Arctic sea ice drops to 2nd lowest level on record
August 27, 2008 By DAN JOLING , Associated Press Writer(AP) -- Arctic Ocean sea ice has melted to the second lowest minimum since satellite observations began, according to scientists at the National Snow and Ice Data Center. Sea ice melt recorded on Monday exceeded the low recorded in 2005, which had held second place.
Content from The Associated Press expires 15 days after original publication date. For more information about The Associated Press, please visit www.ap.org .
Similar stories from PHYSorg:
Arctic sea ice settles at second-lowest, underscores accelerating decline
Sep 16, 2008 |
3.7 / 5 (26) |
23
Arctic sea ice reaches minimum extent for 2009, third lowest ever recorded
Sep 17, 2009 |
2.8 / 5 (8) |
1
Arctic ice pack at third lowest extent since 1979: US
Sep 18, 2009 |
2.4 / 5 (5) |
9
NASA data show Arctic saw fastest August sea ice retreat on record
Sep 28, 2008 |
2.8 / 5 (14) |
4
Arctic sea ice minimum shatters all-time record low, report University of Colorado scientists
Sep 20, 2007 |
4.8 / 5 (12) |
0
1.jpg)
This is a pathetic over-simplification of the processes at work. But it's squarely aligned with the money-talk that gets published as science. What a shameless masquerade.
http://arctic.atm...anom.jpg
Which scientific facts are a masquerade, can you be specific? It is not possible for readers to rely on comments without prove. United Nations has, unlike you so far, given some proves already.
It's an intresting device called sarcasm...
Here...DKA meet sarcasm, sarcasm meet DKA...
Sheesh.
Sorry for the sarcasm folks.
Ok, it's getting warmer. After it got colder:
Yeah, and he invented the internet, and walks on water every other sunday, and... Oh, and he almost flunked both the college science classes he took.
it did or not is not relevent. Co2 makes climate warmer. There are still local conditions that influence climat, that will never change. Co2 is one of them, and it is an increasingly deadly one.
The UN IPCC has not provided any proofs. They also didn't do a meta-analysis of other peoples' data. What they did do is a literature review. One of the problems with their review is that they included papers written by people working for the IPCC (something like circular reasoning.) They also averaged the outputs of 5 climate models,none of which have been proofed or agree with each other with any degree of precision.
The comments during the review process have been placed online:
http://www.climat...df/ipcc/
http://hcl.harvar...ns/ipcc/
http://pds.lib.ha.../7794905
And there is an analysis of them at
http://scienceand...bias.pdf
DNC.
I looked at the last link. It is a window af years that include an las ninas year as the last year. Directly said, it is manipulative and have been done this way to intentionaly misslead readers into thinking that the earth is not warming. Very sad that some people do some acts of hate against other human, I guess this will never stop, there will always be extreme in hatred, no morale whatsoever.
How does CO2 make the climate warmer? The IR theory has been extinguished due to the fact all the IR due to radiative forcing is absorbed within 10 meters. If you up the amount of CO2 you just shorten the distance in which all IR is captured.
If you reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere you'll kill a lot of plant life and a lot of marine life.
The seas are highly alkaline, CO2 reduces the pH of the ocean water making it livable for flora and fauna. They make their shells oout of it, their homes, they use it for food, we use it as limestone to built beautiful things.
AGW is a farce. If you disagree, prove it and I'll show you where you're wrong.
After all, I have 37000 scientists on my side. You have about 400.
You mean like the IPCC/Mann/Hansen charts that only start at the end of a cooling period? Oh, I know they aren't comparable...