KenTX \ Rockulus Debate | 70 comments (70 topical, 0 hidden)
Antarctic ice, the media lies, of course they do (none / 0)

Antarctic Sea Ice for November 2009 Higher Than 1979 - December 10, 2009

Contrary to media reports Antarctic sea ice continues to expand.  Ice totals for November 2009 are significantly higher than 1979 when measurements began.  The main stream media concentrates on a couple of small area of the Antarctic in order to scare you in to believing that Antarctica is melting, when in fact it is gaining ice.

From the National Snow and Ice Data Center, University of Colorado

 

Since measurements began in 1979 antarctic sea ice has continued to expand, contrary to what the news media would have you believe.  We bring this information to you month after month and still there is no sign of the main stream media picking up on the story.  They continue to discuss the relatively small areas of the Western Antarctic Peninsula that are melting due to changes in ocean currents.

You may have heard that some of the "computer models" predicted increases in antarctic ice, but they predicted increased "interior ice" due to increased snow fall.  None of the models predicted increased sea ice around the antarctic.  Yet that is what we have, more sea ice in November of 2009 than what we had in November of 1979 when measurements began.  This is highly significant yet hardly anyone in the main stream media (MSM) is talking about it.

Sea ice is much different than interior ice.  Some of the computer models predicted increased ice over the interior of antarctic.  If you've ever lived in the extreme cold temperature regions you already understand the reasons why.  When it gets very cold the air becomes drier and it snows less, as the temperature warms towards freezing it actually snows more.  Since the antarctic rarely even gets close to freezing its understandable that warming would cause more snow to fall.  Over time compacted snow would lead to more ice.  But that is not what is happening here.  We're seeing increases in "sea ice", this ice is over the ocean.  Sea ice is caused by colder temperatures, not by increased snow fall.  But we hear nothing from either MSM or the scientific community.  Especially compared to the out 6%-7% decrease at the artic (this isn't year over year, this is a 6% decline since 1980!).

Antarctic Sea Ice for November 

Year     ;   Coverage Area     ;    Ice Concentration

2009     ; 16.3 million sq km    11.6 million sq km

1995     16.0 million sq km    11.4 million sq km

1979     15.9 million sq km    11.2 million sq km

This continues a long trend of increasing sea ice that has been noted here for several months.

Interior ice is also increasing but not due to warming as the models have predicted.  According to NOAA GISS data winter temperatures in the antarctic have actually fallen by 1 degree F since 1957, with the coldest year being 2004.  All the while global CO2 levels have gone up and the MSM has been reporting near catastrophic warming conditions.  They regularly show Antarctic sea ice shelves breaking apart, which is an entirely normal process (though they never tell you that part).  The MSM and certain elements of the scientific community truly must hav no shame.

Don't waste your vote, vote Green or Independent in the next election.

by mcamelyne on 03/18/2010 10:14:35 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Forget the media (none / 0)

This is a phenomena peculiar to the location and conditions.   Antarctic sea ice hasn't been "growing", there were simply a couple of years where it hadn't receded in the summer as much as predicted. 

 

Here's the USGS in February:

Research by the U.S. Geological Survey is the first to document that every ice front in the southern part of the Antarctic Peninsula has been retreating overall from 1947 to 2009, with the most dramatic changes occurring since 1990. The USGS previously documented that the majority of ice fronts on the entire Peninsula have also retreated during the late 20th century and into the early 21st century. 

 

Here's NASA in 2008:

Ice loss in Antarctica increased by 75 percent in the last 10 years due to a speed-up in the flow of its glaciers and is now nearly as great as that observed in Greenland, according to a new, comprehensive study by NASA and university scientists.

In a first-of-its-kind study, an international team led by Eric Rignot of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., and the University of California, Irvine, estimated changes in Antarctica's ice mass between 1996 and 2006 and mapped patterns of ice loss on a glacier-by-glacier basis. They detected a sharp jump in Antarctica's ice loss, from enough ice to raise global sea level by 0.3 millimeters (.01 inches) a year in 1996, to 0.5 millimeters (.02 inches) a year in 2006.

 

Here's NASA again:

There has been lots of talk lately about Antarctica and whether or not the continent's giant ice sheet is melting. One new paper, which states there’s less surface melting recently than in past years, has been cited as "proof" that there’s no global warming. Other evidence that the amount of sea ice around Antarctica seems to be increasing slightly is being used in the same way. But both of these data points are misleading. Gravity data collected from space using NASA's Grace satellite show that Antarctica has been losing more than a hundred cubic kilometers (24 cubic miles) of ice each year since 2002. The latest data reveal that Antarctica is losing ice at an accelerating rate, too. How is it possible for surface melting to decrease, but for the continent to lose mass anyway? The answer boils down to the fact that ice can flow without melting.

 

A good discussion of the subject can be found here.

by bfaul on 03/19/2010 12:04:59 PM EST

[ Parent ]
You haven't proven anything. (none / 0)

Your first one was the USGS for the Southern part only.  It's a big continent.

The rest are for 10 or less year periods which can be caused by natural weather variability.  Again they are picking the data points that best suit the argument.

My article took the last 30 years, the period which represents the supposed warming after the cooling period  during the 60's and 70's.

Yes, the earth is heating up.  Man may have a small, miniscule responsibility.  It is the natural ebb and flow of the earth to heat up and cool and return to ice.

Don't waste your vote, vote Green or Independent in the next election.

by mcamelyne on 03/19/2010 08:38:13 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Sorry, it's too short a timeline (none / 0)

Everyone likes to pick their time lines to make their case.  It is absolutely true that since 1860, temperatures have been rising.  Albeit by a very small amount.  The issue is whether this is caused by man or whether it is caused by natural earth cycles.

Most people are ego-centric and believe the universe revolves around them.  When in fact we are just minor historical footnote in the galactic scale.  Yes, we are polluting, yes we are making the "so called" greenhouse gases in ever greater numbers.  The truth s a bitter pill.  It doesn't matter in the grand time scale.

Every 100,000 years there is a new ice age epoch.  Whatever we do will be insignificant to effect the outcome. Whether this ice age has started, will start in 10 years or 200 years, it will start.  God isn't going to come to our rescue, alter the orbit of our planet and prevent the next great ice age.

http://itsrainmakingtime.co m/2009/climate-part1/

Destroying our economies with transfer taxes isn't going to change that.  The goals and aspirations of environmentalists are noteworthy.  However they must be honest about them.  Using pseudo science to support a green agenda and a global agenda to redistribute wealth is simply dishonest.

Scaring the west into doing something they couldn't sell at the ballot box is criminal.  The end doesn't justify the means.

Recently the sun has started to behave in an abnormal manner.  Scientists may have to reevaluate the whole solar sun spot theory.  Whoops.  Did the scientists get it wrong?

http://www.independent.co.u k/news/science/the-missing- sunspots-is-this-the-big-ch ill-1674630.html

The solar conveyor belt has been linked to sunspot activity.  Faster belt, more sunspots, more energy going to earth, however sunspot activity is at a 100 year low and the belt is running at top speed.  See the excerpt below:

"However, in 2004 the speed increased to nearly 30 mph and has remained that fast since."

The faster pace is a revelation because it occurred during the deepest solar minimum in almost 100 years and indications that the next solar cycle will be a weak one.

This contradicts some theories that say a fast pace results in increased sunspot production. But it agrees with others that say a fast pace results in decreased sunspot production.

The faster rate of currents on the sun and the expected weaker solar cycle have affects for those of us here on Earth.

One affect is the temperature increase of the Earth could slow down, there would be fewer auroras, and to the extent that we depend on satellites, GPS, and cell phones there should be less disruption in service.

http://www.spacedaily.com/r eports/Solar_Conveyor_Belt_ Runs_At_Record_High_Speeds_ 999.html

Don't waste your vote, vote Green or Independent in the next election.

by mcamelyne on 03/19/2010 09:57:04 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Sure (none / 0)
If you drive fast enough and hit a strong enough building!

Nothing personal, but we are all part of the problem and could help in that way.;-)

"The first thing Fascists usually try to do is silencing the opposition."

by opposition on 05/07/2010 02:57:16 AM EST

[ Parent ]

KenTX \ Rockulus Debate | 70 comments (70 topical, 0 hidden)