Skip to comments.Polar Ice Caps receding or expanding
Posted on 12/08/2009 11:39:08 PM PST by Praxeologue
Can anyone provide a link to credible sources of clear, simple satellite photos that indicate unchanging or expanding polar ice caps?
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.
It’s clear to me that they are respanding exceeedingly.
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.
Meet the new alarmists, same as the old alarmists.
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.
Wanna buy a years supply of food? Two years?? Pooooor Art Bell.
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.
It’s moments like this that make me proud to be a scientist.
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.
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
Gee, and I thought all you did was give away Kibble.
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.
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.
Over the past 20 years, southern sea ice has expanded, in contrast to the Arctic's decline, and researchers want to understand why.
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:
(Yes, it’s a real, albeit long, link.)
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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]
no volcanos under the south pole
Me no see.
You got link?
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.
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).
There are many volcanoes in Antarctica.
You just want to squabble then.
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.
It’s an experiment.
Does that help you?
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?
(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.)
For you review.
You may want to repost your topic with this.
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.
As long as I can still use my hands.
I have been using http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm
Me see - but me no believe.
The only constant on this planet is change.
Now that’s the kind of science that should be getting the headlines.
.....and it makes sense, too.....
Good Heavens Miss Sakomoto you’re beautiful!
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.
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.
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.
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.