By E. Thomas McClanahan, Kansas City Star Editorial Page columnist
For all those worried that the North Pole might melt, consider this: There's been a rapid rebound in the level of global sea ice. Fits in with the recent evidence that if anything these days, the Earth has been cooling.
Sea ice is floating and, unlike the massive ice sheets anchored to bedrock in Greenland and Antarctica, doesn't affect ocean levels. However, due to its transient nature, sea ice responds much faster to changes in temperature or precipitation and is therefore a useful barometer of changing conditions.
Earlier this year, predictions were rife that the North Pole could melt entirely in 2008. Instead, the Arctic ice saw a substantial recovery. Bill Chapman, a researcher with the UIUC's Arctic Center, tells DailyTech this was due in part to colder temperatures in the region.
Delicious
Digg
ed hardy ed hardy ed hardy
ed hardy ed hardy
ed hardy clothing ed hardy clothing
ed hardy shop ed hardy shop
christian audigier christian audigier
ed hardy cheap ed hardy cheap
ed hardy outlet ed hardy outlet
ed hardy sale ed hardy sale
ed hardy store ed hardy store
ed hardy mens ed hardy mens
ed hardy womens ed hardy womens
ed hardy kids ed hardy kids ed hardy kids
If you love fashion,you must
If you love fashion,you must konw abercrombie and fitch
and you are a abercrombie manor
abercrombie womensand
hollister clothingis also very fashion.
And you know RuehlNo.925
I also like abercrombie outlet,and you?
edith, I must make one
edith,
I must make one correction to your first post on this editorial, other than that God is not spelled with an h.
Conservatives are not born that way, it's a choice.
I respectfully disagree
First, ghod is an old u.g. comic term that, I think, captures to some extent the idiocy of exuberant girls who use it as a flavoring particle in their speech. If they actually meant to call upon the Deity, they would probably not use expressions such as OMFG! and omigod omigod omigod! would not pop up every sixty seconds on Friends and similar as a laugh line.
Second, the idea of "choosing" to become a conservative is troubling. In part, that means that many people who were raised as Christians make a conscious decision to embrace the schizophrenia of, on the one hand, professing the beliefs that,
-we are commanded to forgive those who do us ill seventy times seven times
-we are to love others as ourselves
-we are to gain salvation by works, not faith (yes, I know, Paul vs. James, Peter, Jesus and everybody else--I'll go with the majority on this one).
And on the other hand, we are beholden to no one but ourselves, should bomb, smite, and burn to the ground the houses of any who oppose our will, define sharply whom we hate and whom we embrace, store weapons to murder anyone who dares trespass on our property, and, in general, treat the least of these as the scum they are.
It's much easier to believe that conservatives are born, not made.
The Earth's climate has
The Earth's climate has always been cyclic. It has alternately ranged from way to hot to way to cold, for us. The Earth is in no danger from this cyclic pattern.
The Human race may be in deep poo, but Earth Abides.
It's the microwaves!!! It has to be!
The melting of the sea ice is obviously the result of the weather and climate satellites shooting microwaves at the ice for the lib scientists' "studies". It is simply job security for the scientists and ensures continued research funding - shooitng microwaves at the ice. Try this out - put an ice cube in the microwave and cook for just 10 seconds. See what happens? It has to be the lib scientist satellites. I would guess the scientists didn't use the satellites as much this year and that is why the sea ice is increasing, and global warming is not.
Stop smoking the 'green' weed
Hey Interface, I guess that you are too focused on 'your' set of facts to see your gaffe.
The post concerned the Arctic Sea Ice and not the Antarctic. Thanks though for providing us readers with an update about the Antarctic Ice also rebounding. Now if we could get an update about Greenland, we would see the entire picture, right?
dedo is a dodo
Guess in addition to (or because of?) smoking too much of your own weed, you have reading comprehension issues.
From the Huffingtonpost article chazzy posted:
"More to the point, 2007 happened also to be the time of maximum historic sea ice in Antarctica."
Moron.
Interface, why do you do that?
End you post with "Moron"? Please call you Mom and ask her for some maturity. She forgot to give it to you.
Jenny
I have about as little respect for idiocy as I do for bigotry.
Good work Interface....
Already got your bank account growing today with your use of the word bigot or any form thereof.
Another profitable day on the way lib.
Who needs "bigot"?
"Liar" is more accurate. Ready to apologize for lying about the content of the article? Ready to learn how to spell three-syllable words today, or are you still going to rely on single-syllable words so your two conservative buddies can understand you?
Edith
Pro fit a ble (I count four)
Of course
When you're addressing a liberal directly, as below, you use "liberal," which does indicate you're shaping your message to your intended audience. Good work.
And Interface
I have about as much respect for immature liberal name-callers. The other part of your response to Dedo was fine, but you had to reach back to the playground. And you can respond to Jenniferm if you want, but I wrote the post.
climate change is real
And has been for over 12,000 years that we know with relative certainty. Few scientists will deny that we have been in a warming cycle,excluding the last 3 years, for about 30 years. The net result that the sea ice is exactly the same as it was 30 years ago
Even the left wing Huffington Post "green blog" is now exposing the colossal hoax of Gore, his movie, and his devotees.The entire envirofascist movement is beginning to fall apart as the reality of the fraud becomes more and more obvious and more and more widely embraced.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harold-ambler/mr-gore-apology-accepted_b_154982.html
To say that I was shocked to see such a post at huffpo today is a genuine understatement. The end of the Gore lead economic hijacking attempt is finally visible. We just have to make sure that his fellow investors like Pelosi (reportedly in the quarter million vicinity) do not have any success in legislating support for their "investments in our children's future"
While never a supporter of Bush, his unwillingness to buy into the scam has saved us millions, likely billions .....maybe trillions in tough times.
Now the helium filled loons are audaciously proposing "geoengineering" as a solution......to a 12,000 year old certainty.......a changing climate. Were it not so absurd in its arrogant presumption of the need it would be turned into a Mork and Mindyesque sitcom. There is no end to the lengths they will go to mandate and direct capital investments in their causes.
chazzy
you're drinking the kool-aid, old man.
I'm still sticking with NASA and the scientists on this one.
As for that Antarctic sea ice canard, there's a logical explanation:
From NASA:
Typically, warming of the climate leads to increased melting rates of sea ice cover and increased precipitation rates. However, in the Southern Ocean, with increased precipitation rates and deeper snow, the additional load of snow becomes so heavy that it pushes the Antarctic sea ice below sea level. This results in even more and even thicker sea ice when the snow refreezes as more ice. Therefore, the paper indicates that some climate processes, like warmer air temperatures increasing the amount of sea ice, may go against what we would normally believe would occur.
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2005/sea_ice.html
And another site:
Overall, it is true that sea ice in the Antarctic is increasing.
Around the peninsula, where there is a lot of warming [PDF], the ice is retreating. This is the area of the recent and dramatic Larsen B and Ross ice shelf breakups.
But the rest of the continent has not shown any clear warming or cooling and sea ice has increased over the last decade or so.
This is not actually a big surprise.
In fact, it is completely in line with model expectations that CO2-dominated forcing will have a disproportionately large effect in the north. The reasons lie in the much larger amount of land in the northern hemisphere and the fact that the ocean's thermal inertia and ability to mix delay any temperature signal from the ongoing absorption of heat. The local geography also plays a dominating role. The circumpolar current acts as a buffer preventing warm water from the tropics from transporting heat to the South Pole, a buffer that does not exist in the north.
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/11/7/192721/175
Also from that link: "One must look at the balance of evidence, not just those bits one likes."
Words of wisdom.
Interface
Good morning.
I appreciate your forthright response absent the condescending snippets that zealots like Winch insist on framing their responses with. I spent over 10 hours on the sites that you proferred last month and, obviously, remain unconvinced of the validity of AGW.
In that same window of time 17 scientists have come forward to deny their inclusion in the UN IPCC....one of the 3 major promoters of what I call the "urgent fear scam". I am more convinced than ever of a suspicious stink to the entire AGW scare.
To be sure their are very legitimate scientists and researchers who ascribe to the theory. There is also a nearly equal and growing number of scientists who believe it is bunch of hooey. I am also quite certain that scientists and climatologists are excited that the hubbub of the last ten years has created a "sexy", high profile aura that their community has never enjoyed. Follow the money here.
The easiest way to explain it is this: the same climatologists, scientists and researchers who advocate AGW are usually being paid quite good money to study it. if they want to continue their research ....and they do....on the dime of governments and vested interest based organizations you bet they are going to find evidence of AGW. Much as the cigarette company scientists for years concluded that their employers were not making anyone sick.
It is amazing what scientists will conclude when their pocketbooks are impacted. They are no different than politicians, doctors, lawyers or you and me in that regard.
One of the least publicised climate and temperature affectors is volcanic activity. Since 1991 we have been experiencing a 3 century low in said activity. We are due. Overdue, in fact. Virtually nothing affects the temp curve as dramatically as volcanic eruptions. The temperature drops are precipitous and immediate. We have also just gone through the lowest sunspot activity year since 1901. Those 2 facts joined to the stabilizing ice, cooling activity of at least 3 years (many argue 9 or 10) galvanize my position.
My conclusion then, having lived through the "virtual certainty" of the little ice age forecasts of the mid seventies, is to be respectful of both sides, skeptical of the zealots like Gore who completely exaggerate, lie and distort, completely disregard those like Walter who are filled with pejorative comments for any who disagree and to continue reading and exploring.
In so doing however, I will be a staunch opponent of government mandates in response to theoretical concluions regarding AGW. Yes, I support conservation of our resources. Yes, I believe it is necessary to find a path to energy independence. Yes, I belive it is very prudent to curb our carbon emissions. I believe all of thos things are important ......but not at the exclusion of economic stability or the cost of economic reengineering.
Volcanism and effects on climate
Here's a site with a graphic comparison of volcanism and global temperature measurements. As you can see, the impact is immediate and short-lived, having little to no impact on the long-term warming trend over the past century.
http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/05/21/volcanoes/
The graph below is Figure 1 in Chapter 8 of the latest IPCC report. The black line shows temperatures, the yellow lines show results from 14 different models, and the red line is the average of all the simulations. As you can see, the four biggest tropical eruptions over the past century had slight cooling effects.
http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/wp-content/files/2007/05/volcanoes_cooling.gif
Still going with the data and the scientists on this one, rather than the global warming denier camp.
volcanoes...?
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/11/011128035329.htm
"n short, a lack of volcanic activity had some part in temperature rise over the first half of the 20th century. However, it has had little to no part in the modern global warming trend that began in the 1970's. On the contrary, relatively frequent volcanic activity in the late 20th century may have masked some of the warming caused by CO2."
http://www.skepticalscience.com/volcanoes-and-global-warming.htm
The real answer, without getting terribly scientific about it.
CO2 levels have never gone above 281 parts per million in 650,000 years of ice core data.
We're now at 380 parts per million
And the growth in CO2 emmisions correlates perfectly with our fossil fuel emmisions.
"virtual certainty"?
http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2008/10/global-cooling-was-a-myth.html
"It is true that there were some predictions of an "imminent ice age" in the 1970s, but a cursory comparison of those warnings and today's reveals a huge difference.
Today, you have a widespread scientific consensus, supported by national academies and all the major scientific institutions, solidly behind the warning that the temperature is rising, anthropogenic CO2 is the primary cause, and it will worsen unless we reduce emissions.
In the 1970s, there was a book in the popular press, a few articles in popular magazines, and a small amount of scientific speculation based on the recently discovered glacial cycles and the recent slight cooling trend from air pollution blocking the sunlight. There were no daily headlines. There was no avalanche of scientific articles. There were no United Nations treaties or commissions. No G8 summits on the dangers and possible solutions. No institutional pronouncements. You could find broader "consensus" on a coming alien invasion.
Quite simply, there is no comparison."
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/11/23/18534/222
I'm sticking with 21st century science on this one.
Yes, Interface's beloved scientists!
You know, the ones that are receiving grant money to research global warming. And what would happen to their grant money if they said it was a hoax? Follow the money.
Or
simply follow the data. :-)
I'm sticking with the facts, ma'am.
let's check NASA
Wonder what "recent evidence" McClanahan is talking about, hmmm?
NASA has a graph which shows the trend:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.lrg.gif
and another:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A3.lrg.gif
McClanahan's proven himself time and again to be something less than the sharpest tack.
How about a conversation about Demographic Winter?
Yes, the world is obsessed with global warming. Yes, we have been indoctrinated since the first Earth Day in (what?) 1972 about over-population. Yes, we live in a time when women have "choices" and men marry men. The latest research, however, from bona fide scientists, renowned sociologists from throughout the world, all point to a critical decline in the births of humans in both industrialized and non-industrialized nations. This is a link to a Q and A and discussion thread regarding a (non-Michael Moore-Al Gore) documentary. Very chilling sociological and economic forecast, and probably worth a serious discussion. The sky is falling, the earth is warming, er, cooling, and now we aren't repopulating: http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/demographic_winter/
Happy New Year.
Fair enough
The concept is called the social security hypothesis in development economics. It's very simple, and VERY predictive. A couple has just enough children to ensure, if necessary, that they'll be provided for in their old age. In traditional societies, you have to end up with at minimum one male child who survives to adulthood. That means six to seven children. Half will die before reaching adulthood, half will be girls, who'll leave for another family. Surprise! That's the average number of children per family in traditional societies, as predicted.
If you can save enough money to provide for yourself and spouse, the number of children drops dramatically.
If the government steps in and forces you to save, the number of children drops even further.
If having children is irrelevant to your financial security in old age, the number of children gets down to well under the replacement level.
And, yeah, that's the demographic transition you may have heard about.
That's it! No deep motivation, no conspiracies. Tell me how important your society makes it to have kids to support you in old age and I'll tell you how many kids the average family will produce. All that other stuff is fine, but as the article notes, even paying people to have kids doesn't bring forth more kids if people don't have to worry about security after they can't work.
That means nothing to Al Gore.
Debate is over. Period. Al Gore, the media and libs have decided it for us. It fits with what they want to think. More and more scientists are retreating from global warming. But it means nothing. Debate is over because Al Gore and the libs say so. It has become PC so much so that conservative candidates fear to argue with them. Every piece of evidence that we are cooling is thrown aside.
Send in the clowns
Of course neither McClanahan nor twas_was actually went to the site and read the article, OR THE MANY OTHER STATEMENTS UI HAS MADE AT THEIR SITE ON THE SUBJECT. McClanahan, who MUST have inherited the job, quotes, not UIUC, but the blog author who misquotes the people who actually did the work. Ghod it must be wonderful to be born conservative and learn everything you need to know from AM radio commentators.
Articles Like This Drive the Libs Nuts
Anything which says you need less governmental interference is to be called junk science etc. The fact that the earth has been cooling for the last 6 years has no bearing on ecofreaks such as big Al.
Gore has prostituted himself to the real junk science and more and more real scientists are finally calling him on it with facts such as this article saying the global ice sheet has REMAINED THE SAME FOR 29 YEARS.
Find another crusade libs.
Here's a Funny Spoof...
What our auto industry will offer after the libs run it into the ground. This is of course after trying to save the uncompetitive UAW jobs. Another waste of our money.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAqPMJFaEdY&eurl=http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2008/12/the-pelosi-gtxi-ssrt-take-2.html&feature=player_embedded
How about a crusade for Remedial Reading for the Slow
Damn pity the article says nothing of the sort, but that doesn't slow you down one iota, does it, you lying twit? I mean, you DID read the UI posts on their website, didn't you? Or did you just stop with what the moron said who told you what another moron said it said, because it fits your bizarre worldview that global warming is a socialist conspiracy to destroy the free market?