Melting ice a 'sleeping giant' that will push sea levels higher, scientist says

[westwall]

When I was sitting in elementary school 35 years ago I was told this same bullshit. Well guess what, New York is not underwater, Reagan didn't destroy the planet and we're not out of oil. The sky isn't falling, find a new hobby.

Word

No one ever forecasted new York to be underwater by 2013.
Reagan or any president before him could of sparked a nuclear war. You really think this wasn't possible?
Thank the shale oil and new tech. Thank a scientist!

Lastly, Why don't you go to take a college course in science???? smarty pants.

Actually, Hansen did.

 

[Kosh]

Sea level has matched temperature since 1690 at least

WOW you just proven that AGW is bunk!

Good for you!

Conservatives are so anti-science that you truly don't even have to think.

more energy within the ocean= higher sea levels. Energy as temperature is of course notable for atmospheric temperature = conservative whining.

Over half of the raise of sea levels since 1940(73 years), 140 mm out of 280mm (11")since 1760 is somehow bunk.

1880 we have seen nearly 7.8"...

honestly, I don't believe in 6' by 2100 as I am a luke warmer and there's nothing suggesting that is going to happen. I believe we will have 9 to 12" more inches by 2100.

And I see the far left AGW church going Obama drone has no clue what science is (well other than what the church says it is).

 

[Kosh]

When I was sitting in elementary school 35 years ago I was told this same bullshit. Well guess what, New York is not underwater, Reagan didn't destroy the planet and we're not out of oil. The sky isn't falling, find a new hobby.

Word

No one ever forecasted new York to be underwater by 2013.
Reagan or any president before him could of sparked a nuclear war. You really think this wasn't possible?
Thank the shale oil and new tech. Thank a scientist!

Lastly, Why don't you go to take a college course in science???? smarty pants.

Sounds like you need to go to a non-far left AGW Obama drone school and learn what real science is.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Bitch, I know more within my pinky about science then you will ever fucking know. All you know how to do is insult and call people global warming church members. That isn't debate.

Truth is the oceans are rising. They sure as hell aren't rising as fast as the IPCC believes but they're following the energy going into the climate system.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Word

No one ever forecasted new York to be underwater by 2013.
Reagan or any president before him could of sparked a nuclear war. You really think this wasn't possible?
Thank the shale oil and new tech. Thank a scientist!

Lastly, Why don't you go to take a college course in science???? smarty pants.

Actually, Hansen did.

I think he was talking about the long term...Like 300-500 down the line.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Another way to tell that more energy is entering the system is the rise of sea levels...Thermal expansion.

 

[PredFan]

Glaciers advance and recede, sea levels rise and fall, ice melts and reforms. Been happening for eons.

 

[Abraham3]

Glaciers advance and recede, sea levels rise and fall, ice melts and reforms. Been happening for eons.

And there we have the head-in-the-sand approach. And you're comments are factually incorrect to boot.

Glaciers are receding, they are not advancing.
Sea level is rising, it is not filling.
Ice is melting, it is not reforming.

 

[Kosh]

Bitch, I know more within my pinky about science then you will ever fucking know. All you know how to do is insult and call people global warming church members. That isn't debate.

Truth is the oceans are rising. They sure as hell aren't rising as fast as the IPCC believes but they're following the energy going into the climate system.

I have to call you liar.

Ok since you know so much about science then post the datasets with source code that proves CO2 drives climate.

I have been asking the AGW church members to post it, not one post so far.

Until you do you will be an AGW hack that has no clue about real science.

If you want to debate then post real facts.

 

[Kosh]

Another way to tell that more energy is entering the system is the rise of sea levels...Thermal expansion.

Google is not your friend.

 

[orogenicman]

Bitch, I know more within my pinky about science then you will ever fucking know. All you know how to do is insult and call people global warming church members. That isn't debate.

Truth is the oceans are rising. They sure as hell aren't rising as fast as the IPCC believes but they're following the energy going into the climate system.

I have to call you liar.

Ok since you know so much about science then post the datasets with source code that proves CO2 drives climate.

I have been asking the AGW church members to post it, not one post so far.

Until you do you will be an AGW hack that has no clue about real science.

If you want to debate then post real facts.

Every dataset you are requesting is freely available, much of it online. We are not your private secretaries. If you want that data, I suggest you do what everyone else does, and go to the web sites where they are located, download them, and then, if you have an ounce of scientific perspective, process them and show us what your results are, and what you conclude from those results. Until you do that, no one has any cause to accept the notion that you have a clue.

 

[Kosh]

Bitch, I know more within my pinky about science then you will ever fucking know. All you know how to do is insult and call people global warming church members. That isn't debate.

Truth is the oceans are rising. They sure as hell aren't rising as fast as the IPCC believes but they're following the energy going into the climate system.

I have to call you liar.

Ok since you know so much about science then post the datasets with source code that proves CO2 drives climate.

I have been asking the AGW church members to post it, not one post so far.

Until you do you will be an AGW hack that has no clue about real science.

If you want to debate then post real facts.

Every dataset you are requesting is freely available, much of it online. We are not your private secretaries. If you want that data, I suggest you do what everyone else does, and go to the web sites where they are located, download them, and then, if you have an ounce of scientific perspective, process them and show us what your results are, and what you conclude from those results. Until you do that, no one has any cause to accept the notion that you have a clue.

Exactly you can't post it, because it does not exist!

Which goes to show that AGW is bunk!

Come on post it! Otherwise you are nothing but an AGW hack!

 

[Zoom-boing]

It was only five years ago in December that Al Gore claimed that the polar ice caps would be completely melted by now. But he might be surprised to find out that Arctic ice coverage is up 50 percent this year from 2012 levels.

“Some of the models suggest that there is a 75 percent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during some of the summer months, could be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years,” Gore said in 2008.

The North Pole is still there, and growing. BBC News reports that data from Europe’s Cryosat spacecraft shows that Arctic sea ice coverage was nearly 9,000 cubic kilometers (2,100 cubic miles) by the end of this year’s melting season, up from about 6,000 cubic kilometers (1,400 cubic miles) during the same time last year.

This came as a shock to researchers who saw Arctic sea ice coverage shrink to a documented low in 2012. However, now sea ice coverage has expanded to reach the sixth record low, according to AFP.

“We didn’t expect the greater ice extent left at the end of this summer’s melt to be reflected in the volume,” said Rachel Tilling of the Centre for Polar Observation and Modelling in a statement. “But it has been, and the reason is related to the amount of multi-year ice in the Arctic.”

“In previous summers, some of the [multi-year ice] migrated over to the Alaska and Siberia areas where it melted,” Dr. Don Perovich, a sea-ice expert at Dartmouth College, told BBC News. “But this past summer, it stayed in place because of a change in wind patterns. And so there’ll likely be more multi-year ice next year than there was this year.”

This is good news for the Arctic, but presents somewhat of a tough problem for environmentalists and some climate scientists who have been pummeled with evidence this year contradicting the theory of man-made global warming.

Satellite data shows Arctic sea ice coverage up 50 percent | The Daily Caller

 

[orogenicman]

I have to call you liar.

Ok since you know so much about science then post the datasets with source code that proves CO2 drives climate.

I have been asking the AGW church members to post it, not one post so far.

Until you do you will be an AGW hack that has no clue about real science.

If you want to debate then post real facts.

Every dataset you are requesting is freely available, much of it online. We are not your private secretaries. If you want that data, I suggest you do what everyone else does, and go to the web sites where they are located, download them, and then, if you have an ounce of scientific perspective, process them and show us what your results are, and what you conclude from those results. Until you do that, no one has any cause to accept the notion that you have a clue.

Exactly you can't post it, because it does not exist!

Which goes to show that AGW is bunk!

Come on post it! Otherwise you are nothing but an AGW hack!

Wow, the stupidity of that statement is just breathtaking. It appears that the only way you could possibly have come to such a conclusion is by believing that there are no databases that climate scientists draw from in conducting their research. And if that is the case, all I can say to that is take a pill, bubba.

 

[Kosh]

Every dataset you are requesting is freely available, much of it online. We are not your private secretaries. If you want that data, I suggest you do what everyone else does, and go to the web sites where they are located, download them, and then, if you have an ounce of scientific perspective, process them and show us what your results are, and what you conclude from those results. Until you do that, no one has any cause to accept the notion that you have a clue.

Exactly you can't post it, because it does not exist!

Which goes to show that AGW is bunk!

Come on post it! Otherwise you are nothing but an AGW hack!

Wow, the stupidity of that statement is just breathtaking. It appears that the only way you could possibly have come to such a conclusion is by believing that there are no databases that climate scientists draw from in conducting their research. And if that is the case, all I can say to that is take a pill, bubba.

So in other words you can not produce said information.

So either put up or shut up!

 

[Zander]

Al Gore says we only have a few years left. So you'd better get your adductor muscles massaged ...... By a stranger in a hotel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Old Rocks]

Exactly you can't post it, because it does not exist!

Which goes to show that AGW is bunk!

Come on post it! Otherwise you are nothing but an AGW hack!

Wow, the stupidity of that statement is just breathtaking. It appears that the only way you could possibly have come to such a conclusion is by believing that there are no databases that climate scientists draw from in conducting their research. And if that is the case, all I can say to that is take a pill, bubba.

So in other words you can not produce said information.

So either put up or shut up!

Crap, but you are a dumb ass.

Sea-level Rise Hazards and Decision Support, Sea-Level Rise\

Center of Excellence for Geospatial Information Science (CEGIS)

National Assessment of Coastal Vulnerability To Sea-Level Rise

USGS Release: New Sea-Level-Rise Modeling Forecasts Major Climate Impact to Low-Lying Pacific Islands (4/11/2013 12:00:00 PM)

Just from one scientific agency of the US government. On one subject. Kosh, people like you are damned pathetic. Willfully ignorant, and unwilling to expend even the slightest energy to do real research. You are lazy, period.

 

[westwall]

No one ever forecasted new York to be underwater by 2013.
Reagan or any president before him could of sparked a nuclear war. You really think this wasn't possible?
Thank the shale oil and new tech. Thank a scientist!

Lastly, Why don't you go to take a college course in science???? smarty pants.

Actually, Hansen did.

I think he was talking about the long term...Like 300-500 down the line.

No, in 1988 he was claiming New York would be inundate within 25 years at the present increase in CO2 levels (back then!), we now know that he was horribly wrong on his worst guestimate of where the CO2 levels would be today (he was fantastically low on that estimate) and his temperature guesses were likewise worthless (being, of course, fantastically high), in other words nothing that he predicted ever occurred.

That's why the climate fraudsters no longer will give a measurable prediction. It will prove them wrong yet again.

 

[westwall]

Another way to tell that more energy is entering the system is the rise of sea levels...Thermal expansion.

Sea level rise has been consistent for the last century and a half, at least. There has been no increase in the rate. The rise is absolutely consistent with what you would see with a recovery from the LIA.

Linear mean sea level (MSL) Global Sea Level Trends in mm/yr - NOAA Tides & Currents

 

[westwall]

Bitch, I know more within my pinky about science then you will ever fucking know. All you know how to do is insult and call people global warming church members. That isn't debate.

Truth is the oceans are rising. They sure as hell aren't rising as fast as the IPCC believes but they're following the energy going into the climate system.

I have to call you liar.

Ok since you know so much about science then post the datasets with source code that proves CO2 drives climate.

I have been asking the AGW church members to post it, not one post so far.

Until you do you will be an AGW hack that has no clue about real science.

If you want to debate then post real facts.

Every dataset you are requesting is freely available, much of it online. We are not your private secretaries. If you want that data, I suggest you do what everyone else does, and go to the web sites where they are located, download them, and then, if you have an ounce of scientific perspective, process them and show us what your results are, and what you conclude from those results. Until you do that, no one has any cause to accept the notion that you have a clue.

Really? Show us the link to Hadley's raw data set. The same for Mann's data set. Then provide us a link to their algorithms.