This is science by scientists and in the liberal mind the science is now settled science. Case closed.

Quote:The levels of Antarctic sea-ice last week hit an all-time high – confounding climate change computer models which say it should be in decline.

America’s National Snow And Ice Data Center, which is funded by Nasa, revealed that ice around the southern continent covers about 16million sq km, more than 2.1 million more than is usual for the time of year.

It is by far the highest level since satellite observations on which the figures depend began in 1979.
In statistical terms, the extent of the ice cover is hugely significant.

It represents the latest stage in a trend that started ten years ago, and means that an area the size of Greenland, which would normally be open water, is now frozen.

The Antarctic surge is so big that overall, although Arctic ice has decreased, the frozen area around both poles is one million square kilometres more than the long-term average.

In its authoritative Fifth Assessment Report released last year, the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change admitted that the computer models on which scientists base their projections say Antarctic ice should be in decline, not increasing.

The report said: ‘There is low confidence in the scientific understanding of the observed increase in Antarctic sea ice extent since 1979, due to… incomplete and competing scientific explanations for the causes of change.’

Some scientists have suggested the Antarctic ice increase may itself be caused by global warming. But Professor Judith Curry, head of climate science at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, said the arguments were not convincing.

She added: ‘We do not have a quantitative, predictive understanding of the rise in Antarctic sea ice extent.’


She said it was becoming increasingly apparent that long-term cycles in ocean temperatures were responsible for a significant proportion of the ice decline in the Arctic – a process that may be starting to reverse.

Prof Curry also revealed that because of the ‘pause’, in which world average temperatures have not risen for more than 16 years, the Arctic ice decline has been ‘touted’ by many as the most important evidence for continued global warming.


But in her view, climate scientists have to consider evidence from both Poles.

She added: ‘Convincing arguments regarding the causes of sea-ice variations require understanding and ability to model both the Arctic and Antarctic.’

Link

Interesting. Do they have any measurements on thickness of the ice, or total volume?

(07-07-2014 10:53 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  Interesting. Do they have any measurements on thickness of the ice, or total volume?

No. But, actual video down there shows much of to be thin pack ice. The Larsen B Ice-shelf an area the size of Rhode Island has not refrozen at all, in fact the the Larsen C Ice-shelf is becoming unstable and could break up aswell. and the Crane Glacier speed has picked up threefold due to the break-up of the Larsen B Ice-shelf.

Also, note of the wording "sea ice" not an Ice-shelf or Glaciers which are still in decline.

(07-07-2014 10:40 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Some scientists have suggested the Antarctic ice increase may itself be caused by global warming.

As I was reading the article, I was saying to myself that I'm surprised that some of these sh*t-for-brains didnt try to make the argument that the increase in ice was due to global warming. As it turns out, they did not disappoint.

(07-08-2014 08:09 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-07-2014 10:40 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Some scientists have suggested the Antarctic ice increase may itself be caused by global warming.

As I was reading the article, I was saying to myself that I'm surprised that some of these sh*t-for-brains didnt try to make the argument that the increase in ice was due to global warming. As it turns out, they did not disappoint.

Sorry that basic science escapes you. Salt water has a lower freezing temp. than fresh water. But, no one too into account the amount of fresh water ice melt and how that reduces the salt levels in the surface water and that raises the freezing point temp of the water....

(07-08-2014 08:31 AM)ecumbh1999 Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 08:09 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-07-2014 10:40 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Some scientists have suggested the Antarctic ice increase may itself be caused by global warming.

As I was reading the article, I was saying to myself that I'm surprised that some of these sh*t-for-brains didnt try to make the argument that the increase in ice was due to global warming. As it turns out, they did not disappoint.

Sorry that basic science escapes you. Salt water has a lower freezing temp. than fresh water. But, no one too into account the amount of fresh water ice melt and how that reduces the salt levels in the surface water and that raises the freezing point temp of the water....

So, based on what you are saying is there is more ice because the ice melted?

It is amazing that our society has denigrated to the point that there are people out there that lose sleep on this kind of schit.

(07-08-2014 08:35 AM)DragonLair Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 08:31 AM)ecumbh1999 Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 08:09 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-07-2014 10:40 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Some scientists have suggested the Antarctic ice increase may itself be caused by global warming.

As I was reading the article, I was saying to myself that I'm surprised that some of these sh*t-for-brains didnt try to make the argument that the increase in ice was due to global warming. As it turns out, they did not disappoint.

Sorry that basic science escapes you. Salt water has a lower freezing temp. than fresh water. But, no one too into account the amount of fresh water ice melt and how that reduces the salt levels in the surface water and that raises the freezing point temp of the water....

So, based on what you are saying is there is more ice because the ice melted?

Or that ice forms easier during a heat wave.

(07-08-2014 08:31 AM)ecumbh1999 Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 08:09 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-07-2014 10:40 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Some scientists have suggested the Antarctic ice increase may itself be caused by global warming.

As I was reading the article, I was saying to myself that I'm surprised that some of these sh*t-for-brains didnt try to make the argument that the increase in ice was due to global warming. As it turns out, they did not disappoint.

Sorry that basic science escapes you. Salt water has a lower freezing temp. than fresh water. But, no one too into account the amount of fresh water ice melt and how that reduces the salt levels in the surface water and that raises the freezing point temp of the water....

So, conceivably, you could have a significant block of ice melt and run into the adjacent water and then some freezes into a thin layer. The total volume of ice is actually reduced, but ice extent increases. Is that what you're saying?

(07-08-2014 08:31 AM)ecumbh1999 Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 08:09 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-07-2014 10:40 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Some scientists have suggested the Antarctic ice increase may itself be caused by global warming.

As I was reading the article, I was saying to myself that I'm surprised that some of these sh*t-for-brains didnt try to make the argument that the increase in ice was due to global warming. As it turns out, they did not disappoint.

Sorry that basic science escapes you. Salt water has a lower freezing temp. than fresh water. But, no one too into account the amount of fresh water ice melt and how that reduces the salt levels in the surface water and that raises the freezing point temp of the water....

So basically you are saying the problem is that the Earth has too much fresh water....got it......

(07-08-2014 09:34 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 08:31 AM)ecumbh1999 Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 08:09 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-07-2014 10:40 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Some scientists have suggested the Antarctic ice increase may itself be caused by global warming.

As I was reading the article, I was saying to myself that I'm surprised that some of these sh*t-for-brains didnt try to make the argument that the increase in ice was due to global warming. As it turns out, they did not disappoint.

Sorry that basic science escapes you. Salt water has a lower freezing temp. than fresh water. But, no one too into account the amount of fresh water ice melt and how that reduces the salt levels in the surface water and that raises the freezing point temp of the water....

So, conceivably, you could have a significant block of ice melt and run into the adjacent water and then some freezes into a thin layer. The total volume of ice is actually reduced, but ice extent increases. Is that what you're saying?

Extending that out, would not the increased ice cover area lower the regions temperatures leading to more ice being added back to the glaciers? And if so, could one not be forgiven for thinking that sounded suspiciously like a cycle?

(07-08-2014 09:52 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 09:34 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 08:31 AM)ecumbh1999 Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 08:09 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-07-2014 10:40 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Some scientists have suggested the Antarctic ice increase may itself be caused by global warming.

As I was reading the article, I was saying to myself that I'm surprised that some of these sh*t-for-brains didnt try to make the argument that the increase in ice was due to global warming. As it turns out, they did not disappoint.

Sorry that basic science escapes you. Salt water has a lower freezing temp. than fresh water. But, no one too into account the amount of fresh water ice melt and how that reduces the salt levels in the surface water and that raises the freezing point temp of the water....

So, conceivably, you could have a significant block of ice melt and run into the adjacent water and then some freezes into a thin layer. The total volume of ice is actually reduced, but ice extent increases. Is that what you're saying?

Extending that out, would not the increased ice cover area lower the regions temperatures leading to more ice being added back to the glaciers? And if so, could one not be forgiven for thinking that sounded suspiciously like a cycle?

I would think it would be a positive feedback mechanism if it is maintained for any length of time, yes. Not sure it's proof that it's part of a cycle.

If only the climate change fools had shot our atmosphere full of ash in the 70's like they wanted, perhaps the planet would have warmed enough to melt some sh*t. Now look at us, we have all of this damned fresh water that keeps freezing everything up, creating new habitats for penguins. We cant have that sh*t happening. How the hell are we supposed to push through a liberal agenda on the worlds population if the damned planet wont cooperate with our propaganda?????????

(07-08-2014 10:08 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  If only the climate change fools had shot our atmosphere full of ash in the 70's like they wanted, perhaps the planet would have warmed enough to melt some sh*t. Now look at us, we have all of this damned fresh water that keeps freezing everything up, creating new habitats for penguins. We cant have that sh*t happening. How the hell are we supposed to push through a liberal agenda on the worlds population if the damned planet wont cooperate with our propaganda?????????

Gotta preserve that penguin habitat, otherwise they'll migrate north and we'll be deluged by them. Angry penguins everywhere.

Was there ever penguins at the North pole?
Never heard of them being there.
What about polar bears at the South pole?

(07-08-2014 08:35 AM)DragonLair Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 08:31 AM)ecumbh1999 Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 08:09 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-07-2014 10:40 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Some scientists have suggested the Antarctic ice increase may itself be caused by global warming.

As I was reading the article, I was saying to myself that I'm surprised that some of these sh*t-for-brains didnt try to make the argument that the increase in ice was due to global warming. As it turns out, they did not disappoint.

Sorry that basic science escapes you. Salt water has a lower freezing temp. than fresh water. But, no one too into account the amount of fresh water ice melt and how that reduces the salt levels in the surface water and that raises the freezing point temp of the water....

So, based on what you are saying is there is more ice because the ice melted?

Yes and no. Yes there is more seasonal surface ice that is less than 20 feet thick. No in the the total volume of ice is decreasing. Seasonal ice packs covering a larger area than normal =/= more total volume. The ice shelves and glaceirs are still melting a high rates. And, that Ice can be 100's feet thick, not thin seasonal ice packs.

(07-08-2014 09:52 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 09:34 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 08:31 AM)ecumbh1999 Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 08:09 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-07-2014 10:40 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Some scientists have suggested the Antarctic ice increase may itself be caused by global warming.

As I was reading the article, I was saying to myself that I'm surprised that some of these sh*t-for-brains didnt try to make the argument that the increase in ice was due to global warming. As it turns out, they did not disappoint.

Sorry that basic science escapes you. Salt water has a lower freezing temp. than fresh water. But, no one too into account the amount of fresh water ice melt and how that reduces the salt levels in the surface water and that raises the freezing point temp of the water....

So, conceivably, you could have a significant block of ice melt and run into the adjacent water and then some freezes into a thin layer. The total volume of ice is actually reduced, but ice extent increases. Is that what you're saying?

Extending that out, would not the increased ice cover area lower the regions temperatures leading to more ice being added back to the glaciers? And if so, could one not be forgiven for thinking that sounded suspiciously like a cycle?

No, Glaceirs are on land and this ice in article is seasonal pack ice on the sea surface held in place by wind weather patterns. A few storms will break up most it. This last year has strongee than normal winds with fewer storm down there. Also, last I checked water doesn't flow up hill. Glaciers can be a mike think and are land above the sea, Ice-shelves can be hundreds of feet thick some, thousands, they are above the pack ice. You can as cold as want down there you aren't going add to the ice with rain or snow falling on the land. and as point of fact Anartica is the driest place on earth. Wind parterns prevent warm moist air from reaching the pole and therefor it doesn't hardly snow or rain on the land in Anartica, on some of the northernost area it sometimes, but we talking less than an 1/8 of inch. The storm systems go around Anartica in a gaint belt way dumping their snow rain over the southern ocean.

Will that new ice not just pack additional snow and ice on top of it.

Climate change is getting worse. So why is Antarctica’s sea ice expanding?


By Guy Williams June 6
Guy Williams is a sea ice specialist at the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystem CRC at the University of Tasmania.

This year could well see a new record set for the extent of Antarctic sea ice – hot on the heels of last year’s record, which in turn is part of a puzzling 33-year trend in increasing sea ice around Antarctica. Unsurprisingly, these records have provided fodder for those wishing to cast doubt or resist action on climate change. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change itself states that while hypotheses exist for Antarctic sea ice trends, they are “incomplete and competing” (see page 909 here).

But far from waving the white flag, or falling on their ice corers, Antarctic sea ice researchers are relishing this grand puzzle of the Southern Ocean. In terms of natural experiments, they don’t come much bigger or more exciting than those unfolding across the Antarctic climate system right now. What’s more, the science is beginning to yield answers.


Canaries in different coal mines

It’s currently autumn in the Southern Hemisphere — which means that Antarctic sea ice is once again marching north, responding to the cold, dark polar winter. It’s one of Earth’s greatest seasonal changes. Sea ice is the ephemeral lovechild born from an ocean coupled with a cold atmosphere. It is very sensitive to the complex interplay of thermodynamic (freezing and melting) and mechanical (compacting, ridging, rafting, breaking) processes driven by both parents.

As such, sea ice is a canary in the coal mine for changes to polar climate. That much has certainly been obvious in the Arctic. The dramatic decline of Arctic sea ice since 1981 is now firmly in the public consciousness as proof that global warming is real, and that it is a serious and pressing issue. The Arctic canary is unwell, to say the least. However at the other end of the planet, the Antarctic canary seems to be singing away happily, as the total extent has grown, albeit weakly, over the same period. The past two years have each been record-breakers, and 2014 looks to be building the same way. You can track how it’s going here, which shows how much more sea ice there is relative to the 1981-2010 average.

Highs and lows

Perhaps the most important fact about the (slight) increase in total Antarctic sea ice extent is that it masks major and contrasting regional changes. For example, there has been a strong decrease in sea ice duration in the Bellingshausen Sea, while the duration has increased in the western Ross Sea. Such curiosities have led sea ice scientists to investigate several possible mechanisms, and explanations for these patterns are now starting to emerge.


The Amundsen Sea Low is a pattern of low atmospheric pressure in the Pacific part of the Southern Ocean, which drags warm air south and pushes cold air north. This southward flow of warm air meets Antarctica in the Bellingshausen Sea, explaining why ice in this area is now in decline. Meanwhile, the cold air is being pushed north from the western Ross Sea — where sea ice extent is increasing. So the Amundsen Sea Low can be used to explain at least two variations in Antarctic sea ice.

The Southern Annular Mode (also called the Antarctic Oscillation) is a term that describes the north-south position of the westerly wind belt that encircles Antarctica in the Southern Ocean. These winds are known variously as the “roaring 40s”, “furious 50s”, and “screaming 60s” depending on their latitude, and when they meet sea ice they drive it northwards (away from Antarctica). Like many other climate patterns (such as El Niño/La Niña), SAM has “positive” and “negative” phases. A positive SAM pushes the winds south to higher latitudes, meaning they encounter more sea ice, pushing more of it northwards and increasing the total ice extent. The Amundsen Sea Low also strengthens with the Southern Annular Mode’s positive phase. The mode has been strongly positive over the past three decades, helping to explain the overall increase in Antarctic sea ice extent, as well as the regional variations.

But that isn’t global warming … or is it?

Here’s the kicker: The strengthening of SAM over recent decades has been directly linked to human activity. Since the 1940s, ozone depletion and increasing greenhouse gases have caused the westerly winds to intensify and migrate south toward Antarctica.

The net effect of this drives sea ice further north and increases its total extent. There is still plenty of great work ahead to improve our understanding and modeling of Antarctica’s climate, but a basic message is emerging. Far from discounting climate change in the Southern Hemisphere, the apparent paradox of Antarctic sea ice is telling us that it is real and that we are contributing to it. The Antarctic canary is alive, but its feathers are increasingly wind-ruffled.