Quite true, and it is indeed melting towards a new record low. Thanks for the reminder, troll.

 

[westwall]

Lots more arctic ice than you boys have been reporting. Data courtesy of the US Navy and collated by Watts up with that. Of course if he touched it it must be bad but the Navy HAS to know how thick the ice is for its boomers.....unlike the AGW folks who go up and freeze their toucases off in an effort to show the ice is gone...not!


Arctic Ice Volume Has Increased 25% Since May, 2008 | Watts Up With That?

 

[RollingThunder]

Lots more arctic ice than you boys have been reporting. Data courtesy of the US Navy and collated by Watts up with that. Of course if he touched it it must be bad but the Navy HAS to know how thick the ice is for its boomers.....unlike the AGW folks who go up and freeze their toucases off in an effort to show the ice is gone...not!


Arctic Ice Volume Has Increased 25% Since May, 2008 | Watts Up With That?

LOLOLOL....so the paranoid conspiracy theory du jour on dingbat denier cult blogs is 'secret data', eh? More ice than is being reported? LOL. Jeez, you're gullible, walleyed.

Arctic Sea Ice Extent & Volume at Record Lows for the Date
Submitted by Nick Sundt on Sat, 05/29/2010 - 09:44

On 28 May, the extent of Arctic sea ice dropped to a record low for the date of 11,162,188 km2, surpassing the previous record low of 11,199,844 km2 set on 28 May 2006. Since reaching a seasonal maximum of approximately 14,407,344 km2 on 31 March, the extent of sea ice has fallen a staggering 3,245,156 km2 or 2,016,446 square miles. That is an area roughly half the size of the entire United States (including Alaska) and represents a decline of roughly 55,950 km2 per day (34,766 square miles per day). While the extent of Arctic sea ice normally declines during the "melt season" that typically begins in March and continues into September, the decline is unusually rapid for this time of year.

Meanwhile, the sea ice volume for the date is at a record low, falling 9-10,000 km3 below the average (1979-2009) values for the date. That volume, greater than that of Lakes Michigan and Huron combined (8,260 km3 or 1,980 cu mi), is the largest negative anomaly on record (i.e. for all dates since 1979).

In addition to being a very large volume in absolute terms, the volume also is large relative to the total volume of Arctic sea ice. According to a model developed by the University of Washington's Polar Science Laboratory (PSL), the average Arctic sea ice volume in late May averaged around 26,000 km3 during the 1979-2009 period. The current negative anomaly in ice volume therefore represents a loss of around one third of the average sea ice volume.

* © 2010 World Wildlife Fund

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)

 

[westwall]

Lots more arctic ice than you boys have been reporting. Data courtesy of the US Navy and collated by Watts up with that. Of course if he touched it it must be bad but the Navy HAS to know how thick the ice is for its boomers.....unlike the AGW folks who go up and freeze their toucases off in an effort to show the ice is gone...not!


Arctic Ice Volume Has Increased 25% Since May, 2008 | Watts Up With That?

LOLOLOL....so the paranoid conspiracy theory du jour on dingbat denier cult blogs is 'secret data', eh? More ice than is being reported? LOL. Jeez, you're gullible, walleyed.

Arctic Sea Ice Extent & Volume at Record Lows for the Date
Submitted by Nick Sundt on Sat, 05/29/2010 - 09:44

On 28 May, the extent of Arctic sea ice dropped to a record low for the date of 11,162,188 km2, surpassing the previous record low of 11,199,844 km2 set on 28 May 2006. Since reaching a seasonal maximum of approximately 14,407,344 km2 on 31 March, the extent of sea ice has fallen a staggering 3,245,156 km2 or 2,016,446 square miles. That is an area roughly half the size of the entire United States (including Alaska) and represents a decline of roughly 55,950 km2 per day (34,766 square miles per day). While the extent of Arctic sea ice normally declines during the "melt season" that typically begins in March and continues into September, the decline is unusually rapid for this time of year.

Meanwhile, the sea ice volume for the date is at a record low, falling 9-10,000 km3 below the average (1979-2009) values for the date. That volume, greater than that of Lakes Michigan and Huron combined (8,260 km3 or 1,980 cu mi), is the largest negative anomaly on record (i.e. for all dates since 1979).

In addition to being a very large volume in absolute terms, the volume also is large relative to the total volume of Arctic sea ice. According to a model developed by the University of Washington's Polar Science Laboratory (PSL), the average Arctic sea ice volume in late May averaged around 26,000 km3 during the 1979-2009 period. The current negative anomaly in ice volume therefore represents a loss of around one third of the average sea ice volume.

* © 2010 World Wildlife Fund

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)

Now what was that argument you said about biased sources there blunder. Seems to me the WWF is one of THE most biased and untruthful organizations out there...seems to me if I remember correctly some of their claims got into a certain IPCC report and were proven to be complete BS. GREAT SOURCE DOOD!

 

[gslack]

LOL so the troll does exactly what I said he would do... he doesn't try and argue the merits of the OP or any of the subsequent nonsense he or anyone else puts up. He just posts more nonsense....

THanks for helping me to out you fake...

 

[Old Rocks]

And this is an example of a balanced viewpoint on global warming. They report the data and make no attempt at a political statement, instead choosing to present both sides of an argument with corresponding avenues for further research. How refreshing. Like science is supposed to be.


Greenhouse effect - New World Encyclopedia

Positive feedback and runaway greenhouse effect
When there is a loop of effects, such as the concentration of a greenhouse gas itself being a function of temperature, there is a feedback. If the effect is to act in the same direction on temperature, it is a positive feedback, and if in the opposite direction it is a negative feedback. Sometimes feedback effects can be on the same cause as the forcing but it can also be via another greenhouse gas or on other effects, such as change in ice cover affecting the planet's albedo.

Positive feedbacks do not have to lead to a runaway effect. With radiation from the Earth increasing in proportion to the fourth power of temperature, the feedback effect has to be very strong to cause a runaway effect. An increase in temperature from greenhouse gases leading to increased water vapor, which is a greenhouse gas, causing further warming is a positive feedback (Terradaily 2006). This cannot be a runaway effect or the runaway effect would have occurred long ago. Positive feedback effects are common and can always exist while runaway effects are much rarer and cannot be operating at all times.

If the effects from the second iteration of the loop of effects is larger than the effects of the first iteration of the loop this will lead to a self perpetuating effect. If this occurs and the feedback only ends after producing a major temperature increase, it is called a runaway greenhouse effect. A runaway feedback could also occur in the opposite direction leading to an ice age. Runaway feedbacks are bound to stop, since infinite temperatures are not observed. They are allowed to stop due to things like a reducing supply of a greenhouse gas, or a phase change of the gas, or ice cover reducing towards zero or increasing toward a large size that is difficult to increase.

The runaway greenhouse effect could also be caused by liberation of methane gas from hydrates by global warming if there are sufficient hydrates close to unstable conditions. It has been speculated that the Permian–Triassic extinction event was caused by such a runaway effect (Racki and Wignall 2005). It is also thought that larger area of heat absorbing black soil could be exposed as the permafrost retreats and large quantities of methane could be released from the Siberian tundra as it begins to thaw (Pearce 2006), methane being 25 times more potent a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide (Miller 2000).

 

[Old Rocks]

Lots more arctic ice than you boys have been reporting. Data courtesy of the US Navy and collated by Watts up with that. Of course if he touched it it must be bad but the Navy HAS to know how thick the ice is for its boomers.....unlike the AGW folks who go up and freeze their toucases off in an effort to show the ice is gone...not!


Arctic Ice Volume Has Increased 25% Since May, 2008 | Watts Up With That?

So who are we to trust. The people at the University of Washington, or an undegreeded ex-weatherman that has been caught repeatedly lying?

 

[gslack]

BLah BLAH BLAH!

Doomed I say Doomed!

 

[RollingThunder]

BLah BLAH BLAH!

Doomed I say Doomed!

I assume you're talking about your last few remaining brain cells.

 

[westwall]

Lots more arctic ice than you boys have been reporting. Data courtesy of the US Navy and collated by Watts up with that. Of course if he touched it it must be bad but the Navy HAS to know how thick the ice is for its boomers.....unlike the AGW folks who go up and freeze their toucases off in an effort to show the ice is gone...not!


Arctic Ice Volume Has Increased 25% Since May, 2008 | Watts Up With That?

So who are we to trust. The people at the University of Washington, or an undegreeded ex-weatherman that has been caught repeatedly lying?

When he is publishing information from reputable sources you have to go with him. Especially in light of the fact that at least he is not under a criminal investigation....unlike one of the leading lights of the AGW movement.

 

[westwall]

And this is an example of a balanced viewpoint on global warming. They report the data and make no attempt at a political statement, instead choosing to present both sides of an argument with corresponding avenues for further research. How refreshing. Like science is supposed to be.


Greenhouse effect - New World Encyclopedia

Positive feedback and runaway greenhouse effect
When there is a loop of effects, such as the concentration of a greenhouse gas itself being a function of temperature, there is a feedback. If the effect is to act in the same direction on temperature, it is a positive feedback, and if in the opposite direction it is a negative feedback. Sometimes feedback effects can be on the same cause as the forcing but it can also be via another greenhouse gas or on other effects, such as change in ice cover affecting the planet's albedo.

Positive feedbacks do not have to lead to a runaway effect. With radiation from the Earth increasing in proportion to the fourth power of temperature, the feedback effect has to be very strong to cause a runaway effect. An increase in temperature from greenhouse gases leading to increased water vapor, which is a greenhouse gas, causing further warming is a positive feedback (Terradaily 2006). This cannot be a runaway effect or the runaway effect would have occurred long ago. Positive feedback effects are common and can always exist while runaway effects are much rarer and cannot be operating at all times.

If the effects from the second iteration of the loop of effects is larger than the effects of the first iteration of the loop this will lead to a self perpetuating effect. If this occurs and the feedback only ends after producing a major temperature increase, it is called a runaway greenhouse effect. A runaway feedback could also occur in the opposite direction leading to an ice age. Runaway feedbacks are bound to stop, since infinite temperatures are not observed. They are allowed to stop due to things like a reducing supply of a greenhouse gas, or a phase change of the gas, or ice cover reducing towards zero or increasing toward a large size that is difficult to increase.

The runaway greenhouse effect could also be caused by liberation of methane gas from hydrates by global warming if there are sufficient hydrates close to unstable conditions. It has been speculated that the Permian–Triassic extinction event was caused by such a runaway effect (Racki and Wignall 2005). It is also thought that larger area of heat absorbing black soil could be exposed as the permafrost retreats and large quantities of methane could be released from the Siberian tundra as it begins to thaw (Pearce 2006), methane being 25 times more potent a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide (Miller 2000).

Jeez old fraud, same poop different day. The operative word in that whole post is "could".
So far their coulds havn't ina any way at all. They have been trying to frighten people with "coulds" and "possibly's" and "mights" and "suggests" for two frikin decades now......and so far they have had no joy. This is how dodgy dealers on ebay evade fraud charges. They say this "might" be a Van Gogh worth millions and after you pay several hundred thousand for it and find out it's not you can't go after the scammer....This is well known bunco artist lingo.

Give it a rest.

 

[westwall]

BLah BLAH BLAH!

Doomed I say Doomed!

I assume you're talking about your last few remaining brain cells.

You have an untouchable lead in that race Blunder.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Lots more arctic ice than you boys have been reporting. Data courtesy of the US Navy and collated by Watts up with that. Of course if he touched it it must be bad but the Navy HAS to know how thick the ice is for its boomers.....unlike the AGW folks who go up and freeze their toucases off in an effort to show the ice is gone...not!


Arctic Ice Volume Has Increased 25% Since May, 2008 | Watts Up With That?

So who are we to trust. The people at the University of Washington, or an undegreeded ex-weatherman that has been caught repeatedly lying?

When he is publishing information from reputable sources you have to go with him. Especially in light of the fact that at least he is not under a criminal investigation....unlike one of the leading lights of the AGW movement.

Why wouldn't you just go directly to those "reputable sources" themselves, instead of reading the filter put on them by someone who never even finished college?

 

[westwall]

So who are we to trust. The people at the University of Washington, or an undegreeded ex-weatherman that has been caught repeatedly lying?

When he is publishing information from reputable sources you have to go with him. Especially in light of the fact that at least he is not under a criminal investigation....unlike one of the leading lights of the AGW movement.

Why wouldn't you just go directly to those "reputable sources" themselves, instead of reading the filter put on them by someone who never even finished college?

The last I looked the sources are unfiltered, the way they should be...not cut and pasted to remove the parts that conflict with your agenda like old fraud and others have done.

College football huh? I notice the tag has disappeared....why is that if it was truly nothing?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

College football huh? I notice the tag has disappeared....why is that if it was truly nothing?

It was an old tag that showed up after the admins deleted my current profile.

USC was California St football champs in 2003
LSU was national champs