21–30 of 61 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not much different than global warming believers that point to just trends that support their position.
So the entirety of climate science is a "trend". I guess we can just take the whole of astronomy as a trend that the Earth is round too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not much different than global warming believers that point to just trends that support their position.
Anthropogenic global warming is a scientific theory with a preponderance of evidence. Like all scientific theories it is open to being revised if/when contrary data emerges. At the moment, the vast majority of data supports it as a theory.
I am simply pointing out that both sides of the argument can cherry pick, and often do. Much like any other debate, especially on the internet.
Dumb question: if all the ice melts, especially in Arctics shouldn't the see level fall down as volume of water is smaller than volume of ice? And with increased temperature there is also increased vaporization and world's average humidity - another reason for sea levels to fall down.
Dumb question: if all the ice melts, especially in Arctics shouldn't the see level fall down as volume of water is smaller than volume of ice? And with increased temperature there is also increased vaporization and world's average humidity - another reason for sea levels to fall down.
https://youtu.be/lPgZfhnCAdI?t=459
While looking for the clip I found this gem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjuGCJJUGsg
Could this be related to a shifting in the tilt/orientation of the planet? Or perhaps in an upcoming polarity flip?
Ahhh, the earth's tilt/orientation changes very slowly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_tilt Earth's obliquity oscillates between 22.1 and 24.5 degrees on a 41,000-year cycle. It is currently 23.44 degrees and decreasing. Magnetic pole changes take 1,000 to 10,000 years to happen. So again, unlikely. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geomagnetic_reversal And also, what do magnets have to do with ice melting? I'd reco…
Hooray, the polar bears are saved!
Well, not really. Polar bears live in the Northern Hemisphere. (Here's a riddle: why won't a polar bear eat a penguin even if the bear is starving? Answer: they live in different hemispheres.)
Dumb question: if all the ice melts, especially in Arctics shouldn't the see level fall down as volume of water is smaller than volume of ice? And with increased temperature there is also increased vaporization and world's average humidity - another reason for sea levels to fall down.
Also, the average humidity is quite stable on earth, and any excess water that evaporates into the atmosphere quickly rains out again. Furthermore, the amount of water in the atmosphere is very small in comparison to the amount of water in the oceans. (See e.g. here: http://water.usgs.gov/edu/watercycleatmosphere.html). So it is very difficult to imagine that an increased humidity would have a significant effect on the sea level.
The important takeaway from this is that we don't have to worry as much about melting in Antartica. Melting everywhere else in the world, however, is proceeding at a fast pace and is more immediately concerning. Unfortunately, I imagine this report is going to get jumped on by global warming deniers as solid evidence that climate change is not real and there's nothing to worry about.
The word 'denial' does not permit of much nuance, does it? Smacks of faith and a religion, really. I wonder if & why you disagree with Judith Curry. "The definition of ‘dangerous’ climate change is ambiguous, and hypothesized catastrophic tipping points are regarded as very or extremely unlikely in the 21st century. Efforts to link dangerous impacts of extreme weather events to human-caused warming are misleading and…
Climate change policy is on the other hand wickedly difficult (despite climate change itself being well-established), because there are so many practical uncertainties and so many different stakeholders, in which you could reasonably include unborn people and/or nonhuman ecosystems, which have a hard time lobbying for themselves. However, much like poverty (which is a hard policy problem, for much the same reasons), just acting like it doesn't exist, or denying the scientific evidence, is sure not to help.
Dumb question: if all the ice melts, especially in Arctics shouldn't the see level fall down as volume of water is smaller than volume of ice? And with increased temperature there is also increased vaporization and world's average humidity - another reason for sea levels to fall down.
Look at this graph. By having the ice melt you'll have more salty water. Even if it is all fresh, the density maximum is close to 5 degrees Celsius. Ocean water is warmer in most of the oceans.
Water vapor is a greenhouse gas - more water vapor will mean even higher temperatures, which would lead to more melting.
