Opinion Polls: Delphi's Polling Place

Opinion polls on all subjects. Opinions? Heck yes, we have opinions - but we're *always* nice about it, even when ours are diametrically opposed to yours. Register your vote today!

4923
MEMBERS
124131
MESSAGES
12
POSTS TODAY

Discussions

Climate Change farce... The Serious You: How Current Events Affect You

Started 9/8/22 by WALTER784; 10656 views.

Msg 119 of 190

In reply toRe: msg 118

Staff

From: WALTER784

Feb-28

Climate scientists baffled as to why Antarctica has not warmed in 70 years despite rising CO2 levels

Despite consistent rises in carbon dioxide output globally the Antarctic region has recorded no average rise in temperatures in the last 70 years and in 2021 saw its coldest 6-month winter since records began in the 1950s.

Chris Morrison
Tue Jan 31, 2023 - 10:19 am EST

(The Daily Sceptic) — Scientists are scrambling to explain why the continent of Antarctica has shown Net Zero warming for the last seven decades and almost certainly much longer. The lack of warming over a significant portion of the Earth undermines the unproven hypothesis that the carbon dioxide humans add to the atmosphere is the main determinant of global climate.

Under “settled” science requirements, the significant debate over the inconvenient Antarctica data is of necessity being conducted well away from prying eyes in the mainstream media. Promoting the Net Zero political agenda, the Guardian recently topped up readers’ alarm levels with the notion that “unimaginable amounts of water will flow into oceans,” if temperatures in the region rise and ice buffers vanish.

The BBC green activist-in-chief Justin Rowlatt flew over parts of the region and witnessed “an epic vision of shattered ice.” He described Antarctica as the “frontline of climate change.” In 2021, the South Pole had its coldest six-month winter since records began in 1957, a fact largely ignored in the mainstream. One-off bad weather promoter Reuters subsequently “fact checked” commentary on the event in social media. It noted that a “six-month period is not long enough to validate a climate trend.”

A recent paper from two climate scientists (Singh and Polvani) accepts that Antarctica has not warmed in the last seven decades, despite an increase in the atmospheric greenhouse gases. It is noted that the two polar regions present a “conundrum” for understanding present day climate change, as recent warming differs markedly between the Arctic and Antarctic. The graph below shows average Antarctica surface temperatures from 1984–2014, compared to a base period 1950–1980.

The scientists note that over the last seven decades, the Antarctica sea ice area has “modestly expanded” and warming has been “nearly non-existent” over much of the ice sheet. NASA estimates current Antarctica ice loss at 147 gigatons a year, but with 26,500,000 gigatons still to go, this works out at annual loss of 0.0005 percent. At current NASA ice loss melt, it will all be gone in about 200,000 years, although the Earth may well have gone through another ice age, or two, before then.

Most alarmist commentary centres around the cyclical loss of sea ice around the coast and some warming on parts of the west of the continent. But sea ice cover is running at levels seen around 50 years ago, as the graph below shows. Small rises and falls in the early 2010s have been followed by a reversion to the mean.

C/O: The Daily Sceptic

The warmth to the west, seen in the first graph, could have been caused by any number of natural localised events including warmer oceanic waters and the effects of under-water volcanic activity. It has, of course, attracted widespread alarmist interest – in particular, the fate of the Thwaites ice stream, also known as the “Doomsday Glacier.” However, recently a group of oceanographers discovered that Florida-sized Thwaites had retreated at twice the rate in the past, when human-caused CO2 could not have been a factor. The retreat could have occurred centuries ago and is said to have been “exceptionally fast.”

Much of climate science today seems to suffer from confirmation bias. Few grants are available to those who don’t start with the premise that the climate is changing mostly, or entirely, due to humans burning fossil fuel. But many present, historic, and paleo climate observations fail to establish a clear connection between temperatures and CO2 levels. In the past, the life-enhancing gas has occupied a space in the atmosphere up to 20 times higher, without evidence of huge temperature rises.

Singh and Polvani’s explanation for expected warming in Antarctica is the depth of the continent’s ice. To this end, they use two climate models that purport to show that the “high ice sheet orography” robustly decreases the climate sensitivity to extra CO2, and that “a flattened Antarctic ice sheet would experience significantly greater surface warming than the present-day Antarctica ice sheet.” This conclusion comes from computer models, but later in the paper is an admission that they fail to agree on significant matters. It is revealed that one of the models predicts less sea ice retreat in a flattened Antarctica when CO2 doubles, and the other one, more retreat.

...[Message truncated]

View Full Message

Msg 120 of 190 to WALTER784WALTER784

In reply toRe: msg 119

Host

From: Showtalk

Feb-28

Because they don’t understand how temperatures work.

Msg 121 of 190 to Showtalkshowtalk

In reply toRe: msg 120

Staff

From: WALTER784

Feb-28

Showtalk said...
Because they don’t understand how temperatures work.

Such a simple thing.

1. When the sun comes up, the temperature rises.

2. When the temperature hits its peak, it stays steady for a while.

3. When the sun goes down, the temperature drops again.

4. When the temperature hits its low, it stays steady for a while.

5. Repeat 1 ~ 4 over and over and over!

So simple even a 5 year old could understand.

FWIW

Msg 122 of 190 to WALTER784WALTER784

In reply toRe: msg 121

Host

From: Showtalk

Feb-28

But it also tends to be extreme at the poles.

Msg 123 of 190 to Showtalkshowtalk

In reply toRe: msg 122

Staff

From: WALTER784

Mar-1

That's what they say, but the melting is a yearly occurrence that has been going on for hundreds of years. Long before our industrial revolution and cars.

During the summertime, the north pole melts while the south pole increases its masses.

And during the wintertime, the south pole melts while the north pole increases its masses.

Japan has had camps on both the north and south poles since the 1930's. Over the years, they've made quite a few studies about the melting and then growing of both poles. They drilled a 5cm hole over 200 meters deep into the side of one of the snow mountains. What they discovered was amazing. The ice in the first 40 meters was only 1~1.5 years old. The ice at the 60 meter mark was 4 ~ 6 years old. The ice at 100 meters was 12 ~ 14 years old. The ice at 150 meters was 80 ~ 85 years old, and the ice at the 200 meter mark was over 200 years old.

In other words, every year, approximately 40 meters of ice is melted and then grows back... each and every year. So, the pictures that the global warming or climate change activists show you occurs each and every year. NASA pictures from space of the north pole back up that fact up as well.

Their fake claims are a farse and they are well aware of it. They're just attempting to make money out of scare mongering the general public who don't know any better.

Fact: None of their predictions over the past 50 years have ever come true.

FWIW

Msg 124 of 190

In reply toRe: msg 123

Staff

From: WALTER784

Mar-3

This is an oldy but goody...

Lefty Sirota: 'We Are Incinerating the Planet...Because Too Many of Us Like to Eat Cheeseburgers'

DAN GAINOR
MAY 4, 2013 | 3:36PM EDT

How do you top making national news for bigotry? Trying getting people to "Give Up (Eating) Hamburgers to Stop Climate Change."

For loony lefty syndicated columnist David Sirota, it's all just another day at the office. Sirota made national news for his bizarre and bigoted hope that the Boston bomber would turn out to be "a white American."

Fresh off that fiasco, Sirota has turned his sights to changing the climate by changing America's diet. According to Sirota's May 2 column, "the fastest way to reduce climate change" simply "requires us all to eat fewer animal products." In case that wasn't sufficiently clear, he added that "we are incinerating the planet and dooming future generations simply because too many of us like to eat cheeseburgers." Sirota's article on the left-wing site Salon included a photo of what appeared to be a bacon cheeseburger with an egg on top of it.

"That's right; essentially, if every fourth time someone craved, say, beef, chicken or cow milk they instead opted for a veggie burger, a bean burrito or water, we have a chance to halt the emergency," he added.

But Sirota wasn't optimistic that conservatives would join him in his veggie crusade. "I'm sure some conservatives will read this column and send me email smugly pledging to eat even more meat than they already do, just to make some incoherent point about freedom." Somehow "freedom" is always incoherent to the left. No matter. We either stop eating what we want or we are endangering what Sirota called our "ecological survival."

The left has been making what we eat their business for years, but it has escalated under the leadership of First Lady Michelle Obama and New York Nanny State Mayor Michael Bloomberg. With extreme groups like the Center for Science in the Public Interest and Food Democracy Now, that trend has accelerated. Liberals have targeted a wide variety of foods and drinks, portion size, menu information, what's in the food, what restaurants can serve and where they can even be located.

Lefty Sirota: 'We Are Incinerating the Planet...Because Too Many of Us Like to Eat Cheeseburgers' | CNSNews

FWIW