Global warming again

[Sangersteve]

Allow me to sum up, these idiots have no clue.




The levels of Antarctic sea-ice last week hit an all-time high – confounding climate change computer models which say it should be in decline.

America’s National Snow And Ice Data Center, which is funded by Nasa, revealed that ice around the southern continent covers about 16million sq km, more than 2.1 million more than is usual for the time of year.

It is by far the highest level since satellite observations on which the figures depend began in 1979.
In statistical terms, the extent of the ice cover is hugely significant.

BETWEEN 1998 and 2013, the Earth’s surface temperature rose at a rate of 0.04°C a decade, far slower than the 0.18°C increase in the 1990s. Meanwhile, emissions of carbon dioxide (which would be expected to push temperatures up) rose uninterruptedly. This pause in warming has raised doubts in the public mind about climate change. A few sceptics say flatly that global warming has stopped. Others argue that scientists’ understanding of the climate is so flawed that their judgments about it cannot be accepted with any confidence. A convincing explanation of the pause therefore matters both to a proper understanding of the climate and to the credibility of climate science—and papers published over the past few weeks do their best to provide one. Indeed, they do almost too good a job. If all were correct, the pause would now be explained twice over.

[PlanoSooner]

i thought we fixed this global cooling in the 70s?

[geeiabil]

.

I guess that giant hole in the ozone layer over Chile, that we never hear about anymore, got better so the ice is regenerating itself.

[Bob Of Burleson]

Rose-colored glasses:
Antarctic sea ice is the Mail
on Sunday's latest
global warming distraction

The Daily Mail tries to distract from global warming by selectively looking southward

TheGuardian.com

David Rose and The Mail on Sunday produce the most reliable global warming journalism, in the sense that they can be relied upon to consistently misrepresent climate science. Their latest piece focuses on Antarctic sea ice.

You might wonder why we should particularly care about Antarctic sea ice. The answer is that it provides a nice distraction from rapidly declining Arctic sea ice, glaciers around the world, the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets, the warming oceans, the warming atmosphere, and so on. Antarctic sea ice has bucked these trends by modestly increasing in extent and volume.

To put this increase in context, the volume of Antarctic sea ice has risen by about 7.5% since 1992, according to a recent study. The volume of Arctic sea ice, on the other hand, has declined by about 75% since 1980. Antarctica has been gaining about 30 cubic kilometers (km3) of sea ice volume per year, while the Arctic has been losing 10 times as much – 300 km3 per year.

What's causing Antarctic sea ice to increase is an interesting scientific question. After all, the Antarctic region is warming, including its oceans. As a result, two recent studies concluded that the collapse of the Western Antarctic ice sheet is already underway and is unstoppable.

Some studies have suggested that the influx of cold fresh water from melting Antarctic ice shelves may be contributing to the increase in Antarctic sea ice. Others argue the increase can be explained by natural variability. Yet others have suggested that the increase may not be real, but rather an error in satellite measurements, although this explanation seems unlikely.

Human influences may be responsible, or they might not. This remains an open question that climate scientists are investigating. It's also true that global climate models tend to have difficulty in simulating the Antarctic sea ice increase. While they're good with the big global picture, regional changes are more challenging for climate models.

Meanwhile, surface temperatures in 2014 are on pace to be the hottest on record.

MORE

[planosteve]

they can be relied upon to "consistently misrepresent climate science""it provides a "nice distraction"
"a blurb written by contrarian climate blogger Andrew Montford (consistent with the accuracy of the rest of the piece, the Mail spells his name wrong"
Montford rehashes the "zombie climate myth"
"Koch-funded" Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature group

I think when you read a snarkily written piece like this you really have to wonder if they have any objectivity at all.

[Mark]

Once again, global warming is a political position, not a legitimate scientific conclusion.

[planosteve]

Dr Jeffery Sachs on Mourning Joe today. (By the way he's a medical doctor, not a PHD)
"This is going to be the hottest year in history."
So, they can't even wait till the year's over to declare it the hottest in history! And the fact that there has not been any warming for the last 17 years and 10 months is not even worth mentioning!
Does anyone think that if the evidense so far indicated it would be the coolest year in history that they would have admitted it?