Hi Wharf Rat; Re: "Actually, they say Antarctic sea ice is supposed to increase, but don't let the facts get in your way.";
Very good, you actually linked in a peer reviewed scientific paper!!!
Very good.
Unfortunately, the first sentence of the abstract (from 2007) gives the game away:
Estimates of sea ice extent based on satellite observations show an increasing Antarctic sea ice cover from 1979 to 2004 even though in situ observations show a prevailing warming trend in both the atmosphere and the ocean.
journals.ametsoc.org
This is not a "supposed to" paper. This was not a prediction. As is usual with climate "science" this is a postdiction. I read the paper. They didn't even try to predict what would happen to Antarctic sea ice in the future.
So they're claiming that they understand what happened after it already happened. You don't have to be a scientist to do this. Any religious leader can make claims just like this. Climate is an incredibly complex chaotic system. And they've reduced it to a differential equation. Hey, if climate science were only that simple, LOL. I've little doubt that if you look around the peer reviewed climate science literature you'll find postdictions on Antarctic sea ice that disagree with this one, as to the causes. For example, see the 2009 article that claims it's related to the ozone hole, LOL:
Non-annular atmospheric circulation change induced by stratospheric ozone depletion and its role in the recent increase of Antarctic sea ice extent
Turner, Comiso, Marshall, Lachlan-Cope, Bracegirdle, Maksym, Meredith, Wang and Orr
Geophysical Research Letters, Vol 36, Issue 8, pp
Based on a new analysis of passive microwave satellite data, we demonstrate that the annual mean extent of Antarctic sea ice has increased at a statistically significant rate of 0.97% dec-1 since the late 1970s. The largest increase has been in autumn when there has been a dipole of significant positive and negative trends in the Ross and Amundsen-Bellingshausen Seas respectively. The autumn increase in the Ross Sea sector is primarily a result of stronger cyclonic atmospheric flow over the Amundsen Sea. Model experiments suggest that the trend towards stronger cyclonic circulation is mainly a result of stratospheric ozone depletion, which has strengthened autumn wind speeds around the continent, deepening the Amundsen Sea Low through flow separation around the high coastal orography. However, statistics derived from a climate model control run suggest that the observed sea ice increase might still be within the range of natural climate variability.
onlinelibrary.wiley.com
Compare the above with the explanation in your article: "The model shows that an increase in surface air temperature and downward longwave radiation results in an increase in the upper-ocean temperature and a decrease in sea ice growth, leading to a decrease in salt rejection from ice, in the upper-ocean salinity, and in the upper-ocean density. The reduced salt rejection and upper-ocean density and the enhanced thermohaline stratification tend to suppress convective overturning, leading to a decrease in the upward ocean heat transport and the ocean heat flux available to melt sea ice. The ice melting from ocean heat flux decreases faster than the ice growth does in the weakly stratified Southern Ocean, leading to an increase in the net ice production and hence an increase in ice mass. "
Look around and you'll find some more explanations. The science is not settled. The cause of the growth of the Antarctic sea ice is not known. Certainly it's not known to the degree necessary to use it as a tool to help destroy modern civilization, LOL.
--------------------------------------------------------------
What's impressive is when a scientist tells us in advance what is going to happen to Antarctic sea ice. (And Arctic sea ice, and Greenland and the droughts, and the floods and all the other things that you claim are caused by CO2.) Telling us in retrospect is unconvincing, especially after their buddies blew the temperature predictions for the pause.
No, let me tell you what would have been impressive, what would have convinced people like me that climate scientists really did understand the climate.
Back in 1982, when Hansen started scaring Congress, if he had said back then that Antarctic sea ice was going to increase for the next 35 years, now *that* would have been impressive. If he'd gone on to say that air temperatures would increase until roughly 2000, and then the excess heat would go into the oceans causing a pause in surface air temperatures, now *that* would have been impressive.
But he did none of these things.
Instead, absolutely everything that happens to the planet's weather is a complete surprise to the climate scientists, except when temperatures go up. They're like a broken watch. Every now and then they tell the right time but it's always the same time. And if you listen to the alarmists, we're always about to run out of time to take care of global warming. Okay, here it is 2014 and CO2 has climbed faster than Hansen predicted. Hell, CO2 has accelerated. It's time to admit that your crowd lied about how dire the situation was 30 years ago.
-- Carl |
