Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Polar Ice Caps receding or expanding
vanity | December 9, 2009 | vanity

Posted on 12/08/2009 11:39:08 PM PST by Kennard

vanity


TOPICS: Politics
KEYWORDS: globalwarming; icecaps; polaricecaps
In conversations with global warming advocates, I am asked: "Are you telling me that those Landsat photos of the polar ice caps are doctored?" I don't have an answer for that, even after considerable searching. To the simple images of the receding advocates, the expanding images I have seen are either from less credible sources or of compromised integrity. The debate ends with the ice caps, because it is simple and visual. Debating average temperatures is exponentially more difficult to assess.

Can anyone provide a link to credible sources of clear, simple satellite photos that indicate unchanging or expanding polar ice caps?

1 posted on 12/08/2009 11:39:09 PM PST by Kennard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kennard

They are expanding but that doesn’t have anything to do with a climate change. It’s due to the ozone holes at the poles. They reduce the greenhouse effect.


2 posted on 12/08/2009 11:45:56 PM PST by avid (Please consider the environmental impact of not printing this posting!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kennard; Salamander; Markos33; Slings and Arrows

It’s clear to me that they are respanding exceeedingly.

http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results/851/Polar_ice_cap_studies_refute_global_warming.html


3 posted on 12/08/2009 11:49:20 PM PST by shibumi (" ..... then we will fight in the shade.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kennard
It wonder what would have happened to those poor polar bears if the world had listened to the climate alarmists back in 1975?

Climatologists are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climatic change, or even to allay its effects. They concede that some of the more spectacular solutions proposed, such as melting the Arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot or diverting arctic rivers, might create problems far greater than those they solve... The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality.

From: Newsweek: The Cooling World (April 28, 1975)

Meet the new alarmists, same as the old alarmists.

4 posted on 12/08/2009 11:52:36 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shibumi
It’s clear to me that they are respanding exceeedingly. http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results/851/Polar_ice_cap_studies_refute_global_warming.html

Thank you. However, this is an eight-year-old article from a libertarian foundation without satellite images. I hate to be picky, but I am dealing with people who need simplicity and pictures.

5 posted on 12/09/2009 12:01:56 AM PST by Kennard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kennard

Wanna buy a years supply of food? Two years?? Pooooor Art Bell.


6 posted on 12/09/2009 12:03:59 AM PST by Waco (Stay as bootiful as ya are Karvile.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kennard

I recommend the solarcycle24,com message board to find links to credible citations. There is one thread on the global warming board called “sea ice” or something like that that has lots of pictures, graphs and stuff. Lots of smart skeptics post there.


7 posted on 12/09/2009 12:07:30 AM PST by Thickman (Term limits are the answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: shibumi; Salamander; Markos33

It’s moments like this that make me proud to be a scientist.


8 posted on 12/09/2009 12:08:20 AM PST by Slings and Arrows (Jew, conservative, and proud supporter of Israel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kennard
The arctic ice cap receded a great deal in 2007 because there was a prevailing wind which blew across the pole and into the Norwegian Sea. This meant that even as ice was formed in the winter the entire ice pack was being blown into the Atlantic. Temps in the region were no warmer that year than in previous years (or years since) it was simply a function of the prevailing wind. Since first year ice is weaker than multi-year ice there was a larger decline in the ice pack during the summer of 2008 than the average. In 2009 after a year of recovery the ice pack receded less than average during the summer.

This year the ice pack, so far, is expanding faster than normal.

BTW, while everyone talks about the arctic the antarctic actually contains 90% of the world's ice and has been growing.

9 posted on 12/09/2009 12:10:27 AM PST by Straight Vermonter (Posting from deep behind the Maple Curtain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard
Meet the new alarmists, same as the old alarmists.

These "alarmists", however, are armed with the collective resources of the world's academia. They have their shocking images published throughout the MSM. My friends are not the problem. They are honest, misinformed people, just like millions of others.They are responsible and intelligent, but are overwhelmed with seemingly credible information from the "alarmists".

Simply calling them alarmists, accurate as it may be, does not convince them

10 posted on 12/09/2009 12:12:45 AM PST by Kennard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Slings and Arrows

Gee, and I thought all you did was give away Kibble.


11 posted on 12/09/2009 12:15:41 AM PST by shibumi (" ..... then we will fight in the shade.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Kennard

The satellite photos only show how much area the ice covers. Doesn’t it also matter how thick the ice is? Do they have some way to measure that?

i.e. The prevailing winds could push the ice from one area to another, causing it to pile up, and still have the same amount of ice, more or less, just more concentrated in some areas instead of being spread out.


12 posted on 12/09/2009 12:17:28 AM PST by smokingfrog (I'm from TEXAS -- what country are YOU from?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kennard
Fire Under Arctic Ice: Volcanoes Have Been Blowing Their Tops In The Deep Ocean

ScienceDaily (June 26, 2008) — A research team led by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) has uncovered evidence of explosive volcanic eruptions deep beneath the ice-covered surface of the Arctic Ocean. Such violent eruptions of splintered, fragmented rock--known as pyroclastic deposits -- were not thought possible at great ocean depths because of the intense weight and pressure of water and because of the composition of seafloor magma and rock.

13 posted on 12/09/2009 12:17:32 AM PST by Berlin_Freeper (Daddy's First Christmas!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard
The polar bears are fine, but the penguins are feeling the heat...


14 posted on 12/09/2009 12:20:04 AM PST by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper
As arctic ice melts, South Pole ice grows

Over the past 20 years, southern sea ice has expanded, in contrast to the Arctic's decline, and researchers want to understand why.

15 posted on 12/09/2009 12:20:23 AM PST by Berlin_Freeper (Daddy's First Christmas!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Kennard; Slings and Arrows

Interesting (especially in light of the recent skullduggery uncovered at CRU) as I searched for images of the Antarctic Ice Cap growing I encountered the following:

http://images.search.yahoo.com/images/view?back=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fsearch%2Fimages%3Fp%3Dantarctic%2Bice%2Bcap%2Bgrowing%26ei%3DUTF-8%26fr2%3Dtab-web&w=580&h=471&imgurl=geology.wcedu.pima.edu%2F%7Ebnevarez%2Fwebdcutting_files%2FImage4.jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fgeology.wcedu.pima.edu%2F%7Ebnevarez%2Fwebdcutting.htm&size=86k&name=Image4+jpg&p=antarctic+ice+cap+growing&oid=f92905b6bc5fc91e&fr2=tab-web&no=4&tt=5&sigr=11nipbcrc&sigi=11t8872ci&sigb=12t686dbu

(Yes, it’s a real, albeit long, link.)


16 posted on 12/09/2009 12:21:05 AM PST by shibumi (" ..... then we will fight in the shade.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper
So in post 13 you got volcanos under the north pole which is supposedly getting smaller and in post 15 you got no volcanos under the south pole which is getting bigger.

I am no egghead even though i play one on the internet but that seems to me the answer is VOLCANOS.

Good luck with trying to regulate that.

17 posted on 12/09/2009 12:22:39 AM PST by Berlin_Freeper (Daddy's First Christmas!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Straight Vermonter
This year the ice pack, so far, is expanding faster than normal. BTW, while everyone talks about the arctic the antarctic actually contains 90% of the world's ice and has been growing.

Thank you. Your image would fit right in to an Al Gore slide show. The truth is the opposite of the image, so we can't use it.

We need an Arctic image from this Fall and expanding before and after Antarctic images.

Look at it this way. My friends are GW agnostics. They are shown your image and asked to become GW believers. Based on your image alone, it would not be unreasonable to accept the GW hypothesis. Then we give them a verbal explanation about winds blowing ice around and new ice and old ice and the south pack is expanding, but no images of that, and then ask for their vote. How would you react if you possessed only this information?

18 posted on 12/09/2009 12:31:28 AM PST by Kennard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: shibumi

Thank you for the “long link” image. “Expanding” was merely one of your search terms. There is only one image; a before and after is necessary. There is no date. Any further inquiry is “forbidden”, according to the source.


19 posted on 12/09/2009 12:47:59 AM PST by Kennard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Kennard

My point was exactly that - NOT that the image proved anything, but that the owner of the image would not allow inquiry.

That struck me as odd.


20 posted on 12/09/2009 12:50:48 AM PST by shibumi (" ..... then we will fight in the shade.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper
There are many antarctic volcanoes. Most are probably undiscovered.


21 posted on 12/09/2009 12:53:16 AM PST by Straight Vermonter (Posting from deep behind the Maple Curtain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Kennard
Simply calling them alarmists, accurate as it may be, does not convince them

That's probably because they're not as "honest, responsible, and intelligent" as you think they are. They are obviously "misinformed" and probably incompetent as well, if indeed they are "advocates" of the "global warming" fraud as you say they are. It's the age of the internet - - the information they need to become informed about something they "advocate" is all over the place. You could direct them here, for example.

FRegards,
LH

22 posted on 12/09/2009 1:00:00 AM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: shibumi; Slings and Arrows; Markos33

Have you guys seen the “falling polar bears” ad yet?

Glenn Beck ran it and I laughed so hard I nearly wet myself.

Hubby looked at me like I’d lost my mind and had to thump me on the back when I started to choke from laughing so hard.

Funniest “liberals sobbing into their aprons” crapaganda ad ever.

[woulda been even better if they’d been shrieking on the way down]


23 posted on 12/09/2009 1:16:55 AM PST by Salamander (I'm sure I need some rest but sleepin' don't come very easy in a straight white vest.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Straight Vermonter

no volcanos under the south pole


24 posted on 12/09/2009 1:18:31 AM PST by Berlin_Freeper (Daddy's First Christmas!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Salamander

Me no see.

You got link?


25 posted on 12/09/2009 1:36:37 AM PST by shibumi (" ..... then we will fight in the shade.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Thickman
I recommend the solarcycle24,com message board to find links to credible citations. There is one thread on the global warming board called “sea ice” or something like that that has lots of pictures, graphs and stuff. Lots of smart skeptics post there.

I visited this site and registered. Under global warming, 2009 Sea Ice, there is a useful discussion. I went back months and did not find images. There are graphs, however, particularly from Japan's JAXA re the Arctic only. The data, if anything, appears to support GW. They also post lots of data from the GW camp with comments such as "it's pre-Copenhagen spin".

If this is the best we can do, a ham radio site, we're going to lose. The GW crowd has us out-gunned. We should have well-prepared text, charts, graphs and images, updated on a regular basis. Maybe the EPA finding will coalesce a group of affected parties to pull this information together. Please tell me there is more than this out there.

26 posted on 12/09/2009 1:44:15 AM PST by Kennard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Kennard
The ice caps shrink in the summer and expand in the winter. They also have other cycles obviously driven wind and ocean currents as well as other natural factors. Possibly these are in turn driven primarily by the amount of ketchup we all prefer to put on our hamburgers, but that makes little more sense than saying they are driven by a marginal variant of the average temperature of the Earth's climates.

Your friends should have to make the connection, not you. Instead use the same graphics to show the dangers of ill portioned hamburger ketchup. If the ice caps expand...it was ketchup. If they shrink...its ketchup. If they stay the same...its due to ketchup. All natural disasters in modern times...due to ketchup. After all you have PROOF...since your friends can't deny that there were natural disasters. Show them any old pictures of destruction and human suffering due to disasters. Demand to know what they are going to do about ketchup portions in their own lives. If they balk, tell them the debate is over, and any "expert" who disagrees is in league with "Big Ketchup" (i.e. John Kerry).

27 posted on 12/09/2009 1:49:00 AM PST by AndyTheBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper

There are many volcanoes in Antarctica.


28 posted on 12/09/2009 1:57:41 AM PST by Straight Vermonter (Posting from deep behind the Maple Curtain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Straight Vermonter

You just want to squabble then.


29 posted on 12/09/2009 1:59:37 AM PST by Berlin_Freeper (Daddy's First Christmas!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Kennard

In order for ice to melt it must be warmed above its freezing point. Ice cannot melt in Antarctica since it is virtually always below freezing even in the Summer. Ice can however be lost via sublimation, which is caused directly from the sun. The ice pack in the Arctic is different in that it is mostly sea ice and can be affected by warmer localized ocean currents. These local warmer ocean currents do not indicate that the entire earth’s oceans are warming. In fact sensors indicate that the oceans as a whole have not warmed at all this entire dcade.


30 posted on 12/09/2009 2:23:25 AM PST by kik5150
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shibumi

It’s an experiment.


31 posted on 12/09/2009 2:28:09 AM PST by Slings and Arrows (Jew, conservative, and proud supporter of Israel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper
What is your point? Here is a list of Antarctic volcanoes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_volcanoes_in_Antarctica

Does that help you?

32 posted on 12/09/2009 2:31:00 AM PST by Straight Vermonter (Posting from deep behind the Maple Curtain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Slings and Arrows
She Blinded Me With Science.


33 posted on 12/09/2009 2:33:46 AM PST by shibumi (" ..... then we will fight in the shade.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Straight Vermonter

And there are stars in the sky and the moon orbits the earth.

Have any other useless information to this thread that you like to Troll with?


34 posted on 12/09/2009 2:42:32 AM PST by Berlin_Freeper (Daddy's First Christmas!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Kennard
You can compare satellite data for the Arctic sea ice extent for most days from 1979 until now at http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh.

(Some of the satellite data from around the end of 2008 and and through the beginning of 2009 unfortunately are considered not useful due to problems with a satellite's sensing unit; you can look at Satellite sensor errors cause data outage for a long discussion of the problems.)

35 posted on 12/09/2009 2:53:46 AM PST by snowsislander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shibumi

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcIolTc4uwE


36 posted on 12/09/2009 3:34:18 AM PST by Salamander (I'm sure I need some rest but sleepin' don't come very easy in a straight white vest.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Kennard

For you review.

You may want to repost your topic with this.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/recent365.anom.region.9.html


37 posted on 12/09/2009 3:45:31 AM PST by Paul Pierett (Paul Pierett)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kennard

Most of my work is posted at nationalforestlawblog.com Oct. Newsletter.

The present situation is sunspots. There are few and far between. We are in a solar minimum which means.

Fewer and weaker hurricanes and shorter hurricane seasons

Appears to be an increase in tornados and stronger longer lasting Tornados

Increased glacier activity; is not the Arctic a floating glacier

Severe winters, severe cold

Crop damage and lower yields

Drop in Ozone production which needs hot summers

Long term drought

By the way, there is a documentary out there that shows during post WWII that a lake in Antarctica had water at 40 degrees due to an underground volcanic activity.

In all my studies I have not come across volcanic activity under the Arctic.


38 posted on 12/09/2009 4:07:44 AM PST by Paul Pierett (Paul Pierett)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shibumi

As long as I can still use my hands.


39 posted on 12/09/2009 4:55:37 AM PST by Slings and Arrows (Jew, conservative, and proud supporter of Israel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: avid

I have been using http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm


40 posted on 12/09/2009 6:22:03 AM PST by jonrock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Salamander

Me see - but me no believe.


41 posted on 12/09/2009 8:15:54 AM PST by shibumi (" ..... then we will fight in the shade.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Straight Vermonter

The only constant on this planet is change.


42 posted on 12/09/2009 8:17:24 AM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Paul Pierett

Now that’s the kind of science that should be getting the headlines.

.....and it makes sense, too.....


43 posted on 12/09/2009 8:19:05 AM PST by shibumi (" ..... then we will fight in the shade.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: shibumi

Good Heavens Miss Sakomoto you’re beautiful!


44 posted on 12/09/2009 8:19:16 AM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: shibumi

Thank you,

Paul


45 posted on 12/09/2009 10:11:16 AM PST by Paul Pierett (Paul Pierett)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: jonrock
Investors Business daily cited http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/ as evidence of sea ice expansion. I visited the site (funded by NOOA) and see the opposite. Factoring out a summer 2007 enhanced melt, we seem to be back to a 2007/2008 trajectory that is outside (on the downside) of the margin of error of the average for 1979/2000. IBD's other source is the aforementioned Heartland Institute: nothing against them: they are an advocacy group, not an objective source.

I would like to re-post one of the links that have been helpfully posted above and start a new thread, but I cannot find helpful data on either ice extent or mass from any source. JAXA is closest, but falls short.

I am left with telling my "group" that the last few years are an anomaly. BS, they will say.

So that you know, I am in Canada, where nobody gets Fox News, which is 1/2 of the U.S. viewership. Boomers here, by and large, still get their news from television and newspapers. Skeptics are deniers. Black is white. I thought the Internet would have some useful sales tools, but thus far, I haven't run across any. Which leads me to be concerned about government regulation, and Canada's tar sands in particular.

46 posted on 12/11/2009 12:07:04 PM PST by Kennard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Kennard

No offense, but you obviously did not review that board closely. It is dominated by skeptics and voluminous information and links which can provide one with great knowledge.


47 posted on 12/18/2009 11:11:08 PM PST by Thickman (Term limits are the answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Thickman
Thickman,

Perhaps I couldn't navigate on that site properly. Thank you for the link. The sites that I ultimately found most useful are: http://bishophill.squarespace.com/ , and http://wattsupwiththat.com/ .

My fundamental PR problem is the Arctic ice cap images. AGW is a very complex issue due to the volume of misinformation and lies generated by its proponents. However, discussing the issue, with a business associate for five minutes over a coffee, for example, inevitably ends with their disbelief that the images could be a lie. I'm getting better at it, but it's tough. This may be unique to Canada, but afterward I am considered suspect, which does not encourage people to speak up.

48 posted on 12/19/2009 7:25:18 PM PST by Kennard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson