Thursday, September 27, 2007

There's a problem with the sea ice

We're all gonna die. The latest 'proof' of our imminent demise is receding Arctic sea ice -- a recession oddly enough that (despite what you hear) is doing nothing to slow down expanding polar bear populations up north.

But the "warming" that is supposed to catastrophic is also supposed to be global, so why are we not also hearing about the levels of sea ice down south in the Antarctic? Simple: sea ice isn't receding down there, it's expanding. And why are we hearing only about about Arctic sea ice when the extent of global sea ice fluctuations have shown little change over 25 years. There's a simple explanation, says James Taylor; the Arctic sea ice scare is yet more misleading alarmism:
Alarmist Front Group Launches Misleading Campaign Regarding Sea Ice
A public relations campaign funded by such leftwing activist groups as the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and the Pew Charitable Trusts is seeking to mislead the public about global warming by highlighting retreating Arctic sea ice. Predictably, the public relations campaign selectively cites the relevant science and only tells half of the story.
In a September 25 press release titled 'Arctic Ice Melting Faster Than Expected,' a front group called SmartPower reported that Arctic sea ice is receding and asked, "How many of these dire predictions can we afford to ignore? This report is yet another in a series of scientifically factual studies th at once again serve as an important call to action," the press release added.
What the press release conveniently failed to mention is that while Arctic sea ice is currently receding (though likely not as much as it receded in the 1930s and 1940s), Antarctic sea ice has expanded to record levels, and is continuing to expand.
So, does common sense tell us there is proof, or even strong evidence, of planetary warming when the sea ice at one pole is receding and the sea ice at the other pole is growing to record levels? Only in the looking-glass world of global warming alarmists with public relations money burning a hole in their pockets.
Look forward then to lots of shots of Antarctic sea ice expanding to record levels in your local newspaper, in the National Geographic and on TV3's 'Socialism at Seven.' Not. Expect instead to see more shots of falling ice shelves up north and lots of shots of fluffy penguins down south. And no discussion at all about pressure groups making geographically selective "record level" announcements about the thin slices of time over which most of this research is carried out.

Labels: , ,

4 Comments:

Anonymous DenMT said...

PC: As you are no doubt aware, the albedo effect of sea ice is in no scientific doubt.

As such, are you suggesting that the Antarctic icepack increase entirely mitigates the expected effects of losses in the Arctic icepack?

Alternatively, is this just a naked bait-and-switch? Expand, for this readers edification, on exactly what significance the Antarctic ice cover has on Arctic sea ice.

DenMT

9/27/2007 02:20:00 pm  
Blogger Lyndon said...

Oddly, google search raises the possibility that there'd be more antarctic sea ice because it's warmer.

Can we agree that records at both poles does not look like business as usual?

9/27/2007 03:25:00 pm  
Blogger PC said...

Den, would you like to do the radiative forcing calculation with the lesser albedo, using some genuinely global figures and I/S's hyperbolic language, and then tell us what you find? See if you can scare anyone.

And perhaps too you can ask I/S why he's amended the BBC's date for the ends of the world from 2040 to 2030 ("This isn't about our children anymore - it will happen in our lifetime"!!!). Taking ten years off the date we "could be" dead doesn't seem right, does it.

9/27/2007 05:03:00 pm  
Anonymous Eddie said...

The Heartland excerpt PC quotes leaves out the most important thing: quantitative measures. Does the increase in Antarctic ice balance out the decrease in Arctic ice?

As it happens, it's easy enough to check the actual numbers.

For the Antarctic, we see a barely significant uptrend:
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.anom.south.jpg

For the Arctic ... well, take a look for yourself:
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.anom.jpg

These graphs are also discussed in comments here:
http://tamino.wordpress.com/2007/08/29/polar-ice/

9/29/2007 02:58:00 pm  

Post a Comment

Respond with a polite and intelligent comment. (Both will be applauded.)

Say what you mean, and mean what you say. (Do others the courtesy of being honest.)

Please put a name to your comments. (If you're prepared to give voice, then back it up with a name.)

And don't troll. Please. (Contemplate doing something more productive with your time, and ours.)

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home