<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Followup on Antarctic Melt Rates</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2009/10/followup-on-antarctic-melt-rates.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2009/10/followup-on-antarctic-melt-rates.html</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 02:38:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wally</title>
		<link>http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2009/10/followup-on-antarctic-melt-rates.html/comment-page-1#comment-5881</link>
		<dc:creator>Wally</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 18:21:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climate-skeptic.com/?p=1327#comment-5881</guid>
		<description>Norm, 
It&#039;s not the surface temp you have to worry about. Its the base temp. Which was about -9. Take off 1 or 2 degrees cause ice squishes quickly under that much weight, now, deduct the few degrees the global temps gone up in the last 20 years that is filtering into the system as we speak, Now we are talking about a few degrees, not -45 or -50 but -4, -5 or -6. How many coal fired power stations does it take to knock off another degree  10, no. 100 maybe, 500, now were cooking, how about 1000? We are talking about 10 to 20% of the remaining safety margin. 

Now that the constraining and insulating ring of ground ice around Antarctica is going, going, gone... add in a lot of fresh surface melt that FLOWS DOWN to refreeze (EXPAND) taking away more cold from the base and forcing the glaciers to accelerate more each year (thats accelerate not just move). Double the number of melt days each year and climbing.
So we have twice the lateral pressure over twice the time period with twice the heat thats 2 x 2 x 2 = 8 times change over time. Then feel what happens when the first really big chunk of ice (say 100k by 1k) falls into off the land into a deep ocean, (that wave will ruin the east coast of Australia evidenced in sediments in the North Western valleys behind Newcastle NSW etc.) Such a big splash and a big shake, may trigger other actions. 

Add in the once frozen methane now bubbling up from the ocean floor....... 25 times worse than Co2 and lots of it.

And through in another billion people all wanting a shiny new car...

Has science proven that smoking is slow murder? Have the politicians band cigarettes? No. 
Did a thousand PhD&#039;s in economics predict the GFC?
How many species a day are we killing?
It took us million years to invent the wheel and climate science receives less funding than a failed American Bank.

We learn the hard way, it makes us tough then smart, fight and flight is one way of saying their are only 2 options. When there are hundreds.

Are insurance companies winding down their costal portfolios? yes! (sub, sea prime)

Can you get a housing loan with out insurance? Not usualy!

How high is the sewerage system above sea level? The absolute minimum (its cheaper). 

How many US dollars will have to be printed to save Florida alone. 

What will it cost to move just in displaced farming land.


And now instead of moving to higher ground someone is going to tell me that its all crap, fine they are your children, do nothing.


Norm,
Can someone explain me why raising the temperature of Antarctica from say -50 to -45 would have any effect on ice melt?
October 14, 2009, 9:55 am</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Norm,<br />
It&#8217;s not the surface temp you have to worry about. Its the base temp. Which was about -9. Take off 1 or 2 degrees cause ice squishes quickly under that much weight, now, deduct the few degrees the global temps gone up in the last 20 years that is filtering into the system as we speak, Now we are talking about a few degrees, not -45 or -50 but -4, -5 or -6. How many coal fired power stations does it take to knock off another degree  10, no. 100 maybe, 500, now were cooking, how about 1000? We are talking about 10 to 20% of the remaining safety margin. </p>
<p>Now that the constraining and insulating ring of ground ice around Antarctica is going, going, gone&#8230; add in a lot of fresh surface melt that FLOWS DOWN to refreeze (EXPAND) taking away more cold from the base and forcing the glaciers to accelerate more each year (thats accelerate not just move). Double the number of melt days each year and climbing.<br />
So we have twice the lateral pressure over twice the time period with twice the heat thats 2 x 2 x 2 = 8 times change over time. Then feel what happens when the first really big chunk of ice (say 100k by 1k) falls into off the land into a deep ocean, (that wave will ruin the east coast of Australia evidenced in sediments in the North Western valleys behind Newcastle NSW etc.) Such a big splash and a big shake, may trigger other actions. </p>
<p>Add in the once frozen methane now bubbling up from the ocean floor&#8230;&#8230;. 25 times worse than Co2 and lots of it.</p>
<p>And through in another billion people all wanting a shiny new car&#8230;</p>
<p>Has science proven that smoking is slow murder? Have the politicians band cigarettes? No.<br />
Did a thousand PhD&#8217;s in economics predict the GFC?<br />
How many species a day are we killing?<br />
It took us million years to invent the wheel and climate science receives less funding than a failed American Bank.</p>
<p>We learn the hard way, it makes us tough then smart, fight and flight is one way of saying their are only 2 options. When there are hundreds.</p>
<p>Are insurance companies winding down their costal portfolios? yes! (sub, sea prime)</p>
<p>Can you get a housing loan with out insurance? Not usualy!</p>
<p>How high is the sewerage system above sea level? The absolute minimum (its cheaper). </p>
<p>How many US dollars will have to be printed to save Florida alone. </p>
<p>What will it cost to move just in displaced farming land.</p>
<p>And now instead of moving to higher ground someone is going to tell me that its all crap, fine they are your children, do nothing.</p>
<p>Norm,<br />
Can someone explain me why raising the temperature of Antarctica from say -50 to -45 would have any effect on ice melt?<br />
October 14, 2009, 9:55 am</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hunter</title>
		<link>http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2009/10/followup-on-antarctic-melt-rates.html/comment-page-1#comment-5803</link>
		<dc:creator>hunter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Oct 2009 03:59:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climate-skeptic.com/?p=1327#comment-5803</guid>
		<description>Norm,
Those are the same researchers that said, about 4 years ago, that we ahd 4 years to prevent a climate tipping point that would kill us all.
Those are the same researchers who said that the 2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons were caused by AGW, and that we would be seeing those types of storms yearly.
Those are the same researchers who have been saying that AGW is much worse than predicted every few months for the past 20 years.
Those are the same researchers who predicted the last year the Arctic would be ice free.
And the Catlin survey is fraud. Period.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Norm,<br />
Those are the same researchers that said, about 4 years ago, that we ahd 4 years to prevent a climate tipping point that would kill us all.<br />
Those are the same researchers who said that the 2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons were caused by AGW, and that we would be seeing those types of storms yearly.<br />
Those are the same researchers who have been saying that AGW is much worse than predicted every few months for the past 20 years.<br />
Those are the same researchers who predicted the last year the Arctic would be ice free.<br />
And the Catlin survey is fraud. Period.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Dickey</title>
		<link>http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2009/10/followup-on-antarctic-melt-rates.html/comment-page-1#comment-5791</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Dickey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 23:44:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climate-skeptic.com/?p=1327#comment-5791</guid>
		<description>Why is it that when those using arctic ice reduction figures are questioned about antarctic ice increases, the argument goes something like this-&quot;... yeah, most of the warming in the most prevalent studies happened prior to 1980, but the ARCTIC ice is receding..&quot; Antarctic ice volume is MUCH larger that that of the northern hemisphere combined, and as such, has a balancing effect on the whole picture.
    I agree that we need to minimize our use of all materials, utilize the most efficient methods of power production, transportation and manufacturing, and in general use our planet well, but the fact we cannot predict weather for more than 3-5 days with any degree of certainty, we must take all scientific conclusions with a grain of salt.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why is it that when those using arctic ice reduction figures are questioned about antarctic ice increases, the argument goes something like this-&#8221;&#8230; yeah, most of the warming in the most prevalent studies happened prior to 1980, but the ARCTIC ice is receding..&#8221; Antarctic ice volume is MUCH larger that that of the northern hemisphere combined, and as such, has a balancing effect on the whole picture.<br />
    I agree that we need to minimize our use of all materials, utilize the most efficient methods of power production, transportation and manufacturing, and in general use our planet well, but the fact we cannot predict weather for more than 3-5 days with any degree of certainty, we must take all scientific conclusions with a grain of salt.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Francis Manns</title>
		<link>http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2009/10/followup-on-antarctic-melt-rates.html/comment-page-1#comment-5780</link>
		<dc:creator>Francis Manns</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:07:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climate-skeptic.com/?p=1327#comment-5780</guid>
		<description>Martin Sommerkorn of the World Wildlife Fund said the Arctic sea holds a central position in the Earth’s climate system.

“Such a loss of Arctic sea ice cover has recently been assessed to set in motion powerful climate feedbacks which will have an impact far beyond the Arctic itself,” he said.

He added: “This could lead to flooding affecting one-quarter of the world’s population, substantial increases in greenhouse gas emissions from massive carbon pools and extreme global weather changes.”

Critical thinking required: melting floating ice will not raise sea level at all.  It&#039;s already in the ocean.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Martin Sommerkorn of the World Wildlife Fund said the Arctic sea holds a central position in the Earth’s climate system.</p>
<p>“Such a loss of Arctic sea ice cover has recently been assessed to set in motion powerful climate feedbacks which will have an impact far beyond the Arctic itself,” he said.</p>
<p>He added: “This could lead to flooding affecting one-quarter of the world’s population, substantial increases in greenhouse gas emissions from massive carbon pools and extreme global weather changes.”</p>
<p>Critical thinking required: melting floating ice will not raise sea level at all.  It&#8217;s already in the ocean.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Norm</title>
		<link>http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2009/10/followup-on-antarctic-melt-rates.html/comment-page-1#comment-5778</link>
		<dc:creator>Norm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 05:51:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climate-skeptic.com/?p=1327#comment-5778</guid>
		<description>North Pole summers ice-free in 10 years: researchers say
Last Updated: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 &#124; 8:45 PM ET 

The Associated Press

The North Pole will turn into an open sea during summer within a decade, according to data released Wednesday by a team of explorers who trekked through the Arctic for three months.

The Catlin Arctic Survey team, led by explorer Pen Hadow, measured the thickness of the ice as it sledged and hiked through the northern part of the Beaufort Sea earlier this year during a research project.

Their findings show that most of the ice in the region is first-year ice that is only around 1.8 metres deep and will melt next summer. The region has traditionally contained thicker multiyear ice, which does not melt as rapidly.

&quot;With a larger part of the region now first-year ice, it is clearly more vulnerable,&quot; said Professor Peter Wadhams, part of the Polar Ocean Physics Group at the University of Cambridge, which analyzed the data.

&quot;The area is now more likely to become open water each summer, bringing forward the potential date when the summer sea ice will be completely gone.&quot;

Wadhams said the Catlin Arctic Survey data supports the new consensus that the Arctic will be ice-free in summer within 20 years, and that much of the decrease will happen within 10 years.

Martin Sommerkorn of the World Wildlife Fund said the Arctic sea holds a central position in the Earth&#039;s climate system.

&quot;Such a loss of Arctic sea ice cover has recently been assessed to set in motion powerful climate feedbacks which will have an impact far beyond the Arctic itself,&quot; he said.

He added: &quot;This could lead to flooding affecting one-quarter of the world&#039;s population, substantial increases in greenhouse gas emissions from massive carbon pools and extreme global weather changes.&quot;

Global warming has raised the stakes in the scramble for sovereignty in the Arctic because shrinking polar ice could someday open resource development and new shipping lanes.

The rapid melting of ice has raised speculation that the Northwest Passage linking the Atlantic and Pacific oceans could one day become a regular shipping lane.

The results come as negotiators prepare to meet in Copenhagen in December to draft a global climate pact.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>North Pole summers ice-free in 10 years: researchers say<br />
Last Updated: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 | 8:45 PM ET </p>
<p>The Associated Press</p>
<p>The North Pole will turn into an open sea during summer within a decade, according to data released Wednesday by a team of explorers who trekked through the Arctic for three months.</p>
<p>The Catlin Arctic Survey team, led by explorer Pen Hadow, measured the thickness of the ice as it sledged and hiked through the northern part of the Beaufort Sea earlier this year during a research project.</p>
<p>Their findings show that most of the ice in the region is first-year ice that is only around 1.8 metres deep and will melt next summer. The region has traditionally contained thicker multiyear ice, which does not melt as rapidly.</p>
<p>&#8220;With a larger part of the region now first-year ice, it is clearly more vulnerable,&#8221; said Professor Peter Wadhams, part of the Polar Ocean Physics Group at the University of Cambridge, which analyzed the data.</p>
<p>&#8220;The area is now more likely to become open water each summer, bringing forward the potential date when the summer sea ice will be completely gone.&#8221;</p>
<p>Wadhams said the Catlin Arctic Survey data supports the new consensus that the Arctic will be ice-free in summer within 20 years, and that much of the decrease will happen within 10 years.</p>
<p>Martin Sommerkorn of the World Wildlife Fund said the Arctic sea holds a central position in the Earth&#8217;s climate system.</p>
<p>&#8220;Such a loss of Arctic sea ice cover has recently been assessed to set in motion powerful climate feedbacks which will have an impact far beyond the Arctic itself,&#8221; he said.</p>
<p>He added: &#8220;This could lead to flooding affecting one-quarter of the world&#8217;s population, substantial increases in greenhouse gas emissions from massive carbon pools and extreme global weather changes.&#8221;</p>
<p>Global warming has raised the stakes in the scramble for sovereignty in the Arctic because shrinking polar ice could someday open resource development and new shipping lanes.</p>
<p>The rapid melting of ice has raised speculation that the Northwest Passage linking the Atlantic and Pacific oceans could one day become a regular shipping lane.</p>
<p>The results come as negotiators prepare to meet in Copenhagen in December to draft a global climate pact.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian Klappstein</title>
		<link>http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2009/10/followup-on-antarctic-melt-rates.html/comment-page-1#comment-5772</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Klappstein</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 18:29:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climate-skeptic.com/?p=1327#comment-5772</guid>
		<description>I posted some comments on the Steig story over at RealClimate.org, suggesting that 1980 might be the warmest year for some manned stations in Antarctica, and got slapped down with a response that I hadn&#039;t done my homework and used a graph of AWS&#039;s, and manned stations showing warmest year by station to show how wrong I was. However, after some other posters and myself noted that pretty much no AWSs existed in 1980, the response to my post was appended with this comment: &quot;...Still, your point is not unreasonable — not all of Antarctica has warmed significantly, and in the last few decades East Antarctica’s trend has flattened. Nowhere do we claim otherwise.–eric..&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I posted some comments on the Steig story over at RealClimate.org, suggesting that 1980 might be the warmest year for some manned stations in Antarctica, and got slapped down with a response that I hadn&#8217;t done my homework and used a graph of AWS&#8217;s, and manned stations showing warmest year by station to show how wrong I was. However, after some other posters and myself noted that pretty much no AWSs existed in 1980, the response to my post was appended with this comment: &#8220;&#8230;Still, your point is not unreasonable — not all of Antarctica has warmed significantly, and in the last few decades East Antarctica’s trend has flattened. Nowhere do we claim otherwise.–eric..&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NormD</title>
		<link>http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2009/10/followup-on-antarctic-melt-rates.html/comment-page-1#comment-5771</link>
		<dc:creator>NormD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 16:55:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climate-skeptic.com/?p=1327#comment-5771</guid>
		<description>Can someone explain me why raising the temperature of Antarctica from say -50 to -45 would have any effect on ice melt?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Can someone explain me why raising the temperature of Antarctica from say -50 to -45 would have any effect on ice melt?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AztecBill</title>
		<link>http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2009/10/followup-on-antarctic-melt-rates.html/comment-page-1#comment-5770</link>
		<dc:creator>AztecBill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 16:16:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climate-skeptic.com/?p=1327#comment-5770</guid>
		<description>The book The Chilling Stars proposes that solar changes effect low level clouds that lead to climate change. More low level clouds will cool the Arctic but warm the Antarctic. So the fact that the two areas have warmed and cooled at opposite times lends credence to changes in low level clouds as the reason.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The book The Chilling Stars proposes that solar changes effect low level clouds that lead to climate change. More low level clouds will cool the Arctic but warm the Antarctic. So the fact that the two areas have warmed and cooled at opposite times lends credence to changes in low level clouds as the reason.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fred from Canuckistan . . .</title>
		<link>http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2009/10/followup-on-antarctic-melt-rates.html/comment-page-1#comment-5767</link>
		<dc:creator>Fred from Canuckistan . . .</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 20:57:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climate-skeptic.com/?p=1327#comment-5767</guid>
		<description>The Steig study was also very, very  geographically &quot;challenged&quot; with a statistical weighting scheme that Climate Audit ripped into little bitty pieces of crapola.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Steig study was also very, very  geographically &#8220;challenged&#8221; with a statistical weighting scheme that Climate Audit ripped into little bitty pieces of crapola.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

