Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
About that big ice melt
Posted by: McQ on Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Uh oh:
NEW evidence has cast doubt on claims that the world’s ice-caps are melting, it emerged last night.

Satellite data shows that concerns over the levels of sea ice may have been premature.

It was feared that the polar caps were vanishing because of the effects of global warming.

But figures from the respected US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration show that almost all the “lost” ice has come back.

Ice levels which had shrunk from 13million sq km in January 2007 to just four million in October, are almost back to their original levels.

Figures show that there is nearly a third more ice in Antarctica than is usual for the time of year.

The data flies in the face of many current thinkers and will be seized on by climate change sceptics who deny that the world is undergoing global warming.
Ya think?! BTW, skeptics aren't denying that there is climate change. Most skeptics understand the climate is always changing. What most skeptics don't believe is that man has a major hand in that climate change nor are they keen on spending multiple trillions of dollars to try to arrest something which hasn't been proven to be the cause of said climate change.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
Well! that ice wouldn’t have reformed except for it got cold for a while, otherwise it would match the models we’ve created that show it melting.

The present problem is the real world keeps failing to live up to the parameters and algorithms we’ve created for the models, and it is generally our opinion that this failure to match real world climate to the models is a direct result of human forced environmental modification.

Once man has stopped forcing CO2 into the atmosphere we have no doubt that real worldness will reflect our modelness and our predictions of reality will no longer be inaccurate with respect to reality.

Deniers!
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
cue the usual suspects. (most of them in social science and activist roles, not scientists)
 
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
So wait...

During the year, ice melted, and now there’s more ice?

My god, It’s like there’s a link to temp and ice formation... If only we understood it!!
 
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
I’m afraid it doesn’t matter. Global warming is now received wisdom, taught in the schools. Even some nominally reasonable people, including some who call themselves conservative or libertarian, have bought into it, without significant reservation, and see fit to lecture the rest of us on how we just don’t understand the overwhelming evidence.

The movement is based in various emotional predilictions that cause people to want to believe in grand causes and simple solutions. Michael Crighton wrote a couple of essays that provide a better explanation of that than I ever could.

Absent a prolonged cooling spell that completely demolishes the global warming case through real-world experience by our half-literate citizenry, global warming will be considered fact for decades. If temps go up, no matter whether it’s CO2, the sun, or aliens beaming microwaves onto Earth, the global warmenists will claim they were right all along. If temps stabilize, it will be because of their tireless efforts to get us to make adjustments, which no matter how minor they are, will receive the credit. And they’ll still claim they were right all along. They can refine and manipulate their mathematical models to get pretty much any result they want, and someone who doesn’t understand how mathematical modeling works, and how weak it is at modelling chaotic phenomena, will continue to be taken in.

And any restrictions put in place, and expansion of government power that is put in place, to "combat global warming" will never go away absent a revolution or near-revolution. Even if we suddenly swung to a cooling period, the whole government apparatus built to "fight warming" would simply redefine its mission, demand more money, and keep on bossing the rest of us around.

And any so-called libertarian or conservative who doesn’t see that is deceiving himself.
 
Written By: Billy Hollis
URL: http://
If only we understood it!!
Not possible without 3rd party interpretation on right thinking (less they put us in jail for an incorrect policy thought).
 
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
Hollis:
I’m afraid it doesn’t matter. Global warming is now received wisdom, taught in the schools.
But that’s O.K., because bringing the counter-offensive against it will be a true "learning experience" about the politics that brought the hysteria on in the first place.

Besides, even if global warming was half the threat the Warmists say it is, it’s nothing compared to the threat posed by public schools.

Those things are part of what Don Luskin calls (it’s the name of his blog) "the conspiracy to keep you poor and stupid."

When the Warmists are fully countered, the line that "they even tried to teach it in the schools!" should echo throughout the land.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
There’s an earlier article about warming being overstated by 50% due to bad data and some interesting names show up in the story.

The researcher who found the error is Dr. Patrick J. Michaels - a Climatologist and Professor of Environmental Studies at UVA - where Dr. Michael E. Mann also taught. Dr. Mann is an applied mathematician and physicist with a masters in Physics & PhD Geology and Geophysics. Michaels is an expert on climate. Mann builds computer models.

In 1998, Mann shocked the IPCC with his MBH98 "hockey stick" graph, which appears 5 times in the IPCC report, because it is precisely the answer the IPCC had sought. When Drs. Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas from Harvard questioned the hockey stick, pointing out that the graph seemed to have omitted the Medieval Warm period and the Little Ice age, they were thrown under the bus.

Dr. John Christy, a climatologist, pointed out that the surface observations were at variance with both satellite and balloon measurements and the projections seemed highly counterintuitive. Christy, himself a lead author of the UN IPCC report in 2001, does not support the report’s conclusions.

Two Canadians - Stephen McIntyre and Dr. Ross McKitrick - also challenged the hockey stick because Mann’s projections did not approximate actual measured data. When they asked to examine Mann’s algorithms, he refused. Finally, Mann let M&M have the model. When they input actual data, the output was a hockey stick. Using Monte Carlo random numbers, they got a hockey stick. Leaving the data blank, guess what, they got a hockey stick. If you want a hockey stick, Mann is your guy.

In 2003, NSF and NASA funded a study of Dr. Mann’s models (MBH98 & MM05) to compare them with measured data. A principal investigator was Dr. John Christy. The conclusion? Mann’s models overstate warming by 100% to 300%.

Before we spend $500B per year, we need to look at this problem without political bias.
 
Written By: Arch
URL: http://
Before we spend $500B per year, we need to look at this problem without political bias.
Ummm, for a good part of those pushing AGW, political bias is the only factor. Many simply want to cripple capitalism (free markets) in a way that their beloved socialism/communism utterly and systemically failed. Capitalism, simply, must be punished. Further, while ostensibly founded in science, AGW has morphed into an emotive issue (collective, and largely misappropiated guilt - much like the zionist movement in the late 1940’s) e.g. We and our neighbors like big SUV’s therefore we must be to blame. I think Billy is correct above, contrary facts will no longer matter the the proponents of AGW. They are the clergy of the new church, and their faith is beyond reproach.
 
Written By: bains
URL: http://
I used to be a skeptic. Then I decided that maybe GW was occurring, and the solution would be nuclear power and electric cars (Skeptical Optimist’s blog.) Sure enough, now I am becoming more skeptical once again as more evidence comes out the other way, and especially we hear more about the peer pressure affecting the critical scientists and the poor science used by the activists.

In any case, I still want nuclear power and electric cars if only for national security reasons.

 
Written By: Harun
URL: http://
Then I decided that maybe GW was occurring,
Just add a B to your note Harun and you’ll be fine. People have been complaining of GWB occurring for almost 8 years now ;-)
 
Written By: meagain
URL: http://
My god, It’s like there’s a link to temp and ice formation... If only we understood it!!
ROFLMAO
 
Written By: Dale Franks
URL: http://www.qando.net
In any case, I still want nuclear power and electric cars if only for national security reasons.
I spit on your electric cars. In the 1930’s we were promised flying cars by the year 2000. I’m not settling for anything less than slipping the surly bonds of earth.

So, there.
 
Written By: Dale Franks
URL: http://www.qando.net
I’m not settling for anything less than slipping the surly bonds of earth.
Definitely
 
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
Considering how most people I see while commuting handle two dimensions, I don’t think we’d have any buildings over one story tall left if flying cars became common.
 
Written By: Kevin R
URL: http://
Considering how most people I see while commuting handle two dimensions, I don’t think we’d have any buildings over one story tall left if flying cars became common.
You’d also see a radical shift in evolutionary trends. There wouldn’t be too many people driving while shaving, putting on makeup, eating, or talking on cell phones and surviving.
 
Written By: Steverino
URL: http://
"My god, It’s like there’s a link to temp and ice formation... If only we understood it!!"

Think of the possibilities, man! If we could somehow reverse the process, we could drink cold beer in the summer! The Nobel committee would give you two prizes.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider