Issue #112: Polar Ice Caps Are Global...

Issue #112: Polar Ice Caps Are Global Warming Deniers

There are 42 comments on the The Heartland Institute story from Dec 6, 2013, titled Issue #112: Polar Ice Caps Are Global Warming Deniers. In it, The Heartland Institute reports that:

Southern Hemisphere polar ice extent set new records this week, combining with fairly average Northern Hemisphere polar ice extent to set the final stages of a year marked by above-average global polar ice extent.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Heartland Institute.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#21 Dec 10, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL
You find it amusing to be exposed as a liar?

Revealing.
Fun Facts

Huntsville, AL

#22 Dec 10, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
You find it amusing to be exposed as a liar?
Revealing.
LOL

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#23 Dec 11, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL
Endgame for deniers as their lies are exposed: the hated-filled, unhinged laughter.

They don't care.
Fun Facts

Huntsville, AL

#24 Dec 11, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Endgame for deniers as their lies are exposed: the hated-filled, unhinged laughter.
They don't care.
Did you look it up, find out I was right and now you're stuck not knowing what to do next?

LOL
Cut n Paste

Minneapolis, MN

#25 Dec 11, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
Thus the southern hemisphere must be down to regional variation, and indeed it is.
http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/2013/...
The huge decline in Arctic sea ice is rightly ascribed to global warming and is dramatic evidence of it.
And the increase in southern hemisphere is indeed an example of noise that climate change deniers like to point to as an excuse for ignoring the real evidence.
Judged:111
Cut n Paste wrote:
"Every Science Academy agrees:
Greater polar ice extent is an example of "noise" within the data.
Below average ice at the poles are evidence of Global Warming."

Certainly,'confirmation bias' plays no role in such opinions?
Fun Facts

Huntsville, AL

#26 Dec 11, 2013
A few more graphs on the 'see-saw effect'.

http://origin-ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1...

http://www.geo.arizona.edu/palynology/geos462...

http://www.realclimate.org/images/DOevents2.g...

We have been measuring ice extent since 1979 with satellites. Without satellites 2000 years ago we would not know the extent of the ice.

What we do know is the data contained in the ice core studies from both Antarctica and Greenland. The 'see-saw' pattern is evident in temperatures derived from the ice cores. If ice extent is a result of temperature, and we are told it is, then we can extrapolate that the temperatures represented also indicate ice extent.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#27 Dec 11, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you look it up, find out I was right and now you're stuck not knowing what to do next?
LOL
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Diversion.
Where are the studies that prove a see-saw relationship between Arctic and Antarctic ice?
They don't exist.
You are a liar and get called a liar because you lie.
Have you produced those studies?

Nope.

Still a liar.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#28 Dec 11, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
A few more graphs on the 'see-saw effect'.
These are all temperature.

Where's the see-saw in Arctic/Antarctic ice you claimed?

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#29 Dec 11, 2013
litesong wrote:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/re leases/2005/06/050630064726.ht m
Antarctic sea ice was predicted to increase in 2002, confirmed in 2005, & proved to be such, by AGW.
Fun Facts wrote:
Predicted? If the arctic decreases the antarctic increases, didn't have to be predicted it had been observed.
The arctic and antarctic have a 'see-saw' relationship to each other. Many studies have described this.
Litesong is talking about ice; the thread is about ice.

Where are the many studies that have described the see-saw relationship in Arctic and Antarctic ice?

It looks like you're confusing sea ice with temperature.

The important thing to recognise here is that Antarctic sea ice is increasing even though the Antarctic is *warming*, just as the Arctic is warming.
Fun Facts

Huntsville, AL

#30 Dec 11, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Litesong is talking about ice; the thread is about ice.
Where are the many studies that have described the see-saw relationship in Arctic and Antarctic ice?
It looks like you're confusing sea ice with temperature.
The important thing to recognise here is that Antarctic sea ice is increasing even though the Antarctic is *warming*, just as the Arctic is warming.
Try reading the posts. If your interested in the effect as measured by satellites then here's a graph. Note the location of the 2002 date cited by litesong.

http://nsidc.org/cryosphere/sotc/images/arc_a...
Fun Facts

Huntsville, AL

#31 Dec 11, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
These are all temperature.
Where's the see-saw in Arctic/Antarctic ice you claimed?
You can't see the see-saw effect in the graphs?

A see-saw effect is when one side/graph data goes up and the other side/graph data goes down.

This is easily seen in the ice core data.

Isn't it temperature that is causing the arctic ice to melt? Isn't that what we are told? Our production of CO2 is causing temperatures to increase causing the ice to melt.

Well here's data on the temperatures. If it's temperatures that cause the accumulation and decreased accumulation of ice, then the temperatures as recorded in the ice core data should indicate the ice extent.

I know it's hard, but try to understand how this works. You can call it a proxy study.

All proxy studies have the same limitations in that they don't measure exactly what they are reporting on but measure another value that would show the pattern of activity they are studying.

Now if you don't like proxy studies, then those tree rings are of no value.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#32 Dec 11, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
Try reading the posts. If your interested in the effect as measured by satellites then here's a graph. Note the location of the 2002 date cited by litesong.
http://nsidc.org/cryosphere/sotc/images/arc_a...
What you have there is called a coincidence. Antarctic ice increasing as Arctic ice decreases.

A coincidence does not prove a relationship.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#33 Dec 11, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
You can't see the see-saw effect in the graphs?
A see-saw effect is when one side/graph data goes up and the other side/graph data goes down.
This is easily seen in the ice core data.
Isn't it temperature that is causing the arctic ice to melt? Isn't that what we are told? Our production of CO2 is causing temperatures to increase causing the ice to melt.
Well here's data on the temperatures. If it's temperatures that cause the accumulation and decreased accumulation of ice, then the temperatures as recorded in the ice core data should indicate the ice extent.
I know it's hard, but try to understand how this works. You can call it a proxy study.
All proxy studies have the same limitations in that they don't measure exactly what they are reporting on but measure another value that would show the pattern of activity they are studying.
Now if you don't like proxy studies, then those tree rings are of no value.
So you *are* confusing temperature with sea ice extent!

Temperature is self evidently not a good proxy for Antarctic sea ice as Antarctic sea ice extent is increasing as Antarctic temperatures rise: there are other factors which, at least in the short term, have more influence on ice extent.

The suggestion that Antarctic sea ice increase is a natural consequence of Arctic sea ice loss is a lie.

There are no studies that describe such a linkage, and the temperature see-saw effect is not relevant to the current situation.

The Antarctic is not cooling, as the Arctic warms, it's warming too!
Fun Facts

Huntsville, AL

#34 Dec 11, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
So you *are* confusing temperature with sea ice extent!
Temperature is self evidently not a good proxy for Antarctic sea ice as Antarctic sea ice extent is increasing as Antarctic temperatures rise: there are other factors which, at least in the short term, have more influence on ice extent.
The suggestion that Antarctic sea ice increase is a natural consequence of Arctic sea ice loss is a lie.
There are no studies that describe such a linkage, and the temperature see-saw effect is not relevant to the current situation.
The Antarctic is not cooling, as the Arctic warms, it's warming too!
I don't think so.

http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2010...

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/ANTARCTIC_SP....

http://vademecum.brandenberger.eu/grafiken/kl...

http://i39.tinypic.com/9hqeeh.jpg

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#35 Dec 12, 2013
Fun Facts

Huntsville, AL

#36 Dec 14, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
More lies.
Four blogs? Why not a real scientific source?
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.ph...
The Antarctic is warming.
I posted graphs from UAH,. GHCN GISS/NASA, and MSU.

You posted a piece without temperature data.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#37 Dec 14, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
I posted graphs from UAH,. GHCN GISS/NASA, and MSU.
You posted a piece without temperature data.
No, you posted blogs with their own graphings of the data done by non scientists.

The ice is of course not in the Troposphere and the satellites are not very good at measuring the temperature of the Troposphere above the Antarctic anyway because of their orbit, and your NASA data is ten years out of date.

Relevant up to date data from real scientists say the Antarctic is warming.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#38 Dec 14, 2013
Cut n Paste wrote:
<quoted text>
Judged:111
Cut n Paste wrote:
"Every Science Academy agrees:
Greater polar ice extent is an example of "noise" within the data.
Below average ice at the poles are evidence of Global Warming."
Certainly,'confirmation bias' plays no role in such opinions?
I'm sure koolaid, bs as in bs, antichrist, and your other multiple personalities agree with you.
Fun Facts

Huntsville, AL

#40 Dec 15, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you posted blogs with their own graphings of the data done by non scientists.
The ice is of course not in the Troposphere and the satellites are not very good at measuring the temperature of the Troposphere above the Antarctic anyway because of their orbit, and your NASA data is ten years out of date.
Relevant up to date data from real scientists say the Antarctic is warming.
No. You are too accustomed to Skeptical Science where they do modify graphs.

I can't make you look at what you won't see. We have been discussing this issue for a while now and you haven't presented anything. Some things never change.

Like the climate. The warming period is over and the cooling period is upon us. Eventually the cooling will end and the warming will be back. It's always been this way and it is proceeding just as it always has.

Get a coat.
Fun Facts

Huntsville, AL

#42 Dec 15, 2013

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Natural Disasters Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Italy earthquake: Amid the rubble, a couple say... 4 hr who do u call 1
News Why scientists reconstructed an ancient plague 4 hr who do u call 1
News 22 per cent of forests lost in 14 years 5 hr who do u call 1
News Study: Global Greening Will Stave Off The Bad P... 5 hr Earthling-1 1
News In drought, drones help California farmers save... 8 hr Welfare Farmers 1
News Collier residents tense over Zika spraying rules 15 hr oldmanlew 3
News Drones meet drought in skies of storied Califor... Tue Stephany McDowell 1
More from around the web