Climate change data from EPA

[shira]

Does anyone even remember Catastrophic Global Warmists claiming that the Arctic would be ice free in 2013?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7139797.stm

Does anyone remember the now head of the NSIDC Mark Serreze claiming that Arctic ice was in a "DEATH SPIRAL" ? Does anyone else remember those disaster claims?

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2745499020080827?sp=true

Now we have proof that Arctic ice extent and area are at it's highest level in 8 years, back to average levels. Why would you claim that anyone that's a bit skeptical of some of these far fetched disaster claims is a conspiracy theorist or crazy ?

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/04/29/another-arctic-sea-ice-milestone/

Into denial much?

The average ice extent for March 2010 was 670,000 square kilometers (260,000 square miles) higher than the record low for March, observed in 2006. The linear rate of decline for March over the 1978 to 2010 period is 2.6% per decade.

But don't let the facts get in the way of your ideology.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Into denial much?

But don't let the facts get in the way of your ideology.

Essentially no net change over the last 10 years and trend is going upward. Some would say that this is good news.

From NSIDC:
"Arctic sea ice reached its maximum extent for the year on March 31 at 15.25 million square kilometers (5.89 million square miles). This was the latest date for the maximum Arctic sea ice extent since the start of the satellite record in 1979.

Early in March, Arctic sea ice appeared to reach a maximum extent. However, after a short decline, the ice continued to grow. By the end of March, total extent approached 1979 to 2000 average levels for this time of year. The late-season growth was driven mainly by cold weather and winds from the north over the Bering and Barents Seas. Meanwhile, temperatures over the central Arctic Ocean remained above normal and the winter ice cover remained young and thin compared to earlier years."

 

[Atreus21]

In 20 years, when nothing has changed, there will be another thread like this one.

 

[PJABBER]

Over a year ago, I predicted that the U.S. would have a cold winter with lots of snow. I was so confident in my prediction that I bought a new FourSquare parka and I urged everyone on this board to buy a parka before winter set in. I was so confident in my prediction that I also bought new Tecnica ski boots and then I bought Burton Gore-tex board pants. I had plenty of use out of them as this was a wicked good winter for skiing.

I believe that if anyone takes a position the exact contrary to what progressives and liberals fervently believe, they will inevitably be proved correct. There are no two ways about it.

To a great extent, I am a contrarian investor in that I bet against the prevailing consensus. And my posts are contrary to the prevailing "givens" of the liberal fringe. It is so accurate a system in determining the truth of something that I am wondering if I should securitize it somehow.

Just a thought.

:awe:

 

[monovillage]

This press release proves that i was wrong. According to this new study by Professor Shepard and his team, the melting of sea ice is causing sea levels to rise. Using satellite data and models they show that it causes sea levels to rise 49 micrometers per year !! That's the thickness of a human hair! every year !! It's worse then i thought! The evidence is robust! Well except they forgot to mention that sea ice in both the arctic and antarctic is on the rise, but never mind the facts, the models show sea level is on the rise from this. I'm sorry i ever doubted the crisis that global warming has become.

http://www.leeds.ac.uk/news/article/793/melting_icebergs_causing_sea_level_rise

"Professor Shepherd and his team used a combination of satellite observations and a computer model to make their assessment. They looked at changes in the area and thickness of sea ice and ice shelves, and found that the overall signal amounts to a 742 cubic kilometres per year reduction in the volume of floating.

Because of differences in the density and temperature of ice and sea water, the net effect is to increase sea level by 2.6% of this volume, equivalent to 49 micrometers per year spread across the global oceans. "

 

[dainthomas]

This press release proves that i was wrong. According to this new study by Professor Shepard and his team, the melting of sea ice is causing sea levels to rise."

Negative. When an ice cube melts in a glass, does the water level go up?

In other words, it's not even as bad as this Professor says.

 

[bfdd]

They don't Predict Years. That seems to be your problem and the problem of most Deniers. You don't want the Science, you want a TV Guide to base your Life around. It doesn't work that way.

... then show me someone who has predicted 2000-2010 correctly or anything that proves they know wtf they are talking about.

 

[Amused]

Now now, Amused, read my post. You just have a bad case of denial. You're like a trapped mental patient about to get the net and screaming "You're all crazy!".

Why yes, of course you're correct Moonie. In fact, maybe they should have an inquisition to weed out the nonbelievers then convert those who can be saved, and punish and/or imprison the rest?

Oh... wait...

 

[sandorski]

... then show me someone who has predicted 2000-2010 correctly or anything that proves they know wtf they are talking about.

What part of "It doesn't work that way" do you not understand?

 

[bfdd]

What part of "It doesn't work that way" do you not understand?

what part of they made predictions including this year don't you understand? post some of these old predictions that totally convinced you AGW is real, please do it.

here i'll get you started
http://www.lesjones.com/2009/01/15/james-hansens-1988-global-warming-predictions-vs-reality/

 

[ShawnD1]

It's not the science that's bad, it's the response to science. This is something we see a lot of:
-Sea levels will potentially rise by 1 meter (factual statement). The whole world will end because of it!!! (opinion statement)
-Plants native to this region can no longer grow here because of global warming (factual statement). The whole world will end because of this!! (opinion statement)
-Temperature is increasing (factual statement). The whole fucking world will end! (opinion statement)

It's annoying because the world is not ending. If this a problem, it will have serious consequences for some people. The debate needs to be kept civil and realistic. I live in a high elevation region, so I really don't give a shit if all of California is covered and some island in the middle of the ocean sinks. If I'm supposed to care about global warming, tell me how this going to affect me. Me personally.

 

[sandorski]

It's not the science that's bad, it's the response to science. This is something we see a lot of:
-Sea levels will potentially rise by 1 meter (factual statement). The whole world will end because of it!!! (opinion statement)
-Plants native to this region can no longer grow here because of global warming (factual statement). The whole world will end because of this!! (opinion statement)
-Temperature is increasing (factual statement). The whole fucking world will end! (opinion statement)

It's annoying because the world is not ending. If this a problem, it will have serious consequences for some people. The debate needs to be kept civil and realistic. I live in a high elevation region, so I really don't give a shit if all of California is covered and some island in the middle of the ocean sinks. If I'm supposed to care about global warming, tell me how this going to affect me. Me personally.

"The World will end" is a Strawman extreme position used by Deniers to discredit what the IPCC and Climate Scientists are actually saying. That is, that our Current System will likely collapse due to these changes. The World(Economic and Political) will very likely not able to cope with such extensive change.

 

[bfdd]

"The World will end" is a Strawman extreme position used by Deniers to discredit what the IPCC and Climate Scientists are actually saying. That is, that our Current System will likely collapse due to these changes. The World(Economic and Political) will very likely not able to cope with such extensive change.

... they started the whole the world will end unless we do something movement wtf are you talking about?

 

[NeoV]

I was waiting for some idiot to post a Hanson graph compared to actual and then use that as some sort of proof as to how inaccurate our models are..

The FACT of the matter is that Hanson laid out 3 scenarios - A, B, and C - of course the single-minded deniers only like to look at the A scenario - when in fact, as stated at the time - the B scenario was judged as the most likely - and in fact lines up quite nicely with actual trends since then..

but don't let facts get in your way...

by the way, this post from PJabber - new nominee as the worst post of the week:

"Over a year ago, I predicted that the U.S. would have a cold winter with lots of snow. I was so confident in my prediction that I bought a new FourSquare parka and I urged everyone on this board to buy a parka before winter set in. I was so confident in my prediction that I also bought new Tecnica ski boots and then I bought Burton Gore-tex board pants. I had plenty of use out of them as this was a wicked good winter for skiing.

I believe that if anyone takes a position the exact contrary to what progressives and liberals fervently believe, they will inevitably be proved correct. There are no two ways about it.

To a great extent, I am a contrarian investor in that I bet against the prevailing consensus. And my posts are contrary to the prevailing "givens" of the liberal fringe. It is so accurate a system in determining the truth of something that I am wondering if I should securitize it somehow. "

All I can say is that you are an idiot - and you should really shut your smug mouth before you put your foot any further down it.

GLOBAL temperatures - not just the ones where you live - are what we are talking about here.

I bet you were jumping up and down as the VA area got record snowfall this winter, along with your idols Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity - weren't you?

please stop posting in threads having anything to do with this topic - your complete lack of understanding anything on a scientific level has been made clear to everyone, no need to keep doing it over and over

Just a thought.

 

[bfdd]

NeoV, I'm not arguing that all his predictions are wrong, I was just showing that a prediction that pushed people into this whole green frenzy was wrong. There's been others too, I'm asking someone to show me the predictions that happened over a decade ago that show they knew wtf they were talking about and shows the current trend. Fact is there really is none, not even Hansens other predictions which are more in line with what is actually happening.

 

[monovillage]

Devastating photos of 139 years of sea level rise in La Jolla, and a nice view of a photo shopped London partly underwater.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/...sing-wouldnt-someone-have-noticed/#more-19142

 

[TwinsenTacquito]

How long until we're back to cooling being the problem?

I love that the EPA is the agency we're "trusting" with this.

"Devil says of hell, 'Not So Bad'"

 

[NeoV]

bfdd - look at the "B" scenario graphs to actual

 

[Jaskalas]

Regarding the EPA.

You think a government agency is neutral in this? That's funny. You realize you're talking politics here, right? Climate Change has nothing to do with science. It has everything to do with group think assonaited with your political party.

The Atlantic itself could freeze over and you'd still be buying carbon credits from your religious deities.

 

[monovillage]

bfdd - look at the "B" scenario graphs to actual

Both Hansen B and Hansen C when compared to GISS surface and RSS satellite are high, but they focused on Hansen A to drive policy. As if GISS surface isn't without it's own data problems.

 

[bfdd]

Both Hansen B and Hansen C when compared to GISS surface and RSS satellite are high, but they focused on Hansen A to drive policy. As if GISS surface isn't without it's own data problems.

Exactly, B might be more in line with what actually happened or is happening, but that wasn't the one they used to push all this bullshit, they used the one I posted.