Antarctic Ice Discussion

[BornFromTheVoid]

To be fair this is a Antarctica ice discussion thread so I wasn't going to talk about Greenland ?

 

Although the figures you quoted I don't dispute , the graphs look 'impressive' which is what their meant to be

 

If we saw a graph showing actual percentage of mass lost at around 0.00002% per year they would be very boring .

 

Well, selectiveness, or cherry picking, is ignoring the majority of the data in order to pick out the small piece of anomalous data. For example, whether someone is claiming some kind of global "balance" due to mass increases in the higher elevations of Greenland, or East Antarctica, or a handful of growing glaciers in the Karakoram region, it's all selectiveness and cherry picking because it's not representative of all the known data.

 

 

The graphs show the ice loss in gigatonnes. Impressive or not is an individuals perspective, if you find a simple graph like that impressive, then I'm kinda envious!

 

Showing the percentage of ice loss wouldn't give much information when it came to sea level rise, which is the main issue with the ice sheet melt. Likewise, showing the global temperature increase in Kelvin and as a percentage wouldn't give much of an idea of the change that has occurred or it's relevance to us.

[Methuselah]

Whilst the Antarctic Ice-Sheet's advance is fully consistent with both AGW theory and the Solar Cycle Theory, the continuing demise of the Arctic clearly is not...Unless we invoke 'time lags' - of which we know nothing.

[be cause]

See .. I reckon that only when there is full unhindered debate as above do those like me wishing to gain knowledge and perspective on some of the most important issues in today's world  get the best out of Netweather ... ta !

[knocker]

Showing the percentage of ice loss wouldn't give much information when it came to sea level rise, which is the main issue with the ice sheet melt. Likewise, showing the global temperature increase in Kelvin and as a percentage wouldn't give much of an idea of the change that has occurred or it's relevance to us.

 

I was just about to say something along the same lines.

[knocker]

I appreciate many will know all this but this short podcast is quite informative.

 

Recent ice-melt in the Antarctica Peninsula

30 April 2013

This week in the Planet Earth Podcast: Robert Mulvaney and Emilie Capron from NERC's British Antarctic Survey explain how ice cores drilled from Antarctica give us a unique window into Earth's past climate and reveal a worrying trend over the last 50 years.

 

http://planetearth.nerc.ac.uk/multimedia/story.aspx?id=1445&cookieConsent=A

[stewfox]

 

Showing the percentage of ice loss wouldn't give much information when it came to sea level rise, which is the main issue with the ice sheet melt. Likewise, showing the global temperature increase in Kelvin and as a percentage wouldn't give much of an idea of the change that has occurred or it's relevance to us.

 

Main stream media look at the effect of the total loss of ice at the poles 70/80 metres. I think its important we educate and don't scare the public, just my view.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/aug/11/climatechange

 

0.0023435669% sea level rise last 70yrs

 

100mm sea level rise last 70yrs

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_sea_level_rise

 

The average depth of the ocean is about 4,267 meters (14,000 feet)

 

. http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/oceandepth.html

 

Post glacial sea level rise attached. Man Kind did 'survive; 100 metre plus sea level rises

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Post-Glacial_Sea_Level.png

Edited July 30, 2013 by stewfox

[keithlucky]

But if that is correct it's being very selective. The Antarctic Peninsula is warming faster than just about anywhere on earth and the western Antarctic is losing mass, the implications of which are far worse that a slight increase in sea ice.

185,ooo sq km above previous ,record low temperatures across South America Snow on coast of Brazil for the first time in 60yrs ,records being broken is fact and,not being selective.

[knocker]

185,ooo sq km above previous ,record low temperatures across South America Snow on coast of Brazil for the first time in 60yrs ,records being broken is fact and,not being selective.

 

Of course it is as you don't mention any heat records or changing atmospheric and ocean patterns. You are just quoting weather events. And while on South America.

 

http://www.scienceworldreport.com/articles/8466/20130729/climate-change-impacts-ice-field-chile-argentina-face-water-storage.htm

Edited July 30, 2013 by knocker

[Devonian]

Main stream media look at the effect of the total loss of ice at the poles 70/80 metres. I think its important we educate and don't scare the public, just my view.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/aug/11/climatechange

 

0.0023435669% sea level rise last 70yrs

 

100mm sea level rise last 70yrs

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_sea_level_rise

 

The average depth of the ocean is about 4,267 meters (14,000 feet)

 

. http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/oceandepth.html

 

Post glacial sea level rise attached. Man Kind did 'survive; 100 metre plus sea level rises

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Post-Glacial_Sea_Level.png

 

 

If the sea rises 2m it sounds like a problem but if it only rises 20 *.0023435669% it will only rise a piffling .04687134%. Problem solved

[stewfox]

185,ooo sq km above previous ,record low temperatures across South America Snow on coast of Brazil for the first time in 60yrs ,records being broken is fact and,not being selective.

 

In need I just wonder how many cold records would be broken if Antarctica had 100,000 + weather stations

 

 

http://twitpic.com/m75r1

Edited July 30, 2013 by stewfox

[stewfox]

If the sea rises 2m it sounds like a problem but if it only rises 20 *.0023435669% it will only rise a piffling .04687134%. Problem solved

 

You a fellow politician as well ?

[UV-RAY]

Whilst the Antarctic Ice-Sheet's advance is fully consistent with both AGW theory and the Solar Cycle Theory, the continuing demise of the Arctic clearly is not...Unless we invoke 'time lags' - of which we know nothing.

 

 

Whilst the Antarctic Ice-Sheet's advance is fully consistent with both AGW theory and the Solar Cycle Theory, the continuing demise of the Arctic clearly is not...Unless we invoke 'time lags' - of which we know nothing.

The thing is Pete no one predicted arctic ice to decline this fast, so any model projections can also be discounted. As for lags there could well be many oceanic lags we simply haven't discovered yet, then again there may not be. I still feel we still  have so much to learn about  our climate forcings and ocean heat content.

[BornFromTheVoid]

Main stream media look at the effect of the total loss of ice at the poles 70/80 metres. I think its important we educate and don't scare the public, just my view.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/aug/11/climatechange

 

0.0023435669% sea level rise last 70yrs

 

100mm sea level rise last 70yrs

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_sea_level_rise

 

The average depth of the ocean is about 4,267 meters (14,000 feet)

 

. http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/oceandepth.html

 

Post glacial sea level rise attached. Man Kind did 'survive; 100 metre plus sea level rises

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Post-Glacial_Sea_Level.png

 

I haven't seen any suggestion in the mainstream media that we'll see anything more than a few meters sea level rise by the end of this century.

 

Telling someone who's home is likely to get flooded not to worry because the sea level rise has only risen .002% isn't much comfort to them.

 

Has anyone in the mainstream media suggested that humanity would not survive the projected sea level rise?

[Methuselah]

I haven't seen any suggestion in the mainstream media that we'll see anything more than a few meters sea level rise by the end of this century.

 

Telling someone who's home is likely to get flooded not to worry because the sea level rise has only risen .002% isn't much comfort to them.

 

Has anyone in the mainstream media suggested that humanity would not survive the projected sea level rise?

It's nowt more than a straw man...No one has made either claim...

[keithlucky]

Antarctic sea ice smash all records again by 280,000 sq km 8th daily record in 9 days

[BornFromTheVoid]

Yep, Antarctic sea ice area showing no signs of moving back towards average. I guess this is one of the few natural -ve feedbacks that's still working well!

 

Extent, not looking so great

 

Edited August 1, 2013 by BornFromTheVoid

[stewfox]

I haven't seen any suggestion in the mainstream media that we'll see anything more than a few meters sea level rise by the end of this century.

 

 

 

As I posted already the guardian stated 'all we can prepare for is extinction'

 

It goes on to say

 

"The collapse of the polar ice caps would become inevitable, bringing long-term sea level rises of 70-80 metres. All the world's coastal plains would be lost, complete with ports, cities, transport and industrial infrastructure, and much of the world's most productive farmland"

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/aug/11/climatechange

 

I still believe we should report the facts rather then alarmist rhetoric, less beg to differ and leave it at that.

[stewfox]

Yep, Antarctic sea ice area showing no signs of moving back towards average. I guess this is one of the few natural -ve feedbacks that's still working well!

 

Extent, not looking so great

 

 

Surely still the 2nd highest on record ??

[BornFromTheVoid]

As I posted already the guardian stated 'all we can prepare for is extinction'

 

It goes on to say

 

"The collapse of the polar ice caps would become inevitable, bringing long-term sea level rises of 70-80 metres. All the world's coastal plains would be lost, complete with ports, cities, transport and industrial infrastructure, and much of the world's most productive farmland"

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/aug/11/climatechange

 

I still believe we should report the facts rather then alarmist rhetoric, less beg to differ and leave it at that.

 

Yep, I'll agree with you partially on that, a way, way over the top piece.

It doesn't suggest it will happen by the end of the century, but a ridiculous piece nonetheless.

 

 

Surely still the 2nd highest on record ??

 

It only shows a few years. Look how close we are to average. You can't have that average line without having many previous years above it, which suggests many years above 2013 also.

[keithlucky]

More records tumble 10 th daily record in 11 days

[stewfox]

More records tumble 10 th daily record in 11 days

 

Breaks the old record by 300,000 sq km and 1,000,000 sq km above the 30 yr mean  

 

Interesting read

 

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/07/22/why-antarctic-sea-ice-is-the-better-climate-change-indicator/

[keithlucky]

Don"t forget everybody GW causes cooling as well as warming lol Sea Ice Extent is up 1,500,000 sq. km. from 1980 to 2013 and up 1,800,000 sq km from the lowest extent in 1986.

 

Edited August 4, 2013 by keithlucky

[Gray-Wolf]

When do you imagine the impacts of the ozone hole began to stir things up down there Kieth? I've always thought that the process of strenghthening the circumpolars (winds then current via the winds) began during the mid 80's as the spring hole blossomed over the pole?

 

I understand you are reluctant to see man's hand in climate chaos but what of his hand in smashing the ozone? is that up for question too? Oh! and by the way, what were the type ofppm's of the atoms doing the damage to the atmosphere?

[Richie V]

What a car crash the last few pages of this thread is. Another record has been also broken this week... The self scented tamerity record is the highest for 5 years in here. I'm just waiting for someone to ask me to back up my post with data

WE HAVE NEW EXTENT RECORDS IN ANTARTICA.... END OF.

DON'T MAKE ME GET THE HOSE!

Just venting, nothing personal

Edited August 5, 2013 by Richie V

[keithlucky]

When do you imagine the impacts of the ozone hole began to stir things up down there Kieth? I've always thought that the process of strenghthening the circumpolars (winds then current via the winds) began during the mid 80's as the spring hole blossomed over the pole?

 

I understand you are reluctant to see man's hand in climate chaos but what of his hand in smashing the ozone? is that up for question too? Oh! and by the way, what were the type ofppm's of the atoms doing the damage to the atmosphere?

Can  climate change be explained by ozone hole over south and north pole or is it due solar variation http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2013/07/new-paper-supports-planetary-theory-of.html