Where did you hear this fact in the news?
New study reveals
Antarctic ice shelf area has grown by 5305 km2 from 2009-2019
A new study by a team of climate scientists and published
by the European Geosciences Union reveals that the Antarctic ice shelf area has
grown by 5305 km2 from 2009-2019, gaining 661 Gt of ice
mass over the past decade.
The new observations confirm the findings of eminent meteorologist Professor J. Ray Bates whose research has shown that trends in polar sea-ice levels give little cause for alarm.
In a paper published just over a year ago by the Global Warming Policy Foundation, Professor Bates contrasted climate model simulations - which predict significantly decreasing sea ice levels in both hemispheres - with empirical data and observed trends in Arctic and Antarctic sea ice.
Professor Bates said:
"In 2007, Al Gore told us that Arctic sea ice levels were ‘falling off a cliff’. It’s clear now that he was completely wrong. In fact, the trends in sea-ice are an antidote to climate alarm.”
Professor Bates also says that little reliance should be placed on model simulations of future sea-ice decline:
"Climate models failed to predict the growth in Antarctic sea ice, and they missed the recent marked slowdown of sea-ice decline in the Arctic. It would be unwarranted to think they are going to get things right over the next 30 years.”
Professor Bates’ paper can be downloaded here (pdf)
Who are you going to believe? NASA or global warming policy foundation. GWPF needs to do this in a format in which NASA is shown to be somehow grossly mistaken. Which I doubt sincerely that GWPF will ever do.
ReplyDeletehttps://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/ice-sheets/
Key Takeaway:
Antarctica is losing ice mass (melting) at an average rate of about 150 billion tons per year, and Greenland is losing about 270 billion tons per year, adding to sea level rise.
You appear to have overlooked that this was not simply the word of the GWPF. It was a new study by a team of climate scientists and published by the European Geosciences Union.
DeleteProfessor Bates has GWPF right in his title. GWPF is a little shady for me to accept. Compare that to NASA with satellite observations, I don't think Professor Bates has any serious credibility on this.
DeleteThe warming arctic stacks the odds against us. This only amplifies the importance of getting off of fossil fuels.
ReplyDeletehttps://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2023/06/arctic-sea-ice-under-threat.html
As discussed in earlier posts such as this one, conditions are dire:
• Earth's energy imbalance is at record high
• emissions are at record high
• greenhouse gas concentrations are at record high
• temperatures are very high, especially in the Arctic
• North Atlantic sea surface temperature is at record high
• sea ice is very vulnerable
• the Jet Stream is strongly deformed
Furthermore, there are circumstances that could coincide in a cataclysmic alignment: El Niño is on the way, sunspots are higher than predicted and the Tonga submarine volcano did add large amounts of water vapor high into the atmosphere.
All this looks set to jointly result in massive loss of Arctic sea ice over the coming months, with loss of the latent heat buffer and loss of albedo threatening to trigger eruption of methane from the seafloor of the Arctic Ocean, as has been described many times before, such as in this post, in this post and in this post.
You make things sound very scary, but there is no need to panic. All these predictions of doom and gloom have been made many times before and none of them has come true. The scare stories will continue to be ramped up, backed up with film of every extreme weather event they can find but most of us will just carry on as before. Just relax and enjoy the warm summer days and be thankful that we are not yet back into an ice age.
ReplyDeleteDo you understand the energy imbalance in our atmosphere?
ReplyDeleteThe earth has gained the energy of 3 billion hiroshima bombs since 1998. That is from less energy leaving than the energy coming in from the sun.
https://4hiroshimas.info/
Our climate is absorbing a lot of heat. When scientists add up all of the heat warming the oceans, land, and atmosphere and melting the ice, they find our climate is accumulating 4 Hiroshima atomic bombs worth of heat every second.
This warming is due to more heat-trapping greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The burning of fossil fuels means we are emitting billions of tonnes of carbon dioxide every year. This is the main contributor to global warming.
To communicate the sheer amount of heat our planet is accumulating, we have created this widget, embeddable on blogs and also available as a Facebook app, an iPad app, and an iPhone app. To help get the word out on just how much global warming our planet is experiencing, add the widget to your own blog or use the widget on Facebook, like it and share it.
Why would I want to frighten people unnecessarily ? Such a figure is completely meaningless without putting it into context by showing how much energy the planet was absorbing in the past. Exactly how much extra heat is due to human emissions of CO2? Here are some interesting figures - the sun gives us approximately 239 watts per square meter, and human influences amount to between 1.1 and 3.3 watts per square meter. In other words around 1% You can see that these measurements are only known to within a certain precision, so there is a great deal of uncertainty about the whole thing.
ReplyDeletePre industrial ocean did not heat up. Its heating up now. 93% of the energy returning to earth from our carbon pollution goes into the ocean. If you look at the NASA argo buoys website, we are heating up a little more than 7% of the ocean heat gain.
DeleteThe certainty of science increases as many larger uncertain peices of data trend in the same direction. We are trending warming. 1.1 to 3.3 watts per meter squared is trending positive. Why bet the farm when it is certain that there will be damage from human global warming. We have a choice to make, why not the right choice of no pollution?
[[[[[we are heating up a little more than 7% of the ocean heat gain.]]]]]]
ReplyDelete7% more of the 93% heat gain.