No time to spare in addressing anthropogenic climate change from burning fossil fuels

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Your usual padding and nothing to do with claims that ice caps should have melted years ago according to the alarmists.



But just for giggles, the same prediction, just moved on down the road as usual.

The ice caps are melting. That is a fact. And with all the attendant problems that will bring.

[Mountain Man]

Is that so?

This was way back in 2012 predicting complete collapse of arctic sea ice in 4 years. 10 years later it's still not true.

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...llapse-sea-ice

Try again.

One of my favorite "climate change" stories from a few years back was when a bunch of greenies hopped on a ship to study the diminishing Arctic sea ice, only for their ship to get stuck in records amount of ice that their computer models and predictions told them shouldn't be there.

[shunyadragon]

Yet you also had a climate scientist telling Gore that in 2008 that the North Pole would be ice free in 2013.

Gore is not qualified in anything to do with global warming, and his book reflects that. His choice of scientists to cite also reflect that. Again pure scientific physics refutes these claims simply on the basis of the amount of time required for the vast volume of ice involved to melt.

And keep in mind that James E. Lovelock, the environmental scientist has proclaimed that "By 2040, parts of the Sahara desert will have moved into middle Europe. We are talking about Paris – as far north as Berlin." and that people would have to move to Antarctica to survive.

James Lovelock?!?!?! What a joke. You might do better quoting Velikovsky from Worlds in Collision. You do not have any better judgement citing scientists than Al Gore.

[rogue06]

Gore is not qualified in anything to do with global warming, and his book reflects that. His choice of scientists to cite also reflect that. Again pure scientific physics refutes these claims simply on the basis of the amount of time required for the vast volume of ice involved to melt.

As his supporters noted when the ice cap didn't melt, this was not a prediction from Gore, but rather he passed on what a climate scientist was claiming.

Your objection is no different than complaining that, say, the New York Times is not qualified in anything to do with global warming, if they publish a claim from a scientist about AGW that doesn't pan out.

James Lovelock?!?!?! What a joke. You might do better quoting Velikovsky from Worlds in Collision. You do not have any better judgement citing scientists than Al Gore.

Fellow of the Royal Society (1974) Tswett Medal for Chromatography (1975) American Chemical Society Award in Chromatography (1980) Norbert Gerbier–MUMM Award (1988) Dr A.H. Heineken Prize for Environmental Sciences (1990) Commander of the Order of the British Empire (1990) Volvo Environment Prize (1996) Companion of Honour (2003) Wollaston Medal (2006) Arne Naess Chair in Global Justice and the Environment (2007)[1]

[shunyadragon]

As his supporters noted when the ice cap didn't melt, this was not a prediction from Gore, but rather he passed on what a climate scientist was claiming.

Your objection is no different than complaining that, say, the New York Times is not qualified in anything to do with global warming, if they publish a claim from a scientist about AGW that doesn't pan out.

Fellow of the Royal Society (1974) Tswett Medal for Chromatography (1975) American Chemical Society Award in Chromatography (1980) Norbert Gerbier–MUMM Award (1988) Dr A.H. Heineken Prize for Environmental Sciences (1990) Commander of the Order of the British Empire (1990) Volvo Environment Prize (1996) Companion of Honour (2003) Wollaston Medal (2006) Arne Naess Chair in Global Justice and the Environment (2007)[1]

I am complaining also specifically about the impossibility of the ice caps melting quickly not only the sources. Yes, laymen sources including the New York Times do cite questionable sources in the past. The list of phony scientific predictions can be much much longer. I gave the facts of the problem of these predictions of the ice caps melting quickly, which is physically impossible unless you are on Venus, and your list goes on and on.

Actually you have yet to cite a specific source as to HOW the ice caps can physically melt so fast.

[Roy]

cmp.png
https://www.realclimate.org/index.ph...-observations/

They predicted global warming far in excess of the perfectly normal and natural trends we are actually seeing, which is what I said ("...almost every single global cooling global warming climate change prediction made over the past 50-years has not only been wrong but wildly wrong...").

So you don't understand graphs.

[shunyadragon]

The problem with the "scientific" position is that almost every single global cooling global warming climate change prediction made over the past 50-years has not only been wrong but wildly wrong, yet they keep making those same predictions over and over again and then accuse us of denial when we don't cower in fear at their prognostications of doom and gloom.

Too many skeptics of global warming have been citing off the wall terrible references on the history of predictions by scientists. It is time to cite the relatively accurate predictions made over time. One confusion is the predictions of the loose of shelf ice being confused with the loose of ice caps. Yes there have been many valid prediction of the extreme loose of seasonal shelf ice and the thinner relatively permanent ice over the oceans, but not valid predictions that the ice caps them selves will melt in a few years.

Source: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/08/220812224149.htm

Antarctica's ice shelves could be melting faster than we thought

Date:August 12, 2022Source:California Institute of TechnologySummary:A new model illustrates how meltwater from the Antarctic ice can trap heat under ice shelves, increasing melting in a feedback loop.Share: FULL STORY

---

A new model developed by Caltech and JPL researchers suggests that Antarctica's ice shelves may be melting at an accelerated rate, which could eventually contribute to more rapid sea level rise. The model accounts for an often-overlooked narrow ocean current along the Antarctic coast and simulates how rapidly flowing freshwater, melted from the ice shelves, can trap dense warm ocean water at the base of the ice, causing it to warm and melt even more.

The study was conducted in the laboratory of Andy Thompson, professor of environmental science and engineering, and appears in the journal Science Advances on August 12.

Ice shelves are outcroppings of the Antarctic ice sheet, found where the ice juts out from land and floats on top of the ocean. The shelves, which are each several hundred meters thick, act as a protective buffer for the mainland ice, keeping the whole ice sheet from flowing into the ocean (which would dramatically raise global sea levels). However, a warming atmosphere and warming oceans caused by climate change are increasing the speed at which these ice shelves are melting, threatening their ability to hold back the flow of the ice sheet into the ocean.

"If this mechanism that we've been studying is active in the real world, it may mean that ice shelf melt rates are 20 to 40 percent higher than the predictions in global climate models, which typically cannot simulate these strong currents near the Antarctic coast," Thompson says.

In this study, led by senior research scientist Mar Flexas, the researchers focused on one area of Antarctica: the West Antarctic Peninsula (WAP). Antarctica is roughly shaped like a disk, except where the WAP protrudes out of the high polar latitudes and into lower, warmer latitudes. It is here that Antarctica sees the most dramatic changes due to climate change. The team has previously deployed autonomous vehicles in this region, and scientists have used data from instrumented elephant seals to measure temperature and salinity in the water and ice.

The team's model takes into account the narrow Antarctic Coastal Current that runs counterclockwise around the entire Antarctic continent, a current which many climate models do not include because it is so small.

"Large global climate models don't include this coastal current, because it's very narrow -- only about 20 kilometers wide, while most climate models only capture currents that are 100 kilometers across or larger," Flexas explains. "So, there is a potential for those models to not represent future melt rates very accurately."

The model illustrates how freshwater that melts from ice at the WAP is carried by the coastal current and transported around the continent. The less-dense freshwater moves along quickly near the surface of the ocean and traps relatively warm ocean saltwater against the underside of the ice shelves. This then causes the ice shelves to melt from below. In this way, increased meltwater at the WAP can propagate climate warming via the Coastal Current, which in turn can also escalate melting even at West Antarctic ice shelves thousands of kilometers away from the peninsula. This remote warming mechanism may be part of the reason that the loss of volume from West Antarctic ice shelves has accelerated in recent decades.

"There are aspects of the climate system that we are still discovering," Thompson says. "As we've made progress in our ability to model interactions between the ocean, ice shelves, and atmosphere, we're able to make more accurate predictions with better constraints on uncertainty. We may need to revisit some of the predictions of sea level rise in the next decades or century -- that's work that we'll do going forward."

© Copyright Original Source

[Gondwanaland]

The ice caps are melting. That is a fact. And with all the attendant problems that will bring.

Sure. They've been melting for the last 18,000 years, when they included a mile of ice sitting in the location that is currently New York City. That is a fact. And humanity has had to deal with and adapt to the attendant problems that it has brought and will continue to bring.

[Mountain Man]

Too many skeptics of global warming have been citing off the wall terrible references on the history of predictions by scientists. It is time to cite the relatively accurate predictions made over time. One confusion is the predictions of the loose of shelf ice being confused with the loose of ice caps. Yes there have been many valid prediction of the extreme loose of seasonal shelf ice and the thinner relatively permanent ice over the oceans, but not valid predictions that the ice caps them selves will melt in a few years.

[cite]Antarctica's ice shelves could be melting faster than we thought

... A new model developed by Caltech and JPL researchers... [/cite]

So your response to the wildly inaccurate models and predictions over the decades... is to reference an article about a new model.

I'm sure they'll get it right this time. No, really.

[shunyadragon]

So your response to the wildly inaccurate models and predictions over the decades... is to reference an article about a new model.

I'm sure they'll get it right this time. No, really.

No, Of course no coherent response. The usual flap flap.

More to follow . . .

[seanD]

Emissions Gap Report 2022

(bold emphasis mine)

The report is the 13^th edition in an annual series that provides an overview of the difference between where greenhouse emissions are predicted to be in 2030 and where they should be to avert the worst impacts of climate change.

The report shows that updated national pledges since COP26 – held in 2021 in Glasgow, UK – make a negligible difference to predicted 2030 emissions and that we are far from the Paris Agreement goal of limiting global warming to well below 2°C, preferably 1.5°C. Policies currently in place point to a 2.8°C temperature rise by the end of the century. Implementation of the current pledges will only reduce this to a 2.4-2.6°C temperature rise by the end of the century, for conditional and unconditional pledges respectively.

The report finds that only an urgent system-wide transformation can deliver the enormous cuts needed to limit greenhouse gas emissions by 2030: 45 per cent compared with projections based on policies currently in place to get on track to 1.5°C and 30 per cent for 2°C. This report provides an in-depth exploration of how to deliver this transformation, looking at the required actions in the electricity supply, industry, transport and buildings sectors, and the food and financial systems.

So they're essentially saying that, in spite of the Biden admin knee-capping the US energy industry in the name of climate change and the energy toll the war is having in the EU, with energy prices already high and all the political turmoil just that alone is causing, we need to do even MORE to dismantle the fossil fuel energy industry.

Yeah, good luck with that, and the civil unrest you'll face if you push the populace even harder than you already are.