Cryosphere still warming.

Posted by: samwik

Cryosphere still warming. - 09/18/14 07:57 AM

In addition to August 2014 being another
'hottest on record' type of month, globally, this year....

Greenland is experiencing another one of its
'new normal' type of years:


National Snow and Ice Data Center :: Advancing knowledge of Earth's frozen regions

...just fyi....

~ wink
Posted by: paul

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 09/19/14 08:10 PM

Quote:
hottest on record' type of month,


thats because theres more and more air conditioners coming
on line artificially heating up the atmosphere , look at this wall of air conditioners.



LOL


Quote:
Greenland is experiencing another one of its
'new normal' type of years:


normal , because air conditioners are not needed in greenland.


yes , humans have caused a slight degree of warming compared to the
larger degree of cooling of the climate , but warming of the
climate is not caused by CO2.

also , recorded temperatures seem to be recorded in highly populated
hotter areas , thats why I try to focus on the satellite imagery
only ( the white stuff on the ground ) because the white stuff
on the ground tells a conflicting story to the story of todays weather
recording stations mounted in the middle of black asphalt parking lots
or a few feet away from the exhaust side of air
conditioning systems just so that an agenda can be realized.

Posted by: samwik

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 10/01/14 11:37 PM

Back on topic....

msnbc has this about a 'record-breaking' 35,000 walruses:

Quote:
Pacific walrus that can't find sea ice for resting in Arctic waters are coming ashore in record numbers on a beach in northwest Alaska. Unlike seals, walrus cannot swim indefinitely and must rest.

Females give birth on sea ice and use ice as a diving platform to reach snails, clams and worms on the shallow continental shelf.

In recent years, sea ice has receded north beyond shallow continental shelf waters and into Arctic Ocean water, where depths exceed 2 miles and walrus cannot dive to the bottom. Walrus in large numbers were first spotted on the U.S. side of the Chukchi Sea in 2007.

...also:

"The gathering of walrus on shore is a phenomenon
that has accompanied the loss of summer sea ice
as the climate has warmed."

Here is a copy of the photo:

http://www.rcinet.ca/eye-on-the-arctic/wp-content/uploads/sites/30/2014/10/07147758.jpg
...click on link to see larger, high-res. version of 35,000 beached walruses!....

~
Posted by: paul

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 10/02/14 06:38 PM

Quote:
Pacific walrus that can't find sea ice


http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/archive.html

todays cryosphere image...


the oct 1 1979 image



you can pick any 2 days way back to 1979 and compare all the melting
that isn't occurring...

ie...

jan 11 1979


jan 11 2013


I suppose the so called climate scientist and the so called climate scientist off shoot global warming alarmist and scammers for profit and fear mongering for profit people/groups might have a different definition for the word warming than the images all portray.

Posted by: samwik

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 10/05/14 11:59 PM

^^Thanks Paul, for those nicely picked images. Do you claim to see some trend in your cherry-picked set; or is this just more, lengthy handwaving, from the googlyboop troupe?
Whichever it may be, thanks for sharing your 'self-proclaimed' denialist's perspective.
===

Back on topic:

There is this, from that Laboratory Equipment site. They seem to stay up-to-date.

http://www.laboratoryequipment.com/news/2014/09/study-tracked-sea-levels-over-five-ice-ages

"Land ice decay at the end of the last five ice ages caused global sea levels to rise at rates of up to 5.5 meters per century, according to a new study.
An international team of researchers developed a 500,000 year record of sea level variability, to provide the first account of how quickly sea level changed during the last five ice age cycles."
Quote:
“This happened within 400 years for 68 percent of all 120 cases considered, and within 1,100 years for 95 percent. In other words, once triggered, ice sheet reduction (and therefore sea level rise) kept accelerating relentlessly over periods of many centuries.”
Rohling speculates that there may be an important lesson for our future, “Man-made warming spans 150 years already and studies have documented clear increases in mass-loss from the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets. Once under way, this response may be irreversible for many centuries to come.”


Fortunately, they conclude.... smile

"Time periods with less than twice the modern global ice volume show almost no indications of sea level rise faster than about two meters per century. Those with close to the modern amount of ice on Earth, show rates of up to one to 1.5 meters per century."

~
Posted by: paul

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 10/06/14 10:20 AM

what are you trying to say sam?

are you suggesting that because the ( natural ) climate
cycles cause sea level rises that somehow that ( natural )
climate cycle is connected to manmade greenhouse gasses.

BTW , I didn't cherry pick the images.

I simply used the oldest and newest images from January 12
1979 and 2013 found in the list on the page.
check it out yourself.

note: on the web site clicking on the January 12 2013
image link shows the January 11 image and that's not my fault wink







Posted by: samwik

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 10/07/14 01:04 AM

Originally Posted By: paul
what are you trying to say sam?
...that the cryosphere, especially the Northern Hemisphere's Arctic Regions, is "still warming."

Originally Posted By: paul
are you suggesting that because the (natural) climate
cycles cause sea level rises that somehow that (natural)
climate cycle is connected to manmade greenhouse gases.
...sure? The natural climate is "connected to" greenhouse gases,
regardless of whether the source of the greenhouse gas is 'natural' or 'manmade,' isn't it?
===

But I think the article is "suggesting" that we can better learn
how the cryosphere could respond now,
based on the more detailed picture of how
it has responded to (normal) climate forcing in the past.

Originally Posted By: Cited Science Article, from above:
"Time periods ...with close to the modern amount of ice on Earth, show rates of up to one to 1.5 meters per century."

~
Posted by: paul

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 10/07/14 02:07 PM

Quote:
...that the cryosphere, especially the Northern Hemisphere's Arctic Regions, is "still warming."


the problem that I have with the proposed "warming" is that
I cant find any evidence of "warming".

when I look at the cryosphere imagery and I see all the
areas where there is more and more snow and ice forming
during the years leading up to the current year I cant
equate that to "warming" , I can equate that to cooling
however.

and speaking of the Northern Hemisphere, when I look at this
picture that pops up under the sponsor bar occasionally ,
you've seen her the Lady with the red sweater , I just feel
all warm and cozy , that's because my mind is referencing
past experiences of warmth and coziness.

The Lady with the Red Sweater

I don't get any warm and cozy feelings when I see the
cryosphere images that are showing more and more snow and ice each year as time passes ...


Posted by: Max

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 10/08/14 02:50 AM

Hey Paul, I think you missed the disclaimer at the bottom of the page about historic snow coverage. The older pictures do not show snow coverage. HTH

Edit...
http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh
Posted by: Amaranth Rose II

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 10/08/14 06:24 AM

I looked at the October 1, 2004 vs. the October 1, 2014 map. There seems to be a major reduction in the purple colored regions. The map key doesn't say what the white signifies, but it is about the same or a little reduced and rearranged on the 2014 map. I would have to say it looks like there is less ice this year than there was 10 years ago. I just chose those two dates at random, because it was set up with October 1 as the date initially. It looks like there is a major change between 1994 and 2004, also. I would have to say it looks like a 20 year trend towards loss of ice in the Arctic. Whether that is a long-term trend or just for those two decades, I cannot say. But it certainly looks to me like there is less of the thick ice up there.
Posted by: samwik

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 10/09/14 08:42 AM

Originally Posted By: Max
Hey Paul, I think you missed the disclaimer at the bottom of the page about historic snow coverage. The older pictures do not show snow coverage. HTH

Edit...
http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh
... smile
Even if those pictures of “snow cover” are misleading, they don’t matter much either way in terms of the long-term effects from greenhouse heating. Increased snowfall is a common response to greenhouse heating in certain regions, since the warmer air can hold more moisture, so long as it’s still cold enough to snow within that region.
Paul may recall how "Global Warming Won't Stop Snowstorms"...
Quote:
“People may know the expression, ‘It’s too cold to snow’ — if it’s very cold, there is too little water vapor in the air to support a very heavy snowfall, and if it’s too warm, most of the precipitation will fall as rain,” O’Gorman said. “Snowfall extremes still occur in the same narrow temperature range with climate change, and so they respond differently to climate change compared to rainfall extremes or average snowfall.”

===

Originally Posted By: Amaranth Rose II
...I would have to say it looks like a 20 year trend towards loss of ice in the Arctic. Whether that is a long-term trend or just for those two decades, I cannot say. But it certainly looks to me like there is less of the thick ice up there.
...There is this NASA graph of various trend perspectives on the temperature anomaly, but that is just air temperatures.
The “ice extent” and “new ice” and “multi-year ice” are important dimensions to consider also, for gauging overall warming of the cryosphere.
They [the measurements] are all ahead of what science predicted, for their long-term decline, in response to increased greenhouse heating.


===

But yes, the decline in thick, multi-year ice seems to be highlighted in these images below, whatever their map keys are supposed to show.


1979-2003 ucsusa.org
vs.

1980-2012 scientificamerican.com
= =


nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/ [Oct. 7, 2014]

Since there is less multi-year ice each year, more ‘new ice’ develops and melts away during the yearly cycles nowadays, so the changes related to albedo as well as 'flux in heat capacity' are much greater nowadays. No scientists will admit to a direct linkage, yet, but the effects on the Polar Jet Stream and Polar Vortex seem to have become obvious ...istm, over the past several years.

~ wink
Posted by: Bill S.

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 10/09/14 04:49 PM

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26317?cmpid=NLC|NSNS|2014-1009-GLOBAL&utm_medium=NLC&utm_source=NSNS&#.VDa64xawSYg

“Scientists may have hugely underestimated the extent of global warming because temperature readings from southern hemisphere seas were inaccurate.”
Posted by: Max

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 10/09/14 08:53 PM

I can't believe that people are still talking about AGW. You guys can't use Polar ice as a poster child for AGW. Soot is melting the ice, just like I said years ago. I'm sure some of you remember when I posted the video where you could see it happen. BTW, Hide the decline. smile

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=hide...3AEB5DAED0239F3
Posted by: samwik

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 10/13/14 02:50 PM

Originally Posted By: Max
Soot is melting the ice, just like I said years ago. I'm sure some of you remember when I posted the video where you could see it happen.


I think that, going by the charts, soot is well known to account for about one third of the anthropogenic effect, and about one quarter of the overall "climate forcing" effect.

And as you mention, known about for a long time now....
http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080723/full/454393a.html
Published online 23 July 2008 | Nature 454, 393-396

"Combining with the dust to drive climate change are emissions of 'black carbon', the soot that results when people cook with biofuels such as wood, crop waste or dung. Southeast Asia, including the Himalayas, is one of the global hotspots for black-carbon emissions...."
===

http://nsidc.org/icelights/2011/02/23/is-dirty-air-adding-to-climate-change-2/
February 23, 2011 “Is dirty air adding to climate change?”


“Arctic sea ice has declined faster than climate models predicted. Could soot be one of the reasons? The graph above shows the forecast of sea ice decline in gray, based on eighteen computer models used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in preparing its 2007 assessments. The red line shows actual observed sea ice extent, based on satellite data, from 1979 to 2009.”
===

Yep, and....
http://www.nature.com/news/double-threat-for-tibet-1.15738?WT.ec_id=NATURE-20140821
Hot, dry weather and progressive urbanization are turning grasslands into sand near the headwaters of the Yellow, Yangtze and Mekong rivers.”
Originally Posted By: Nature: Aug. 2014
A comprehensive environmental assessment of the Plateau of Tibet has found that the region is getting hotter, wetter and more polluted, threatening its fragile ecosystems and those who rely on them.

But some areas, such as the headwater region of Asia’s biggest rivers, have become warmer and drier and are being severely affected by desertification and grassland and wetland degradation.

The plateau and its surrounding mountains cover 5 million square kilo¬metres and
hold the largest stock of ice outside the Arctic and Antarctic;
the region is thus often referred to as the Third Pole.
And like the actual poles, it is increasingly feeling the effects of climate change, but rapid development is putting it doubly at risk, the report says.

Pollution is coming not just from local sources. Dust, black carbon, heavy metals and other toxic compounds are being blown in from Africa, Europe and southern Asia. The dust and carbon residues are darkening glaciers, making them more susceptible to melting, and the toxic chemicals are poisoning crops, livestock and wildlife.
...another part of the planet's cryosphere, still warming....

“But the threats from mining and pollution are dwarfed by the potential repercussions of changes in ice and vegetation cover, the assessment says.”
===

In the end, the Tibetan plateau may be a crucial testing ground for how humans and the environment collide in a globally warmed world.
Can the world's third pole be saved?
“Let's hope that the changes the plateau is going through are only transient,” says Yao.
“What we do about them probably will determine what's going to happen to it in the future.”

~ :yep:
Posted by: Bill S.

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 12/18/14 09:47 PM

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/imageo...l-warming/#5465

Where did that one go?
Posted by: Amaranth Rose II

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 12/20/14 12:14 AM

Looks like the ocean is making inroads into Greenland. A fjord where there once was a glacier is a major reorganization. The oceans are coming to get us. We had better be prepared.
Posted by: Bill S.

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 01/20/15 04:34 PM

http://www.laboratoryequipment.com/news/...20&type=cta

One tends to think of lots of water when glaciers melt, and possibly piles of moraine, but I hadn't thought about this quantity of organic carbon.
Posted by: samwik

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 06/07/15 09:04 AM

Here is more change climate is causing:

http://www.hcn.org/articles/this-just-happened-alaskas-warm-winter
"...temperatures in Anchorage did not go below zero a single time in 2014."

Quote:
Perhaps most jarring, temperatures in Anchorage did not go below zero a single time in 2014. Because this new record covers an entire calendar year, it also reflects last winter’s abnormal warmth.

...discussing whether climate change “caused” this particular bad winter misses the point, which is that this winter’s warmth is now part of the climate record. ...
In other words, it’s not whether climate change caused this winter, it’s that this winter is climate change.

....The snow line will migrate higher in elevation and farther north, disrupting traditions such as the Iditarod.

In March, a challenging mushing season culminated with the Iditarod. Open rivers and scant snow hampered trainings and qualifying races, while the food drops that are traditionally left frozen outdoors required artificial refrigeration.
Eventually, organizers moved the race 300 miles north to Fairbanks,
for the second time in 12 years.
...worthy of a bumper sticker!

"...it’s not whether climate change caused this winter,
it’s that this winter is climate change."


...and how about this spring?!?
...as the Polar Jet Stream increasingly becomes weakened by continued greenhouse warming.

~
Posted by: Bill S.

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 06/15/15 08:33 PM

Haven't seen Paul for a while, so I thought I would post this comment in case he's still with us.

15th June, just a few days off the summer equinox and according to the local Met Office there was "grass frost" in the Harwich area this morning.

Global what? smile
Posted by: Amaranth Rose II

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 06/18/15 05:51 PM

Hi, Bill S. I think you mean Summer Solstice, not Summer Equinox. Equinoxes occur in the Fall and Spring. The Summer Solstice is the shortest night of the year (bad news for those of us who are already sleep-deficient) and was believed to be magical by many of Earth's peoples. I'm not sure I believe in magic, but it is a somewhat special time of year.
Posted by: Bill S.

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 06/19/15 01:36 AM

Originally Posted By: AR11
I think you mean Summer Solstice, not Summer Equinox.


You are absolutely right, of course. It's a good thing someone knows what I mean. smile
Posted by: paul

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 05/06/16 09:16 PM

Quote:
n addition to August 2014 being another
'hottest on record' type of month, globally, this year....


hottest on record!!!

do the ice core records count as records?

Posted by: samwik

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 05/15/16 02:11 AM

Originally Posted By: paul
Quote:
In addition to August 2014 being another
'hottest on record' type of month, globally, this year....

hottest on record!!!

do the ice core records count as records?
...Can you point to where “August” would be, in your “record” above? Then no, but....

It would be interesting to compare this present Inter-Glacial Period (IGP) with earlier IGPs,
especially the most recent “Eemian” period, from about 120,000 years ago.

The Eemian does get “warmer” than any time in our current IGP, by several degrees,
but look at the duration for the Eemian IGP, compared with the duration of this current IGP,
and look at the rate of change for temperature, during the Eemian.



Historically, what we perceive as ‘radical’ change, such as between the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age,
is caused by a ‘small’ change in the long-term average temperature, of about a half a degree Celsius
or about one degree F, over centuries.

And as long as that ‘radical change’ keeps drifting back and forth
around some roughly constant temperature over thousands of years,
agriculture and civilizations can evolve and grow and develop.

The horizontal ‘zero’ line on these graphs essentially shows us where that “roughly constant” temperature has been set for this IGP.
In the past century, we’ve added about 1 C degree (2 F) onto the ‘mini-ice-age’ temperatures,
and we are now on track to double or triple that change within the next century.

On the scale of these ice age graphs, that much change over so little time is graphed as a vertical line.
CO2 (the red line) has reached the 400 ppm level (off these charts) over the past year and it will continue increasing.

Even the sharp rise, and the following sharp fall, in temperatures during the Eemian
would be considered slow by the standards of what we are now forcing the planetary systems to experience.

Look at how flat and almost level (+/- 0.5 degree) the averages are for any century over the past 8-10 thousand years,
and compare that with the centuries and millennia of constant large change that builds up the Eemian average.

Do you think agriculture could have developed during an Eemian climate regime?
Do you think civilization will survive, in some form at least,
while we superimpose an Eemian-like climate excursion
onto a graph of our next century?

~ eek
Posted by: paul

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 05/16/16 02:48 AM

so I suppose that you agree that august 2014 was not even
close to being a hottest on record type of month since records
have been being recorded in the ice cores.

also , I would like to point out again that all of the charts
and the data that these charts are made from all show that the
co2 increases follow temperature increases.

its really easy to see that the co2 alarmist are barking up
the wrong tree and its because they can get rich from selling blocks of co2 emissions to industry and its really hard to sell a natural occurrence that has happened throughout history.

those of us that know how to read a chart know that its a
scam if it claims that co2 causes or has caused any warming at all.

were you to claim that methane was the culprit then you would
have solid ground to stand on ... but industry doesnt pump out methane and you cant tax flatulence and rotting life and flora ...


Quote:
Do you think civilization will survive, in some form at least,


small pockets of people who dont waste their time arguing about
what will be the cause of the comming ice age and instead
spend their time thinking of ways to survive and preparing
for the comming ice age will most likely survive but it will
not be a simple task because there is a 90 thousand year gap
between the interglacial periods.

there wont be grocery stores or facebook there will be
a sudden realization that the bare necessities needed to
survive the cold were not even thought of because everyone
was focusing on it being global warming not cooling.

Posted by: samwik

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 05/18/16 08:16 AM

Originally Posted By: paul
so I suppose that you agree that august 2014 was not even
close to being a hottest on record type of month since records
have been being recorded in the ice cores.
....Right, this is comparing months “…during the period 1951-1980.”

“Last month was the hottest April on record globally ...by the largest margin ever....”
Quote:
…the hottest April on record globally – and the seventh month in a row to have broken global temperature records.
…the global temperature of land and sea was 1.11C [2F] warmer in April than
the average temperature for April during the period 1951-1980.

The new record broke the previous one …set in 2010, at 0.87C above the baseline average for April.

It makes three months in a row that the monthly record has been
broken by the largest margin ever,
and seven months in a row that are at least 1C above the 1951-80 mean for that month.
When the string of record-smashing months started in February, scientists began talking about a “climate emergency”.


Decline of Arctic Ice continues ahead of predictions:


...plus:
“Early start to Greenland Ice Sheet melt season”

Quote:
“Early melt events are important as they lower the surface albedo by increasing the snow grain size. A lower albedo allows for more absorption of the sun’s energy, fostering more ice melt.”

“Such an event is unusual but not unprecedented; the record surface melt season of 2012 began in a similar manner.”
These warm April conditions follow on the warmest winter (January 1 to March 31, 2016)
recorded for the Arctic
.”
===

Originally Posted By: paul
also , I would like to point out again that all of the charts
and the data that these charts are made from all show that the
co2 increases follow temperature increases.
....Right, the scientists know about that, Paul,
and how that is caused by orbital changes—Milankovitch cycle—
which should be sending us back into an ice age.

But extra CO2 (and methane, which converts into CO2 after a few years) has been
offsetting the normal cooling pattern. There is now more than enough greenhouse effect to
override the cooling part of the orbital cycle,
as well as amplify any warming side of the orbital cycle.

...and still, in the cryosphere, the reflective ice continues diminishing:
Arctic sea ice coverage is shrinking so drastically …had to redraw atlas maps.

“Arctic sea ice coverage is shrinking so drastically that last August,
National Geographic had to redraw its atlas maps.”

~ sick
Posted by: paul

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 05/18/16 02:31 PM

Quote:
…the hottest April on record globally – and the seventh month in a row to have broken global temperature records.





the warming has nothing to do with co2 and the 400ppm co2 is due to the 800 year
lag from the temperature increase in the medieval warm period.

we can certainly expect that co2 will decrease in the near future according to the graph even if we do nothing at all
to decrease co2 concentrations.

Al Gore was right there is a connection between temperatures and co2 but hes no scientist so those who told him that co2 was causing warming were the ones in error.

7 months ago...

the 7 month record temp you talk about may be the result of the
massive methane release in california (5 billion cu ft ) along with many other similar methane releases.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/ener...ory-study-says/

co2 does not cause warming ... it causes cooling.

methane causes warming.

these methane releases may be much more important to our
survival than you might think because these releases can quickly
warm the earth and on demand!!

after all it was methane releases that brought us out of the
last ice age.

the oceans warm really slowly and as the oceans warm up
co2 is released from the ocean water.

our oceans are the prime source of co2 that is emitted into
our atmosphere.

our little tiny human caused co2 output may be less than 1% of the oceans co2.

we cant warm the oceans , but the sun can if there's methane
in the atmosphere.

so the oceans are naturally going to try to cool down and
when they do they will soak up massive amounts of co2 which plant life needs.

we eat plants...

what this all says is that we can possibly control the climate
with this methane release technology that we have stumbled upon.


I say dump billions into it.
you cant spend billions in an ice age.

Posted by: Bill S.

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 06/23/16 02:59 AM

http://www.nature.com/news/support-gun-r...=OTQzMjQwNzYwS0

No comment; just an interesting read.
Posted by: paul

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 06/23/16 01:59 PM

Quote:
the American Medical Association (AMA) declared gun violence a public-health crisis, and announced that it will apply its considerable lobbying power to pressure Congress to fund research into this violence.


6000 deaths due to gun violence and 251000 due to medical errors.

deaths due to medical errors is the number 3 cause of death
in the US while deaths due to firearms is number 6

heart disease and cancer are the only two reasons above
medical error as the cause of death and its not even listed
on a death certificate ... how convenient for the medical industry.

dont look at the tree limb sticking in the eye of the medical industry ... look over there at the splinter sticking in the eye
of firearms.

I can personally attest to the fact that being in the vicinity
of a medical facility and its medical workers is more dangerous
than being in the vicinity of firearms ... in fact if everyone did own firearms I can almost guarantee that there would be much fewer deaths due to medical error.

btw ... most of the anguish in europe that we see in the mainstream news is due to gun control.

from what I can tell by watching the videos that people are
making explaining how the immigrants are acting and treating
the people in the countries that have allowed them in and are
supporting them financially so that the immigrants will have
food and shelter and a better life than they had in the
countries that they ran from , it wont be long before the citizens of those countries will have had enough of the disrespect that the immigrants have shown them and continue
to show them and they will forcefully remove the immigrants
themselves even if the governments and law enforcement agencies
of those countries do not allow it.

the immigrants have expressed that they desire that new laws
be imposed in the countries that allowed them in laws that they
are used to and comfortable with.

they basically want to have what they had.

on the other hand the europeans want to keep what they had
and feel comfortable with before the immigrants were imposed on them in there lands.

I say let the immigrants have what they had ... ship them back
to the places that they came from and then maybe they will be happy and content with the things that they are comfortable with
... the things that caused them to seek a better place.

but you dont see any news stories that show massive numbers
of immigrants going back to where they came from now do you.

so instead of going back to what they are used to they want
to destroy what the europeans have built and turn europe into
the same types of places that they ran from fearing their
lives were in danger.

the scary part about this is that an angry army of european citizens will have a difficult time distinguishing who the immigrants are so they may have to set up detainment camps
for those that are determined to be immigrants and are
awaiting deportment to their respective former country.

and judging from the anger that has built in the european
peoples due to the way that they have been treated by the
immigrants I wouldnt expect that the immigrants would be
or should expect to be treated well.

and the really really scary part of this is that if a means
of deportment cannot be negotiated then the camps might very
well begin to resemble and function as the ww2 nazi extermination camps that were set up all over europe.

and from a conspiracy viewpoint the whole thing with the
immigrants and the refusal of the governments to hold the
immigrants responsible for their actions and crimes is pretty
much causing all of the anger that is building in the european
citizens.

and it seems like this whole thing is designed to lead the
immigrants to their slaughter.

the immigrants dont see it coming so they continue to harass
the citizens building more and more anger and hatred in the
citizens of the countries that have given them shelter and food
and money.

I would hate to see it all come to this but in my mind this is
the only recourse that the citizens have if the governments
do not treat the immigrants as equals and hold them accountable
for their actions.

the people of the United States do not have gun control in place
except in the few places where gun control is in place and they just happen to be the places where gun violence is now the highest.

so why should the US impose gun control on its citizens when
we see the results of government imposed gun control in europe.


Posted by: Bill S.

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 06/23/16 02:23 PM

I'm losing it! laugh

I suppose firing guns does contribute to climate change.

That was not the link I meant to put in that thread.

I think it was this one.

http://www.nature.com/news/bring-climate...=OTQzMjQwNzYwS0
Posted by: paul

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 06/23/16 03:30 PM

I thought you were simply exercising your right to
perform thread drift ...

but in a sense it was about climate change , storms arising
winds blowing , etc.
Posted by: paul

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 06/23/16 04:20 PM

OMG , that is so sad. wink

the poor poor innocent rats ... well perhaps those in
mourning in australia can take comfort in knowing that not all rats
have become extinct.



of course there are the others who dont want to share
their livelihood with the rats.



Posted by: samwik

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 06/24/16 12:06 AM

But back on topic, these are some general "cryosphere" observations currently:

"The Arctic sea ice is breaking up to the north of Greenland during June."
Originally Posted By: internet blog
Overall, for this time of year, Arctic sea ice extent remains in or near record low ranges despite weather conditions that would have traditionally helped to preserve sea ice.

After record Arctic warmth this Winter and Spring,
storms churning over the sea ice during June have done little to prevent
continued record low extents throughout the Northern Polar zone
...or to disallow strange events like
the early-season break-up of ice to the north of Greenland.
...and also from that site:

"Record low sea ice extents for 2016 are likely to continue to have an influence on Northern Hemisphere weather
—assisting the formation of high amplitude Jet Stream wave patterns.

These waves are associated with extreme and persistent weather conditions
to include — heatwaves, droughts, wildfires and floods.
One such wave pattern is now facilitating record hot temperatures and increased wildfire hazards over the US West
and has the potential to set off heatwaves over the Alaskan and Canadian Arctic even as
anomalous rainstorms form over wide sections of the Arctic Ocean during the next couple of weeks."

It'll be interesting to see if "anomalous rainstorms" actually do "form over
wide sections of the Arctic Ocean during the next couple of weeks."
~
Posted by: paul

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 06/24/16 11:20 PM

Quote:
despite weather conditions that would have traditionally helped to preserve sea ice


I know its an inconvenient truth but that methane really
is a strong greenhouse gas isnt it.

did you ever look at any of the graphs that show both
temps and co2 levels and wonder why the temperature
rises before the co2?

or is that type of data not acceptable in the global warming
due to co2 realm?

just asking so I will know where you stand on co2
causing any warming ever throughout history.
Posted by: samwik

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 06/25/16 11:16 AM

Originally Posted By: paul
...but that methane really is a strong greenhouse gas isnt it.
Yes Paul, science already knows all about how “methane really is a strong greenhouse gas”
...when methane is compared directly with CO2.

And science also knows about how CO2 is a stronger influence,
overall—when compared to methane—on our climate.


...since methane disappears much more quickly, AND...

...since methane is measured in ppb (parts per billion)...
...there isn't nearly as much methane as there is CO2.


So I hope you can see how the shorter time scale of methane’s effect,
along with the much smaller amount of methane (parts per billion, compared with ppm for CO2),
means this “stronger” GHG doesn’t make as much difference as CO2 does, in the big climate picture.

That’s why the “radiative forcing” from methane is considered to be
smaller than the forcing caused by CO2 (shown on the right, above).
===


Originally Posted By: paul
did you ever look at any of the graphs that show both
temps and co2 levels and wonder why the temperature
rises before the co2?
Yes! And science already knows about how “temperature rises before the co2” on the geological time scale,
normally, in response to orbital (Milankovitch) forcing.

“The lag proves that …higher CO2 levels cause warming.”
“The lag proves that rising CO2 did not cause the initial warming as past ice ages ended,
but it does not in any way contradict the idea that higher CO2 levels cause warming.”
===


Originally Posted By: paul
or is that type of data not acceptable in the
global warming due to co2
realm?
There is not anything “not acceptable” about any of that
in the “global warming due to co2” realm of science.


These two points that you've mentioned above,
are accepted and understood by mainstream physics and chemistry,
and they are consistent with the mainstream views on global warming.

Do you think your two points somehow contradict the mainstream theory?
===


Or maybe you’re right on topic, focusing on methane,
because if the Arctic permafrost heats up too much more,
methane would likely become the bigger problem.

Arctic could become an overall source of carbon to the atmosphere.
“If …a lot of permafrost thaws out, the Arctic could become an overall source of carbon to the atmosphere….”

Originally Posted By: see also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_methane_emissions
“Global warming accelerates its release, due to both release of methane from existing stores, and from methanogenesis in rotting biomass.”

cut'n'paste url=Time Magazine
content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1969767,00.html
“…methane, a greenhouse gas that is 30 times more effective in trapping heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide, is bubbling up from the continental shelf and leaking into the atmosphere. The estimated total: 8 teragrams — that's 8 trillion grams — per year.” ...[fyi: 1 teragram = 1 megaton = 0.001 gigaton]

www.reef2rainforest.com/2016/04/22/dragon-watch/
“Is the warming Arctic incubating a methane monster that could unleash mass extinction on Earth?”

Lots of good reasons to keep the cryosphere cool.
~ cool
Posted by: paul

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 06/25/16 01:47 PM

OK , I read the highly informative and scientific article
on the "NEW SCIENTIST" web site that you posted the link to.

Quote:
we know that co2 is a greenhouse gas because it absorbs
and emits infrared radiation , basic physics tells us that
gasses with this property trap heat radiating from the earth...



basic physics tells us the following about the above MYTH !!!

lets reduce this process down to a earth that has only 1
co2 molecule in the atmosphere.

tell me at which time in the following basic physics processes
does the earth or the atmosphere warm due to the co2 molecule in the
atmosphere.

where t = time interval
and E = added energy
Earth = the earth
Atmos = the earths atmosphere

t=1
Earth E = 0
Atmos E = 0

sunlight passes by the co2 molecule on its trip to
the earths surface because its frequency is different
from the co2 molecule.

t=2
Earth E = 1
Atmos E = 0

the sunlight is absorbed by an object on the earth.
at this point for a fraction of a second there is a
tiny amount of heat transferred into the object on the
earth.


t=3
Earth E = .5
Atmos E = 0

a fraction of a second later the object then emits
infrared light (a photon of light)
at this point the object retains some of the heat energy
that it initially received from sunlight.
because the object released energy when it emitted the infrared light


t=4
Earth E = .5
Atmos E = .5

the infrared light that was emitted from the object
is then absorbed by the co2 molecule in the atmosphere.
at this point the co2 molecule becomes excited and undergoes
a frequency change ... and it cannot absorb another photon
until it emits a photon of the same energy that it absorbed.
for a tiny fraction of a second the co2 molecule moves around
in the atmosphere faster than it did before it became excited
by the infrared light that was emitted from the object on the earth.

t=5
Earth E = .5
Atmos E = 0

the co2 molecule then emits a photon with the exact energy
that it absorbed.

so far during this process the earth has gained .5 energy from the
visible light not the infrared light as the energy of the infrared light
is emitted by the object.

the co2 molecule has not gained any energy and the atmosphere has not
gained any energy.

so where in physics can it be claimed that co2 causes any warming?

the energy that is sent into the atmosphere (infrared) is not stored.

it is immediately released mostly back into space or towards the earth again.

now suppose the co2 molecule emits its infrared photon towards the earth
and the infrared photon is absorbed by the object on the earth.

t=6
Earth E = 1
Atmos E = 0

the infrared light is absorbed by the object on the earth.
and almost immediatly the object emits a infrared photon with the exact same energy.

t=7
Earth E = .5
Atmos E = 0

the photon of infrared light emitted from the object
is now traveling to the co2 molecule that is in the atmosphere.

--------------------------------------------------------------

this process can never change in a way that will cause
any additional energy (heat) to be stored on the earth or
in the atmosphere.

and it does not matter how many times the process is repeated.

and adding more co2 molecules to the atmosphere will deliver the same
results per each co2 molecule added.

note: where the belief , thoughts or claims that co2 causes any warming at all
is in question everything , all evidence , every claim and every word that exist above
the basic fundamental physical processes involved are muted debunked and totally
refuted by basic physics.

also:

if you desire to claim that the time interval between
t=4 and t=5 where the co2 molecule moves around in the
atmosphere faster and that an interaction with other
particles and/or molecules in the atmosphere causes some
degree of heat to build in the atmosphere then you will
need to explain where the energy that causes the heat comes
from ... because the co2 molecule must release a photon of
the same energy that it absorbed.


and as we you all know
" you cant get a free lunch "
" you cant pull yourself up by your bootstraps "
and
" you cannot create energy "

etc ... etc ... etc ...



but your welcome to try if you like.


Posted by: Amaranth Rose II

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 08/17/16 06:59 AM

Paul, your link to apparently videos or you tubes are showing up in my machine as thick black vertical bars. Any insight as to what the trouble might be? Maybe you could post a link to them. Thanks.

Amaranth Rose II
Posted by: Bill

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 08/17/16 01:18 PM

Originally Posted By: Amaranth Rose II
Paul, your link to apparently videos or you tubes are showing up in my machine as thick black vertical bars. Any insight as to what the trouble might be? Maybe you could post a link to them. Thanks.

Amaranth Rose II


That is strange everything is showing up ok in my browser.

Bill Gill
Posted by: paul

Re: Cryosphere still warming. - 08/26/16 05:48 PM

the links were to youtube videos showing the
rat infestations in australia

https://youtu.be/zWVw-j8eYSk

and the adaptations of
farmers using dogs to hunt and kill the rats.

https://youtu.be/PY6W2EGF9ho

something to think about!
one pair of rats can multiply up to
15,000 rats in 1 year.

https://youtu.be/RJA4IW_pkeo

but the rat poison companies that make a working poison
keep getting bought up by companies that make better rat
feed than rat poison.

its getting to where using poisons to control pest populations
is a thing of the past and is being replaced by traps as a
means of solving the problem.

I went through 2 big bags of tomcat mouse and rat poison the last year , but kept seeing more and more rats ... I bought a small catch and release animal trap and in two days there were no more rats left to catch , they had been strategically deployed to the
woods where other hungry animals such as foxes owls hawks falcons
snakes etc can use them more than I can.

thats how I adapted to the situation of greedy companies in
this particular situation.