NASA : Nonexistent Ice Thickening Faster Than It Used To

[rangerrebew]

NASA : Nonexistent Ice Thickening Faster Than It Used To
Posted on December 7, 2018 by tonyheller

NASA, which predicted Arctic sea ice would be gone by now, says Arctic sea ice is thickening faster than it used to – but the earth is still doomed.

https://realclimatescience.com/2018/12/nasa-nonexistent-ice-thickening-faster-than-it-used-to/

[Fishrrman]

Ain't it funny how the "nonexistant" ice somehow thickens faster...?

[Skeptic]

I found this NASA article pretty much showing that there is over 2 million square kilometer less ice than in 1979.

https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/4435

Check out this trippy video of the movement of the northern polar ice. Much different from Antarctic ice, which is stationary.


https://youtu.be/H-BbPBg3vj8

You can pretty much see that although there is fresh ice every year at the north pole, there is less than before and that doesn't account for southern polar ice melt.

During the coldest part of the year there is seasonal ice that freezes over great areas but what the global warming folks are talking about are the ice shelfs and glaciers that have grown over millions of years. You can wait for seasonal ice to reach its limit and take a picture then say hey they lied to us! But 6 months later it's all melted and the permafrost is a little bit smaller.

There's an ebb and flow to the ice just like an ocean tide.

[DB]

I found this NASA article pretty much showing that there is over 2 million square kilometer less ice than in 1979.

https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/4435

Check out this trippy video of the movement of the northern polar ice. Much different from Antarctic ice, which is stationary.


https://youtu.be/H-BbPBg3vj8

You can pretty much see that although there is fresh ice every year at the north pole, there is less than before and that doesn't account for southern polar ice melt.

During the coldest part of the year there is seasonal ice that freezes over great areas but what the global warming folks are talking about are the ice shelfs and glaciers that have grown over millions of years. You can wait for seasonal ice to reach its limit and take a picture then say hey they lied to us! But 6 months later it's all melted and the permafrost is a little bit smaller.

There's an ebb and flow to the ice just like an ocean tide.

And if you recall, the 1970s was going to be the beginning of a "new ice age" because of all the cold and ice building up... So they use that as the baseline, using the coldest period with peak ice as the starting point and then claim any warming and melting of arctic ice after that time is evidence of man made warming... It is absurd "science".

[Skeptic]

And if you recall, the 1970s was going to be the beginning of a "new ice age" because of all the cold and ice building up... So they use that as the baseline, using the coldest period with peak ice as the starting point and then claim any warming and melting of arctic ice after that time is evidence of man made warming... It is absurd "science".

I don't recall because I wasn't there but what you're saying affirms what I was saying about the ebb and flow tidelike movement of the polar ice. So if what you're saying is true that the ice was building then why hadn't they recorded this phenomenon?

[DB]

I don't recall because I wasn't there but what you're saying affirms what I was saying about the ebb and flow tidelike movement of the polar ice. So if what you're saying is true that the ice was building then why hadn't they recorded this phenomenon?

It is recorded. The point is they used that high point (maximum ice) as the starting point for their data to show warming/melting.

Form your quote: "I found this NASA article pretty much showing that there is over 2 million square kilometer less ice than in 1979."

The late 1970's was the peak. So of course ice melted after the peak.

[roamer_1]

It is recorded. The point is they used that high point (maximum ice) as the starting point for their data to show warming/melting.

Form your quote: "I found this NASA article pretty much showing that there is over 2 million square kilometer less ice than in 1979."

The late 1970's was the peak. So of course ice melted after the peak.

I would point out that the ability to measure anything on a global scale was severely restricted in 1970, with but a few satellites, and substantially less land based measuring stations. I wonder at their abilities that far back to be so certain of anything.

[Skeptic]

My question is what if they're correct about global warming? What does that mean for the Republican party?

[roamer_1]

My question is what if they're correct about global warming? What does that mean for the Republican party?

A moot question. You may as well question whether the moon is made of green cheese.

[bigheadfred]

My question is what if they're correct about global warming? What does that mean for the Republican party?

Same as anyone else.

Sink or swim.

[DB]

My question is what if they're correct about global warming? What does that mean for the Republican party?

What if they are wrong about man made global warming - and they are - what does that mean for the Democratic party?

[bigheadfred]

My question is what if they're correct about global warming? What does that mean for the Republican party?

Nothing. Unless you are seeking to be quartered in the public square. No, I mean seeking the highlander ground, billy bad ass. no. I mean William Wallace  Either way, There is a moray eel to this story.

[Skeptic]

What if they are wrong about man made global warming - and they are - what does that mean for the Democratic party?

I would guess that the Democrats would be hurting more simply because they are riding their campaigns on climate change and global warming. You make a good point. So, right or wrong, they are wasting mic time and resources bickering about it while Republicans make progress on other issues.
 

[bigheadfred]

I would guess that the Democrats would be hurting more simply because they are riding their campaigns on climate change and global warming. You make a good point. So, right or wrong, they are wasting mic time and resources bickering about it while Republicans make progress on other issues.
 

I insist on this point. Conservatives remain. While the rest go down the drain.

[GtHawk]

A moot question. You may as well question whether the moon is made of green cheese.

Well that's just silly, everyone knows the green cheese theory has been discredited


Sorry...

[roamer_1]

Well that's just silly, everyone knows the green cheese theory has been discredited

Exactly.