Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Arctic Ice Hits Near-Record Low, Threatening Wildlife

  1. #1
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar
    Posts
    4,798

    Arctic Ice Hits Near-Record Low, Threatening Wildlife

    [URL="http://www.npr.org/2011/09/16/140516890/arctic-ice-hits-near-record-low-threatening-wildlife?sc=fb&cc=fp"]http://www.npr.org/[/URL]


    [QUOTE]

    Ice on the Arctic Ocean has melted to its second-lowest level on record, according to researchers in Colorado who track this trend. The summertime melt coincides with a dramatic warming over the past decade, and it's already affecting wildlife in the Arctic Ocean.

    The Arctic ice comes and goes with the seasons; typically about half of the wintertime ice melts away by mid-September. After that low point, the ice regrows. In 2007, the amount of ice left in September hit a dramatic low.

    Mark Serreze, who heads the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Colorado, says this year's low is not far off that 2007 record.

    "What it's telling us is that the long-term decline in Arctic sea ice is continuing, and even appears to be accelerating at this point," he says.

    Serreze says what's notable about this year is how different the weather was, compared with the record-low year in 2007.

    "In 2007, one of the big reasons we got to a record low is because we essentially had a near-perfect weather pattern that pumped a lot of warm air into the Arctic," Serreze says.

    Unusually cloud-free skies hastened the melting, and wind patterns made the ice prone to disappear. Serreze says this year's melt was nearly as bad, but without the extreme weather.

    "That's telling us that sea ice is really in trouble," he says. "The ice is so thin now that it just can't take a hit in summer anymore."

    That's setting up a vicious cycle. There's no question that the Arctic Ocean will freeze up again over the fall and winter, but there's less and less really thick ice building back up year to year.

    "Come next spring, we're just going to have a lot of thin ice that formed over the autumn and winter. That's the stuff that melts out easily the next summer," Serreze says. "So there's a feedback at work here, and that feedback is getting stronger with time."

    Serreze says the Arctic could be ice-free in the summer by about 2030, though that is hard to predict; other scientists say it could be mid-century before that dramatic point is reached.

    Why does this matter? Ice that's floating on the sea surface doesn't raise the sea level when it melts. But researchers suspect it will alter the weather that reaches us far to the south. It's already affecting Arctic wildlife.

    Thousands of walruses that usually float around on sea ice and dive down to feed on the ocean floor abandoned those floes when the only ice left off the coast of Alaska was over water that was too deep.

    "After the sea ice ran out, a lot of the walruses came to the shore of northwest Alaska and began hauling out there," says Chad Jay, a research ecologist with the U.S. Geological Survey in Alaska. He says it's harder on the walruses to feed from shore, because they have to swim farther to get back to their food supply. It's also more hazardous for them to be up on the rocks instead of on ice, he says.

    "When they're hauled out in these large aggregations on the shore, if there's a disturbance or something that causes walruses to flee into the water quickly, then quickly the calves get run over and die as a result," Jay says.

    He's now trying to figure out how the walruses will adapt as the sea ice continues to melt away.

    [/QUOTE]

  2. #2
    [IMG]http://www.real-science.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/PaintImage3519.jpg[/IMG]




    [QUOTE]Arctic Continues A Strong Recovery From The 2007 Low
    Posted on September 17, 2011 by Steven Goddard

    The orange line represents NSIDC’s “normal” line. Green is 2011 ice not present in 2007. Red is the opposite.

    More than 30% of the missing ice area in the western Arctic has recovered since 2007. This is one of the most important indicators that the Arctic is “recovering” but it is unlikely that you will be hearing much about this from the experts.

    If the Arctic continues to recover at the present rate, it will be back to NSIDC’s “normal” by 2020.[/QUOTE]

  3. #3
    Misleading thread title. It should read Arctic Sea Ice not Arctic Ice.

  4. #4
    All League
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Boston area
    Posts
    4,475
    The bottom line is that whatever is/is not going on- is not caused by man. The Al Gore types have the arrogance to believe this is the one area where the we can control climate cycles like mother nature has been doing without the human race for billions of years.

  5. #5
    [QUOTE=PatriotReign;4147100]The bottom line is that whatever is/is not going on- is not caused by man. The Al Gore types have the arrogance to believe this is the one area where the we can control climate cycles like mother nature has been doing without the human race for billions of years.[/QUOTE]

    Bottom line you don't have a clue to the damage we are doing to the environment including warming. Nobody is saying we control climate cycles.

    Nobody is saying that BB cheating impacted a particular game during your SB run. We simply are saying having an edge obtained through cheating is still an edge.

  6. #6
    All League
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Boston area
    Posts
    4,475
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs;4147188]Bottom line you don't have a clue to the damage we are doing to the environment including warming. Nobody is saying we control climate cycles. [/quote]

    Way to contradict yourself. Are you a member of the Al Gore tin foil hat brigade who blame bigger hurricanes on man? Of course man has an effect on the environment to a degree but to imply that climate cycles are because of man reeks of arrogance. What caused the climate changes billions of years ago? Was it the methane from all the dinosaur sh!t? :rolleyes:

    [quote]Nobody is saying that BB cheating impacted a particular game during your SB run. We simply are saying having an edge obtained through cheating is still an edge.[/QUOTE]

    Nobody is saying that Jet fans use asterisks as a form of therapy but's it's a strong possibility.

  7. #7
    [QUOTE=PatriotReign;4147200]Way to contradict yourself. Are you a member of the Al Gore tin foil hat brigade who blame bigger hurricanes on man? Of course man has an effect on the environment to a degree but to imply that climate cycles are because of man reeks of arrogance. What caused the climate changes billions of years ago? Was it the methane from all the dinosaur sh!t? :rolleyes:



    Nobody is saying that Jet fans use asterisks as a form of therapy but's it's a strong possibility.[/QUOTE]

    I'm not arrogant enough to believe we don't impact the environment. We have completely changed the landscape, cut down millions of acres of trees, changed the natural flow of rivers, dumped enough oil in rivers so they catch fire and dumped all kinds of toxic crap into the earth and sea not to mention the air.

    You have to be a dope to believe we aren't negatively impacting the planet with all the toxic crap we use and put into the environment on a daily basis.

    The idea that we shouldn't conserve has nothing to do with Al Gore, it has to do with respect for yourself, your kids and your neighbors.

    I don't believe in a new world order or political solutions to our environmental problems, that doesn't mean I have to stick my head up my ass and disagree with the scientific consensus on mans impact on our environment.
    Last edited by Winstonbiggs; 09-17-2011 at 01:12 PM.

  8. #8
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs;4147205]I'm not arrogant enough to believe we don't impact the environment. We have completely changed the landscape, cut down millions of acres of trees, changed the natural flow of rivers, dumped enough oil in rivers so they catch fire and dumped all kinds of toxic crap into the earth and sea not to mention the air.

    You have to be a dope to believe we aren't negatively impacting the planet with all the toxic crap we use and put into the environment on a daily basis.

    The idea that we shouldn't conserve has nothing to do with Al Gore, it has to do with respect for yourself, your kids and your neighbors.

    I don't believe in a new world order or political solutions to our environmental problems, that doesn't mean I have to stick my head up my ass and disagree with the scientific consensus on mans impact on our environment.[/QUOTE]
    .............................................................................................

    [QUOTE]
    SPECIAL REPORT: More Than 1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims - Challenge UN IPCC & Gore Visit Site

    Climate Depot Exclusive: 321-page 'Consensus Buster' Report set to further chill UN Climate Summit in Cancun


    More than 1,000 dissenting scientists (updates previous 700 scientist report) from around the globe have now challenged man-made global warming claims made by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and former Vice President Al Gore. This new 2010 321-page Climate Depot Special Report -- updated from the 2007 groundbreaking U.S. Senate Report of over 400 scientists who voiced skepticism about the so-called global warming “consensus” -- features the skeptical voices of over 1,000 international scientists, including many current and former UN IPCC scientists, who have now turned against the UN IPCC. This updated 2010 report includes a dramatic increase of over 300 additional (and growing) scientists and climate researchers since the last update in March 2009. This report's release coincides with the 2010 UN global warming summit in being held in Cancun.

    The more than 300 additional scientists added to this report since March 2009 (21 months ago), represents an average of nearly four skeptical scientists a week speaking out publicly. The well over 1,000 dissenting scientists are almost 20 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the media-hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers.

    The chorus of skeptical scientific voices grew louder in 2010 as the Climategate scandal -- which involved the upper echelon of UN IPCC scientists -- detonated upon on the international climate movement. "I view Climategate as science fraud, pure and simple," said noted Princeton Physicist Dr. Robert Austin shortly after the scandal broke. Climategate prompted UN IPCC scientists to turn on each other. UN IPCC scientist Eduardo Zorita publicly declared that his Climategate colleagues Michael Mann and Phil Jones "should be barred from the IPCC process...They are not credible anymore." Zorita also noted how insular the IPCC science had become. "By writing these lines I will just probably achieve that a few of my future studies will, again, not see the light of publication," Zorita wrote. A UN lead author Richard Tol grew disillusioned with the IPCC and lamented that it had been "captured" and demanded that "the Chair of IPCC and the Chairs of the IPCC Working Groups should be removed." Tol also publicly called for the "suspension" of IPCC Process in 2010 after being invited by the UN to participate as lead author again in the next IPCC Report. [Note: Zorita and Tol are not included in the count of dissenting scientists in this report.]

    Other UN scientists were more blunt. A South African UN scientist declared the UN IPCC a "worthless carcass" and noted IPCC chair Pachauri is in "disgrace". He also explained that the "fraudulent science continues to be exposed." Alexander, a former member of the UN Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters harshly critiqued the UN. "'I was subjected to vilification tactics at the time. I persisted. Now, at long last, my persistence has been rewarded...There is no believable evidence to support [the IPCC] claims. I rest my case!" See: S. African UN Scientist Calls it! 'Climate change - RIP: Cause of Death: No scientifically believable evidence...Deliberate manipulation to suit political objectives' [Also see: New Report: UN Scientists Speak Out On Global Warming -- As Skeptics!] Geologist Dr. Don Easterbrook, a professor of geology at Western Washington University, summed up the scandal on December 3, 2010: "The corruption within the IPCC revealed by the Climategate scandal, the doctoring of data and the refusal to admit mistakes have so severely tainted the IPCC that it is no longer a credible agency."

    Selected Highlights of the Updated 2010 Report featuring over 1,000 international scientists dissenting from man-made climate fears:

    [b]“We're not scientifically there yet. Despite what you may have heard in the media, there is nothing like a consensus of scientific opinion that this is a problem. Because there is natural variability in the weather, you cannot statistically know for another 150 years.” -- UN IPCC's Tom Tripp, a member of the UN IPCC since 2004 and listed as one of the lead authors and serves as the Director of Technical Services & Development for U.S. Magnesium.

    “Any reasonable scientific analysis must conclude the basic theory wrong!!” -- NASA Scientist Dr. Leonard Weinstein who worked 35 years at the NASA Langley Research Center and finished his career there as a Senior Research Scientist. Weinstein is presently a Senior Research Fellow at the National Institute of Aerospace.

    “Please remain calm: The Earth will heal itself -- Climate is beyond our power to control...Earth doesn't care about governments or their legislation. You can't find much actual global warming in present-day weather observations. Climate change is a matter of geologic time, something that the earth routinely does on its own without asking anyone's permission or explaining itself.” -- Nobel Prize-Winning Stanford University Physicist Dr. Robert B. Laughlin, who won the Nobel Prize for physics in 1998, and was formerly a research scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.

    “In essence, the jig is up. The whole thing is a fraud. And even the fraudsters that fudged data are admitting to temperature history that they used to say didn't happen...Perhaps what has doomed the Climategate fraudsters the most was their brazenness in fudging the data” -- Dr. Christopher J. Kobus, Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Oakland University, specializes in alternative energy, thermal transport phenomena, two-phase flow and fluid and thermal energy systems.

    “The energy mankind generates is so small compared to that overall energy budget that it simply cannot affect the climate...The planet's climate is doing its own thing, but we cannot pinpoint significant trends in changes to it because it dates back millions of years while the study of it began only recently. We are children of the Sun; we simply lack data to draw the proper conclusions.” -- Russian Scientist Dr. Anatoly Levitin, the head of geomagnetic variations laboratory at the Institute of Terrestrial Magnetism, Ionosphere and Radiowave Propagation of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

    “Hundreds of billion dollars have been wasted with the attempt of imposing a Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) theory that is not supported by physical world evidences...AGW has been forcefully imposed by means of a barrage of scare stories and indoctrination that begins in the elementary school textbooks.” -- Brazilian Geologist Geraldo Luís Lino, who authored the 2009 book “The Global Warming Fraud: How a Natural Phenomenon Was Converted into a False World Emergency.”

    "I am an environmentalist,” but “I must disagree with Mr. Gore” -- Chemistry Professor Dr. Mary Mumper, the chair of the Chemistry Department at Frostburg State University in Maryland, during her presentation titled “Anthropogenic Carbon Dioxide and Global Warming, the Skeptic's View.”

    “I am ashamed of what climate science has become today.” The science “community is relying on an inadequate model to blame CO2 and innocent citizens for global warming in order to generate funding and to gain attention. If this is what 'science' has become today, I, as a scientist, am ashamed.” -- Research Chemist William C. Gilbert published a study in August 2010 in the journal Energy & Environment titled “The thermodynamic relationship between surface temperature and water vapor concentration in the troposphere” and he published a paper in August 2009 titled “Atmospheric Temperature Distribution in a Gravitational Field.” [Update December 9, 2010]

    “The dysfunctional nature of the climate sciences is nothing short of a scandal. Science is too important for our society to be misused in the way it has been done within the Climate Science Community.” The global warming establishment “has actively suppressed research results presented by researchers that do not comply with the dogma of the IPCC.” -- Swedish Climatologist Dr. Hans Jelbring, of the Paleogeophysics & Geodynamics Unit at Stockholm University. [Updated December 9, 2010. Corrects Jelbring's quote.]

    “Those who call themselves 'Green planet advocates' should be arguing for a CO2- fertilized atmosphere, not a CO2-starved atmosphere...Diversity increases when the planet was warm AND had high CO2 atmospheric content...Al Gore's personal behavior supports a green planet - his enormous energy use with his 4 homes and his bizjet, does indeed help make the planet greener. Kudos, Al for doing your part to save the planet.” -- Renowned engineer and aviation/space pioneer Burt Rutan, who was named "100 most influential people in the world, 2004" by Time Magazine and Newsweek called him "the man responsible for more innovations in modern aviation than any living engineer."

    “Global warming is the central tenet of this new belief system in much the same way that the Resurrection is the central tenet of Christianity. Al Gore has taken a role corresponding to that of St Paul in proselytizing the new faith...My skepticism about AGW arises from the fact that as a physicist who has worked in closely related areas, I know how poor the underlying science is. In effect the scientific method has been abandoned in this field.” -- Atmospheric Physicist Dr. John Reid, who worked with Australia's CSIRO's (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization) Division of Oceanography and worked in surface gravity waves (ocean waves) research.

    “We maintain there is no reason whatsoever to worry about man-made climate change, because there is no evidence whatsoever that such a thing is happening.” -- Greek Earth scientists Antonis Christofides and Nikos Mamassis of the National Technical University of Athens' Department of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering.

    “There are clear cycles during which both temperature and salinity rise and fall. These cycles are related to solar activity...In my opinion and that of our institute, the problems connected to the current stage of warming are being exaggerated. What we are dealing with is not a global warming of the atmosphere or of the oceans.” -- Biologist Pavel Makarevich of the Biological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences.


    “Because the greenhouse effect is temporary rather than permanent, predictions of significant global warming in the 21st century by IPCC are not supported by the data.” -- Hebrew University Professor Dr. Michael Beenstock an honorary fellow with Institute for Economic Affairs who published a study challenging man-made global warming claims titled “Polynomial Cointegration Tests of the Anthropogenic Theory of Global Warming.”


    “The whole idea of anthropogenic global warming is completely unfounded. There appears to have been money gained by Michael Mann, Al Gore and UN IPCC's Rajendra Pachauri as a consequence of this deception, so it's fraud.” -- South African astrophysicist Hilton Ratcliffe, a member of the Astronomical Society of Southern Africa (ASSA) and the Astronomical Society of the Pacific and a Fellow of the British Institute of Physics.[/b][/QUOTE]
    ..........................................................................................

  9. #9
    [QUOTE]SPECIAL REPORT: [B]Climate Depot Exclusive: [/B]321-page 'Consensus Buster' Report set to further chill UN Climate Summit in Cancun
    [/QUOTE]

    An unbiased citation.:rolleyes: Climate Depot and CPAT are run by a right wing PR man.

  10. #10
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar
    Posts
    4,798
    [QUOTE=PatriotReign;4147100]The bottom line is that whatever is/is not going on- is not caused by man. The Al Gore types have the arrogance to believe this is the one area where the we can control climate cycles like mother nature has been doing without the human race for billions of years.[/QUOTE]

    No

    the bottom line is we should be looking into what can be done to 'fix' this. if anything.

    If you are right and this is just the natural cycle, it still sucks. When a blizzard hits Boston do you guys say "this was not caused by man, lets just wait for it to melt" or do you send out snowplows?

    As for the "Al Gore types" think of this. We have been digging up and pumping up carbon and adding it to our ecosystem for 100+ years. The last time this carbon was part of the ecosystem the planet was a giant shallow steamy ocean with some islands sticking up.

  11. #11
    All League
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Boston area
    Posts
    4,475
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs;4147205]I'm not arrogant enough to believe we don't impact the environment. We have completely changed the landscape, cut down millions of acres of trees, changed the natural flow of rivers, dumped enough oil in rivers so they catch fire and dumped all kinds of toxic crap into the earth and sea not to mention the air.

    You have to be a dope to believe we aren't negatively impacting the planet with all the toxic crap we use and put into the environment on a daily basis.

    The idea that we shouldn't conserve has nothing to do with Al Gore, it has to do with respect for yourself, your kids and your neighbors.

    I don't believe in a new world order or political solutions to our environmental problems, that doesn't mean I have to stick my head up my ass and disagree with the scientific consensus on mans impact on our environment.[/QUOTE]

    I don't dispute ONE BIT that we impact the environment. I agree that we are crapping on the eco system. I am all for doing more to prevent it (although pollution belching countries like China and India will never comply with whatever is decided in that respect).

    My issue is with the people who melodramatically extrapolate that as the cause of the polar ice melts, bigger hurricanes and climate changes. I'm saying that the climate change will happen whether or not we do anything as it has done in cycles for billions of years. That position doesn't mean by default that we should not do all we can to protect the environment.
    Last edited by PatriotReign; 09-17-2011 at 04:31 PM.

  12. #12
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,966
    The previous generation could give a f*ck about how they leave the world for the next.

    Self center, selfish douchebags that are more concerned about taking d*ck pills and trying to bang their botox infused, over tanned sea hag wives with fallen organs, stretch marks and sagging boobs.

    Hopefully, Viagra causes cancer of the d*ck and they'll all be clocking out sooner than later.

  13. #13
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs;4147205]I'm not arrogant enough to believe we don't impact the environment. We have completely changed the landscape, cut down millions of acres of trees, changed the natural flow of rivers, dumped enough oil in rivers so they catch fire and dumped all kinds of toxic crap into the earth and sea not to mention the air.

    You have to be a dope to believe we aren't negatively impacting the planet with all the toxic crap we use and put into the environment on a daily basis.

    The idea that we shouldn't conserve has nothing to do with Al Gore, it has to do with respect for yourself, your kids and your neighbors.

    I don't believe in a new world order or political solutions to our environmental problems, that doesn't mean I have to stick my head up my ass and disagree with the scientific consensus on mans impact on our environment.[/QUOTE]

    A hearty +1, actually.:yes:

    And yet....

    [QUOTE=PatriotReign;4147304]I don't dispute ONE BIT that we impact the environment. I agree that we are crapping on the eco system. I am all for doing more to prevent it (although pollution belching countries like China and India will never comply with whatever is decided in that respect).

    My issue is with the people who melodramatically extrapolate that as the cause of the polar ice melts, bigger hurricanes and climate changes. I'm saying that the climate change will happen whether or not we do anything as it has done in cycles for billions of years. That position doesn't mean by default that we should not do all we can to protect the environment.[/QUOTE]

    I have to again give a hearty +1 to this as well.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us