Easy to see why they have record ice.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Recent Comments
gelcarrion0t on “You Can’t Hide Yo… gelcarrion0t on Doubling Energy Costs gelcarrion0t on Australia Permanent Drought Up… gelcarrion0t on “New computer modeling… Morgan Wright on Climate Destroying Shrimp Christopher Simpson on 1896 : Japan Hit By Earthquake… energywise on What’s At Stake? Robert Cherba on Too Hot To Live gelcarrion0t on Too Hot To Live Nicholas McGinley on “The world began to end…
Why is that? We have found out that in the Arctic it is not air temps that are important for the ice, but currents, winds and sea temps.
I would assume that these are important factors in Antarctica too….
not as much as in the north, the ice pack moves around with the currents and the wind, the antarctic is mainly bedrock, which is a little tougher to move around. The ice flows around the coasts will move around but that is a minority of the ice involved
It’s almost as cold as England at the moment.
I think it is due to get a bit warmer soon. I assume the values there are used by the Met Office for hottest year take this into accont?
Andy
Morning Andy
Hope you did not get stuck in that 3 hour tailback on the M25 yesterday.
Perhaps next time you might listen to your Mrs and take your snow stuff to work with you.
AndyW, how much snow have you received in Kent?
It seems there are a lot less robins here in the UK than usual as many of them died off last winter because it was so cold.
Sorry, link for above.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/wildlife/8164576/Fewer-robins-will-be-keeping-gardeners-company-this-winter.html
Hey Steve, its your old buddy John Stevenson. I noticed you seem to be a climate change denier. And I also notice how you seem to be focused on a lot of these cold events. Well, you and I both live in L.A. How come you don’t post any of the global record high temps as well? Like here in L.A. where we had the highest recorded temps in a 100 years? Or about how the oceans are warming? Can you explain that? And how a piece of Greenland 4 times the size of Brooklyn & as thick as 1/2 the height of the Empire State Building just broke off Greenland? If you need me to take you over to Caltech to meet some actual climate scientists, I can do that for you. That way you can have all your questions answered for you. Call me sometime. Or email me. JSAautomotive1@aol.com
LA?
Steven:
Maybe Los Alamos is Southern Colorado. The state that was formerly known as New Mexico.
Maybe he is referring to the relocation of Cal Tech to a reputable state and they have not changed the name yet to Col Tech.
Mentioning a broken thermometer at a location that did not even meet NOAA siting standards and normal ice calving to make some type of claim.
LA?
The guy doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Where did he get L.A. from?????
I can actually explain how a piece of ice extending out onto the ocean from land lacked the structural integrety to survive being moved up , down and around by the tides, ocean currents and wind until it broke off, sort of like a piece of sheet metal that you bend up and down repeatedly . But then reading the rest of your post I realize that you could care less about an actual answer than an actul discussion of the science invlove with the climate…
Perhaps you should just crawlk back under your bridge until called forth
John, maybe you got the wrong Steven. Its my understanding that this Steve G. lives in Colo. I think you being in error in this regard is entirely possible, seeing that you apparently don’t know anything about calving icebergs.
I also see the record high in Cali. is this, California 134(degrees F) July 10, 1913
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001416.html
Maybe you guys were measuring the asphalt during rush hour?
John, I’d also like to point out, I know skeptics of current climate science. I don’t know any “climate change deniers”. As far as I can tell, its a fictional strawman, created by alarmists.
So, here’s what I can do for you, and your buddies at Caltech, drop by make a contribution to the topic being discussed and maybe you can learn something about the inanity of climate science claims.
James
Highest temp in 100 years eh?
Did CO2 cause the one before as well?
I suggest you actually study the issue in an open minded way instead of just mopping up the propaganda fed to you by the useful idiots in the media who have long ago lost any journalistic ability.
“And how a piece of Greenland 4 times the size of Brooklyn & as thick as 1/2 the height of the Empire State Building just broke off Greenland?”
Ever here of cantilever stress? Look it up sometime and you will have an explanation.
John Stevenson says:
December 1, 2010 at 12:17 pm
Or about how the oceans are warming?
ARGO buoys show the oceans are cooling.
John Stevenson says:
December 1, 2010 at 12:17 pm
some actual climate scientists
Are Richard Lindzen, Roy Spencer, and John Christy on you list?
We meant climate scientists that didn’t build their careers upon being wrong (Spencer and Christy). If I was as wrong as they were for as long as they were and made public statements about how right I was, i’d be fired. (this is referring to their UAH processing skills).
Don’t travel to Manhattan. Hansen said it is drowning by now and all the windows blew out in the wind. Now there is a “real” scientist. The kind who feed hysteria and can’t admit they are wrong.
clearscience
that’s some killer facetious sarcasm!
Norway coldest in 222 years !!!!!! http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aftenposten.no%2Fvaer%2Farticle3927193.ece&hl=en&langpair=auto|en&tbb=1&ie=ISO-8859-1
While that may be possible, it is more likely a result of where the measuring sites were 222 years ago as compared with the locations today.
Clearscience writes:
“We meant climate scientists that didn’t build their careers upon being wrong (Spencer and Christy). If I was as wrong as they were for as long as they were and made public statements about how right I was, i’d be fired. (this is referring to their UAH processing skills).”
Do you realize that then makes RSS j(Frank Lentz et al) just as wrong too by the way you smear Spencer and Christy?
How big is your foot anyway?
How big is your foot anyway?
yah. i guess he never heard of James Hansen
just for starters.
Very familiar with James Hansen & he to this day still concurs on the data that clearly shows the earth is warming and its due to CO2 levels over 350 ppm thanks to combustion processes all over the world. The cherry picked data that is shown here by some of the climate change deniers is classic and shows you haven’t digested the massive amount of data the worlds leading government climate science researchers have compiled and IS the reason why Al Gore says the evidence is clear now. Its because it is. If you people spent as much time researching MASSIVE AMOUNT OF PEER REVIEWED DATA that does shows the planet is warming due to excess CO2 vs. the TINY amount of data that shows otherwise…then you’d have a better grasp on reality.
J S:
You are attempting to tell jokes here? Right?
You mention the climate change Deniers, Are those the ones that think a magic bullet struck in 1950 that took natural long twrm weather patterns out of the picture and replaced them with CO2 as the primary cause of weather?
I agree that they are indeed in denial of the forces that created even more dramatic weather than we are experiencing now or have since 1950.
You are describing your self and your heroes like Brother Al the Snake Oil salesman and Big Jim The GIGO Prophet!
So let me guess. The massive and overwhelming majority of all the world government climate scientists are colluding together to forward an agenda that the current warming trends are not accountable to mans activity nor CO2? Talk about conspiracy theories! Lol! Theres a reason why none of you actually work as climate scientists, because you aren’t qualified. When any of you have published a paper thats been peer reviewed by the worlds or your countries science journals, let me know. Something recent. Ok? I’ll be waiting.
Manhattan is indeed underwater already as Hansen forecast in 1988.
What’s that I hear? Oh, yeh, the familiar drone of the ‘appeal to authority’. Of course, this leaves me wondering, what are, exactly, the qualifications to being a ‘climate scientist’? Dr. Lindzen has stated that now if any study happens to mention AGW or any variant thereof, he gets the label ‘climate scientist’. Then, of course, you’ve mentioned ‘peer reviewed’ literature. Would that be akin to the peer reviewed science that went into the Amazon shrinking because of CAGW?
In the last few years, I’ve probably read a thousand or so ‘peer reviewed’ papers. Many of them are so basically flawed it stretches the imagination that anyone would put any stock in the term ‘peer reviewed’ today. Many are scientifically flawed, mathematically erroneous,(either intentional or because of lack of basic math skills) or simply the thought process was logically inverted. Most are filled with hyperbole and sweeping statements.
Sis, you go ahead and acquiesce your God given right to think for yourself, I’ll pass on that.
BTW, the reason I’m not a ‘climate scientist’ is because I’ve better things to do other than imagine various ways we could meet our doom. It’s called doing something useful.
John,
Will these 800 do for today?
http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html
And on Dec 7, there will be another to add!!
Spangled:
By peer review John was referring to Peers in the AGW Cult of pathological Science not peer review by real scientists!