Global warming 2019

[Howard Is]

Your Antarctica article has a misleading title. Once again it is the ice shelves that are floating on the water that are melting in East Antarctica. That will not change the volume of the ocean by much since a floating mass of ice displaces the same amount of water when it melts. It is a concern because when they do melt that will increase the rate of melting. Also they appear to conflate the shelf of the Totten Glacier with the entire glacier. The floating portion of it has already affected sea level. When that part melts there will be little increase in sea level, but as I already said a greater area would be ice free and overall warming will increase. The increase in warming due to the ice shelves melting is a major concern. But they should make it clear that the loss of those will not directly raise sea levels. That is the sort of abuse of the facts that is used by deniers of AGW.

Gotcha. Thank you.

 

[80s fashion girl]

If these fires continue unabated, and currently there is nothing to stop them, our planet will have a significant drop in atmospheric oxygen, and a significant increase in CO2 levels.

Very soon.

This is global suicide by capitalism.

The water will soon boil, and the frog doesn’t care.

Yet.

The elite have their underground bunkers and the rest of us...hmmm. I wouldn't want to live underground.

 

[Shaul]

Aha. That’s your issue. Don’t give an inch to the damned socialists.

And I thought we were discussing global warming.

How silly of me.

Again, don’t put words into my mouth. I have made no mention whatsoever of socialists.

I was indeed discussing global warming. Not the apparent chip on your shoulder.

 

[Howard Is]

Again, don’t put words into my mouth. I have made no mention whatsoever of socialists.

Yeah right. How dare I put words into your mouth.

Reread this...

No it would not “be wise to stop doing those things which accelerate it?”, if by that you mean wholesale abandonment of liberty into the hands of little Napoleons.

Why the f*** would I mean ‘wholesale abandonment of liberty’ ?

That was just an infantile insult from you.

And who are the ‘Little Napoleons’ you claim I am assisting ?

You give yourself carte blanche to be judgemental and insulting and then complain when it comes back at you.

Put a sock in it, hypocrite.

 

[Shaul]

Yeah right. How dare I put words into your mouth.

Reread this...



Why the f*** would I mean ‘wholesale abandonment of liberty’ ?

That was just an infantile insult from you.

And who are the ‘Little Napoleons’ you claim I am assisting ?

You give yourself carte blanche to be judgemental and insulting and then complain when it comes back at you.

Put a sock in it, hypocrite.

How hilarious of you to completely ignore that I wrote “if”. A miscomprehension on your part does not equate to hypocrisy on mine.

 

[Howard Is]

How hilarious of you to completely ignore that I wrote “if”. A miscomprehension on your part does not equate to hypocrisy on mine.

What a cowardly response. The intent of your post was obvious.

But you wrote “if”. Who’s a clever boy then ?

 

[shunyadragon]

The sea land ice cap in Antarctica is still growing. The recent news was about sea ice. Sea ice varies. There were stories a few years ago about a supposed imminent collapse of the Ross ice shelf. They didn’t happen, it was a temporary blip. Just like the current Antarctic sea ice stories.

Don’t attempt to put words in my mouth. I never said there wasn’t any global warming.

No it would not “be wise to stop doing those things which accelerate it?”, if by that you mean wholesale abandonment of liberty into the hands of little Napoleons. There is no need for alarmism.

Antarctica is isolated by circular water and air currents that help to make Antarctica temperatures more stable than the Arctic, which is also the reason why in recent geologic history the Antarctic has been historically uniformly cold. I check out the more accurate references as to what is happening concerning global warming in the Antarctica continent.

 

[dianaiad]

I think you should LEAVE POLITICAL AGENDAS OUT OF IT!!!

No the source was not even handed nor a legitimate scientific source.

Your opinion is noted.

 

[dianaiad]

Pardon me for being simplistic, but if there is no global warming, why are the polar icecaps melting ?

"Global warming' has been converted to 'climate change.'

And the claim is that humans are solely responsible for it and that the USA can cure it all by ourselves because we are the sole villains of the piece.

I personally find that to be THE most arrogant and idiotic claim I've ever heard, frankly, but it's the one all the 'global warming' (OK, "climate change') claims seem to boil down to.

If AMERICA would only lower it's carbon emissions and go back to the stone age, then the world would be just fine; no more global warming...er, climate change...and everything would be just fine.

Except that America is about the ONLY nation that is working on it seriously, and other nations...like China and India, are not only NOT working on the problem, THEIR carbon emissions and pollution, unlike that of America, is actually increasing.

America isn't burning down our forests; south America is. So how come the burning of the Amazon is somehow OUR fault and WE should fix it, even as we are supposed to keep our mitts OUT of the business of other nations?

America, as it happens, is reforesting and has more trees than we did when the Europeans arrived.

WE have not destroyed our entire grain growing lands with nuclear fall out. Russia did. WE did not make an entire inland sea disappear, exposing a government hazardous waste site to wide spread proliferation. Russia did that, too. How come nobody is coming down on Russia? Quite the opposite; the far left wants us to follow their lead, establishing the government that allowed both of the above things to happen.

Is the climate changing? Yes.
Are humans partially responsible? Yes...as we have always contributed to climate change.
Can we totally stop it and freeze the climate to what it is right now, because doing so would be far more convenient for the twits who built sea side homes (like, oh, Al Gore and Obama)?

No. We can't, and we shouldn't. When you figure that ONE volcanic eruption puts out more greenhouse gasses than the nastiest polluting nation can in a year or two, I fail to see how WE can end the universe in ten years.

Do we need to do our best? Yes...because doing our best can make a difference. Doing our best is why London no longer has, quite literally, killer smog, and why LA is very, very seldom wreathed in brown air any more.

Are the chicken littles who predict that if we don't elect Democrats who build their houses on the seashore and fly around on private jets while telling us that WE have to give up our cars and use public transportation that doesn't actually exist?

Are not worried about climate change. They are worried only about getting elected and telling the rest of us what we can do, what we can say, and how we can think.

 

[shunyadragon]

Your opinion is noted.

It is not my opinion. It is good scientific references more to follow.

 

[shunyadragon]

"Global warming' has been converted to 'climate change.'

Not really, both words refer tp the same thing as climate change over time used by layman.

And the claim is that humans are solely responsible for it and that the USA can cure it all by ourselves because we are the sole villains of the piece.

That is not the claim by science. This is an over the top rhetoric on your part.

I personally find that to be THE most arrogant and idiotic claim I've ever heard, frankly, but it's the one all the 'global warming' (OK, "climate change') claims seem to boil down to.

What you personally find has no relevance. First you have cite legitimate scientific references,

If AMERICA would only lower it's carbon emissions and go back to the stone age, then the world would be just fine; no more global warming...er, climate change...and everything would be just fine.

Except that America is about the ONLY nation that is working on it seriously, and other nations...like China and India, are not only NOT working on the problem, THEIR carbon emissions and pollution, unlike that of America, is actually increasing.

America isn't burning down our forests; South America is. So how come the burning of the Amazon is somehow OUR fault and WE should fix it, even as we are supposed to keep our mitts OUT of the business of other nations?

More meaningless rhetoric. It is a global issue and not a North American nor South American issue.

America, as it happens, is reforesting and has more trees than we did when the Europeans arrived.

Not true. References please describing the forest cover now greater than in 1400.

WE have not destroyed our entire grain growing lands with nuclear fall out. Russia did. WE did not make an entire inland sea disappear, exposing a government hazardous waste site to wide spread proliferation. Russia did that, too. How come nobody is coming down on Russia? Quite the opposite; the far left wants us to follow their lead, establishing the government that allowed both of the above things to happen.

Nothing whatsoever to do with whether there is 'global warming' influenced by human activity,

Is the climate changing? Yes.
Are humans partially responsible? Yes...as we have always contributed to climate change.
Can we totally stop it and freeze the climate to what it is right now, because doing so would be far more convenient for the twits who built sea side homes (like, oh, Al Gore and Obama)?

Glad you agree that humans influence effects the global warming we are experiencing. As a scientist I would never cite Al Gore nor Obama.

No. We can't, and we shouldn't. When you figure that ONE volcanic eruption puts out more greenhouse gasses than the nastiest polluting nation can in a year or two, I fail to see how WE can end the universe in ten years.

Do we need to do our best? Yes...because doing our best can make a difference. Doing our best is why London no longer has, quite literally, killer smog, and why LA is very, very seldom wreathed in brown air any more.

Are the chicken littles who predict that if we don't elect Democrats who build their houses on the seashore and fly around on private jets while telling us that WE have to give up our cars and use public transportation that doesn't actually exist?

Are not worried about climate change. They are worried only about getting elected and telling the rest of us what we can do, what we can say, and how we can think.

This rhetoric does not contribute to the dialogue concerning whether or not, or to what degree human activities influence and/or increase global warming.global warming.

 

[dianaiad]

Not really, both words refer tp the same thing as climate change over time used by layman.



That is not the claim by science. This is an over the top rhetoric on your part.

you are half right. It IS over the top rhetoric. However, it's not by me.

What you personally find has no relevance. First you have cite legitimate scientific references,

I have. You have not, and you have utterly dismissed anything I have posted if it messes with your preconceptions.

 

[Milton Platt]

Over the years I have posted anual information on temperature and other trends indicating Global Warming. This thread will deal with the trends in 2019.

July was the hottest month ever on Earth. Now massive wildfires are burning across the globe.

July was the hottest month ever on Earth. Now massive wildfires are burning across the globe.

DENVER – Wildfires are burning across the globe, clogging the sky with smoke from Alaska to the Amazon, and scientists say it's no coincidence that July was the warmest-ever month recorded on Earth.

The fires have forced evacuations worldwide, most recently on Spain's Canary Islands, where more than 8,000 people have been forced to flee. Smoke from some of the fires is so bad satellites can see it from space, blanketing large portions of South America and the Arctic.

Climate scientists say the fires are partly the result of a world growing warmer, making it easier for flames to spread.

“In these conditions, it is easier for wildfires to grow and to be more long-lived,” said Mark Parrington, a senior scientist in the Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service at the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts.

The Amazon rain forest fires can be seen from space, and NASA can see these fires from space. Veuer’s Keri Lumm reports. Buzz60

The average global temperature in July was 1.71 degrees F above the 20th-century average of 60.4 degrees, making it the hottest July in the 140-year record, according to scientists at NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information.

The previous hottest month on record was July 2016. Nine of the 10 hottest recorded Julys have occurred since 2005; the last five years have ranked as the five hottest. Last month was also the 43rd consecutive July and 415th consecutive month with above-average global temperatures.

Parrington said it's not possible to draw direct connections between hotter weather and more wildfires, citing human activity. For instance, although there are big fires currently burning in the Amazon, the past 20 years have generally seen a reduction in forest fires there, he said. But now the fires are the worst they've been since at least 2010, based on initial data, he said.

Climate experts say there's always going to be regional variations – the U.S. has had a below-average wildfire year following 2018's deadly blazes across California – but the overall trend is toward more extreme weather fueled by a hotter climate.

The Arctic's boreal forests are particularly at risk, said Rick Thoman, a climate specialist with the Fairbanks-based Alaska Center for Climate Assessment and Policy. Like Parrington, he said it's not a simple connection between hotter weather and more fires, but said the conditions for fires are growing more frequent in the north.

"It's a reinforcing loop: The more fires you have, the more land you open up, so in future years you're going to warm that land more because the trees aren't there to shade it, which will in turn melt permafrost, which will then release carbon and methane, which are greenhouse gases, which contribute to warmer summers and more fires," Thoman said.

I'm not a climate change denier...but I disagree with the click bait headline. It may very well be the hottest month in recorded history, however.

 

[Shaul]

What a cowardly response. The intent of your post was obvious.

But you wrote “if”. Who’s a clever boy then ?

Again, I am not culpable for your lack of comprehension.

 

[Shaul]

Antarctica is isolated by circular water and air currents that help to make Antarctica temperatures more stable than the Arctic, which is also the reason why in recent geologic history the Antarctic has been historically uniformly cold. I check out the more accurate references as to what is happening concerning global warming in the Antarctica continent.

Nice “theory”. That might work if the Antarctic were merely not warming as fast as the Arctic. But it doesn’t explain why the Antarctic is getting colder.

 

[shunyadragon]

Nice “theory”. That might work if the Antarctic were merely not warming as fast as the Arctic. But it doesn’t explain why the Antarctic is getting colder.

The question is 'getting colder' for what reason and howlong the data is you selectively choose to cite. Did you research why and how temperatures fluctuate in Antarctica, or are you citing a selectively cite a layman's rag.

It is the Antarctic Circumpolar Current that isolates Antarctic and generally colder.

Not a nice theory what I described concerning Antarctica is fact. Actually the temperature fluctuations.of Antarctica are to great deal independent of the effects of global warming as described, and temperatures may vary over time for simply climatic cyclic reasons. Nonetheless in long term temperature variations the Antarctic are not immune to the effects of global warming.

Digest this and come back.

From: https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL027057

Climate

Antarctic temperatures over the past two centuries from ice cores
1. Introduction
[2] Given the enormous amount of freshwater stored in the Antarctic ice sheet and the impact that temperature changes may have on the ice sheet mass balance, it is important to understand how and why Antarctic temperatures have changed. Several studies have presented summaries of Antarctic temperature change based on instrumental records [e.g., Turner et al., 2005; Jacka et al., 2004; Vaughan et al., 2003]. The Antarctic Peninsula region has experienced some of the strongest surface warming on Earth during the past 50 years, while temperature trends across the continent differ in sign and magnitude among different time periods and seasons [Turner et al., 2005]. Recent cooling across the continent in the summer and autumn has been linked to persistence of the positive index phase of the Southern Hemisphere Annular Mode (SAM) [Thompson and Solomon, 2002]. The recent trend in the SAM has been attributed to various combinations of stratospheric ozone depletion and rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations [e.g., Thompson and Solomon, 2002; Shindell and Schmidt, 2004], implying anthropogenic influences on Antarctic climate. However, the temporal variability of Antarctic climate is not well known, as continuous meteorological observations in the Antarctic began only in the late 1950s. Quantitative reconstruction of Antarctic temperatures has been faced with several challenges. First, the short and sparse instrumental observations make it difficult to determine how well variations in temperatures at research stations represent regional temperature variations across the continent. Second, while stable isotope time series from Antarctic ice cores are well‐known, reaching up to eight glacial cycles into the past [EPICA Community Members, 2004], such records have generally not been available at the high‐resolution required for reconstructing the instrumental record. Finally, while statistical reconstruction approaches have been applied in regional to hemispheric‐scale reconstructions [e.g., Jones and Mann, 2004], such approaches have not been applied to Antarctic data.

[3] New data and improved understanding of the mechanisms explaining Antarctic temperature and stable isotope variations enable the quantitative reconstruction of Antarctic temperatures for the first time. Targeted ice‐coring projects, such as the International Trans‐Antarctic Scientific Expedition (ITASE), which has the specific objective of collecting numerous high‐resolution records, have greatly expanded the availability of proxy indicators of Antarctic climate [Mayewski et al., 2006; Steig et al., 2006]. The aim of this paper is to utilize these new data in a 200‐year‐long Antarctic temperature reconstruction (representing the main part of the continent) methodologically similar to temperature reconstructions covering other geographic regions.

2. Data
[4] For Antarctic surface temperature observations, we use the quality‐controlled station records from the Antarctic READER project, which archives continuous monthly observations covering generally the late 1950s to present [Turner et al., 2004]. Time series from eight stations on the coast and the continental interior are included in our analysis, while data from the Peninsula region are excluded due to their location with respect to the main climatic pattern that dominates the continent (see Methods, below).

[5] Subannually‐resolved δ18O and δD (hereafter denoted “δ”) ice core records are compiled from Law Dome [van Ommen et al., 2004], Siple Station [Mosley‐Thompson et al., 1990], Dronning Maud Land (DML) [Graf et al., 2002], and two West Antarctic sites of the United States component of ITASE [Steig et al., 2006] (Table 1). The Law Dome and DML records are stacks of several records from closely‐spaced sites in the region. These records have been well‐dated through counting of annual layers in ion‐chemistry and δ concentrations, and by the identification of volcanic eruption marker horizons. All isotopic data were referenced to the VSMOW and SLAP (Standard Light Antarctic Precipitation) standards from the International Atomic Energy Agency.

 

[shunyadragon]

More research on Global Warming in particular Antarctica.

cite='Upside-Down Rivers' of Warm Water Are Carving Antarctica to Pieces | Live Science

'Upside-Down Rivers' of Warm Water Are Carving Antarctica to Pieces


By Brandon Specktor - Senior Writer October 10, 2019 Planet Earth

Antarctica's ice shelves are under attack at their most vulnerable points.

On Antarctica's East Getz Ice Shelf, monstrous fractures seem to form in the same places year after year. A new study suggests this reliable breakage may be the effect of underwater "rivers" of hot, buoyant water attacking the ice shelf's most vulnerable points.
(Image: © Karen Alley/The College of Wooster and NASA MODIS/MODIS Antarctic Ice Shelf Image Archive at the National Snow and Ice Data Center, CU Boulder.)

Earth's frozen places are losing ground fast. In Antarctica, melted ice spills into the ocean at rate of about 155 billion tons (140 billion metric tons) per year — an amount so confoundingly huge that it's easier just to call it "chilling" and "unprecedented," as a recent U.N. report did. Those numbers will only increase as humans continue polluting the air with record amounts of heat-trapping greenhouse gases.

On the frontlines of this warm-weather siege are the world's ice shelves. Perched all around the edges of Antarctica and Greenland, ice shelves help stem the tide of melting glaciers by growing outward over the ocean like thick balconies of frost. Nearly 600,000 square miles (1.5 million square kilometers) of ice shelves surround Antarctica alone, through which 80% of the continent's melting ice passes. However, a new study suggests, those dams of ice may have a fatal flaw in the face of Earth's increasingly warming oceans.

Science Advances, researchers used satellite imagery to look at Antarctica's shear margins — fragile areas near the edges of ice shelves where huge cracks tend to spread — and found a troubling pattern. Certain cracks seemed to emerge in the same spots year after year, often stretching clear across the tips of their ice shelves and carving huge chunks into the sea. These cracks were often accompanied by long, sagging troughs and large holes in the ice — suggesting that some natural force under the shelves is causing the same regions to buckle and break every year.

 

[PruePhillip]

More research on Global Warming in particular Antarctica.

What can you do about this?
N.O.T.H.I.N.G.
The carbon to melt all ice on earth is ALREADY IN THE ATMOSPHERE.

But your garden variety Greenie doesn't know that, or doesn't see that
as relevant as his or her agenda to change the world.
I recall the Global Freeze Campaign ca 1978 spoke of Capitalism,
Corporatism and greed being responsible for the coming ice age.
As it is - our global warming today might have stalled the impending
and overdue ice age - saving the lives of billions.

 

[shunyadragon]

What can you do about this?
N.O.T.H.I.N.G.
The carbon to melt all ice on earth is ALREADY IN THE ATMOSPHERE.

Problem no source? The carbon in the atmosphere is not in and of itself what causes Global Warming. It is the higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere then the past that causes the increased reflection of heat energy from the sun, This is a measurable effect over time since the Industrial Revolution.

But your garden variety Greenie doesn't know that, or doesn't see that
as relevant as his or her agenda to change the world.
I recall the Global Freeze Campaign ca 1978 spoke of Capitalism,
Corporatism and greed being responsible for the coming ice age.
As it is - our global warming today might have stalled the impending
and overdue ice age - saving the lives of billions.

The Global Freezing notion was only related to short term data, and found false when compared to long term data. Global Warming is based on long term data.

 

[PruePhillip]

The Global Freezing notion was only related to short term data, and found false when compared to long term data. Global Warming is based on long term data.

Doesn't matter. Global Freezing was a Cause.
Causes show our righteousness and the inherent evil of any
one who disagrees.
So we had the Nuclear Winter Campaign
And the Acid Rain campaign
And the PCB campaign.
And the anti-nuclear campaign

This is why many people are skeptical of Global Warming.
You can't shove "facts" to skeptics because the people
doing the shoveling cared little for facts when the earth
was about to freeze over.