Arctic sea ice melting toward record

[Chris]

Arctic Sea Ice at Lowest Point in Thousands of Years

Date: 04-Jun-2010

The shrinking amount of sea ice that covers the Arctic Ocean today is the smallest it has been in the last few thousand years, a new study suggests.

The sea ice that normally covers huge swaths of the Arctic Ocean has been retreating and thinning over the last few decades, due to the amplified warming at the North Pole, which is a consequence of the buildup of greenhouse gases in Earth's atmosphere.

The most dramatic sea-ice melt in recent years came in 2007, when sea-ice extent (or the area of ocean covered by the ice) dropped to its lowest level since 1979, when satellite measurements began. This event also opened up the fabled Northwest Passage.

Arctic Sea Ice at Lowest Point in Thousands of Years | Science & Environment | Peacefmonline.com

And yet with all the hysteria we get this
Pacific Islands Growing, Not Sinking

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the thread.

But thanks for playing.

 

[Chris]

Exactly. You never hear these doom and gloom libs talk about past ice ages. You'll never hear them mention the fact that our world has been much warmer, and much colder at many points in its history. They claim to embrace scientific fact, but the truth is they ignore scientific facts that don't suit their political agenda.

The only one with a political agenda is you.

The fact that we have almost doubled atmospheric CO2 in the last 200 years, and that this increase in greenhouse gases is warming the earth is irrefutable.

Unless you work for Tom Colburn the Senator from Big Oil....

And yet the CO2 levels have been higher in the past and the mean temperatures have been warmer in the past and the Earth seemed to manage just fine. Claimed proof that humankind contributed all or even a small fraction of any increase of CO2 in the atmosphere is certainly refutable. Also any claimed proof that the anthropogenically produced CO2 is creating any significant or unmanageable 'issues' for humankind is also refutable.

Ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,haaaa............

Oh, thanks for that. I needed a good laugh.

We are adding 10 billion tons of CO2 to the atmosphere every year, and the Antarctic ice cores show that CO2 levels are the highest they have been in 600,000 years, which is as far back as the ice cores go.

Once again, thanks for the laugh...

 

[westwall]

It seems to me that "warmer than normal" does not necessarily translate into 'more melting'. Sub freezing is still sub freezing even if the temperature is warmer.

And though I am no scientist, it seems quite logical to me that if some of the ice doesn't melt now and then at both poles, the ice caps would continue to expand until the Earth is just one giant ice ball. And given the millions and millions of years of ebb and flow in climate change swinging back and forth between mostly tropical climates to ice ages, trying to establish a 'norm' using data from a half century of record keeping borders on the absurd.

Exactly. You never hear these doom and gloom libs talk about past ice ages. You'll never hear them mention the fact that our world has been much warmer, and much colder at many points in its history. They claim to embrace scientific fact, but the truth is they ignore scientific facts that don't suit their political agenda.

The only one with a political agenda is you.

The fact that we have almost doubled atmospheric CO2 in the last 200 years, and that this increase in greenhouse gases is warming the earth is irrefutable.

Unless you work for Tom Colburn the Senator from Big Oil....

So much for the "deniers" thinking they know everything. Chris this statement is absolutely un-proveable.

 

[westwall]

The only one with a political agenda is you.

The fact that we have almost doubled atmospheric CO2 in the last 200 years, and that this increase in greenhouse gases is warming the earth is irrefutable.

Unless you work for Tom Colburn the Senator from Big Oil....

And yet the CO2 levels have been higher in the past and the mean temperatures have been warmer in the past and the Earth seemed to manage just fine. Claimed proof that humankind contributed all or even a small fraction of any increase of CO2 in the atmosphere is certainly refutable. Also any claimed proof that the anthropogenically produced CO2 is creating any significant or unmanageable 'issues' for humankind is also refutable.

Ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,haaaa............

Oh, thanks for that. I needed a good laugh.

We are adding 10 billion tons of CO2 to the atmosphere every year, and the Antarctic ice cores show that CO2 levels are the highest they have been in 600,000 years, which is as far back as the ice cores go.

Once again, thanks for the laugh...

And Chris you seem to keep forgetting that first came the warming, then came the massive CO2 increase. Why is that?

 

[d'Anconia]

So I don't get it. In the past when ice started melting and CO2 was on the rise, what eventually reversed the process?

 

[Chris]

Exactly. You never hear these doom and gloom libs talk about past ice ages. You'll never hear them mention the fact that our world has been much warmer, and much colder at many points in its history. They claim to embrace scientific fact, but the truth is they ignore scientific facts that don't suit their political agenda.

The only one with a political agenda is you.

The fact that we have almost doubled atmospheric CO2 in the last 200 years, and that this increase in greenhouse gases is warming the earth is irrefutable.

Unless you work for Tom Colburn the Senator from Big Oil....

So much for the "deniers" thinking they know everything. Chris this statement is absolutely un-proveable.

Wrong answer.

CO2 causes the earth to retain heat. This was proven experimentally in 1859.

We are adding 10 billion tons of CO2 to the atmosphere every year.

Therefore, we are causing the earth to warm.

Nice try, though.

 

[westwall]

Arctic Sea Ice at Lowest Point in Thousands of Years

Date: 04-Jun-2010

The shrinking amount of sea ice that covers the Arctic Ocean today is the smallest it has been in the last few thousand years, a new study suggests.

The sea ice that normally covers huge swaths of the Arctic Ocean has been retreating and thinning over the last few decades, due to the amplified warming at the North Pole, which is a consequence of the buildup of greenhouse gases in Earth's atmosphere.

The most dramatic sea-ice melt in recent years came in 2007, when sea-ice extent (or the area of ocean covered by the ice) dropped to its lowest level since 1979, when satellite measurements began. This event also opened up the fabled Northwest Passage.

Arctic Sea Ice at Lowest Point in Thousands of Years | Science & Environment | Peacefmonline.com

And the only way you can attribute this fact to AGW is to ignore two basic tenets of science, the first being correlation does not equal causation and the second is of course Occams Razor. We have well documented historically warmer periods independent of any possible effect by man. Why is it that all of a sudden we are the only possible source of the heating this time?

 

[ScienceRocks]

The only one with a political agenda is you.

The fact that we have almost doubled atmospheric CO2 in the last 200 years, and that this increase in greenhouse gases is warming the earth is irrefutable.

Unless you work for Tom Colburn the Senator from Big Oil....

And yet the CO2 levels have been higher in the past and the mean temperatures have been warmer in the past and the Earth seemed to manage just fine. Claimed proof that humankind contributed all or even a small fraction of any increase of CO2 in the atmosphere is certainly refutable. Also any claimed proof that the anthropogenically produced CO2 is creating any significant or unmanageable 'issues' for humankind is also refutable.

Ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,haaaa............

Oh, thanks for that. I needed a good laugh.

We are adding 10 billion tons of CO2 to the atmosphere every year, and the Antarctic ice cores show that CO2 levels are the highest they have been in 600,000 years, which is as far back as the ice cores go.

Once again, thanks for the laugh...

Maybe beating a dead horse, but when thinking about earths avg temperature, we can look back 500 million years. Antarctica has had its ice caps around 20-25 million years as we started to slowly stair climb into the current ice age period, also as the continent moved southward it had less solar output because the curvature of the earth have less focused light,,,lastly long winters nights like we have today became the norm. So yes, it was not just the fact that the climate of earth cooled that made Antarctica the way it is today, but a few other factors.

Yes within our current cycle, if you believe that we're not coming out of it in which between 1-3 million years the periods between ice ages if I remember where far shorter. More of a short wave instead of a long wave sin. This became more so from 5-10 million years.

Who know, we may get super lucky and skip out of the 15-20 million year ice age within our life times, which would be very lucky of you, because that's a one and a trillion chance and you should be having a party like you can't believe if it happens within your life. Pretty much the same odds of having 2, 5 mile wide asteroids aimed at earth within a years time.

But lets say it does happen? In we do or are seeing right now the coming out of the ice age. I think it would make you excited to see something like this that has never happened within human history; the ending of the overall ice age.

Do you think this is a possibility?

 

[Chris]

Arctic Sea Ice at Lowest Point in Thousands of Years

Date: 04-Jun-2010

The shrinking amount of sea ice that covers the Arctic Ocean today is the smallest it has been in the last few thousand years, a new study suggests.

The sea ice that normally covers huge swaths of the Arctic Ocean has been retreating and thinning over the last few decades, due to the amplified warming at the North Pole, which is a consequence of the buildup of greenhouse gases in Earth's atmosphere.

The most dramatic sea-ice melt in recent years came in 2007, when sea-ice extent (or the area of ocean covered by the ice) dropped to its lowest level since 1979, when satellite measurements began. This event also opened up the fabled Northwest Passage.

Arctic Sea Ice at Lowest Point in Thousands of Years | Science & Environment | Peacefmonline.com

And the only way you can attribute this fact to AGW is to ignore two basic tenets of science, the first being correlation does not equal causation and the second is of course Occams Razor. We have well documented historically warmer periods independent of any possible effect by man. Why is it that all of a sudden we are the only possible source of the heating this time?

That is a strawman argument. No one is saying that we are the only possible source of the heating at this time.

But the solar scientists say that the solar changes are causing only a fraction of the warming in the last century, and now the sun is at its lowest level of activity in 80 years. So it should be getting cooler, but it isn't.

 

[westwall]

The only one with a political agenda is you.

The fact that we have almost doubled atmospheric CO2 in the last 200 years, and that this increase in greenhouse gases is warming the earth is irrefutable.

Unless you work for Tom Colburn the Senator from Big Oil....

So much for the "deniers" thinking they know everything. Chris this statement is absolutely un-proveable.

Wrong answer.

CO2 causes the earth to retain heat. This was proven experimentally in 1859.

We are adding 10 billion tons of CO2 to the atmosphere every year.

Therefore, we are causing the earth to warm.

Nice try, though.

Nice try yourself, it does so in only one spectrum band (that being the 14.77 micron band) all other spectrums have no effect which the scientists way back thenwere not able to figure out. So yes it does but not nealry as much as was originally thought. In fact much, much, much less.

GREENIE WATCH

I am sure you will ignore the link as it comes from a skeptic blog but if you are brave enough follow the science do some research yourself and come to your own conclusions. Stop blindly following the baseless science that you have believed for so long.

 

[westwall]

Arctic Sea Ice at Lowest Point in Thousands of Years

Date: 04-Jun-2010

The shrinking amount of sea ice that covers the Arctic Ocean today is the smallest it has been in the last few thousand years, a new study suggests.

The sea ice that normally covers huge swaths of the Arctic Ocean has been retreating and thinning over the last few decades, due to the amplified warming at the North Pole, which is a consequence of the buildup of greenhouse gases in Earth's atmosphere.

The most dramatic sea-ice melt in recent years came in 2007, when sea-ice extent (or the area of ocean covered by the ice) dropped to its lowest level since 1979, when satellite measurements began. This event also opened up the fabled Northwest Passage.

Arctic Sea Ice at Lowest Point in Thousands of Years | Science & Environment | Peacefmonline.com

And the only way you can attribute this fact to AGW is to ignore two basic tenets of science, the first being correlation does not equal causation and the second is of course Occams Razor. We have well documented historically warmer periods independent of any possible effect by man. Why is it that all of a sudden we are the only possible source of the heating this time?

That is a strawman argument. No one is saying that we are the only possible source of the heating at this time.

But the solar scientists say that the solar changes are causing only a fraction of the warming in the last century, and now the sun is at its lowest level of activity in 80 years. So it should be getting cooler, but it isn't.

Excuse me? Strawman argument? No one is saying we are the only source heating at this time?...do I really need to post your own thread where you say exactly that? Do I need to post ALL of the threads where the warmers on this board say that ad nauseum?
Come on, don't make a fool of yourself.

 

[Chris]

"it does so in only one spectrum band"

Thanks for agreeing with me and proving my point.

 

[Chris]

And the only way you can attribute this fact to AGW is to ignore two basic tenets of science, the first being correlation does not equal causation and the second is of course Occams Razor. We have well documented historically warmer periods independent of any possible effect by man. Why is it that all of a sudden we are the only possible source of the heating this time?

That is a strawman argument. No one is saying that we are the only possible source of the heating at this time.

But the solar scientists say that the solar changes are causing only a fraction of the warming in the last century, and now the sun is at its lowest level of activity in 80 years. So it should be getting cooler, but it isn't.

Excuse me? Strawman argument? No one is saying we are the only source heating at this time?...do I really need to post your own thread where you say exactly that? Do I need to post ALL of the threads where the warmers on this board say that ad nauseum?
Come on, don't make a fool of yourself.

I never said that we were the only source of warming.

In fact I was the first one on this board to point out that the sun was at its lowest level of activity in 80 years, and that this past winter would be cooler than we had seen for a while.

So don't lie about what I have said.

 

[RollingThunder]

More bad news for the cargo cult:

The undeath spiral

Over the last three years, Arctic Ice has gained significantly in thickness. The graph above was generated by image processing and analysis of PIPS maps, and shows the thickness histogram for June 1 of each year since 2007.

The blue line represents 2008, and the most abundant ice that year was less than 1.5 metres thick. That thin ice was famously described by NSIDC as “rotten ice.” In 2009 (red) the most common ice had increased to more than 2.0 metres, and by 2010 (orange) the most common ice had increased to in excess of 2.75 metres thick.

We have seen a steady year over year thickening of the ice since the 2007 melt season. Thinner ice is more likely to melt during the summer, so the prognosis for a big melt looks much less likely than either of the previous two summers. More than 70% of the ice this year is thicker than 2.25 metres thick. By contrast, more than half of the ice was thinner than 2.0 metres in 2008.

The undeath spiral | Watts Up With That?

Wow dingbatdood, you just believe any old bullshit that pops up on the denier cult blog run by a very clueless and incompetent retired weatherman who's shilling for the fossil fuel industry. You really think that fool knows more than NASA? You denier cultists are a hoot.

New NASA Satellite Survey Reveals Dramatic Arctic Sea Ice Thinning

ScienceDaily (July 8, 2009) — Arctic sea ice thinned dramatically between the winters of 2004 and 2008, with thin seasonal ice replacing thick older ice as the dominant type for the first time on record. The new results, based on data from a NASA Earth-orbiting spacecraft, provide further evidence for the rapid, ongoing transformation of the Arctic's ice cover.

Scientists from NASA and the University of Washington in Seattle conducted the most comprehensive survey to date using observations from NASA's Ice, Cloud and land Elevation Satellite, known as ICESat, to make the first basin-wide estimate of the thickness and volume of the Arctic Ocean's ice cover. Ron Kwok of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., led the research team, which published its findings July 7 in the Journal of Geophysical Research-Oceans.

The Arctic ice cap grows each winter as the sun sets for several months and intense cold ensues. In the summer, wind and ocean currents cause some of the ice naturally to flow out of the Arctic, while much of it melts in place. But not all of the Arctic ice melts each summer; the thicker, older ice is more likely to survive. Seasonal sea ice usually reaches about 2 meters (6 feet) in thickness, while multi-year ice averages 3 meters (9 feet).

Using ICESat measurements, scientists found that overall Arctic sea ice thinned about 0.17 meters (7 inches) a year, for a total of 0.68 meters (2.2 feet) over four winters. The total area covered by the thicker, older "multi-year" ice that has survived one or more summers shrank by 42 percent.

Previously, scientists relied only on measurements of area to determine how much of the Arctic Ocean is covered in ice, but ICESat makes it possible to monitor ice thickness and volume changes over the entire Arctic Ocean for the first time. The results give scientists a better understanding of the regional distribution of ice and provide better insight into what is happening in the Arctic.

"Ice volume allows us to calculate annual ice production and gives us an inventory of the freshwater and total ice mass stored in Arctic sea ice," said Kwok. "Even in years when the overall extent of sea ice remains stable or grows slightly, the thickness and volume of the ice cover is continuing to decline, making the ice more vulnerable to continued shrinkage. Our data will help scientists better understand how fast the volume of Arctic ice is decreasing and how soon we might see a nearly ice-free Arctic in the summer."

In recent years, the amount of ice replaced in the winter has not been sufficient to offset summer ice losses. The result is more open water in summer, which then absorbs more heat, warming the ocean and further melting the ice. Between 2004 and 2008, multi-year ice cover shrank 1.54 million square kilometers (595,000 square miles) -- nearly the size of Alaska's land area.

During the study period, the relative contributions of the two ice types to the total volume of the Arctic's ice cover were reversed. In 2003, 62 percent of the Arctic's total ice volume was stored in multi-year ice, with 38 percent stored in first-year seasonal ice. By 2008, 68 percent of the total ice volume was first-year ice, with 32 percent multi-year ice.

"One of the main things that has been missing from information about what is happening with sea ice is comprehensive data about ice thickness," said Jay Zwally, study co-author and ICESat project scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. "U.S. Navy submarines provide a long-term, high-resolution record of ice thickness over only parts of the Arctic. The submarine data agree with the ICESat measurements, giving us great confidence in satellites as a way of monitoring thickness across the whole Arctic Basin."

The research team attributes the changes in the overall thickness and volume of Arctic Ocean sea ice to the recent warming and anomalies in patterns of sea ice circulation.

"The near-zero replenishment of the multi-year ice cover, combined with unusual exports of ice out of the Arctic after the summers of 2005 and 2007, have both played significant roles in the loss of Arctic sea ice volume over the ICESat record," said Kwok.

Copyright © 1995-2010 ScienceDaily LLC — All rights reserved

(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.)

 

[jeffrockit]

Arctic Sea Ice at Lowest Point in Thousands of Years

Date: 04-Jun-2010

The shrinking amount of sea ice that covers the Arctic Ocean today is the smallest it has been in the last few thousand years, a new study suggests.

The sea ice that normally covers huge swaths of the Arctic Ocean has been retreating and thinning over the last few decades, due to the amplified warming at the North Pole, which is a consequence of the buildup of greenhouse gases in Earth's atmosphere.

The most dramatic sea-ice melt in recent years came in 2007, when sea-ice extent (or the area of ocean covered by the ice) dropped to its lowest level since 1979, when satellite measurements began. This event also opened up the fabled Northwest Passage.

Arctic Sea Ice at Lowest Point in Thousands of Years | Science & Environment | Peacefmonline.com

And yet with all the hysteria we get this
Pacific Islands Growing, Not Sinking

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the thread.

But thanks for playing.

sure it does as it is another example of the warmers being wrong

 

[Chris]

And yet with all the hysteria we get this
Pacific Islands Growing, Not Sinking

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the thread.

But thanks for playing.

sure it does as it is another example of the warmers being wrong

Not really.

 

[RollingThunder]

It seems to me that "warmer than normal" does not necessarily translate into 'more melting'. Sub freezing is still sub freezing even if the temperature is warmer.

Well, since the scientific measurements and the satellite pictures all show that the Arctic ice is melting away, your understanding of this is obviously based on your own ignorance of this subject. Of course you overlook the fact that the temperature of the water under the Arctic ice is not "sub freezing" or it would be frozen.

And though I am no scientist, it seems quite logical to me that if some of the ice doesn't melt now and then at both poles, the ice caps would continue to expand until the Earth is just one giant ice ball.

You are definitely no scientist. In fact you seem really ignorant about science. Why are you posting ignorant opinions about a subject you know so little about?

And given the millions and millions of years of ebb and flow in climate change swinging back and forth between mostly tropical climates to ice ages, trying to establish a 'norm' using data from a half century of record keeping borders on the absurd.

Your delusion that the data climate scientists are only working with consists of only a half century of record keeping borders on the insane and only demonstrates how very little you know about this topic.

 

[jeffrockit]

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the thread.

But thanks for playing.

sure it does as it is another example of the warmers being wrong

Not really.

I give you links supporting my argument and the best you can come back with is "not really". I guess if I were still in school, I would respond with a "sez you". Perhaps you should work on your debating skills and your comprehension.

 

[westwall]

"it does so in only one spectrum band"

Thanks for agreeing with me and proving my point.

It proves nothing. CO2 has many spectrums that have no effect at all but the AGW folks calculate the whole thing. When it is calculated correctly it does not have the effect you all claim. Quit trying to be a smart aleck and have a cogent conversation, we have enough juvenile behavior with trolling blunder.

 

[Chris]

"it does so in only one spectrum band"

Thanks for agreeing with me and proving my point.

It proves nothing. CO2 has many spectrums that have no effect at all but the AGW folks calculate the whole thing. When it is calculated correctly it does not have the effect you all claim. Quit trying to be a smart aleck and have a cogent conversation, we have enough juvenile behavior with trolling blunder.

Sorry, it is tough to have a coversation with someone that claims CO2 is not a greenhouse gas.

Why do you think Venus is hotter than Mercury?