Climate Change Affecting Polar Regions Worse.

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yea, sure, the earth is warming, but it's all completely normal, dating back millions of years, let's just ignore all the CO2 we are pumping into the atmosphere, nothing to see here folks, it happened millions of years ago, we're good here.

Why are you still releasing CO2? Planet killer!!!

 

[Billy_Bob]

Climate change is happening much faster at the polar regions. But why?

FAQ: Climate Change in the Polar Regions

scripps.ucsd.edu

Credit here to Richard Crim: (no link, copy and paste)


Because of the axial tilt of the planet, both poles get less energy than the equatorial zone. In fact, both poles actually radiate more energy during their winter phase than they take in during the summer phase.

The poles are the planetary "radiators" of the heat engine that is the Earth.

So, 88% of the energy from the Sun the earth absorbs starts in the equatorial zone. This creates a big temperature difference between the equatorial zone and the polar zones.

Heat flows from hot spots to cold spots. The heat moves from the equatorial zones to the polar zones. It keeps doing this until it reaches an equilibrium. A balance between inflow and outflow of heat.

This is the "bottom line" spot for measuring the Earth’s temperature. It's the point where you can literally see how the planet's heat budget totals up.

If the ice is thicker on a year to year basis - the planet is cooling.

If the ice is thinner on a year to year basis - the planet is warning.

It's the sum of all things in the Earth’s climate system.

Now, think about this.

Why does your car's radiator get hot when you run the engine?

If the heat was going out of the radiator just as fast as it was coming in, it wouldn't get hotter. It's gets hotter because the heat comes in faster than it can go out of the system.

It gets hotter because the heat builds up. That's what's happening in the polar regions of the planet. Heat is coming in faster than the earth can shed it and so it's building up fast.

It will keep building up until a new equilibrium is reached between the equatorial zone and the polar zones.

The paleoclimate evidence suggests that the last time CO2 levels were at 400ppm the equatorial zone was 4C hotter. The polar zones were about 15C hotter.

Birch and Aspen forests were growing in Antarctica and sea level was 76 feet higher.

That's what's going to happen in the far north. After all the trees burn.

Two words.... BULL SHIT!

Maybe three. TOTAL BULL SHIT..

I guess the Antarctic ice gains are a figment of our imaginations?

MY gawd you people are ignorant of normal cycles of the earth.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yet ... decade after decade ... remain Climate Change deniers ...

Torturers of logic ... folks who make it their business to genuinely not care about future generations ...

We're gonna burn this whole house down! ...

Right Frank? Todd? Reiny? SStupidDD

generation after generation of failed predictions

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yea, sure, the earth is warming, but it's all completely normal, dating back millions of years, let's just ignore all the CO2 we are pumping into the atmosphere, nothing to see here folks, it happened millions of years ago, we're good here.

450,000 year long side by side dataset shows CO2 LAGGING temperature on both increase and decrease. Is modern CO2 different?

 

[Billy_Bob]

Yea, sure, the earth is warming, but it's all completely normal, dating back millions of years, let's just ignore all the CO2 we are pumping into the atmosphere, nothing to see here folks, it happened millions of years ago, we're good here.

Please explain to the class why the amount of warming expected by CO2 alone is not being reached globally? We expected about 1.8 deg C. What we have seen is 0.4-0.6 deg C.

IF the atmosphere is dampening the warming CO2 is causing, then you are not getting the 2 to 3 times doubling your models (failed I might add) predict. The climate sensitivity number is less than 0.5. Please explain how you're going to get runaway anything from our atmosphere with this reaction.

I'll wait...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Please explain to the class why the amount of warming expected by CO2 alone is not being reached globally? We expected about 1.8 deg C. What we have seen is 0.4-0.6 deg C.

IF the atmosphere is dampening the warming CO2 is causing, then you are not getting the 2 to 3 times doubling your models (failed I might add) predict. The climate sensitivity number is less than 0.5. Please explain how you're going to get runaway anything from our atmosphere with this reaction.

I'll wait...

Science? wuzzdat??

 

[ding]

Shut up, stupid.

I was wondering if you could taste my dick. I've got it shoved pretty far up your ass right now.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Yet you can't say where all the missing carbon dioxide is ... over half man's emissions into the the atmosphere disappears within a year ...

Yep... Mans emissions are gone within three years. Another of the alarmists failed predictions of 100-year half-life of this trace gas.. IT is not creating a "hot spot" in our atmosphere either, so there is no self-reenforcing loop of energy to drive their fantasies... Many of the hypothesis predications are untrue and they won't admit the obvious failure.

 

[ding]

Yep... Mans emissions are gone within three years. Another of the alarmists failed predictions of 100-year half-life of this trace gas.. IT is not creating a "hot spot" in our atmosphere either so there is no self-reenforcing loop of energy to drive their fantasies... Many of the hypothesis predications are untrue and they won't admit the obvious failure.

Are they really though? It's just a material balance.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Please explain to the class why the amount of warming expected by CO2 alone is not being reached globally? We expected about 1.8 deg C. What we have seen is 0.4-0.6 deg C.

IF the atmosphere is dampening the warming CO2 is causing, then you are not getting the 2 to 3 times doubling your models (failed I might add) predict. The climate sensitivity number is less than 0.5. Please explain how you're going to get runaway anything from our atmosphere with this reaction.

I'll wait...

They don't need to explain, they have consensus, Denier!!

"But one must explicitly say: We de facto redistribute the world’s wealth due to climate politics. That the owners of coal and oil are not enthusiastic about this is obvious. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate politics is environmental politics. This has almost nothing to do any more with environmental politics..." -- IPCC

 

[Billy_Bob]

Shut up, stupid.

Looks to me like you don't have the empirical evidence to prove your OP... How unsurprising....

 

[Billy_Bob]

Are they really though? It's just a material balance.

They are sequestered in our oceans or changed back into Oxygen through plant processes. It's a mix of these which removes them. I guess you can argue the point, but it is all part of the cycle on earth that has been going on for eons. We have had levels as high or higher than 7,000ppm. It is most likely a material balance but one we cannot greatly affect.

 

[odanny]

I was wondering if you could taste my dick. I've got it shoved pretty far up your ass right now.

The response of the scientifically illiterate.

 

[odanny]

Why are you still releasing CO2? Planet killer!!!

Because I like making ding and yourself look stupid.

What can I say, it's fun.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Because I like making ding and yourself look stupid.

What can I say, it's fun.

Your planet killing ways only make you look stupid.

 

[ding]

They are sequestered in our oceans or changed back into Oxygen through plant processes. It's a mix of these which removes them. I guess you can argue the point, but it is all part of the cycle on earth that has been going on for eons. We have had levels as high or higher than 7,000ppm. It is most likely a material balance but one we cannot greatly affect.

Based upon pre and post atmospheric CO2 levels I'd have to say the atmosphere is retaining it's fair share just as the ocean is.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Because I like making ding and yourself look stupid.

What can I say, it's fun.

LOL... A legend in your own mind...

 

[Billy_Bob]

Based upon pre and post atmospheric CO2 levels I'd have to say the atmosphere is retaining it's fair share just as the ocean is.

I don't think so, or it would be reflected in global sampling, which it is not.

 

[ding]

I don't think so, or it would be reflected in global sampling, which it is not.

CO2 doesn't magically segregate itself from the environment. If you are arguing that man's emissions don't affect the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere then you must come up with an explanation for the rising CO2 levels. Throughout the geologic record that has been temperature and the rise in post industrial atmospheric CO2 doesn't correlate to that it correlates to emissions.

 

[Billy_Bob]

CO2 doesn't magically segregate itself from the environment. If you are arguing that man's emissions don't affect the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere then you must come up with an explanation for the rising CO2 levels. Throughout the geologic record that has been temperature and the rise in post industrial atmospheric CO2 doesn't correlate to that it correlates to emissions.

Let me rephrase, CO2 is being cleaned from the atmosphere by natural sinks. I will agree there is SOME residual man made that is building as the sinks are not growing fast enough to counter the supply. With the cooling oceans it will soon change as uptake is faster than the supply can generate. It's a balancing act where the vegetation responds to the level of CO2 and that takes time.