Climate change denial - the truth.

by Andy Fri Sep 08, 2017 11:20 am

It appears that climate change is only denied in 3% of published svientified journals.
A scientific study of those 3 % have found them to be factually flawed, biased or simply incorrect.
Worth a read.

https://qz.com/1069298/the-3-of-scientific-papers-that-deny-climate-change-are-all-flawed/

by 'Wolfie Fri Sep 08, 2017 12:03 pm

Those "Climate denialist" pseudo-scientists are a bunch of greedy crooks...

Just to show how easily some fools are easily bought..

As for the majority of those uneducated twonks who are so determined to believe in those scamster 'denialists', just look at how many of them are actively "anti-science," how many name science and maths as their most-hated/least liked subjects at school, how many are incapable of explaining the very concept of empirical reasoning and "scientific" methodology, and how many are plain ignorant.

Razz

by Andy Fri Sep 08, 2017 12:36 pm

Tommy once got a silver star for his science homework. Which in his mind qualifies him to make scientific and evidenced based statements on how climate change is fake news.

by eddie Fri Sep 08, 2017 2:42 pm

I'm not really quite sure how anyone can deny it.

by Andy Fri Sep 08, 2017 3:27 pm

Trump still does.

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 08, 2017 4:23 pm

Yawn...!

by eddie Fri Sep 08, 2017 4:25 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:Yawn...!

Interesting. What made you come to that conclusion then?

by Guest Fri Sep 08, 2017 4:44 pm

eddie wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:Yawn...!

Interesting. What made you come to that conclusion then?

Undeniable evidence by any chance?

Which he is scared, to even contemplate looking at?

by Andy Fri Sep 08, 2017 5:15 pm

That is Toms traditional reply when he has lost the debate and is no longer able to counter it.
But he did get a silver star for his homework in science once.

by 'Wolfie Fri Sep 08, 2017 5:21 pm

A "silver star" !!!

What was that in ??? His First or Second year at primary school..

And it's been downhill ever since ! tongue

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 08, 2017 5:23 pm

eddie wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:Yawn...!

Interesting. What made you come to that conclusion then?

I have posted up numerous pieces of conclusive scientific evidence in the past that shows that the climate has always changed, and that even over the last 8000 years there have been many warmer and cooler periods... with majority of this time being warmer than it is now!!!

I get tired of having to keep repeating the facts to people with the intelligence and memory spans of goldfish...!!!

by Andy Fri Sep 08, 2017 5:27 pm

And your 'scientific' evidence has been debunked as part of the 3% as hogwash, bias, lies and factually incorrect by........ better qualified scientists. So who do we believe?

The 97% whose work is methodical and factual, or Toms denying 3%, which scientists have proved with science is wrong?

by Guest Fri Sep 08, 2017 5:31 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
eddie wrote:

Interesting. What made you come to that conclusion then?

I have posted up numerous pieces of conclusive scientific evidence in the past that shows that the climate has always changed, and that even over the last 8000 years there have been many warmer and cooler periods... with majority of this time being warmer than it is now!!!

I get tired of having to keep repeating the facts to people with the intelligence and memory spans of goldfish...!!!

Yes you have posted articles that have showed that the climate has always changed in the past

No scientists dispute this.

What you have ignored, is all the scientific evidence to show how humans have cause climate change, to dramatic effect.

Yes, I get tired of your ignorance also Tommy, when you ignore the damning evidence

The human element of climate change, where the evidence is overwhelming

Now, do you dare to read and educate yourself on the following?

Or as I already correctly stated, are you too scared to do so?

https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

So lets expose Tommy's ignorance on this. He says its happened before.

Lets look at this, shall will?

Climate Myth...
Climate's changed before
Climate is always changing. We have had ice ages and warmer periods when alligators were found in Spitzbergen. Ice ages have occurred in a hundred thousand year cycle for the last 700 thousand years, and there have been previous periods that appear to have been warmer than the present despite CO2 levels being lower than they are now. More recently, we have had the medieval warm period and the little ice age. (Richard Lindzen)

Rebuttal.
Greenhouse gasses – mainly CO2, but also methane – were involved in most of the climate changes in Earth’s past. When they were reduced, the global climate became colder. When they were increased, the global climate became warmer. When CO2 levels jumped rapidly, the global warming that resulted was highly disruptive and sometimes caused mass extinctions. Humans today are emitting prodigious quantities of CO2, at a rate faster than even the most destructive climate changes in earth's past.

https://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period.htm

by Andy Fri Sep 08, 2017 5:44 pm

It is like trying to explain Einstein's theory of relativity to a banana.

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 08, 2017 5:45 pm

You 2 don't have a clue what youre waffling about...!!!

by Guest Fri Sep 08, 2017 5:47 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:You 2 don't have a clue what youre waffling about...!!!

Really?

is that why you will not take up my challenge Tommy?

Seems to me you are running scared Tommy and you want to bury your head in the sand.

by Guest Fri Sep 08, 2017 5:48 pm

Angry Andy wrote:It is like trying to explain Einstein's theory of relativity to a banana.

Okay, I actually nearly peed myself laughing.... sunny

by 'Wolfie Fri Sep 08, 2017 6:33 pm

Climate change denial - the truth. 1481518877

I actually believe that Andy is being somewhat unfair to bananas !!!

They would undoubtedly be much more receptive to, and rationally 'critical' of, all the available scientific evidence..

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 08, 2017 7:17 pm

by Guest Fri Sep 08, 2017 7:20 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

How about this accurate one Tommy?

Climate change denial - the truth. 2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison

Climate change denial - the truth. Natural_anthropogenic_models_narrow

Climate change denial - the truth. Moberg_Hockey_Stick

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 08, 2017 7:25 pm

CO2 levels have been around 0.03% for the last 8000 years!!!

Only being around 0.04% over the last 150 years or so!!!

But it was warmer for many periods before than it is now!!!

Laughing

by Guest Fri Sep 08, 2017 7:27 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:CO2 levels have been around 0.03% for the last 8000 years!!!

Only being around 0.04% over the last 150 years or so!!!

But it was warmer for many periods before than it is now!!!

What the science says...

Select a level...	Basic		Intermediate
While the Medieval Warm Period saw unusually warm temperatures in some regions, globally the planet was cooler than current conditions.

Climate Myth...

Medieval Warm Period was warmer
The Medieval Warm Period was warmer than current conditions. This means recent warming is not unusual and hence must be natural, not man-made.

One of the most often cited arguments of those skeptical of global warming is that the Medieval Warm Period (800-1400 AD) was as warm as or warmer than today. Using this as proof to say that we cannot be causing current warming is a faulty notion based upon rhetoric rather than science. So what are the holes in this line of thinking?

Firstly, evidence suggests that the Medieval Warm Period may have been warmer than today in many parts of the globe such as in the North Atlantic. This warming thereby allowed Vikings to travel further north than had been previously possible because of reductions in sea ice and land ice in the Arctic. However, evidence also suggests that some places were very much cooler than today including the tropical pacific. All in all, when the warm places are averaged out with the cool places, it becomes clear that the overall warmth was likely similar to early to mid 20th century warming.

Since that early century warming, temperatures have risen well-beyond those achieved during the Medieval Warm Period across most of the globe. The National Academy of Sciences Report on Climate Reconstructions in 2006 found it plausible that current temperatures are hotter than during the Medieval Warm Period. Further evidence obtained since 2006 suggests that even in the Northern Hemisphere where the Medieval Warm Period was the most visible, temperatures are now beyond those experienced during Medieval times (Figure 1). This was also confirmed by a major paper from 78 scientists representing 60 scientific institutions around the world in 2013.

Secondly, the Medieval Warm Period has known causes which explain both the scale of the warmth and the pattern. It has now become clear to scientists that the Medieval Warm Period occurred during a time which had higher than average solar radiation and less volcanic activity (both resulting in warming). New evidence is also suggesting that changes in ocean circulation patterns played a very important role in bringing warmer seawater into the North Atlantic. This explains much of the extraordinary warmth in that region. These causes of warming contrast significantly with today's warming, which we know cannot be caused by the same mechanisms.

Overall, our conclusions are:

a) Globally temperatures are warmer than they have been during the last 2,000 years, and

b) the causes of Medieval warming are not the same as those causing late 20th century warming.

Figure 1: Northern Hemisphere Temperature Reconstruction by Moberg et al. (2005) shown in blue, Instrumental Temperatures from NASA shown in Red.

https://www.skepticalscience.com/medieval-warm-period.htm

Whoops

by Guest Fri Sep 08, 2017 7:30 pm

Like I said, Tommy is too shit scared to read the evidence, because he is too scared of admitting he could be wrong.

Now others have seen me here admit to being wrong and even apologizing when I am.

This proves Tommy is incapable of even believing he could be wrong. I seriously believe he might even malfunction, if he rightly came to the reality he was wrong.

Like i say, will Tommy dare to read the mountain of evidence on climate change?

I guess not

Laughing

by Andy Fri Sep 08, 2017 7:32 pm

Tommy has just turned from bright banana yellow to slightly bruised in places. He is ripening nicely.

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 08, 2017 7:34 pm

No 'whoops' from me Dodge... your source is deliberately inaccurate...

by Guest Fri Sep 08, 2017 7:43 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:No 'whoops' from me Dodge... your source is deliberately inaccurate...

Is that why you cannot disprove it Tommy?

Seriously, you just proved me right, that you are so scared to even read the scientific evidence.

Even I read through conspiracies, to understand where they are coming from, so I can then research and see if they are credible or not. You as seen here, do not even want to look at the evidence from both sides. You simple dismiss the scientific evidence.

Thanks for proving me right Tommy

Enjoy, as you are done and just now the symbol of mockery on this. Cool

Later Tommy, let me know when you take up my offer.

Laughing

by Andy Fri Sep 08, 2017 7:48 pm

I think Tommy has slipped over on fourskins!

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:08 pm

The evidence of majority of the last 8000-10000 years being consistently warmer than today is clearly available for those who want to see the truth...

Here is some more...

http://www.dandebat.dk/eng-klima7.htm

Plus the evolutionary existence of trees such as the giant redwood in america over millions of years, which require forest fires to be able to reproduce and succeed as a species, also shows irrefutable evidence of there being a much longer term normal of warmer temperatures!!!

Get your head out of your arse and look at the facts!!!

by Guest Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:13 pm

Cannot stop laughing.

So Tommy, why will you not look at the vast majority of scientific evidence that refutes your blog site?

What the science says...

Select a level...	Basic		Intermediate
Greenhouse gasses, principally CO2, have controlled most ancient climate changes. This time around humans are the cause, mainly by our CO2 emissions.

Climate Myth...

Climate's changed before
Climate is always changing. We have had ice ages and warmer periods when alligators were found in Spitzbergen. Ice ages have occurred in a hundred thousand year cycle for the last 700 thousand years, and there have been previous periods that appear to have been warmer than the present despite CO2 levels being lower than they are now. More recently, we have had the medieval warm period and the little ice age. (Richard Lindzen)

Greenhouse gasses – mainly CO2, but also methane – were involved in most of the climate changes in Earth’s past. When they were reduced, the global climate became colder. When they were increased, the global climate became warmer. When CO2 levels jumped rapidly, the global warming that resulted was highly disruptive and sometimes caused mass extinctions. Humans today are emitting prodigious quantities of CO2, at a rate faster than even the most destructive climate changes in earth's past.

Abrupt vs slow change.

Life flourished in the Eocene, the Cretaceous and other times of high CO2 in the atmosphere because the greenhouse gasses were in balance with the carbon in the oceans and the weathering of rocks. Life, ocean chemistry, and atmospheric gasses had millions of years to adjust to those levels.

Climate change denial - the truth. 608_EoceneDiorama

Climate change denial - the truth. 608_EoceneDiorama

Lush life in the Arctic during the Eocene, 50 million years ago (original art - Stephen C. Quinn, The American Museum of Natural History, N.Y.C)

But there have been several times in Earth’s past when Earth's temperature jumped abruptly, in much the same way as they are doing today. Those times were caused by large and rapid greenhouse gas emissions, just like humans are causing today.

Those abrupt global warming events were almost always highly destructive for life, causing mass extinctions such as at the end of the Permian, Triassic, or even mid-Cambrian periods. The symptoms from those events (a big, rapid jump in global temperatures, rising sea levels, and ocean acidification) are all happening today with human-caused climate change.

So yes, the climate has changed before humans, and in most cases scientists know why. In all cases we see the same association between CO2 levels and global temperatures. And past examples of rapid carbon emissions (just like today) were generally highly destructive to life on Earth.

Basic rebuttal written by howardlee

https://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period.htm

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:25 pm

That is just more spam waffle for the idiots to soak up, dodge...!!!

Try looking at the facts!!!

This is why I yawn... because you dont have the brain power to understand/consider anything independent, but instead just keep posting biased waffle...!!!

by Guest Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:33 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:That is just more spam waffle for the idiots to soak up, dodge...!!!

Try looking at the facts!!!

This is why I yawn... because you dont have the brain power to understand/consider anything independent, but instead just keep posting biased waffle...!!!

So why not actually read both sides Tommy?

I have asked you and you keep getting emotional

I guess we have to rely on your so called exceptional so called high IQ.

So high, you have an inability to research something fully and rationally, by looking at all the evidence

How strange is that Tommy?

Or is it more to the fact, you are so scared of the fact you are in act wrong?

Cool

by Andy Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:49 pm

It us said that homo sapiens share 85% of the dna of bananas.
Tommy disproves that theory.
He shares 190% of a bananas dna.

by Guest Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:52 pm

Angry Andy wrote:It us said that homo sapiens share 85% of the dna of bananas.
Tommy disproves that theory.
He shares 190% of a bananas dna.

I never knew Andy had such wit.

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 08, 2017 9:36 pm

Why do I need to look at 'both sides'...?

When I have looked at the claims of the 'pro climate change theorists'... and I have then based my opinion on INDEPENDENT EVIDENCE...!!!???

by Guest Fri Sep 08, 2017 9:52 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:Why do I need to look at 'both sides'...?

When I have looked at the claims of the 'pro climate change theorists'... and I have then based my opinion on INDEPENDENT EVIDENCE...!!!???

Independent?

How many is that?

A couple of scientists in the employ of fossil fuel companies, to that of global scientists?

Seriously Tommy. its bad enough when you post about photo shopping, but lets face it mate, you have not read anything other than the views you agree on with this

Spare me your bullshit

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 08, 2017 9:59 pm

Giant redwood trees are not employed by anyone...

by Guest Fri Sep 08, 2017 10:01 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:Giant redwood trees are not employed by anyone...

I never knew Trees had a national insurance number Tommy.

Are you smoking crack?

Razz

by Guest Fri Sep 08, 2017 10:06 pm

I am just going to post up many links to see if Tommy has actually read any

Have nearly 175 more:

Global Warming & Climate Change Myths
Here is a summary of global warming and climate change myths, sorted by recent popularity vs what science says. Click the response for a more detailed response. You can also view them sorted by taxonomy, by popularity, in a print-friendly version, with short URLs or with fixed numbers you can use for permanent references.

	Climate Myth	vs	What the Science Says
1	"Climate's changed before"		Climate reacts to whatever forces it to change at the time; humans are now the dominant forcing.
2	"It's the sun"		In the last 35 years of global warming, sun and climate have been going in opposite directions
3	"It's not bad"		Negative impacts of global warming on agriculture, health & environment far outweigh any positives.
4	"There is no consensus"		97% of climate experts agree humans are causing global warming.
5	"It's cooling"		The last decade 2000-2009 was the hottest on record.
6	"Models are unreliable"		Models successfully reproduce temperatures since 1900 globally, by land, in the air and the ocean.
7	"Temp record is unreliable"		The warming trend is the same in rural and urban areas, measured by thermometers and satellites.
8	"Animals and plants can adapt"		Global warming will cause mass extinctions of species that cannot adapt on short time scales.
9	"It hasn't warmed since 1998"		Every part of the Earth's climate system has continued warming since 1998, with 2015 shattering temperature records.
10	"Antarctica is gaining ice"		Satellites measure Antarctica losing land ice at an accelerating rate.
11	"Ice age predicted in the 70s"		The vast majority of climate papers in the 1970s predicted warming.
12	"CO2 lags temperature"		CO2 didn't initiate warming from past ice ages but it did amplify the warming.
13	"Climate sensitivity is low"		Net positive feedback is confirmed by many different lines of evidence.
14	"We're heading into an ice age"		Worry about global warming impacts in the next 100 years, not an ice age in over 10,000 years.
15	"Ocean acidificationisn't serious"		Ocean acidification threatens entire marine food chains.
16	"Hockey stick is broken"		Recent studies agree that recent global temperatures are unprecedented in the last 1000 years.
17	"Climategate CRU emails suggest conspiracy"		A number of investigations have cleared scientists of any wrongdoing in the media-hyped email incident.
18	"Hurricanes aren't linked to global warming"		There is increasing evidence that hurricanes are getting stronger due to global warming.
19	"Al Gore got it wrong"		Al Gore's book is quite accurate, and far more accurate than contrarian books.
20	"Glaciers are growing"		Most glaciers are retreating, posing a serious problem for millions who rely on glaciers for water.

by Tommy Monk Fri Sep 08, 2017 10:35 pm

The trees have been around a lot longer than NI numbers... and longer than humans too, Dodge...

Their very existence tells us what we should consider as being 'normal' temperatures where they reside...

by eddie Fri Sep 08, 2017 10:35 pm

Tommy I'm not one for science and data and all of that, but I've read articles, talked to people who've done extensive research and I've seen enough with my very own eyes in my very own country, over the years, to see the changes we've had with the seasons and the weather - extreme and otherwise.

Can you please tell me, in your own words because I don't want to read pages of other people's fact and opinions, (I can do all that myself), why you can't see what everyone else seems to see? Have you not noticed the changes in the weather patterns here, for instance, over the last few years particularly?
What about the polar ice caps? Why wouldn't you see that chemicals can indeed, cause our atmosphere to get all fucked up?

Just in your own words please.

by Andy Fri Sep 08, 2017 10:36 pm

I expected Tommy to have a gripe about redwood trees. They have brown bark.
In his eyes, silver birches are far more caucasian.

by Guest Fri Sep 08, 2017 10:42 pm

eddie wrote:Tommy I'm not one for science and data and all of that, but I've read articles, talked to people who've done extensive research and I've seen enough with my very own eyes in my very own country, over the years, to see the changes we've had with the seasons and the weather - extreme and otherwise.

Can you please tell me, in your own words because I don't want to read pages of other people's fact and opinions, (I can do all that myself), why you can't see what everyone else seems to see? Have you not noticed the changes in the weather patterns here, for instance, over the last few years particularly?
What about the polar ice caps? Why wouldn't you see that chemicals can indeed, cause our atmosphere to get all fucked up?

Just in your own words please.

His argument is what has been used before

That climate changes has happened before

No scientist refutes this

What they rightly say, is that humans are causing climate to change at an alarming rate.

He ignores this evidence and thinks we can ride out the coming storm. As seen, within the last few years. The weather has become more and more unstable.

I asked tommy to look at both sides, as i have.

He did not wish to do so

Really have to go Eddie

Night

by Tommy Monk Sat Sep 09, 2017 12:21 am

eddie wrote:
Tommy I'm not one for science and data and all of that, but I've read articles, talked to people who've done extensive research and I've seen enough with my very own eyes in my very own country, over the years, to see the changes we've had with the seasons and the weather - extreme and otherwise.

Can you please tell me, in your own words because I don't want to read pages of other people's fact and opinions, (I can do all that myself), why you can't see what everyone else seems to see? Have you not noticed the changes in the weather patterns here, for instance, over the last few years particularly?
What about the polar ice caps? Why wouldn't you see that chemicals can indeed, cause our atmosphere to get all fucked up?

Eddie... what you think you've seen in your lifetime is not even the blink of an eye compared to the lifetime of this planet... and while you think you are looking at the book, in reality, you are not even seeing a word on the page of a book... not even seeing a letter of a word on a page of a book... when compared to the lifetime of this planet, there's a million libraries, each full of millions of books... and each book has a million pages... and each page has a million words... in a million different languages... and you are only seeing a fragment of a letter of a word in one of these pages... barely a pixel of a fragment...

For us to say it was hotter/colder 40 years ago and different from normal... is like a 'mayfly' saying that the normal warmth that we should all expect was before it flew out of the shadow of a tree...

The Antarctic has been growing in size of icecap for years... and the north pole icecap melt has been greatly exaggerated too over years... so I dont know what you are going on about there...

But what scientists have established is that for most of the last 8000 years, temps have been warmer than today... while CO2 levels were lower... so where does that leave the co2 claim...?

Maybe you can tell us how many hurricanes there were in caribbean islands 500 years ago...?

And how powerful they were...?

And 1000 years ago...?

2000 years ago...?

No...?

So you are comparing recent 100 years with what exactly...!?

by Guest Sat Sep 09, 2017 12:31 am

The Antarctic has been growing Tommy says:?

Climate change denial - the truth. 3489511464

Is Antarctica losing or gaining ice?
Link to this page

What the science says...

Select a level...	Basic		Intermediate
Satellites measure Antarctica is gaining sea ice but losing land ice at an accelerating rate which has implications for sea level rise.

Climate Myth...

Antarctica is gaining ice
"[Ice] is expanding in much of Antarctica, contrary to the widespread public belief that global warming is melting the continental ice cap." (Greg Roberts, The Australian)

Update Nov. 7 2015

A study published by Jay Zwally and his team on Oct. 30 (Zwally et al. 2015) has suggested that until 2008 there might have been a bigger increase in ice on East Antarctica than there is a decrease in the west, meaning that total Antarctic land ice is increasing. While their results for the Antarctic Peninsula and much of West Antarctica agree with other research, the study disagrees with many other techniques. We will update this discussion once more studies address this issue. Until then here are links to some recently published takes on the study:

A controversial NASA study says Antarctica is gaining ice. Here’s why you should be skeptical - Chris Mooney (Nov. 5)

NASA Scientist Warned Deniers Would Distort His Antarctic Ice Study — That's Exactly What They Did - Media Matters (Nov.4)

More on Antarctic Ice Melt - ClimateCrocks (Nov. 3)

Is Antarctica Gaining or Losing Ice? Hint: Losing. - Phil Plait (Nov. 3)

Q&A: Is Antarctica gaining or losing ice? - Carbon Brief (Nov. 3)

Just Because Antarctica Might Be Gaining Ice Doesn't Mean Climate Change Isn't Happening - Vice (Nov. 2)

Skeptic arguments that Antarctica is gaining ice frequently hinge on an error of omission, namely ignoring the difference between land ice and sea ice.
In glaciology and particularly with respect to Antarctic ice, not all things are created equal. Let us consider the following differences. Antarctic land ice is the ice which has accumulated over thousands of years on the Antarctica landmass itself through snowfall. This land ice therefore is actually stored ocean water that once fell as precipitation. Sea icein Antarctica is quite different as it is ice which forms in salt water primarily during the winter months. When land ice melts and flows into the oceans global sea levels rise on average; when sea ice melts sea levels do not change measurably.

In Antarctica, sea ice grows quite extensively during winter but nearly completely melts away during the summer (Figure 1). That is where the important difference between Antarctic and Arctic sea ice exists as much of the Arctic's sea ice lasts all the year round. During the winter months it increases and before decreasing during the summer months, but an ice cover does in fact remain in the North which includes quite a bit of ice from previous years (Figure 1). Essentially Arctic sea ice is more important for the earth's energy balance because when it increasingly melts, more sunlight is absorbed by the oceanswhereas Antarctic sea ice normally melts each summer leaving the earth's energy balancelargely unchanged.
Climate change denial - the truth. SeaIce

Climate change denial - the truth. SeaIce

Figure 1: Coverage of sea ice in both the Arctic (Top) and Antarctica (Bottom) for both summer minimums and winter maximums
Source: National Snow and Ice Data Center

One must also be careful how you interpret trends in Antarctic sea ice. Currently this ice is increasing overall and has been for years but is this the smoking gun against climate change? Not quite. Antarctic sea ice is gaining because of many different reasons but the most accepted recent explanations are listed below:

i) Ozone levels over Antarctica have dropped causing stratospheric cooling and increasing winds which lead to more areas of open water that can be frozen (Gillet 2003, Thompson 2002, Turner 2009).

and

ii) The Southern Ocean is freshening because of increased rain and snowfall as well as an increase in meltwater coming from the edges of Antarctica's land ice (Zhang 2007, Bintanga et al. 2013). Together, these change the composition of the different layers in the ocean there causing less mixing between warm and cold layers and thus less melted sea and coastal land ice.

All the sea ice talk aside, it is quite clear that really when it comes to Antarctic ice and sea levels, sea ice is not the most important thing to measure. In Antarctica, the largest and most important ice mass is the land ice of the West Antarctic and East Antarctic ice sheets.

Therefore, how is Antarctic land ice doing?
Climate change denial - the truth. F5.large

Climate change denial - the truth. F5.large

Figure 2: Estimates of total Antarctic land ice changes and approximate sea level contributions using a combination of different measurement techniques (Shepherd, 2012). Shaded areas represent the estimate uncertainty (1-sigma).

Estimates of recent changes in Antarctic land ice (Figure 2, bottom panel) show an increasing contribution to sea level with time, although not as fast a rate or acceleration as Greenland. Between 1992 and 2011, the Antarctic Ice Sheets overall lost 1350 giga-tonnes (Gt) or 1,350,000,000,000 tonnes into the oceans, at an average rate of 70 Gt per year (Gt/yr). Because a reduction in mass of 360 Gt/year represents an annual global-average sea level rise of 1 mm, these estimates equate to an increase in global-average sea levels by 0.19 mm/yr.
There is variation between regions within Antarctica (Figure 2, top panel), with the West Antarctic Ice Sheet and the Antarctic Peninsula Ice Sheet losing ice mass, and with an increasing rate. The East Antarctic Ice Sheet is growing slightly over this period but not enough to offset the other losses. There are of course uncertainties in the estimation methods but independent data from multiple measurement techniques (explained here) all show the same thing, Antarctica is losing land ice as a whole, and these losses are accelerating quickly.

Basic rebuttal written by mattking

Update July 2015:

Here is the relevant lecture-video from Denial101x - Making Sense of Climate Science Denial

https://www.skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice.htm

Combine Tommy with stupidity and you will never find science

by Tommy Monk Sat Sep 09, 2017 12:48 am

Try to keep up dodge... even your waffle site admits antarctic ice is increasing...

And it also admits...

'...when sea ice melts sea levels do not change measurably...'

by Guest Sat Sep 09, 2017 12:51 am

Tommy Monk wrote:Try to keep up dodge... even your waffle site admits antarctic ice is increasing...

And it also admits...

'...when sea ice melts sea levels do not change measurably...'

PMSL, as is that all you read or picked out in desperation not finishing what was said

Look Tommy, you have at best an IQ of at 100 and I am being genereous

This is evident in how you ignore so many facts I have presented to you..

Most of your your arguments are born from not actually reading anything but what you want to believe

by Tommy Monk Sat Sep 09, 2017 1:08 am

You have not presented any facts... merely spurious and biased opinions that are devoid of any factual content...

Then you cry when I point out the only bits that are true!!!

This is why I yawn... its like shooting fish in a barrel...!

Night night dodge... don't get too hot tonight with all that methane around you from all that shit you come out with...!!!

Laughing

by Tommy Monk Sun Sep 10, 2017 6:50 pm

Bit cold and windy here in London today... which is pretty much what we see every year here around this time...

Yawn...!

Laughing

by Guest Sun Sep 10, 2017 7:50 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

Bit cold and windy here in London today... which is pretty much what we see every year here around this time...

Yawn...!

Yeah, i am sure many flood victims over the last few years feel the same

Doh

You really have not a clue, but stay in denial, by all means, its what you do best.

by Tommy Monk Sun Sep 10, 2017 8:42 pm

Didge... please remove your post dated Fri Sep 08, 2017 10:06 pm as it keeps crashing my computer/screen when trying to access this thread... thanks...!

by Sponsored content