Arctic Sea Ice Shrinkage Grows

Permanent "Sea Ice" Shown To Have Shrunk By Half In Latest NASA Images

(CNET)  NASA has issued a preliminary report confirming environmentalists' fears of disappearing sea ice at the Arctic.

Sea ice is the thick permanent ice formed by frozen ocean water that remains even as seasonal ice melts away in the summer. In the past, it has covered about 60 percent of the Arctic.

The sea ice at the Arctic has now been found to have melted away by as much as half, according to a preliminary report issued Tuesday by NASA and the NASA-supported National Snow and Ice Data Center at the University of Colorado.

"According to NASA-processed satellite microwave data, this perennial ice used to cover 50 to 60 percent of the Arctic, but this winter it covered less than 30 percent," NASA said in a statement.

It is the second-smallest amount of coverage since NASA began monitoring the situation in 1979. The Artic's sea ice coverage this September is about 33 percent below average, compared with the record low of 39 percent below average recorded in 2007.

At this time, neither NASA nor the National Snow and Ice Data Center have made suggestions as to the possible cause for the change. A thorough analysis of the data is scheduled to be released the first week of October, according to NASA.

[on_alert247]

We know why. Bush and the McCain Republicans CENSOR SCIENCE they do not agree with.
Posted by dburfears at 08:21 PM : Sep 18, 2008

If you are going to open your mouth and sound like a moron, you''re going to get feedback. What scientific journals have censored reports at the request of the WH on the recent arctic ice melt? Answer: NONE YOU IDIOT.

[dburfears]

"At this time, neither NASA nor the National Snow and Ice Data Center have made suggestions as to the possible cause for the change."

We know why. Bush and the McCain Republicans CENSOR SCIENCE they do not agree with.

Don''t look for the truth about what is really happening to the planet until these anti-science luddites are shown the door.

[louiville2]

"Also, nice try. The human footprint is huge. Man requires the about 3 square miles per person to live (farm land, golf courses, roads, work locations, etc.) That is alot bigger than a family of four will have over 4,000 sqft. Typical republican smoke and mirrors.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by frankie2fing "

Frank ALL those areas have plants and animals living on them, you know converting CO2 to fixed carbon (i.e. plants grow on CO2-animals eat plants grow then die and get buried, you should really read your own information. They figure that plant production is up by almost 30% over the last 200 years. (i.e. more plants more animals) Typical "red herrings" of the left. BTW I''m not a republican I just have a disdane for people who cry fire over a drop of the hat.

[louiville2]

BTW - Hey frank nice diatribe but I spreken ze Fourier transforms etc... Posted by louiville2

Huh?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by frankie2fing

Hmmmm. Fourier transforms are used in CLIMATE MODELS,kind of one of those DUH things that NYCPROF was complaining about.

[frankie2fing]

Texas 268,601 square miles x 5280 ft x 5280 ft = 7,488,166,118,400 sqft. 7,488,166,118,400 sqft/ 7,000,000,000 people = 1069 sqft/person. In other words ALL of the people in the world could easily fit into the state of Texas. So a family of four will have over 4,000 sqft to live in (about the size of the typical suburban home) and that%u2019s with out stacking in apts. Etc... Earths surface area is 196,935,000 sq miles. 268,601 /196,935,000 sq miles= 0.00145 x 100 = 0.15% of the earths surface. In other words the entire population of the planet occupies less then 0.15% of the world.
Posted by louiville2

Also, nice try. The human footprint is huge. Man requires the about 3 square miles per person to live (farm land, golf courses, roads, work locations, etc.) That is alot bigger than a family of four will have over 4,000 sqft. Typical republican smoke and mirrors.

[frankie2fing]

BTW - Hey frank nice diatribe but I spreken ze Fourier transforms etc... Posted by louiville2

Huh?

[frankie2fing]

But the AGW proponents make outlandish claims of how us, really bacteria of bacteria, on the scale of things are changing the planet. CO2 as compared with the rest of the atmosphere is only 38 molecules out of 100,000 and of that 38 man%u2019s contribution is about 1-2. CO2 is a %u201CTrace Gas%u201D, that%u2019s why after $50 billion the scientist have still not found conclusive proof of AGW and it is still an hypothesis. I really doubt that another $50 billion will solve it.
Posted by louiville2

Those numbers are inaccurate. Further, even if they were right, the way they are presented is misleading. CO2 is about 370 PPM in the atmosphere, that is UP 30% since the signing of the Declaration of Independence. As a ''trace gas'' it is suppose to be a small amount in the atmosphere, and a small increase can cause a large change in the heat trapped by it. While your 38 per 100,000 molecules is accurate, the amount contributed by man is about 11-12. And increasing each year because people like you will not even try to take basic steps towards Environmentally Friendly energy sources.

[louiville2]

I think most AGW proponents do not really understand the scale we are talking about. For example:
Texas 268,601 square miles x 5280 ft x 5280 ft = 7,488,166,118,400 sqft. 7,488,166,118,400 sqft/ 7,000,000,000 people = 1069 sqft/person. In other words ALL of the people in the world could easily fit into the state of Texas. So a family of four will have over 4,000 sqft to live in (about the size of the typical suburban home) and that%u2019s with out stacking in apts. Etc... Earths surface area is 196,935,000 sq miles. 268,601 /196,935,000 sq miles= 0.00145 x 100 = 0.15% of the earths surface. In other words the entire population of the planet occupies less then 0.15% of the world. But the AGW proponents make outlandish claims of how us, really bacteria of bacteria, on the scale of things are changing the planet. CO2 as compared with the rest of the atmosphere is only 38 molecules out of 100,000 and of that 38 man%u2019s contribution is about 1-2. CO2 is a %u201CTrace Gas%u201D, that%u2019s why after $50 billion the scientist have still not found conclusive proof of AGW and it is still an hypothesis. I really doubt that another $50 billion will solve it.

[louiville2]

Further, this smart animal is multiplying at such an alarming rate that they are displacing the space that nature would use to grow plants to try and get rid of the CO2 again. The smart animal decides that it is not a problem, closes his eyes to it and says "climate change is not happening."-Posted by frankie2fing Hey frank nice diatribe but I spreken ze Fourier transforms etc... so let''s really debate this at a higher level.

[louiville2]

This type of hubris is so typical of people who are willfully ignorant (e.g., think Germans in the 1930%u2019s).



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by NYCPROF

Funny you should bring that up!

"National Socialism is a religion. All we lack is a religious genius capable of uprooting outmoded religious practices and putting new ones in their place. We lack traditions and ritual. One day soon National Socialism will be the religion of all Germans. My Party is my church, and I believe I serve the Lord best if I do his will, and liberate my oppressed people from the fetters of slavery. That is my gospel."-Joseph Goebbels Just insert environmetalism (or green) where national socialism is and American where German is.

[frankie2fing]

louiville2 - wow, someone questions your narrow view of the world and you will find anything to contradict even common sense. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, it traps heat - FACT. Nature (environment) deals with it using plant life to convert CO2 into cellulose (wood) and other plant material - FACT. When the plants die, they become buried and the carbon is buried with it. Over time, the plant material will build up and eventually be converted to a hydrocarbon, usually deep within the Earth. Nature has already dealt with the CO2. Now along comes this really smart animal who digs up the hydrocarbons and burns them, releasing the CO2 back into the atmosphere. Further, this smart animal is multiplying at such an alarming rate that they are displacing the space that nature would use to grow plants to try and get rid of the CO2 again. The smart animal decides that it is not a problem, closes his eyes to it and says "climate change is not happening."

[xmanborg]

frankie2fing

Pretty Funny !

[nycprof]

As a scientist conducting research on climate change, I am once again embarrassed by the stupidity of the American populace as exemplified by the preceding comments.

The arrogance of the commentators below who are so willfully ignorant resulting in being reality challenged is so distressing.

We are the ONLY developed country that still has a debate about climate change. When it comes to science literacy, we have less in common with Western Europe and more in common with the Taliban and Saudi Arabia. This type of hubris is so typical of people who are willfully ignorant (e.g., think Germans in the 1930%u2019s).

[frankie2fing]

Since food will be hard to find for the Polar Bear we will just have to start feeding them REPUBLICANS and we will start with George Bush and his Family and then the Cheneys and then Connie Rice and then the Senate Republicans and House Republicans and then all the Red Neck Republicans and so on and so forth.


Posted by XmanBorg

Like they are not dying fast enough, now you want to poison them?

[xmanborg]

willo1301

WWWWWWWWaaaaaaa

We will feed you to the Polar Bears also because your a douschbag.

[louiville2]

"When Ivan Langmuir coined your quotes, he was 76 years old and, some say, senile.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by frankie2fing"

Typical self loathing individual.


"Can''t attack the message attack the messenger%u201D eh truth hurts?

AGW proponents fit this law better.
Maier''s Law

If the facts don''t conform to the theory, they must be disposed of.

Corollaries:
1) The bigger the theory, the better.

2) The experiment may be considered a success if no more than 50% of the observed measurements must be discarded to obtain a correspondence with the theory.


(for proof see http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/09/16/noaa-claims-global-summer-temperature-was-ninth-warmest-questionable/ )

[louiville2]

This article proves that the Ice cap is growing from last year. Since we were told in June that the north pole would be free of ice just shows another scare monger story bust (for those who refuse to see/remember you know the "half empty" crowd).

[xmanborg]

Now the Polar Bear will be on the endangered list and they will be very very very hungry because there is no seals to catch and eat.

Since food will be hard to find for the Polar Bear we will just have to start feeding them REPUBLICANS and we will start with George Bush and his Family and then the Cheneys and then Connie Rice and then the Senate Republicans and House Republicans and then all the Red Neck Republicans and so on and so forth.

McLame and Sarah Palin will be on the menue after the election. Fyi McLame is not very tasty because he is old and full of medications but Sarah Palin is Kibbles and Bits for the Polar Bears she is Hot and Spunky.

[usamohammed]

All guys know Freezing cold causes shrinkage

[xmanborg]

Now the Polar Bear will be on the endangered list and they will be very very very hungry because there is no seals to catch and eat.

Since food will be hard to find for the Polar Bear we will just have to start feeding them REPUBLICANS and we will start with George Bush and his Family and then the Cheneys and then Connie Rice and then the Senate Republicans and House Republicans and then all the Red Neck Republicans and so on and so forth.