Brute: "I’ve also noticed that you guys NEVER mention the Antarctic Ice extent/temperatures (historically high level), when discussing GLOBAL WARMING"

"A more recent study based on satellite measurements of gravity over the entire continent suggests that while the ice sheets in the interior of Antarctica are growing thicker, even more ice is being lost from the peripheries."

------------------------------

Climate myths: Antarctica is getting cooler, not warmer, "disproving" global warming

16 May 2007

NewScientist.com news service

It is clear that the Antarctic Peninsula, which juts out from the mainland of Antarctica towards South America, has warmed significantly. The continent’s interior was thought to have warmed too, but in 2002 a new analysis of records from 1966 to 2000 concluded that it has cooled overall...

This study was promptly seized upon as proof that the world is not warming, but a single example of localised cooling proves no such thing, as the lead author of the 2002 study has tried to point out.

Climate models do not predict an evenly spread warming of the whole planet: changes in wind patterns and ocean currents can change the distribution of heat, leading to some parts warming much faster than average, while others cool at first. What matters is the overall picture, and global temperature maps show far more areas are warming than cooling.

Blowing in circles

So what is happening in Antarctica? The cooling is due to a strengthening of the circular winds around the continent, which prevent warmer air reaching its interior. The increased wind speeds seem to be a result of cooling in the upper atmosphere, caused by the hole in the ozone layer above the pole, which is of course the result of chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) pollution.

Confusingly, it appears that one human impact on the climate – the Antarctic ozone hole – is currently compensating for another, global warming. If the ozone layer recovers over the decades as expected, the circular winds could weaken, resulting in rapid warming.

This raises the question of what is happening to Antarctica's ice sheets, which hold enough water to raise sea level by a catastrophic 61 metres, should it all melt. Contrary to what you might expect, the third IPPC report predicted that global warming would most likely lead to a thickening of the ice sheet over the next century, with increased snowfall compensating for any melting cause by warming.

Gravity revelations

Finding out what is actually happening to the ice is not easy. Radar measurements of the height of the ice over parts of the continent suggest that the huge East Antarctic ice sheet grew slightly between 1992 and 2003.

A more recent study based on satellite measurements of gravity over the entire continent suggests that while the ice sheets in the interior of Antarctica are growing thicker, even more ice is being lost from the peripheries. The study concluded that there was a net loss of ice between 2002 and 2005, adding 0.4 millimetres per year to sea levels (see Gravity reveals shrinking Antarctic ice). Most of the ice was lost from the smaller West Antarctic ice sheet.

---

http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11648

Just like in says in "An Inconvenient Truth"...wait a minute, I didn't see that movie. I remember something about not wanting to drive to the theater becasue of the carbon output that would cause. I guess I could have gone to Blockbuster to get the movie, or had Netflix send it to me by mail, but that too would have caused more carbon output. I guess I will see it on TV, for free, like it should have been presented in the first place.

Come on!! I watched the history of paint the other night, hardly an important message for the world. The uber important message of global warming?? Well, that can come after the first run theater and DVD sales.

And don't tell me the message is what is most important. Question everyones motives.

it is well worth repeating in whole once again:

Well over 90% of "scientists" work for the government, and their jobs depend on their willingness to spout the liberal-fascist party line. Any "scientist" associated with a college or university is especially suspect, since it is an established fact that no conservatives are allowed to be associated with universities or colleges.

All of the propaganda that has been coming out in the media about human-caused climate change has been generated, not by scientists, but by marxist political operatives under the control of Al Gore and the government.

Until universities are federally de-funded, purged of liberal-fascist apparatchiks, and allowed to return to freedom of thought, especially in their scientific research and scientific publishing, there is no way that any sane person can believe anything that they generate. There is not one shred of unbiased scientific evidence supporting the theory of greenhouse gases, the theory of climate change, the theory of human-caused climate change, or the theory that liberal-fascist mandated regulation will have one scintilla of effect on climate.

The motives of the liberal-fascists are plain - totalitarian control of the world economy, eradication of private property, and population control. The free world hangs in the balance, and the concept of freedom and democracy will depend on our ability to thwart the liberal fascists.

I could not have said it better if I tried. These are evil Fascists we are dealing with.

The Fascists come under the flag of the 'positive' and the 'good'. YET nobody should confuse my distaste for these Fascists and their antics for a lack of desire to see new technologies be created to lighten our footprint on our planet over time. Nature is a nice tohing to maintain, even if we are indeed not heating up our planet like the Fascists claim.

Man, some serious crazy coming out in the letters section.

But fear not, BrightStar, you are still the craziest. Your title is secure!

Some other fire-backs: Airistotle 1. Okay… so you’re saying that the IPCC can’t be trusted because of the involvement of bureaucrats with an agenda, and then you refer to a book by a… well… a bureaucrat (Vaclav Klaus) with an agenda.

“Hello, Pot? This is Kettle. You’re black.”

Brute. Ah Brute. If the science doesn’t agree with you, I suppose you can always flee to Political Science, Theology, and psychiatrics.

You claim, on one post that “observations in the last 10 years prove AGW false”, and then, in your response to Droogoy, claim that “accurate measurements beginning in 1979/1980; hardly a long-term analysis”. Did you not think anybody would notice?

The 70s global cooling thing. If you actually look at the scientific literature of the 70s, what you notice is that 7 articles predicted cooling, 44 predicted warming, and 20 were neutral on the subject. The 70s were a strange time, ugly hair and bad clothes had caught on in our culture, as did the idea of global cooling. I guess it was maybe a media construct? Or led to a lot of sci-fi books or something that has lodged the mistaken idea that in the 70s climate science predicted a cooling effect.

The hottest year in the U.S. in the 1930s Yeah. That the 1934 and 1998 were close contender for “hottest” year in US history is not now, nor has it ever been, any particular secret.

The petition thing. Ugh. The “Oregon Petition” again? A non-peer reviewed “article” mailed out to unsuspecting scientists and engineers and such that asked them, based on an included non-peer reviewed “article” to sign a petition urging the US not to sign the Kyoto Protocol? When you’re referencing the Petition Project, you have hit the bottom of the barrel.

As always, Taliesan, Droogoy, and Stet, good to see you all trying to ensure that truth will bear away the victory.