• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Lowest ice cover ever at both poles[W:284]

How many times have I pointed out that Western Antarctica is part of the "Ring of Fire." That means geothermal activity, and it doesn't matter if they are active.
 
What do we know about Arctic sea ice trends?

Posted on August 16, 2017 | 25 comments
by Dr. Ronan Connolly & Dr. Michael Connolly
Satellite observations indicate that the average Arctic sea ice extent has generally decreased since the start of the satellite records in October 1978. Is this period long enough to assess whether the current sea level trend is unusual, and to what extent the decline is caused by humans?
Continue reading →

Summary

  • After re-calibrating the pre-satellite data, it now transpires that Arctic sea ice has alternated between periods of sea ice retreat and growth. The satellite record coincidentally began at the end of one of the sea ice growth periods. This has led to people mistakenly thinking the post-1978 sea ice retreat is unusual.
  • The results from new sea ice proxies taken from ocean sediment cores suggest that Arctic sea ice extent has varied substantially over the last 10,000 years. They also suggest that Arctic sea ice extent was actually less before the Bronze Age than it is today.
  • The current Global Climate Models are unable to reproduce the observed Arctic sea ice changes since 1901, and they seem to drastically underestimate the natural sea ice variability

 
Jack Hays said:
What do we know about Arctic sea ice trends?

[FONT=&]Posted on August 16, 2017 | 25 comments[/FONT]
by Dr. Ronan Connolly & Dr. Michael Connolly
Satellite observations indicate that the average Arctic sea ice extent has generally decreased since the start of the satellite records in October 1978. Is this period long enough to assess whether the current sea level trend is unusual, and to what extent the decline is caused by humans?
Continue reading →

Summary

  • After re-calibrating the pre-satellite data, it now transpires that Arctic sea ice has alternated between periods of sea ice retreat and growth. The satellite record coincidentally began at the end of one of the sea ice growth periods. This has led to people mistakenly thinking the post-1978 sea ice retreat is unusual.
  • The results from new sea ice proxies taken from ocean sediment cores suggest that Arctic sea ice extent has varied substantially over the last 10,000 years. They also suggest that Arctic sea ice extent was actually less before the Bronze Age than it is today.
  • The current Global Climate Models are unable to reproduce the observed Arctic sea ice changes since 1901, and they seem to drastically underestimate the natural sea ice variability
Click to expand...

Yep.

How many times have I mentioned this under 40 year span is too short. Most natural cycles exceed 30 years.
 
Jack Hays said:
[h=2]Antarctica – 91 volcanoes coincidentally found under glaciers warming “due to climate change”[/h]
It’s possibly the densest concentration of volcanoes in the world, some as high as 4km and we didn’t even know these existed til recently. Despite that overwhelming ignorance, we’re 97.00% certain that all the warming in Antarctica is due to your car and airconditioner. Robin McKie, The Guardian writer, talks about the recent discovery of so many volcanoes under the ice. Not surprisingly, we have no data on how active these volcanoes are. However because we *know* climate change is definitely wrecking Antarctica, it follows that your car, air conditioner and pet dog could melt more ice, take the pressure off the tectonic plate and set one off. Then things will really get out of hand.
Anyhow, it’s just a coincidence that all the warming in Antarctica is where the volcanoes are.
Warming in Antarctica | New volcano discoveries
​
Spread the hagtag #allvolcanosmatter.
[h=3]From The Guardian: Scientists discover 91 volcanoes below Antarctic ice sheet[/h]Scientists have uncovered the largest volcanic region on Earth – two kilometres below the surface of the vast ice sheet that covers west Antarctica.
The project, by Edinburgh University researchers, has revealed almost 100 volcanoes – with the highest as tall as the Eiger, which stands at almost 4,000 metres in Switzerland.
Geologists say this huge region is likely to dwarf that of east Africa’s volcanic ridge, currently rated the densest concentration of volcanoes in the world.
These newly discovered volcanoes range in height from 100 to 3,850 metres. All are covered in ice, which sometimes lies in layers that are more than 4km thick in the region. These active peaks are concentrated in a region known as the west Antarctic rift system, which stretches 3,500km from Antarctica’s Ross ice shelf to the Antarctic peninsula.
Who’s responsible for lava?
(Regulate now!)
Click to expand...

The trouble is that when you remove the lid from the volcano, like the old-style percolator coffee pot. Add too much heat, and BANG! Another Climate Change double whammy. We have the warmer temperatures melting the ice. A few volcanic eruptions will melt some additional huge tracts of ice.
 
Jack Hays said:
[h=2]Antarctica – 91 volcanoes coincidentally found under glaciers warming “due to climate change”[/h]
It’s possibly the densest concentration of volcanoes in the world, some as high as 4km and we didn’t even know these existed til recently. Despite that overwhelming ignorance, we’re 97.00% certain that all the warming in Antarctica is due to your car and airconditioner. Robin McKie, The Guardian writer, talks about the recent discovery of so many volcanoes under the ice. Not surprisingly, we have no data on how active these volcanoes are. However because we *know* climate change is definitely wrecking Antarctica, it follows that your car, air conditioner and pet dog could melt more ice, take the pressure off the tectonic plate and set one off. Then things will really get out of hand.
Anyhow, it’s just a coincidence that all the warming in Antarctica is where the volcanoes are.
Warming in Antarctica | New volcano discoveries
​
Spread the hagtag #allvolcanosmatter.
[h=3]From The Guardian: Scientists discover 91 volcanoes below Antarctic ice sheet[/h]Scientists have uncovered the largest volcanic region on Earth – two kilometres below the surface of the vast ice sheet that covers west Antarctica.
The project, by Edinburgh University researchers, has revealed almost 100 volcanoes – with the highest as tall as the Eiger, which stands at almost 4,000 metres in Switzerland.
Geologists say this huge region is likely to dwarf that of east Africa’s volcanic ridge, currently rated the densest concentration of volcanoes in the world.
These newly discovered volcanoes range in height from 100 to 3,850 metres. All are covered in ice, which sometimes lies in layers that are more than 4km thick in the region. These active peaks are concentrated in a region known as the west Antarctic rift system, which stretches 3,500km from Antarctica’s Ross ice shelf to the Antarctic peninsula.
Who’s responsible for lava?
(Regulate now!)
Click to expand...

The idea that mostly-dormant volcanoes are appreciably heating an entire continent is hilarious.
 
Northern Light said:
A friend and former colleague is doing work in Russia right now about the permafrost, which has begun to melt more drastically in the past three years. The greenland and polar ice sheet diminishment are well known, but not enough attention is being brought to the permafrost. If the permafrost melts even by 25% we are totally screwed because of the levels of methane that will be released.
Click to expand...

Methane?? Those folks who claim climate change is bogus, say that supporters or zealot's as they characterize proponents of climate, say that proponents of the science only site one cause. co2. But here's methane. More potent of a greenhouse has than co2.
 
Rich123 said:
Methane?? Those folks who claim climate change is bogus, say that supporters or zealot's as they characterize proponents of climate, say that proponents of the science only site one cause. co2. But here's methane. More potent of a greenhouse has than co2.
Click to expand...

That was supposed to be more potent of a greenhouse gas , auto correct wrote greenhouse has
 
Deuce said:
The idea that mostly-dormant volcanoes are appreciably heating an entire continent is hilarious.
Click to expand...

And you know they are "mostly dormant" how?

[h=1]Volcano discovered smoldering under a kilometer of ice in West Antarctica[/h]From the Washington University in St. Louis Its heat may increase the rate of ice loss from one of the continent’s major ice streams It wasn’t what they were looking for but that only made the discovery all the more exciting. In January 2010 a team of scientists had set up two crossing lines of…

November 17, 2013 in Volcanoes.
 
Last edited:
Rich123 said:
Methane?? Those folks who claim climate change is bogus, say that supporters or zealot's as they characterize proponents of climate, say that proponents of the science only site one cause. co2. But here's methane. More potent of a greenhouse has than co2.
Click to expand...

Methane is also a major concern, but the reason why it hasn't taken center stage is because until now the primary largest source has been from agriculture. Most scientists and economists predict that the Green Revolution will die down in the next 20-30 years as soil and water become depleted, especially where meat production is concerned. As meat becomes less affordable, the economy will correct the methane production in that department.

But CO2 is another story. It's tied to fossil fuel consumption and the positive causation between CO2 and global warming has been both obvious to measure and difficult to remedy. Based on the permafrost problem, CO2 is sort of the gateway greenhouse gas to more major gas releases that will prove catastrophic for humanity. We have three hurricanes on the east coast, the west coast is on fire, and there are major ecological disruptions happening globally. This is all merely from CO2 and a 2 degree temperature increase. If the permafrost methane is released we are totally screwed.
 
Jack Hays said:
And you know they are "mostly dormant" how?

[h=1]Volcano discovered smoldering under a kilometer of ice in West Antarctica[/h]From the Washington University in St. Louis Its heat may increase the rate of ice loss from one of the continent’s major ice streams It wasn’t what they were looking for but that only made the discovery all the more exciting. In January 2010 a team of scientists had set up two crossing lines of…

November 17, 2013 in Volcanoes.
Click to expand...

Because highly active volcanoes are, uh, rather loud.
 
Deuce said:
The idea that mostly-dormant volcanoes are appreciably heating an entire continent is hilarious.
Click to expand...

They aren't. Those areas under 0.1 degrees could easily be errors. The undisputed warming is only where the volcanoes are.

I suppose next, you will be telling me that those volcanoes are there because of warming...

How many times have I spoke of "the ring of fire" every time you guys jumped on the bandwagon about western Antarctica warming? I believe it has bee every time.

The only way to get coverage and see temperture changes over the whole of Antarctica is with satellites. That t 0.1 degree and less is more likely long term sensor drift.
 
LittleNipper said:
First off, most of these alarmists simply don't believe in GOD ---- much less, that there was once a terrible Flood and an ark built by Noah with his family. They don't even wish to imagine that this Flood was likely some 5000 years ago (perhaps even more recent).

I certainly believe that we shouldn't waste things and spoil the environment, but if unborn babies can be thrown away and people continue to pollute their own bodies through, smoking, excessive drinking, tattoos, drugs, sexual abuse, etc. without any regard for the CREATOR of this environment --------------- what makes anyone imagine that these same folks are up to saving a planet.
Click to expand...


Do all us skeptics a favour and stay off our side :(
 
Threegoofs said:
I think he's on the correct side- the side of illogical fantasy and distrust and misunderstanding of science.

He's a bit more self aware than some of you guys, tho.
Click to expand...

And you are simply the comic relief here and the best advert for skepticism we could ever dream of :thumbs:

Haven't you worked that out yet ?
 
[h=2]Real sea level rise: a lost continent called Zealandia submerged[/h]
File this under Nasty Nature. This is the sort of thing planet Earth throws at life.
The is real “sea level rise” — where most of a continent (called Zealandia) sinks under the waves — and — as far as we know, though I could be wrong — fossil fuel use was minimal circa 50 -80 million years ago. Can Exxon be blamed?
New Zealanders may be feeling a bit cheesed that they carelessly lost something like 80% of their land. (Call that “Old Zealand” which was once as big as India.) Given that it is one kilometer underwater, it looks like it isn’t coming back soon. But think of all the national parks, reefs, etc that were destroyed?
Zealandia. | Credit: IODP
​
The story is that the Pacific Rim of Fire “buckled” 40-50 million years ago, and Zealandia sunk a lot deeper. There is a suggestion that it was originally submerged about 80 million years ago (or so), when this renegade land split from Australia and Antarctica.
Since 1,000 tide gauges estimate current sea level rise at around 1 mm a year, real climate change puts the current panic about sea levels into perspective. Even the next ice age, with a 125m sea level drop, is not going to uncover all this lost real-estate.
Keep reading →

 
Jack Hays said:
Real sea level rise: a lost continent called Zealandia submerged]File this under Nasty Nature. This is the sort of thing planet Earth throws at life.
The is real “sea level rise” — where most of a continent (called Zealandia) sinks under the waves — and — as far as we know, though I could be wrong — fossil fuel use was minimal circa 50 -80 million years ago. Can Exxon be blamed?
Click to expand...

Looks like someone is confused by the concept that effects may have multiple causes.
 
Jack Hays said:
[h=2]Real sea level rise: a lost continent called Zealandia submerged[/h]
File this under Nasty Nature. This is the sort of thing planet Earth throws at life.
The is real “sea level rise” — where most of a continent (called Zealandia) sinks under the waves — and — as far as we know, though I could be wrong — fossil fuel use was minimal circa 50 -80 million years ago. Can Exxon be blamed?
New Zealanders may be feeling a bit cheesed that they carelessly lost something like 80% of their land. (Call that “Old Zealand” which was once as big as India.) Given that it is one kilometer underwater, it looks like it isn’t coming back soon. But think of all the national parks, reefs, etc that were destroyed?
Zealandia. | Credit: IODP
​
The story is that the Pacific Rim of Fire “buckled” 40-50 million years ago, and Zealandia sunk a lot deeper. There is a suggestion that it was originally submerged about 80 million years ago (or so), when this renegade land split from Australia and Antarctica.
Since 1,000 tide gauges estimate current sea level rise at around 1 mm a year, real climate change puts the current panic about sea levels into perspective. Even the next ice age, with a 125m sea level drop, is not going to uncover all this lost real-estate.
Keep reading →
Click to expand...

Given that sort of capacity for upward and downward movement of the sea floor, to what degree is the possibility that any sea level changes are due to relatively slight changes in the altitude of parts of the sea floor.

I put out there the idea that since we are over due an earthquake storm the pressure of the driving component of the tectonic system, the mid ocean ridge, will be increasing resulting in it getting higher as the height of it is a function of the lateral force exerted on it by the resistance of the ocean floor/continents to it's push.

Just how accurate are our maps of the ocean floor?
 
Tim the plumber said:
Given that sort of capacity for upward and downward movement of the sea floor, to what degree is the possibility that any sea level changes are due to relatively slight changes in the altitude of parts of the sea floor.

I put out there the idea that since we are over due an earthquake storm the pressure of the driving component of the tectonic system, the mid ocean ridge, will be increasing resulting in it getting higher as the height of it is a function of the lateral force exerted on it by the resistance of the ocean floor/continents to it's push.

Just how accurate are our maps of the ocean floor?
Click to expand...

The US Navy's maps of the ocean floor are extremely accurate.
 
Jack Hays said:
The US Navy's maps of the ocean floor are extremely accurate.
Click to expand...

To what degree of altitude? Is it comapritive to known features or the surface of the ocean?

If it it not to 2mm then the sea level changes could be due to flexing of the sea bed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom