backtop


Print 78 comment(s) - last by Azure Sky.. on Aug 24 at 12:27 PM


  (Source: Virtual Tourist)
But climate scientists believe melting will occur in the Antarctic this century

A new study led by a Georgia Tech climate scientist has shown that Antarctic sea ice has expanded despite global warming, unlike Arctic sea ice; but this is expected to change as greenhouse gases continue to warm Antarctic waters. 

Jiping Liu, a research scientist and leader of the study from Georgia Tech, is now able to provide an explanation for the Antarctic's growing sea ice over the past 30 years, even though global warming has claimed much of the Arctic's sea ice.  

According to climate models and observations of sea-surface temperature and precipitations from 1950 to 2009, ocean warming actually provoked precipitation in the upper atmosphere, which falls as snow in the Antarctic. The top layers of the ocean then becomes less dense because the snow makes these surface layers less salty, thus making them more stable. This prevents density-driven, warmer currents in the deeper part of the ocean from reaching surface waters and from ultimately melting the Antarctic sea ice.

It may seem like a contradiction that warm surface waters are what causes precipitation that is helping create sea ice, yet also causes the melting of sea ice when it rises, but the problem, according to the study, is that oceans are becoming too warm in the Antarctic due to human-caused global warming.

Increased amounts of greenhouse gases causes climate warming, and this warming causes the precipitation in the Antarctic to become rain instead of snow, which melts ice and snow at a much faster pace. The suns rays are then absorbed into the dark ocean as the ice melts, which warms the ocean even more, and eventually leads to the melting of more sea ice. 

Issues associated with melting sea ice is that some animals in the Antarctic rely on it for hunting and survival, and it also could change the way water in the ocean travels around the world, which could interfere with circulation patterns that "provide nutrients for up to three quarters of marine life."

Walt Meier of the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) in Colorado noted that the results of this study are not surprising and the acceleration of melting Antarctic sea ice was previously predicted. He also mentioned that this study disproves the idea that a decline in Arctic ice and expansion of Antarctic ice results in a net zero effect because Arctic ice is "multiyear," meaning that it persists through the seasons, while Antarctic ice melts and forms every year and isn't dictated by air temperature as much as it is wind and ocean circulation.

The study was published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on August 16 of this year.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Make up your mind...
By bentheman939 on 8/19/2010 6:01:43 PM , Rating: 3
In some articles, you say global warming isn't happening. In others, you say it is, but its effects are negligable or trivial. Still in others, like this one, you say it IS happening, it DOES have obvious and non-trivial consequences, but don't worry, because they will substantiate themselves in counterintuative and opposite ways that will cancel out the thing itself...

Also, why is this same process happening only in the antarctic? Why would arctic ice not be stablized in the same way?




RE: Make up your mind...
By code65536 on 8/19/2010 6:32:25 PM , Rating: 3
I would venture a guess that it has something to do with the vastly different geography of the arctic, antarctic, and the surrounding regions.


RE: Make up your mind...
By rcc on 8/19/2010 7:17:28 PM , Rating: 5
Or perhaps because it's a politically driven pot of drivel? Or perhaps economically driven.

I dunno, but I like the part where it was going to rain instead of snow in the antarctic. So GW is supposed to be measured in tenths of degrees, or degrees over a longer period, but in the next couple of years it's going to increase in the Antarctic to the point where a sub zero average environment is going to have rain instead of snow?

Why not.


RE: Make up your mind...
By the3monkies on 8/19/2010 11:54:15 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Or perhaps because it's a politically driven pot of drivel? Or perhaps economically driven.


Yah, just what is going on here? Either all these PhD's and specialists are too dumb to see what is obvious to non-scientist, web surfers like us - which, let's be honest here, is highly unlikely - or we're faced with a vast conspiracy. So we shouldn't content ourselves with merely exposing the fraud of AGW, we've also got to look into why it's happening. I mean, this is scary stuff! I can think of no other instance where the vast majority of the professionals in any scientific discipline have set out to deliberately deceive the public. I know that greed plays a role here, but surely, given the extent of the fraud, something more sinister is going on here!


RE: Make up your mind...
By ekv on 8/20/2010 12:41:25 AM , Rating: 2
DENIER! HERESY!


RE: Make up your mind...
By drumhellar on 8/20/2010 2:10:00 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
ah, just what is going on here? Either all these PhD's and specialists are too dumb to see what is obvious to non-scientist, web surfers like us - which, let's be honest here, is highly unlikely - or we're faced with a vast conspiracy.


Or... the scientists are right? Seems more likely than a vast conspiracy.


RE: Make up your mind...
By FITCamaro on 8/20/10, Rating: -1
RE: Make up your mind...
By mcnabney on 8/20/2010 12:49:18 PM , Rating: 3
Scientists who work in the field of climate studies are not exactly well paid. Most of that money is spent sending graduate students out to remote locations to set up measuring equipment and to pay IT-types to accumulate, manage, and develop reporting in relation to that data.

What you are thinking about is the web of lies that highly paid-military contractors and their associated politicians cooked-up in order to start a war with Iraq. There was actually a ton of money there, but nobody has bothered to do anything about it. And what, it only cost a couple hundred thousand lives - mostly brown people - so I guess it wasn't that big of a big deal.


RE: Make up your mind...
By SPOOFE on 8/20/2010 12:53:06 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
What you are thinking about is the web of lies that highly paid-military contractors and their associated politicians cooked-up in order to start a war with Iraq

Right, because the world can only have a single web of lies at a time, right?


RE: Make up your mind...
By mcnabney on 8/20/2010 2:25:30 PM , Rating: 5
It is much more difficult to do so in the scientific community. Someone else will always try to duplicate your work, and if their results differ the truth comes out. That is why there are constantly new findings. New data appears which often breaks existing models.

The foundation for climate change is sound. Atmospheric carbon (and other greenhouse gases) are increasing. The impact is what is being argued. The planet's environment has a lot of buffers built-in to protect against spikes. The oceans do a great job of absorbing excess CO2, but there are limits to the process and sideffects to it (acidification). Ultimately it gets turned in carbonates and gets packed down to form limestone on the ocean floor.

I personally am of the philosphy that eventually we will burn up every last drop of oil, natural gas, and coal. It is just a matter of time. There are a lot of benefits to stretching out our fossil fuels besides environmental impact. They are useful for other things like chemicals and plastics that go into almost everything. That, and the sooner we become energy self-sufficient the sooner we can tell the Middle East to pound sand.


RE: Make up your mind...
By geddarkstorm on 8/20/10, Rating: -1
RE: Make up your mind...
By SPOOFE on 8/20/10, Rating: -1
RE: Make up your mind...
By FITCamaro on 8/20/10, Rating: -1
RE: Make up your mind...
By drumhellar on 8/20/2010 4:47:32 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
they want a bunch of money and there's far less on the anti-man-made global warming side.


Your right. There isn't much money on the anti-man-made global warming side. The oil and coal companies don't really make any money at all.

I keep hearing the money argument given as if all the money is only on one side, or only the pro-AGW side suffers from greed. Both sides have money to be made, and money to loose.

However, the AGW side is spoken for primarily by scientists, who generally don't make very much money. They promote the idea of man-made global waring because it's what the evidence says.


RE: Make up your mind...
By SPOOFE on 8/20/10, Rating: 0
RE: Make up your mind...
By SPOOFE on 8/20/2010 12:51:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Or... the scientists are right? Seems more likely than a vast conspiracy.

What seems even more likely is that we have a vast series of numerous small conspiracies, mostly among fairly inconsequential individuals for petty reasons.

What's wrong with suggesting a conspiracy? Conspiracies happen all the time. If you and your friends plan a surprise birthday party for a buddy, guess what? That's a conspiracy!


RE: Make up your mind...
By Amiga500 on 8/20/2010 3:13:36 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
Yah, just what is going on here? Either all these PhD's and specialists are too dumb to see what is obvious to non-scientist, web surfers like us - which, let's be honest here, is highly unlikely - or we're faced with a vast conspiracy.


Or... they don't know.

No one knows. No model is complete, no model is anywhere near 100% accurate.

Its all best guess stuff (from EVERYONE) at the moment. That needs to change, fast - but given how political the whole thing has become, even an accurate model including everything is likely to be discarded as "biased" at this stage.

Kinda reminds me of the story of "the boy who cried wolf".


RE: Make up your mind...
By gamerk2 on 8/20/2010 7:57:21 AM , Rating: 2
The problem is no model will ever be 100% correct; dynamic equations like weather systems are impossible to nail down, as any varience, even as small as .01% of a single condition, leads to totally different outcomes to the same equation.

As for Antartic/Artic, I suspect that the various weather systems are circulating more of the greenhouse gasses farther north, which BTW makes sense, considering most of the worlds industry is above the equator..


RE: Make up your mind...
By SPOOFE on 8/20/2010 3:49:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The problem is no model will ever be 100% correct

Which should make people doubt even more those that claim "the science is settled".


RE: Make up your mind...
By rcc on 8/23/2010 6:20:40 PM , Rating: 2
At this point a 20% accurate model would be a huge improvement


RE: Make up your mind...
By AEvangel on 8/20/2010 12:14:33 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I can think of no other instance where the vast majority of the professionals in any scientific discipline have set out to deliberately deceive the public.


The world is Flat, Leaches and bleeding will cure your ill's, Electro-Shock therapy cures crazy people, Lobotomy will cure depression as well as homicidal tendencies, and the most recent Acid Rain.

History is littered with countless uniformed "scientific" theories that were latter proved incorrect.


RE: Make up your mind...
By SPOOFE on 8/20/2010 12:54:26 PM , Rating: 2
History? There are places in the world where the notions you listed are current.


RE: Make up your mind...
By gixser on 8/20/2010 6:01:42 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Make up your mind...
By Azure Sky on 8/24/2010 12:27:27 PM , Rating: 2
Leaches can help some ailments, A friend of mine goes in and lets a leach farm stick a bunch on him because his body stores to much iron and they wont let him donate blood to get rid of it(they want to charge him to bleed him THEN throw the blood away)

Eletro-Shock can have an effect on some types of crazy, A woman I use to work with's daughter had been raped and held as a mans sex slave for 6 months by the time it was over she couldnt talk or communicate, and would start shaking at any loud sounds, they shocked her till she lost all memory's of what happened(and alot of other memories as well saddly) but shes alive, and now shes happy and has a productive life.....better then being stuck in a mental ward or as somebodies sex slave!!!
Mind you, it wont cure physical defects in the brain or body that cause the crazies, thats just a bs excuse to shock the piss out of somebody who annoys you.

and a Lobotomy will cure depression and homicidal tendencies, if you do it properly the person just becomes effectively a walking vegetable :P

oh and acid rain is real, just not the horror stories that they told us would happen with the world covered in acid rain.

acid rain can happen near some kinds of factories and plants, like paper mills, I have seen it eat thru the jellcoat on peoples car paint (I live around 5 miles from a papermill)

so your examples whal true in the way I am sure you ment them are also valid treatments in some rare cases.


RE: Make up your mind...
By ZachDontScare on 8/20/10, Rating: 0
RE: Make up your mind...
By Paj on 8/20/2010 3:32:21 AM , Rating: 3
Of course its economically driven... who's going to buy coal if everyone's house is solar powered?


RE: Make up your mind...
By FITCamaro on 8/20/2010 8:37:04 AM , Rating: 2
People who want power that works?

I know if my area relied on solar power, we wouldn't have hardly any for the past week as its been overcast or raining pretty much all the time.


RE: Make up your mind...
By gamerk2 on 8/20/2010 9:31:41 AM , Rating: 1
Solar doesn't work that way; if its not pitch black outside, you are getting Solar energy. Nevermind your house will still be connected to the main power grid in case power levels get too low...

I've been using Solar for years now, and not once have lost power, even during the great eastern blackout a few years back :P


RE: Make up your mind...
By FITCamaro on 8/20/2010 1:23:19 PM , Rating: 3
I was making the case if hippies got their way and the entire grid was powered by solar and wind(course some of them don't even want that). Yes solar panels produce electricity at overcast weather. But at far less than the stated capacity of the system.

If people want to put solar on their homes to lower their power bills, fine if it makes sense if your area. Just you should have to pay for it and not the rest of us. Would you have put it on your house without the massive tax subsidies on solar installations?


RE: Make up your mind...
By Grabo on 8/20/2010 5:25:22 AM , Rating: 1
So the reason as to why the Arctic is melting while the Antarctic isn't just yet is 'politically driven pot of drivel'? Imagine the equations the scientists must have drawn to reach that conclusion.

The quality of DT comments to anything even in the same dimension as human responsibility hits a new low every week.


RE: Make up your mind...
By JediJeb on 8/21/2010 11:40:42 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
So the reason as to why the Arctic is melting while the Antarctic isn't just yet is 'politically driven pot of drivel'? Imagine the equations the scientists must have drawn to reach that conclusion.


Well since it was about a year ago all the "scientists" were giving the dire warning that they were measuring a marked DECREASE in Antarctic sea ice, and now they say they are measuring an increase in Antarctic sea ice, something sure seems fishy. So is this current conclusion the drivel or was last years conclusion the drivel? One of them must be since you can't have both.

Every year people are getting funding to do research on the topic, and every year the results seem different. Each one looks at it from a slightly different point of view, has different data which support different outcomes and models, and whether the conclusion shows cooler or warmer temperature trends the final and ultimate conclusion is that man is causing the climate to warm (even when the report shows it is cooler). For the final conclusion to remain the same, no matter what the data used reveals, shows there is some type of overall problem. Be it driven by greed for money, greed for prestige, greed for power, or some type of political correctness, there is something outside pure scientific study that is driving the final conclusion.

There is one true answer here that no one wants to say, or admit, and that is; We have no idea what is going on or how or if we can do anything about it. The problem is that during the recent time of modern civilization we have experienced an unusually long period of stable climate which is not the norm for the planet, and now that it is changing a little we freak out because our comfort zone is about to be disturbed. We have a good idea of what historical temperature swings have been, along with the swings in CO2 levels and many other things. Never has it been that life on earth was extinguished because of large rises in CO2 or climate temperatures, though the same can not be said for the much lower temperatures of the ice ages.

If the people at the IPCC truly believe their own report, then why are their offices still using air conditioning? Why don't they open the windows and just let nature take its course? Why is the UN building not shut down at night when you have to have electric lights instead of letting sunlight illuminate your offices? Why does Al Gore have a mansion that has a monthly electric bill larger than most houses have in a year? If these people believe the doomsday prophecy they are pushing on everyone then why don't they live like it? If I thought my use of electricity was going to destroy the planet then I would be doing all I could to do without it.

The whole mess is drivel, maybe not purely political but drivel just the same. When the leaders and scientists pushing this start to make the changes they say are needed in their own lives then maybe people would take this seriously. The meeting in Copenhagen last year just proved they are not serious, if they had been they would have done it by a massive teleconference to save all that fuel needed to transport everyone there. If my boss at work tells us they need to lay off people because money is tight and then turns around and buys a new BMW for his work vehicle I am not going to take him seriously that money is tight, same principle applies here.


RE: Make up your mind...
By Divide Overflow on 8/20/2010 2:01:50 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I would venture a guess that it has something to do with the vastly different geography of the arctic, antarctic, and the surrounding regions.

QFT. People keep trying to generalize the climate of the planet. It's far more complex then we currently understand.


RE: Make up your mind...
By SPOOFE on 8/20/2010 12:58:43 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
People keep trying to generalize the climate of the planet. It's far more complex then we currently understand.

I agree! It's like all these people that keep insisting the planet is just a few particles of CO2 away from EXPLODING in a NON-STOP RUNAWAY TRAIN of WARMING! What a bunch of hysterical morons. Very imaginative, though.


RE: Make up your mind...
By AnnihilatorX on 8/20/2010 6:37:57 AM , Rating: 2
Last time I checked, number of human in NORTHERN hemisphere VASTLY outnumbers number of human in SOUTHERN hemisphere

It's a proof that global warming is man-made!!
(/joking)


RE: Make up your mind...
By gamerk2 on 8/20/2010 9:35:52 AM , Rating: 2
Not proof, but at least corrolation. If weather patterens, particularlly around the eastern US and Europe have the effect of moving emmissions northward, that would be enough to provide a link to warmer northern temperatures.

I suspect it has more to do with water flows then air flows though...


RE: Make up your mind...
By lennylim on 8/19/2010 7:30:23 PM , Rating: 5
Different authors at DailyTech have different views. Next time take a look at who's writing what, and you'll get a general idea of their opinions.


RE: Make up your mind...
By roostitup on 8/19/2010 7:57:18 PM , Rating: 4
Which only enhances the fact that nobody should come here for the written articles, they should come here for the links to the real articles or publications instead. Don't take these biased bloggers who like to think they are journalists too seriously. Real journalists keep a neutral standpoint and do not try to push their idealogy.


RE: Make up your mind...
By nothra on 8/19/2010 8:12:00 PM , Rating: 1
I personally like reading biased article, it is why I come to this site. Any journalist that says they are neutral is not. I'd much rather have obvious biases and read both articles like how a judge decides in a courtroom. I think it helps you to see both sides and decide for yourself, instead of just being presented with the "neutral" side.


RE: Make up your mind...
By psaus42 on 8/20/2010 4:22:46 AM , Rating: 2
Slightly biased view points is one thing that keeps me reading this site too.
But I would like the bigger community (including readers/writers of this site) to admit/recognize that we still know near nothing about what is going on to this planet.
I'm not saying humans are immune/non-participants in the temperature rising. But I'm also not convinced this trend is solely caused by humans either. Add this economic elements seen behind global warming efforts, I can't help but think we're being a little duped....
Now where did Doc Brown run off with that flux capacitor so we can settle this once and for all?! ;-P


RE: Make up your mind...
By gamerk2 on 8/20/2010 9:37:37 AM , Rating: 2
Anyone who says that humans are the sole cause of weather changes needs to have their heads examined. We'll never be able to eliminate all other factors that effect climate change naturally. That being said, we are fully capable of warming teh planet ourselves...


RE: Make up your mind...
By omnicronx on 8/20/2010 11:52:34 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Real journalists keep a neutral standpoint and do not try to push their idealogy.
What world do you live in?
There is not a major news agency that does does not try to push their own idealogy and certainly there is not one that stands on neutral ground.

The fact remains, if you want to remain objective and impartial, you MUST read both sides of the story, you are kidding yourself if you think you can find a truly neutral source of information. Otherwise you are merely picking sides and you are no better than these 'terrible biased bloggers' you are complaining about.


RE: Make up your mind...
By bentheman939 on 8/19/10, Rating: 0
RE: Make up your mind...
By sleepeeg3 on 8/20/2010 4:59:50 AM , Rating: 2
***Chuckle***

".................but climate scientists believe melting will occur in the Antarctic this century"

Riiiiight...

TK - just give it up! Quit trying to convince yourself. You don't really believe in this hogwash. The opening to the headline of one of your last articles read the same way.


RE: Make up your mind...
By ET on 8/20/2010 7:01:43 AM , Rating: 2
I didn't see anything here but quotes from climate scientists. Where exactly do you see the someone at DailyTech claiming anything? As for your question, it's a good one, and you might want to ask the researcher that.


really?
By griffynz on 8/19/2010 11:38:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The suns rays are then absorbed into the dark ocean as the ice melts, which warms the ocean even more, and eventually leads to the melting of more sea ice.


so if the sun remains constant (which it doesn't) and the volume of ocean water increases it will warm quicker?
greater water volumes in the oceans would require much larger amount of solar heating, or else they would in fact cool own and provide a cooling effect on the globe




RE: really?
By Jyrioffinland on 8/20/2010 2:53:29 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
so if the sun remains constant (which it doesn't) and the volume of ocean water increases it will warm quicker?


The natural changes in the radiation of sun are too small to explain the temp rise we've experienced lately.

quote:
greater water volumes in the oceans would require much larger amount of solar heating, or else they would in fact cool own and provide a cooling effect on the globe


What? I don't see any logic in this sentence. How would it be possible that the light-reflecting ice would not be cooling the globe yet the light-absorbing water would? Does not make any sense.


RE: really?
By makken on 8/20/2010 9:08:01 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
What? I don't see any logic in this sentence. How would it be possible that the light-reflecting ice would not be cooling the globe yet the light-absorbing water would? Does not make any sense.


I think what hes saying is that melting of the ice would mean a large influx of 0 degree C water into the oceans, which could lower the average temperature of the oceans.


RE: really?
By gamerk2 on 8/20/2010 9:41:37 AM , Rating: 2
Rememeber basic physics? "White reflects, black absorbs". Same concept here: Less ice = less reflected sunlight = warmer temperatures = less ice. Its a feedback effect.

Likewise, the opposite can quite easily happen: more ice = more reflected light = cooler temps = more ice.

Its more complicated though, due to weather systems and other effects, but thats the basic idea.


RE: really?
By makken on 8/20/2010 9:53:11 AM , Rating: 2
right, but that has nothing to do with the fact that when the ice does melt, that means a huge chunk of 0 degree C water just went into the ocean. now assuming the ocean is well circulated, it would have the effect of lowering the average temperature of the oceans; at least in the very short term.


RE: really?
By SPOOFE on 8/20/2010 1:23:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Same concept here: Less ice = less reflected sunlight = warmer temperatures = less ice. Its a feedback effect.

The AGW movement doesn't have a very good track record when it comes to feedback effects. For instance, for years the assumption was that warmer temps would cause more water to evaporate, and the vapor would accelerate the warming, causing more water to evaporate, etc. However, just this year one of the first direct studies of water vapor in the upper atmosphere found that it may just be a negative feedback effect... that more water vapor retards global warming.

Ergo, if CO2 in the atmosphere is holding in energy reflected off the surface of our planet causing warming, and water vapor is reducing the warming effect, then less reflecting ice and more water vapor would COOL our planet. Obviously more research is necessary, but it's certainly not as "basic" or simple as you suggest.


RE: really?
By griffynz on 8/21/2010 3:24:12 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Rememeber basic physics? "White reflects, black absorbs". Same concept here: Less ice = less reflected sunlight = warmer temperatures = less ice. Its a feedback effect.


so based on the FACT that Antarctica has been in 'night' mode (ie. no sunlight) for the last 4 months, that is why the earth is warm? due to lack of reflection?
but the sun on the North Pole is reflecting not melting?


RE: really?
By griffynz on 8/21/2010 12:53:59 AM , Rating: 2
what I mean is that a greater volume of liquid will always require a greater amount of energy to increase the average temperature of that liquid

1/2 a cup vs. 1 full cup in a microwave, 30 seconds of rays. which would be the warmest?

extra water in the oceans will act as a 'heat' sink, diluting the solar energy much like adding cold water to a cup of heated coffee

the solar energy required to keep these larger oceans at current temperatures would require a long time or much greater amounts of solar energy, to heat then up would take even more

deep water never heats like shallow water does, go down to the beach and you will notice that the shallow water at the waters edge in warmer than the water further out

clouds have more effect on global temperature than anything, they trap heat in or reflect it away

I'm in New Zealand and its 9 degrees Celsius here today, cloudy, no sun, and I bet the oceans are slowly cooling down today


RE: really?
By Jyrioffinland on 8/21/2010 12:58:31 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
extra water in the oceans will act as a 'heat' sink, diluting the solar energy much like adding cold water to a cup of heated coffee


For a while, yes, but it's only a buffer that can slow down the rise of temperature. It won't stop the process if the greenhouse effect gets stronger.

quote:
I'm in New Zealand and its 9 degrees Celsius here today, cloudy, no sun, and I bet the oceans are slowly cooling down today


Even if it were record cold there now, it doesn't mean a rats bottom when it comes to global warming. Global warming means more extreme weather conditions so theoretically it may even cause Antarctica to get colder than before.

Atmosphere and sea currents are a chaotic system so it may change in most unexpected ways. Unfortunately we cannot predict the specifics, we'll just have to live with them.


To me this makes sense
By adhan24 on 8/19/2010 8:06:39 PM , Rating: 2
The Antarctic is a desert. Precipitation doesn't occur all that often because it is too cold and what does fall stays around for a long time. Slightly warmer temperatures would lead to an increase in precipitation. As temperatures continue to increase though you will see that the Antarctic sea ice extent will start to diminish. I guess you can put me in the column with the climate change believers, but I do hope I'm wrong for everyone. I fear what governments may do in the guise of "saving our planet," but I can't ignore what I have personally seen going on in respect to my local glaciers (Rocky Mountain National Park), my local flora (die-backs), and my local fauna (pikas).




RE: To me this makes sense
By Targon on 8/19/2010 9:30:36 PM , Rating: 2
The issue isn't as much that there is climate change, but more about the reason for it in the first place. Now, you may remember that there was an ice age. Now, that ice age reduced temperatures, which we can assume were warmer BEFORE the ice age. So, is global warming making things warmer than they should be, or is the planet still warming back up after the ice age cooled things down to "below normal"?

It could be that the normal temperatures for the planet are 30 degrees warmer on average than they are today, and over the next several thousand years the planet will naturally go back to that temperature. If it makes humans uncomfortable or not, or kills off species that have only evolved the way they have due to the last ice age might just be a normal part of the life cycle of the planet.

Now, the real question is if humanity will force the planet to be comfortable, even if it disrupts the natural cycle.


RE: To me this makes sense
By adhan24 on 8/19/2010 10:13:03 PM , Rating: 2
Ah... that is your view on of non-anthropogenic climate change, which I in part agree with. Others just seem to deny it flat out. Of course I do recall that there was an ice age, but what is different this time is that the warming seems to be occurring at a faster pace. Trees and animals were most often able to adapt to the changing conditions of climate in the past (there are exceptions though) but this time are unable to because they cannot adapt fast enough. As I alluded to in the previous post... I'm still not convinced that humans don't play ANY role at all in the climate change issue. Our changing land use alone affects the albedo of the planet. I believe, and I'm not alone on this, that climate and humans both contribute to climate change. That's really not a stretch if you consider all the science. Remember the worry about global cooling due to particulate put out by coal-fired power plants? That was because, in that instance, an increase of particulate matter in the atmosphere lead to more UV light being reflected back into space. Though the worry ended up being misplaced the science was not faulty. Case in point, each time there is a large volcanic eruption we observe a cooling effect. I know many of you reading this may think that I just debunked my own issue but the thing is that climate systems are complex systems and you need to look at everything together. There are both cooling mechanisms and warming ones and they are contributed to by both natural and human processes.


RE: To me this makes sense
By adhan24 on 8/19/2010 10:22:24 PM , Rating: 2
My mistake... there was an omission in my previous post. The line should read like this: "climate [cycles] and humans both contribute to climate change."


RE: To me this makes sense
By SPOOFE on 8/20/2010 1:10:32 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
but the thing is that climate systems are complex systems and you need to look at everything together.

Which is actually one of the biggest failings behind the claims of anthropogenic climate change; the amount of data the researchers look at has DECREASED over time as they've simply removed "inconvenient" data sources from their tables. And let's not get into the mountain of assumptions surrounding water vapor and its behavior in the face of changing conditions.

The inherent problem comes down to burden of proof; there is none for those that are unconvinced by the claims of AGW proponents. All of the burden is on those claiming that X is happening and that we have to do Y to solve it.


RE: To me this makes sense
By mkrech on 8/20/2010 1:22:41 PM , Rating: 2
Break it down to the basic point. Regardless of whether the issue is anthropogenic, non-anthropogenic, or in any way something we can affect; creating and implementing governing policies that effectively destroy our way of life to prevent an unknown outcome is simply ridiculous.

So, why is the green movement so strongly supported. The answer to this lies in the psychology of cults. Cults are created to aggregate power from masses to a select few. Faith is used as the tool to accomplish this transfer of power. One of many examples: Heavens Gate cult - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven%27s_Gate_%28re...

Is this really about changing society so that the climate 1000 years from now will remain the same as now or is it about changing society so that power and control can be transferred today?


RE: To me this makes sense
By SPOOFE on 8/20/2010 3:51:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
creating and implementing governing policies that effectively destroy our way of life to prevent an unknown outcome is simply ridiculous.

According to the IPCC, we would have to reduce our power consumption by 80% just to noticeably slow the warming trend.

There's no point in talking about IF we should do something before finding out whether or not we CAN.


RE: To me this makes sense
By gcor on 8/20/2010 1:01:53 AM , Rating: 2
Looking at historical Australian rain fall data and antarctic ice cores has shown an inverse relationship between snow falling in antarctic and rain falling in Australia.

For past two decades large tracts of Australia have experienced unusual drought, while the antarctic ice has been increasing.

Why this is occurring is not known, however, the phenomena is well established.


It'll be great...
By Connoisseur on 8/19/2010 6:19:29 PM , Rating: 4
A few hundred or a thousand years from now our ancestors will be locked in the grips of the next great ice age. Scientists will look back on this era and say: "Man those were the good old days" while ice-fishing in Texas.




RE: It'll be great...
By DEVGRU on 8/19/2010 6:28:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
A few hundred or a thousand years from now our ancestors will be locked in the grips of the next great ice age. Scientists will look back on this era and say: "Man those were the good old days" while ice-fishing in Texas.


With those predictions, you must be an accredited Climate Scientist with shedloads of accurate models and data. You need to write a paper.


RE: It'll be great...
By SPOOFE on 8/20/2010 1:30:48 PM , Rating: 2
Appeal to authority fallacy.


RE: It'll be great...
By Camikazi on 8/19/2010 8:43:16 PM , Rating: 2
So umm, my great grand father, will go into the future see the ice age and look back and say my time was the good old days? BTW if you haven't figured it out, ancestor is the wrong word you meant descendants :P

Ancestor = before you
Descendant = after you


By ironargonaut on 8/20/2010 5:39:09 PM , Rating: 2
Temperature does not equal energy.
Temperature increase does not always correlate to energy increase.
CO2 is suppose to increase the ENERGY absorbed by the sun.
Climate scientists measure TEMPERATURE and claim ENERGY has increased.
After this basic problem you have the statistical problem of just because there is/was a pattern for Xyrs does not mean the pattern will continue and/or are related.
Also, can someone explain to me how the original "hockey stick" has been proven to be wrong. Yet, most of the following proxies produced the same stick? What is more logical? The original stick got the "right answer" by dumb luck or the following choose the data/statistal methods that got them the "right answer" that matched the original.




By SPOOFE on 8/20/2010 5:58:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
CO2 is suppose to increase the ENERGY absorbed by the sun.

Hmm? The argument goes that CO2 acts as an insulator, causing the Earth to lose less heat. If energy input remains static but output drops, overall energy at the locality increases.

quote:
Also, can someone explain to me how the original "hockey stick" has been proven to be wrong.

They had a pile of numbers, representing various aspects of abstract temperature measurements (such as tree ring growth over some years). Then they compiled all those numbers to arrive at the figures presented and used to support the AGW hypothesis.

The problem came about when somebody took completely random numbers - instead of actual climate data - and fed it through the same compilation, and got the same hockey stick result. The conclusion being that the hockey stick is a result of the way numbers were compiled, rather than the numbers themselves.


By Jyrioffinland on 8/22/2010 10:10:06 AM , Rating: 2
Funny how people have strong opinions here while lack having the basic understanding of physics. Temperature DOES equal energy.

E.g., in gas, E = 3kT/2 where E = energy, k = constant and T = temp --- or in a more fancy way:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/9/3/b/93baba8ee80...

More at:

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


Some advice
By JimboK29 on 8/20/2010 8:46:27 AM , Rating: 2
Please get a little educated on this subject before making broad brushing statements of 'global' warming. The only warming going on right now is over the continents. Look at ocean temps. Look, when the Northern hemisphere cools, the Southern hemisphere warms. When the Southern hemisphere cools, the Northern hemisphere warms. If they both warm or cool, then we have a problem. Look up and research the PDO. It is a natural cycle of warming and cooling of the oceans. Ice is thickening in the southern hemisphere - now what do you think will happen when the PDO shifts? I think you'll pick this up rather quickly.




RE: Some advice
By gamerk2 on 8/20/2010 9:56:49 AM , Rating: 2
Incorrect. Ocean temps are rising even faster then surface temps, and its very plausable (based on past data) that exchange of heat could start a warming trend in the southern hemisphere as well.


only issue is the time frame
By lenardo on 8/20/2010 9:48:47 AM , Rating: 2
THE TIME frame chosen for this article, for the data STOPS at 1999..they do not use any data from 2000-2009 time frame.

so any projections made do not reflect the actual CURRENT conditions for the antarctic. (1997/98 was the peak)

which for the past decade the water temps have gone down.

antarctic ice is currently at about the highest ever recorded.

arctic ice is at around last years level. and should fall in around 2008/2009 levels not going to get close to 2007.

overall ice is above average.




RE: only issue is the time frame
By Camikazi on 8/20/2010 12:48:04 PM , Rating: 2
That doesn't help their "all the ice is gonna melt and destroy the world" theory, so of course they omitted that information :P


Antartic's gain is Australia's loss
By gcor on 8/20/2010 1:05:16 AM , Rating: 2
Looking at historical Australian rain fall data and antarctic ice cores has shown an inverse relationship between snow falling in antarctic and rain falling in Australia.

For the past two decades large tracts of Australia have experienced unusual drought, while the antarctic ice has been increasing.

Why this is occurring is not known, however, the phenomena is well established.




Summer and Winter
By Spacemenow17 on 8/20/2010 9:44:01 AM , Rating: 2
Let's see. It is Summer in the Norther hemisphere and Winter in the Southern Hemisphere. Maybe that has something to do with it.




What a load of crap
By Denigrate on 8/20/2010 9:48:59 AM , Rating: 2
Talk about reaching for explanations of climate events that don't meet their extremely flawed models. Last summer, we had a very cool summer in North America, but we were supposed to ignore that as it did not fit the models, and didn't mean a thing. Coverage of Global Warming was near nil during this period as well. Of course, this was followed by one a much colder than normal winter as well that included record snow fall and record cold temps in many southern areas. Now this summer, since we are having a heat wave, the world is again doomed and Global Warming is going to kill us all.

Until the Climate Alarmists can come up with a model that actually matches the last 100 years of global climate paterns, I'll continue to ignore their lame attempts to control the populace via FUD.




Wow
By ipay on 8/20/2010 11:18:37 AM , Rating: 2
It's a shame that this is even a debate at this point. Please join me at http://www.TheWorldFrenzy.com and share your thoughts.




By tallcool1 on 8/20/2010 12:25:29 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.tgdaily.com/unbalanced/51112-kill-farti...
quote:
An Australian environmental group is calling for hundreds of thousands of camels, pigs and waterbuffalo to be slaughtered - because of their farts.




1 + 1 =... What?
By ShadowHawk on 8/21/2010 7:31:49 PM , Rating: 2
[Jon Stewart voice]

"In other news... This just in: I'm not peeing on your leg. It's raining!"

[/Jon Stewart voice]




"We are going to continue to work with them to make sure they understand the reality of the Internet.  A lot of these people don't have Ph.Ds, and they don't have a degree in computer science." -- RIM co-CEO Michael Lazaridis














botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki