It's true. But GW-ists would have you believe that a period of cooling is part of global warming's effects. Which pretty much means, from their standpoint, there's no way to disprove it.
North Pole ice completely vanishes this year?
- Thread starter TheMasterOfOrion
- Start date
It's true. But GW-ists would have you believe that a period of cooling is part of global warming's effects. Which pretty much means, from their standpoint, there's no way to disprove it.
Here's a comparison of May 30, 1990 to May 30 2008 Arctic Ice Concentrations.
What I see is considerably more ice at the North Pole now, than in 1990. Something may have been warming the arctic more in the 90's than now. I wonder if that something is a string of previously unknown volcanoes that erupted under the arctic ice in 1999.
What I see is considerably more ice at the North Pole now, than in 1990. Something may have been warming the arctic more in the 90's than now. I wonder if that something is a string of previously unknown volcanoes that erupted under the arctic ice in 1999.
It's false, ask any qualified astronomer and solar scientist. Direct measurements of the Solar output have been taken from outside of the atmosphere by satellite orbiters for almost 30 years. No significant changes to the Sun's output outside the usual 11 year cycle in that time period but CO2 has increased last century from about around 250ppm to 350ppm. The Solar variability plays a very small role, if any, in the recent global warming trend. we've also got a lot of trapped Methane ready to go which would create something akin to Global Warming on Steroids.
Arctic Ice On The Verge Of Another All-Time Low
http://www.spacemart.com/reports/Arctic_Ice_On_The_Verge_Of_Another_All_Time_Low_999.html
I guess all those letters to Santa will have to go to his new address somewhere in the Canadian wilderness. Assuming his reindeerr weren't swollowed up by the ocean.
In a word: Armageddon! Or Gotterdamerung, if you prefer! -- RR
Driven from the North Pole by global warming, can Jolly St. Nick and the Man of Steel share a New York City apartment? Tune in to "Icy Relations" on FOX!
The sad part is, it sounds better than most of their lineup.
Well you can believe the sky-is-falling alarmists OR
YOU CAN LOOK AT THE ICE COVER YOURSELF:
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/
(Looks like plenty of ice there to me...)
YOU CAN LOOK AT THE ICE COVER YOURSELF:
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/
(Looks like plenty of ice there to me...)
All Seeing Eye
Admiral
If the north pole ice is melting due to rise in temperatures, doesn't that mean we can start expanding towns and cities further northwards? It seems like a good thing to me.
There are some news articles on Greenland having new opportunities for farming, fishing and mining.
I'm thinking seriously of investing in some Canadian land just in case the climate in the US gets bad.
Except when you compare yesterdays's image to the image from the same day in 1990, which was also used as an example in this thread.
Look at how much further south ice cover extends in the 1990 image: there is 80+% coverage through the Canadian archipelago, extending as far south as Baffin Island and the northern reaches of Hudson Bay. Russia's northern coast also has significant ice cover, and ice extends halfway down the coast of Greenland.
Looking at today, though, nearly all of the ice can be found north of 90 degrees of latitude, and many of the area which had ice cover in 1990 are completely free of ice today. The Northwest Passage is nearly entirely free of ice aside from a little coverage north of Victoria Island, and the Russian coast is nearly free of ice. There is no ice in Hudson Bay or around Baffin Island, aside from shore ice, and the Greenland coast is bordering on ice-free.
There are other things we can't tell from satellite images, too. Age of the ice is an important factor. I've seen recent studies showing that there is less and less ice lasting from year-to-year in the Arctic, with ice now forming and melting on very short cycles, which is atypical for the region and a sign of weak ice coverage.
Granted, none of this is conclusive, but there is a hell of a lot of evidence to suggest there is definitely a problem.
DontFeedPhil
Fleet Captain
Its all a bunch of cr@p made up by the eco-terrorist nut-jobs. If we were heating up and the oceans were gonna rise and apparently we have almost no ice in the North Pole now...Dont you think that we would have seen sea level go up by atleast a foot or two by now?
Bunch O Cr@p...
Bunch O Cr@p...
because the rate of that rise and fall has never been this high in the history of the earth, and because life on earth as we know it will die unless we stop.
I still don't see how fools can be so duped by exxons billion dollar propaganda war.
ignorance and emotionalized negativity are not equal to the scientific knowledge which states with absolute certainty that global warming is real, we are causing it, and if it doesn't stop, life on earth as we know it will end.
There's nothing scientific at all about your assertion. The fact is, there's a lot of uncertainty about what causes various climate changes here on Earth, and what will happen because of it.
---------------
Similar threads
