Someone cast Wolven Winter on New Orleans!

[Tifone]

It was the Antartic ice. Yeah last winter - just a bit above the average, nothing to go excited about.
This winter instead, among the lower ones ever registered - http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosph...area.south.jpg

Al Gore lied? Not so much. Nine errors, nothing really "wrong" but exaggerations on the full synergy of some of the causes/effects and a bit too catastrophic predictions compared to the actual datas in our hands. - http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/a...ilm/article.do

But we can just say "omg he LIED!!!1!onehundredeleven!!!" and go though it!

[Trumanator]

You know the "Senate Minority Report" now consists of over 650 international scientists who dipute GW. Many of them are current or former IPCC scientists who have turned against it.

Not that it matters anymore. GW has now reached the status of a religion, and it is essentially impossible to convince people on either side of the aisle to join your own side. The only way they do is when they decide for themselves.

The most dangerous part of the GW activist movement is the growing lawlessness of it. A bunch of activists in Britain vandalized a factory, but were aquitted on the grounds that it would cause future damage to them through GW. Their star witness was NASA's official GW expert. Just recently a bunch of activists shut down London airport, and its quite possible that they will get the same treatment.

[thejeff]

Originally Posted by licker

Except that this past winter the arctic had its largest ice coverage in something like 30 or more years (I can look for the citation). But so what?

Yes, it did. Also the thinnest. Ice volume was still very low.
I haven't seen anything on what the summer ice coverage looked like?
How much of that melted away?

[vfb]

'I didn't see one cube of ice':

First commercial ship sails through Northwest Passage

[MaxWilson]

Originally Posted by Tifone

Could you please find another relevant source? One beginning with...

Yes, Monckton has an opinion, and I cited him only to support my facts about Kilimanjaro. I never asked you to believe his analysis, because uncritical belief is exactly what I'm criticizing here. But okay, you asked for a more neutral source for the facts. Here's the paper Monckton cited.

http://eclogite.geo.umass.edu/climat...al_2003jgr.pdf

Abstract: In the context of investigating modern glacier recession on Kilimanjaro, which began around 1880, this study addresses the glacier regime of the vertical ice walls that typically form the margins of Kilimanjaro’s summit glaciers. These walls have suffered a continuous lateral retreat during the twentieth century...

*snip to body* AWS data through July 2002 show that monthly mean air temperatures only vary slightly around the annual mean of 7.1 C, and air temperatures (measured by ventilated sensors, e.g., Georges and Kaser [2002]) never rise above the freezing
point.

By the way, it looks like Monckton was incorrect about sublimation being the primary mechanism, at least according to Molg. Molg concludes that air temperatures are unimportant, and that direct solar radiation is the driver behind the recession. (I.e. it is "melting" after all. At least I think that's what he's saying.)

Do you apply this level of scrutiny to both sides of the global warming debate, or are you skeptical only of the skeptics? If you're skeptical of both, then good.

-Max

[Illuminated One]

About 15 years ago we often used to have snow so high that I could sink in completely in the hinterland (ok, I was a kid back then but I was not that small ). Every winter people went ice skating on frozen lakes. Now for several winters we got maybe 30cm snow at max and going onto the ice is madness (except of course if you don't mind walking home in slowly freezing clothes ). So here the climate has definitely changed.
I won't say that this is due to GW or that we will all die because of GW but I wouldn't dismiss it easily.
The main problem is imo that it has been blown up to giant proportions by the media and activists.

Originally Posted by MaxWilson

By the way, it looks like Monckton was incorrect about sublimation being the primary mechanism, at least according to Molg. Molg concludes that air temperatures are unimportant, and that direct solar radiation is the driver behind the recession. (I.e. it is "melting" after all. At least I think that's what he's saying.)

Hmm, this should probably support the sun-is-getting-hotter-theory?
I can see two problems with that (I haven't fully read through the article though):

First is that measuring the air temperature at a glacier probably doesn't mean too much. When there's ice involved there will be a thermodynamic equilibrium even if there's warm material pumped into the system.
When you have a drink with ice cubes in it and pour in more warm drink the temperature will be the same as before after some minutes only the ice cubes are getting less. I don't know if the glacier situation is exceptional for some reason though.

Second point is that it's quite a jump from it's not the air to it's direct sun radiation.
What about radiation reflected by the atmosphere (which according to global warming should be getting higher)?

Yeah, you could even rise a third point - what about humidity levels? Would be also a relevant factor and the article seems to say they have changed.

[MaxWilson]

Originally Posted by Illuminated One

About 15 years ago we often used to have snow so high that I could sink in completely in the hinterland (ok, I was a kid back then but I was not that small ). Every winter people went ice skating on frozen lakes. Now for several winters we got maybe 30cm snow at max and going onto the ice is madness (except of course if you don't mind walking home in slowly freezing clothes ). So here the climate has definitely changed.

Moreover, the Hudson used to freeze so solid that Washington counted on being able to drag his cannons across on the ice. Not any more. The climate has changed. And before that, it used to be much hotter during the Medieval Warm Period than it is today, so much so that there were dairy farms in Greenland. (IIRC, Iceland just brought in its first barley crop in centuries sometime this past year.) Yes, climate changes. Which direction is it changing in now, since the year 2000? (The evidence that it's still getting hotter is weak, although the evidence that it's starting to cool is even weaker.)

Your other questions and observations (air temperature, etc.) are good too. Thank you. I wish everyone had your attitude.

-Max

P.S. I actually don't necessarily think the study in question supports the sun-is-getting-hotter theory so much as it supports the local-effects-usually-have-local-causes theory.

[JimMorrison]

The average temperature of the world is gradually, and consistently increasing.

Greenhouse effect (Co2) can perhaps not be 100% conclusively linked to this phenomenon, however observations of nearby planets and their atmospheres, plus empirical laboratory testing shows that this -could- contribute to atmospheric warming.

Ultimately, the real point is not whether or not humanity is directly causing the climactic trend. The point is that it is happening, and that if it continues to happen, things are going to get a lot harder for everyone.

So you have to ask yourself, are we helping to solve the problem? Just not causing something through deliberate personal action, doesn't absolve you from the repercussions of the situation.

Living with your head in the sand isn't going to do anyone any good. And just remember, there is a significant chance that sand will be underwater within the decade, and we wouldn't want anyone to drown out of total ignorance, would we?

[MaxWilson]

Originally Posted by JimMorrison

The average temperature of the world is gradually, and consistently increasing.

No, it isn't.

-Max

[JimMorrison]

Actually, yes it is -

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html

Also, sea surface temperature is rising as well -

http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~geerts/cwx/...obal_temp.html


Again I can only repeat - at a certain point, the cause of this trend is somewhat irrelevant, what matters is how we respond to the changes, and safeguard the viability of our massive and growing population.