International CNN: Greenland Gaining ice might not be a good thing? Climate Science or perpetual Scaremongering?

[ocfightfan]

If the glaciers in Greenland lose ice its global warming. If the glaciers in Greenland gain ice its global warming. If there are more hurricanes it's global warming. If there are fewer hurricanes it's also global warming.

The truth is that the AGW alarmists want power and money. If they were serious they would be pushing for real solutions like nuclear power rather than solutions that can't possibly work with current technology. They don't care that they will be relegating most of humanity to the 19th century or worse.

 

[BossRootin]

Why do you think the alarmists try to claim "The debate is over" and "The science is settled"?
It's because any time there is an actual debate they come off looking like complete fools.



Before the debate the ratio of alarmists to skeptics was 2:1. After an hour, the skeptics outnumbered the alarmists.
This is why they have to resort to dirty tactics. The truth is clearly not on their side.

 

[no fat chicks]

heres some more data.
https://public.wmo.int/en/media/pre...018-shows-accelerating-climate-change-impacts
try not to act like creationists or anti vaxxers and dig in deeper when presented with evidence that contradicts your world view and actually read it over.

warming oceans

Spoiler

"Ocean heat: 2018 saw new records for ocean heat content in the upper 700 metres (data record started in from 1955) and upper 2000m (data record started in 2005), topping the previous record set in 2017. More than 90% of the energy trapped by greenhouse gases goes into the oceans and ocean heat content provides a direct measure of this energy accumulation in the upper layers of the ocean."

rising sea levels

Spoiler

"Sea level: Sea level continues to rise at an accelerated rate. Global Mean Sea Level (GMSL) for 2018 was around 3.7 millimetres higher than in 2017 and the highest on record. Over the period January 1993 to December 2018, the average rate of rise is 3.15 ± 0.3 mm yr-1 while the estimated acceleration is 0.1 mm yr-2. Increasing ice mass loss from the ice sheets is the main cause of the GMSL acceleration as revealed by satellite altimetry, according to the World Climate Research Programme global sea level budget group, 2018."

Acidification of the oceans

Spoiler

"Ocean acidification: In the past decade, the oceans absorbed around 30% of anthropogenic CO2 emissions. Absorbed CO2 reacts with seawater and changes the pH of the ocean. This process is known as ocean acidification, which can affect the ability of marine organisms such as molluscs and reef-building corals, to build and maintain shells and skeletal material. Observations in the open-ocean over the last 30 years have shown a clear trend of decreasing pH. In line with previous reports and projections, ocean acidification is ongoing and the global pH levels continue to decrease, according to UNESCO-IOC."

Sea ice

Spoiler

"Sea ice: Arctic sea-ice extent was well below average throughout 2018 and was at record-low levels for the first two months of the year. The annual maximum occurred in mid-March and was the third lowest March extent in the 1979-2018 satellite record. The September monthly sea ice extent was the sixth smallest September extent on record. The 12 smallest September extents have all occurred since 2007. At the end of 2018, the daily ice extent was near record low levels. The Antarctic sea ice extent reached its annual maximum in late-September and early-October. After the maximum extent in early spring, Antarctic sea ice declined at a rapid rate with the monthly extents ranking among the five smallest for each month through the end of 2018."

etc. If you disagree with the above please posit a better theory as to what is driving the most recent climate shift and what data you have to reach that conclusion.

EDIT
Note the lack of concrete responses to this post.

 

[trac209]

Is Greenland not part of the globe? I thought it was Global Warming?

Is any temperature change anywhere proof of your religion? Because the climate has been in flux since before human existence.

Thread

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

try not to act like creationists or anti vaxxers and dig in deeper when presented with evidence that contradicts your world view and actually read it over.

You represent everything wrong with this topic and more proof of what I said in my first post.

 

[Mcountry]

We have 12 years to live people. It's not important that I get this factually right. Just morally right.

 

[sloppypie]

The truth is that the AGW alarmists want power and money.

the truth is you and right wingers are scientifically retarded and you have been brainwashed from 30+ years of right wing propaganda on what to think on this issue. anyone that has even a remote understanding of science has a very clear and definitive understanding of climate change. those that don't go running to their bible screeching that god thinks they are special and science is evil.

 

[Ruprecht]

Oh, bullshit, TS understands this just fine.

The first trace of global warming I have found goes back to 1817:
"It will without doubt have come to your Lordship's knowledge that a considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been during the last two years, greatly abated.

(This) affords ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened and give us leave to hope that the Arctic Seas may at this time be more accessible than they have been for centuries past, and that discoveries may now be made in them not only interesting to the advancement of science but also to the future intercourse of mankind and the commerce of distant nations."
--President of the Royal Society, London, to the Admiralty, 20th November, 1817


We don't really here much more of this until 1922:
"The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consul Ifft, at Bergen , Norway . Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers, he declared, all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met with as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared. Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts, which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds."
-- AP as published in the Washington Post, November 2, 1922

This idea continues and builds up speed for decades as it was massively funded. By the 70's however, the research just wasn't coming back as expected so entire narrative changed 180 degrees. This is when the global cooling hysteria became major news.

Basically, the funds for the global warming bullshit ran out, so they went right on to global cooling.

Time did a big piece, then the BBC and then the Newsweek piece. This was followed by several articles/news stories over the next several years that promoted this same idiocy.

The narrative went something like this:


Science
Another Ice Age?
Monday, Jun 24, 1974...
http://web.archive.org/web/20060812.../time/archive/printout/0,23657,944914,00.html

Then, 1983 rolls around as the research here failed as well and guess what? Yup... global warming again:


By 1988, global warming was fully back as they had been ramping up the idea of carbon 'credits' for years, by 2008 we found out it was climate change, in 2010 we had climate disruption and by 2018 we had a full-on climate crisis. Hell, moonbat AOC recently warned us that we have only 12 years left.

The bottom line? As long as you keep changing the narrative, you can never be wrong.

You should try actually reading rather than cutting and pasting from "skeptic" sites.
That's not even close to a timeline of the science.

 

[lifelessheap]

If the glaciers in Greenland lose ice its global warming. If the glaciers in Greenland gain ice its global warming. If there are more hurricanes it's global warming. If there are fewer hurricanes it's also global warming.

The truth is that the AGW alarmists want power and money. If they were serious they would be pushing for real solutions like nuclear power rather than solutions that can't possibly work with current technology. They don't care that they will be relegating most of humanity to the 19th century or worse.

We should be an all nuclear nation. Cheapest clean energy.

 

[ocfightfan]

the truth is you and right wingers are scientifically retarded and you have been brainwashed from 30+ years of right wing propaganda on what to think on this issue. anyone that has even a remote understanding of science has a very clear and definitive understanding of climate change. those that don't go running to their bible screeching that god thinks they are special and science is evil.

Said a moron who neither understands my views, nor science, nor religion.

If green dip shits really want to fix this problem then the solution is nuclear energy. So called "green" technology in its current form will never provide the amount of energy that we need, and in the form that we need it, without destroying the global economy.

But Green asswipes are not interested in real solutions. They are interested in fantasy solutions which put them in control and grant them the wealth created by others. They want us to rub our hands together to keep warm and eat wheat grass to survive while they live in relative luxury.

If you were serious about solving this problem you would be a nuclear energy paladin. But you are not, so we know what you are really all about.

 

[ocfightfan]

We should be an all nuclear nation. Cheapest clean energy.

I agree, and the safest per kilowatt hour.

 

[Headkicktoleg]

How are people still confused on that the flux and positional shift IS the problem. The heat in itself and the cold in itself is not. ffs.... f.....f.....s

I thought the problem was oceans rising?

 

[Ruprecht]

We should be an all nuclear nation. Cheapest clean energy.

The major problem with Nuclear power, other than the waste, is the political support required and the massive infrastructure investment (especially here in Oz, where there's no nuclear industry at all).
Australia is ideally positioned for nuclear power, with the uranium and potential for storage solutions, but it's impossible to sell politically (we're also ideally positioned for solar power). It periodically gets on the political table, but there's always something to knock it off. Last time it was Fukushima.

 

[lifelessheap]

The major problem with Nuclear power, other than the waste, is the political support required and the massive infrastructure investment (especially here in Oz, where there's no nuclear industry at all).
Australia is ideally positioned for nuclear power, with the uranium and potential for storage solutions, but it's impossible to sell politically (we're also ideally positioned for solar power). It periodically gets on the political table, but there's always something to knock it off. Last time it was Fukushima.

Yes, the problem is that humans are scared of things they don't understand. The word "nuclear" scares people. They don't understand risk, and that coal kills more people than nuclear. Nuclear power is very safe.

 

[Ruprecht]

Yes, the problem is that humans are scared of things they don't understand. The word "nuclear" scares people. They don't understand risk, and that coal kills more people than nuclear. Nuclear power is very safe.

It's understandable that no-one wants a nuclear waste dump in their back yard (especially when a lot of the proposed sites have been Native Title), but we had the Brits testing nukes here in the 50s-60s and that mess still hasn't been cleaned up properly. A proper storage facility would be a huge boon (economically as well, even without the nuclear power).
Last time it was being discussed, we had anti-nuclear protestors here from the US stirring people up as well.

 

[Neph]

Australia is so ideally placed for Nuclear energy. We have 31% of the worlds proven Uranium deposits and therefore the largest in the world. We also have an enormous country, much of which is filled with nothing in the middle, for which to store waste which we could also do for other countries around the world (for big $ too).

Of course it will never get off the ground politically because no-one wants Australia to be the worlds dumping ground for waste but when 90% of Australia is already deemed 'uninhabitable' we should be benefiting from it as much as possible.

 

[Neph]

(especially here in Oz, where there's no nuclear industry at all).

We do have the OPAL (Lucas Heights reactor)

 

[Ruprecht]

We do have the OPAL (Lucas Heights reactor)

Yeah, strictly for medical and scientific use though. I don't think it counts as an industry. Same reason we couldn't pursue nuclear subs.
It would help if the nuclear proponents weren't advocating for experimental reactors though. Makes the cost and capacity figures rubbery at best. I know after the privatisation of the energy industry here in SA, public trust is at an all time low already. Instead of the supposed benefits to consumers we now have some of the highest energy costs in the world (not to mention more blackouts than ever), while public assets were sold off to a small group of political "pals" at cut rates.

 

[BossRootin]

the truth is you and right wingers are scientifically retarded and you have been brainwashed from 30+ years of right wing propaganda on what to think on this issue. anyone that has even a remote understanding of science has a very clear and definitive understanding of climate change. those that don't go running to their bible screeching that god thinks they are special and science is evil.

Typical lunatic leftist who accuses everybody else of what they themselves are most guilty of.
Sorry, but you guys have a virtual monopoly in the behaving like brainwashed sheep department.
The best climate scientists in the world have very little understanding of climate change.

 

[BossRootin]

If you want to see actual scientists talk on the issue, rather than corrupt politicians, greedy businessmen, or fake science TV personalities, watch this video.