Arctic ice area growth since mid-September has shattered the previous record, growing 175,000 Manhattans of new ice over the last four months.
arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/timeseries.anom.1979-2008
Andy Revkin reports on this today, describing the record growth as “record melt.”
Arctic ice continues to melt at a record-breaking pace
Obama and the Environment: What He Can Do – Expert Advice – MensJournal.com
It only makes sense that ice would melt when the temperature is -30C.
Arctic ice area growth since mid-September has shattered the previous record, growing 175,000 Manhattans of new ice over the last four months.
That’s huge. Major huge! Huge huge huge. This is on top of record Antarctic sea ice last year. And cold and snow records being set right now all over the globally warmed world. We need to also do a better job attacking the notion that 2012 was the hottest year ever. And, we need to keep hitting on the point that, contrary to previous ipcc and algor claims, there is no causal correlation between CO2 & temps. Huge!
you are obviously ignorant of 180 years of physics, atmospheric and climate science. you could begin with”Principles of Planetary Climate.”
Start with Obama’s science adviser John Holdren – who said that ice-free winters come after ice-free summers.
Record growth follows record melt. Makes sense…
Obama’s science adviser says that ice-free winters come shortly after ice-free summers.
That does not make nearly as much sense.
So much for the Gore theory of no ice and dark water absorbing all that summer sunlight and melting the winter ice. -30 deg C trumps that one. A Bazinga moment.
Nice rebound from that phony, blizzard induced record low from last September.
No reports on the BBC yet, huh?
Thought not.
Summer 2012 -“Record ice melt!” it made headline news on the beeb.
Nope: http://www.bbc.co.uk/search/news/roger_harrabin?page=3&dir=fd&news=34&news_av=8
but scroll down to 27 Aug’……………….
More sea ice has melted in the Arctic this summer than at any time since satellite records began more than 30 years ago, scientists say.
It is thought a natural warming and cooling cycle could be responsible for up to 30% of the melting – but the rest is the result of human activity releasing greenhouse gases.
Roger Harrabin reports.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-19391211
Tw*t.
Proponents of Global warming have already been found to forge their so-called findings, remember? Why should we beloieve this report? It was in the UK where they forged their documents to deceitfully “support” their false theories.
What we are seeing is a contest between arctic cooling freezing more ice in the winter and soot from China melting it in the summer. The two factors together shift the curves of both peak ice and minimum ice later each year. Wind variability caused the 2007 and 2012 super minimums. When China, and Russia clean up their air pollution, the summer ice will return.
God controls the weather and the climate. Man could not change the weather for a single day if he tried, much less the climate over a period of centuries. “Climate Change” is just a scam to tax Americans into a third world country..
Expect hotter summers and cooler winters,this is because the atmospheric oxygen levels have been dropping over the last thousand years, At one time in the earth’s atmosphere held close to 32% oxygen, it is now down to 18%.,a reduction caused mainly by deforestation and the destruction of greenery which is the major source of the earths atmospheric oxygen (.through photosynthesis). Another factor is the falling water table which accounts for droughts and high temperature. Once we lose a greater part of the atmospheric oxygen , its more likely a global ice age will ensue ,this is because the atmosphere acts as lens to the Sun increasing its warmth , Notice that the higher you travel into space the colder it becomes due to a thinner atmosphere. The freezing temperature of space is somewhere around 400 degrees below zero and without a high percentage of oxygen our thin atmosphere will not protect the earth from the extreme cold of outer space.
Actually all the planets desserts were at one time lush green tropical forests but civilization has never learned how to live in balance with nature .So they cut down the trees for building and agricultural planting consequently ruining the fertility of the soil , as is happening in Brazil at this moment. Humanity causes its own problems through ignorance of a natural way of life. Viktor Schauberger , an inventor of vortex technology and a water researcher predicted all these changes in the 1940s.
http://www.schauberger.co.uk/home.html
Joseph, you must be a public school student, Oxygen IS NOT DOWN, 70 – 80% of it comes from the Ocean. Photosynthetic alage produces much of our oxygen. As for the reference to Brazil and the rain forest is ALSO WRONG, mankind has been cutting the rain forest for over 5,000 years. Because the nutrients come from dead plants, the ground is not all that fertile and only good for being a rain forest. And any area cut is eventually abandoned and it grows back. As a result the area affected by mankind is less than 2%. If you add up all the land used by humans, including roads, we occupy about 29% of Earth is land mass. Of that 29% humans occupy less than 1% of that area. Of the remaining 28% about 40% is pure wilderness. 14% is true desert and 15% has desert like characteristics. 9% is Antarctica. Most of the remaining 22% are agricultural areas. There may be other areas with a human footprint of some kind but it is insignificant in any relation to global warming.
The earth’s ancient atmosphere contained a greater amount of oxygen then the present time due to the large percentage of tropical forestry and water vapor. ( 100,00 years ago or so ) Actually I do remember somebody calling Brazil the “Lungs of the Earth”. As stated below photosynthesis accounts for the most of our oxygen, I learned that in high school before graduating from a University with a B.S degree.
Here is a quote from the scientific paper “ Earths Early Atmosphere.”
Authored by James F. Kasting; Science News Vol. 259
“The most obvious consequence of biological activity is the high 02 partial pressure in the present atmosphere. It has long been recognized that photosynthesis, followed by burial of organic carbon (69)is the source of most of our 02 that can be produced abiotically by the photo-dissociation of H20 followed by escape of H to space is small.”
http://www.csun.edu/~hmc60533/CSUN_311/article_references/Sc_Feb93_EarthEarlyAtmos.pdf
The acidity of the oceans..
Joseph, learn some biology..there is no acidity of the oceans
Biological processes in the ocean produce more acid than CO2 ever could.
If such a low level of CO2 could change the pH of the oceans…the oceans would have never worked in the first place
There is a consensus among researchers that the oceans pH has increased in acidity. A simply Google search will turn up a number of professional sites that back up the data .What I am postulating is the of reduction in the worlds forest is the major cause of climate change Atmospheric carbon is not being converted into oxygen at a fast enough pace because the great amount of reduced greenery and the great increase in fossil fuel burning..The other reasons ocean acidification include fertilizer runoff ,air pollution from toxic metals.
The Dangers of Ocean Acidification [Preview]
Much of the carbon dioxide given off from the burning of fossil fuels goes into the ocean, where it changes the acid balance of seawater. The repercussions for marine life may be enormous
By Scott C. Doney
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-dangers-of-ocean-acid
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2011/04/ocean-acidification/kolbert-text
http://www.greenyearth.org/acid-oceans.html
A healthy society recognizes whats wrong the works hard to find a solution, The idea that there are no problems with the climate will only exacerbate the damage .I’ll say once again we don;t have global warming ,but we do have a ecological crisis caused by deforestation and the misuse of technology.
What Joseph is referring to is 400 million years ago oxygen levels were a lot higher than they are today. However that has nothing to do with the current global warming argument.
It’s true the level of oxygen was much higher in prehistoric times ,it was somewhere around 28 % to 35 % ,Our present level of oxygen is 21 percent in green areas and as low as 15 % in cities.But the earth has lost up to half its greenery ,forest etc during the last 10,000 years .The acidity of the oceans also has greatly reduced its capacity of plankton to photosynthesis and release oxygen.. Deforestation is the main cause of low atmospheric oxygen levels and loss of water .The process leads to desertification and a spike in warming; until it such a point that the earths’ atmosphere can no longer insulate it from the freezing cold of outer space which will eventually result in cooling and a possible ice age. Viktor Schauberger laid out this same theory in the book Living Energies thirty years ago,
Here is a link to his books :
http://www.scribd.com/collections/3077479/Viktor-Schauberger-%E2%99%A3-books-and-documents
Here is a link to the percentage of oxygen in the atmosphere; :
http://disinfo.com/2013/01/atmospheric-oxygen-levels-are-dropping-faster-than-atmospheric-carbon-levels-are-rising/
The acidity of the oceans..
Joseph, learn some biology..there is no acidity of the oceans
Biological processes in the ocean produce more acid than CO2 ever could.
If such a low level of CO2 could change the pH of the oceans…the oceans would have never worked in the first place
The time when oxygen was that high was before the first dinosaur even walked the earth -as a mater of fact the growth and greenery of plant life around the earth over the past 50 years has shot up by a staggering 30% (seaweed is up nearly 50%) – there has been a decline in oxygen since the billions of years ago when O2 first filled our world – if anything O2 levels are on the rise with all the plant life *flourishing* of late.
Here are a number of recent articles based on atmospheric studies that support the theory that our oxygen levels have fallen relatively recently
(A) “According to a study conducted by scientists from the Scripps Institute there is less oxygen in the atmosphere today than there used to be.” written by Mike Johnson
http://blogcritics.org/atmospheric-oxygen-levels-fall-as-carbon/
(B) “Compared to prehistoric times, the level of oxygen in the earth’s atmosphere has declined by over a third and in polluted cities the decline may be more than 50% “.and here is another quote from the article. “Around 10,000 years ago, the planet’s forest cover was at least twice what it is today, which means that forests are now emitting only half the amount of oxygen.” written by Good German,
http://disinfo.com/2013/01/atmospheric-oxygen-levels-are-dropping-faster-than-atmospheric-carbon-levels-are-rising/
I can’t believe that Climate Change is still so politicized. Current arctic sea ice levels are way below the 1979-2000 average. Lots of new ice will form this winter because there was so much exposed water to start with. This will be ‘thin’ ice that will be gone in summer. Much of the thick, old ice is gone forever.
You have no idea what you are talking about. No ice in the Arctic Ocean is ever much more than five years old, because it all drifts out into the North Atlantic and melts after a few years. If it didn’t do that, the ice would be thousands of feet thick.
Steven you are not correct. From tests they did in the 1970’s with submarines, they found that ice circulates and it either expands horizontal or vertical, BUT the volume stays the same. Glaciologists have drilled about a dozen deep ice cores into the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets. It is claimed that annual layers of snow and ice, so well marked at the top of the cores, can be counted downward to 2800 meters for a total of 110,000 years in the GISP2 core
R. Exton,
You are talking about Greenland and the Antarctic Ice Sheets that sit on land. Steven is talking about the Arctic ice sheet which floats on water. He is correct.
As a layman, I am amazed that science is sure about anything, including how to evaluate phenomenon as basic as frozen water in the Arctic, or the effect of solar energy on the temperature of the earth. Interesting that the UN’s panel on climate change has finally acknowledged that the huge burning ball in the sky, around which we orbit, may have some impact on global temperatures. Amazing!
I am confused, this website basically asserts the opposite: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
Can someone explain what I am missing?
The website compares curret ice formation to median values for the period 1979 – 2000 thereby avoiding a comparison of recent trends during the recently ended solar warming cycle (2001 – 2012) and now post warming cycle (2013). These anthropogenic websites seem to always be comparing apples and oranges and often mistitling their charts.
In 1817 the British mapped the arctic and historical documents say that they were surprised because the arctic was wide open and free of ice….long before the sky started falling…seems increases and decreases are perfectly normal. But now there’s a way to make money from fear-mongering….scientists can be corrupt also I guess…
We would like to get permission to use the image above in a document we plan to publish soon for our digital marketing clients. It would be most convenient if you could email back the permission. Gartner is a research and advisory firm that helps organizations make decisions about technology. We publish reports on our website whose access is restricted to our clients. The image would appear in a document called “Tell a Compelling Story Using Data Visualization Principles for Marketing” by analyst Martin Kihn. We would use the image to illustrate the impact of visual over numerical data.