Antarctica should be melting down because of all the CO2 we are dumping into the air.
Instead it is getting colder there and sea ice is increasing. This is also our fault because we are destroying the ozone hole, making it colder there.
The point is that it is our fault that Antarctica is not melting down, and if we weren’t screwing up so badly – Antarctica would be melting down – also due to us.
Either way, the Penguins are really pissed off at us.
But Steve we AREN’T destroying the Ozone hole any more, because the crazy socialist environmentalist whacko’s took away our freedoms and made us stop putting ozone destroying chemicals into the air.
Don’t know if you have been there (I have a few times) but it is a pretty big place and lots can happen there.
The ozone hole is standard climate science explanation for why Antarctica isn’t warming.
Sorry this is OT but it’s proof that not only are climate alarmists stupid so too is the TSA.. http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/11/18/another-tsa-outrage/
Oh my. Over 300 soldiers and one has a set of nail clippers, I laughed so hard I cried. Makes me think of the yobbo’s who tried to mug three guys in London last week, one who had just received a VC in Afghanistan, the other two the George Cross.
Isn’t it interesting the hole in the ozone layer was found exactly when we got the technology to see it?
lol, now I have a guilt complex! If it warms, its our fault, if it cools its our fault! Now the penguins are coming to get us!!!!
Fortunately, I stock piled a lot of those ozone depleting spray cans before they were yanked from the market. I’m thinking of blackmailing the penguin lovers. If they don’t send me millions of dollars, I’ll start spraying! I mean it!
I wrote a college term paper for chemistry about the ozone hole. Dobson found it in 1956 so he was probably using late 40’s technology. With satelites and better technology we measured the hole as getting bigger. But did it get bigger? Chlorine and PSC’s.
They have been espousing this stuff for a long time. Here is a paper from 38 years ago that talks about a possible 5M rise in sea level in 50 years from the collapse of West Antarctic Ice Sheet.
http://tintin.colorado.edu/CVEN5718/Readings/Mercer_Nature_1978.pdf
Glaciermelt. you guys REALLY have to start eading the papers you post. this is getting embarrassing.
“5 m rise in sea level,…may be imminent or in progress after atmospheric CO2 content has only doubled. This concentration of CO2 will be reached within about 50 years if fossil fuel continues to be consumed at its recent accelerating rate, or within about 200 years if consumption is held constant at today’s level.”
I will translate from this article from 1978.
AFTER a doubling of CO2, (whenever that occurs) a 5 meter rise in sea level could be starting or at some unspecified parameter within that 5 meters.
Tony,
Did the rate of consumption of fossil fuels stay the same as 1978? No, it went up. From the article:
“If the global consumption of fossil fuels continues to grow
at its present rate, atmospheric CO 2 content will double in about 50 years. Climatic models suggest that the resultant greenhouse-warming effect will be gref!.tly magnified in high latitudes. The computed temperature rise at lat 80° S could start rapid deglaciation of West Antarctica, leading to a 5 m rise in sea level.”
I can read Tony. I think it is alarmist who need to stop it trying to scare everyone with worthless predictions of doom.
What measurement is 80 degrees S?
I know F and C but S is a new one for me. Could it be 80degreesS WAG for the CLB?
The running around like a chicken with their head cut off is off a bit because a chicken really “Flops” around just like the ACC CLB are flopping around with conflicting claims.
Our Juggler shows this quality by claiming predictions have been made that have come to pass proving ACC except when they did not come to pass but those were not predictions even though they sounded like predictions, They were personal suggestions of possible futures. If a wild A22 Guess is within striking distance of the target it is a prediction if it can be shown to be consistent even if by coincidence even if other factors are better aligned with the observations and in normal science the WAG would have been falsified.
Mike,
THANK you for not calling me a comedian! I could have lost my union membership over this!
So in 12 years it will collapse?
Of course not. The purpose of posting the article was simply to show that the alarmism about polar amplification, and ice sheet collapse due to fossil fuels started long ago.
“If the CO2 greenhouse effect is magnified in high latitudes, as now seems likely, deglaciation of West Antarctica would probably be the first disastrous result of continued fossil fuel consumption.”
“If present trends in fossil fuel consumption continue, and if the greenhouse warming effect of the resultant increasing atmospheric CO2 is as great as the most advanced current models suggest, a critical level of warmth will have been passed in high southern latitudes 50 years from now, and deglaciation of West Antarctica will be imminent or in progress. Deglaciation
would probably be rapid once it had started, and when complete would have led to a rise in sea level of about 5 m along most coasts.”
SUYTS
Absolutely amazing co-incidence that there was an industrial revolution in the 1800’s
and satellite technology in the 1900’s. How is that even possible. WHAT ARE THE ODDS!
No WONDER those rocket scientists worked so hard to get something as unimportant as satelites up and running.
And I almost missed this.
“Those who are most aware of the climatic dangers of increasing atmospheric CO 2 do not seem to view deglaciation in Ant arctica as an immediate threat. For example, Schneider and Dickinson21, and Bolin4 , believe that the Antarctic Ice Sheet will respond to climatic warming very slowly, during millennia, while Rotty and Budyk022,23 are more concerned with the shrinkage and eventual disappearance of the Arctic sea ice. Revelle et al.3 conclude that our present understanding of the
Antarctic Ice Sheet is insufficient for us to forecast how it would be affected by global warming of several degrees.”
The climate is just sitting there waiting for 560 ppm, and then all hell is going to break loose.
Those are not the authors opinions, he is stating what others have said.
Is it your contention that the paper was not presented as a warning that we must stop using fossil fuels or face a catastrophe?
Here is the authors conclusion:
“Furthermore, because the present interglacial has apparently passed its natural peak of warmth-this was probably reached about 9,400 yr ago in the SouthernHemisphere55-deglaciation of West Antarctica would not occur in the foreseeable future without Man’s injection of massive amounts of industrial CO2 into the atmosphere.”
aerosols, CO2, glacial collapse, drought, floods, hurricanes,………
Thats a lot of balls to keep in the air.
tony has the skills
Thanks Tony:
Interpretation:
We do not know what is going on because we do not have enough reliable data but we will run around crying the SKY IS FALLING because we want to belong to the Chicken Little Brigade !!!!
Of course we have Tony that wants us to understand that we do not realize these people do not know what they are talking about but we should take action anyway because the science is settled even though they are not sure exactly what about the science is settled. Debate is futile because there is not enough known to have a meaningful debate!
ACC is proven to be misunderstood and reliable predictions hav been made that predict nothing of value. The ice sheets might do something and whatever they do proves ACC is a real and present danger if you are on the same meds that allow you to hallucinate. Especially if you are afflicted with ACD.
Well, I think that about sums it up.
Exactly my point Mike,
You can’t accept ACC because if anyone says anything is absolutely positively going to happen, you cry they are alarmist, and if they DON’T say it, you say they are just grasping at straws.
This scientific article way back in 1978 is in line with what is being predicted now. It says VERY clearly that at SOME point there could be a 5 meter increase in sea level AFTER 550PPM CO2 is reached, Yet Glacierman presented it as saying that there would be a 5 meter increase by 2078. the paper ALSO says that others, INCLUDING Schneider, think that that rapid an effect is unlikely.
Now I don’t know that I would say Glacier man LIED when he said the paper said there could be a 5meter rise in sea level within 50 years, it is certainly a gross misrepresentation whose only purpose is to advance a narrative of extreme alarmism.
I, being the thoughtful gentleman that I am, corrected him, and then he went and quoted RIGHT up to the quote I cited just before, as if I wouldn’t remember what I had just posted. The paper makes NO CLAIM at all about how long it would take, and he points out that other respected scientists disagree with his analysis.
And of COURSE he is saying we need to stop using fossil fuels to avoid this, or at least cut them down drastically. He believes that CO2 is causing a greenhouse effect that will raise temperatures globally and affect the planet in ways that are detrimental to human society. he was among quite a few scientists who thought this in the 70’s in spit of omnologos contention that there was a consensus about global cooling.
Well, I think that about sums it up.
Gee Whiz Tony:
Why do you suppose they even mentioned any date.
If there was no prediction no date would have been given. You proved my point that the claims were not based on science just like your rants are not based on any known scientific principle but the defining principles of Pathological science or if you will the Antithesis of the philosophy of science.
You are here to provide a path for those who might be swayed by what you say and I am here to provide a counter view of global climate and scientific principles. I believe that people need to think for them selves and research. I read amoto for a reputable scientific organization which is probably one of the oldest scientific organizations in the world. While the quote was in Latin it translated to: Take No Man’s Word! I took that to mean come to your own conclusions after analyzing the research based on what you know about the world.
The organization I am sad to say no longer follows that slogan and is falling into disrespect very fast. It is the Royal Society.
I have a solution for this. We figure a way to instantly pump 1000 ppm of CO2 into the air, and all the whining will be over, because a whole lotta NOTHING will happen.
Now, about this ozone hole. We’re making the hole, but we’re destroying the hole? We will die because of the hole, and Antarctica will melt and we will die if the hole disappears? Aren’t we going to die anyway?
Anyway, nice penguin. I see he found Michael Mann and took care of that problem.
I found the cuse of the problem in Antarctica while reading a thread from Tony Brown At airvent. Here is an interesting excerpt:
Polar ice-sheet modelling scientist
Salary: £25,500 + competitive benefits, including Civil Service Pension
Generic Role: Senior Scientist
Profession: Science
Permanent post at the Met Office, Exeter
Closing date for applications: 11 June 2009
Background information
A significant uncertainty in future projections of sea level is associated with dynamical changes in the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets and a key aspect of this uncertainty is the role of ice shelves, how they might respond to climate change, and the effect this could have on the ice sheets. The goal of the post is to contribute to improved scenarios of sea-level rise, which is an important aspect of climate change, with large coastal impacts.
Specific job purpose
Incorporate a model of ice shelves into the Met Office Hadley Centre climate model to develop a capability to make projections of rapid changes in ice sheets, thereby leading to improved scenarios of future sea-level rise.”
Link to an interesting thread
http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2009/10/19/crossing-the-rubicon-an-advert-to-change-hearts-and-minds/#comments