Arctic Updates

[wintler2]

Dear winkler2, there is no urgency so please try to settle down.

Patronising timewaster.

Now if you are patient, all questions you have will be attended to but it requires a degree of coherency if this exchange is to yield results.

Patronising wanker - where was i incoherent? You answer no questions, you only recycle propolluter propaganda and play bullying mindgames.

Let's keep things simple to begin with, every thing you want addressed will be addressed if you are able to maintain a stable and methodical exchange!

Patronising wanker AND a liar! You 'address' nothing, you only seek to control discussion, if only you weren't so clumsy about it.


So what is your explanation for higher sea temps and melting ice?

[Ben D]

Wonder how many of these methane plume emissions being discovered have been continuous for 15,000 years?

But at what **water temperature dependant** rate, you fool.

Professor Westbrook said..

"It is likely that methane emissions off Svalbard have been continuous for about 15,000 years – since the last ice age –"

Professor Westbrook also said,

"but as yet no one knows whether recent climactic shifts in the Arctic have begun to accelerate them to a point where they could in themselves exacerbate climate change"

Once again winkler2, please steady down, consider me a mere poster, a messenger if you like.

It is Professor Westbrook you need to contact concerning the question of *water temperature dependency* and it is to be hoped that he will be able to respond in a suitably appropriate scientific manner to address your question.

If you need any assistance in this matter, the please PM me and one will do one's best to get you a hearing.

[wintler2]

Professor Westbrook said..
It is Professor Westbrook you need to contact concerning the question of *water temperature dependency* and it is to be hoped that he will be able to respond in a suitably appropriate scientific manner to address your question.

No, it is you i am contacting, because you endlessly spout RightThink talking points. Do you get them by email, or go search them out yourself? Cos you are rarely more than a few days behind.

If you need any assistance in this matter, the please PM me and one will do one's best to get you a hearing.

Westbrook obviously doesn't know, he says so, so as usual you would be wasting everybodies time. There must be a niche for your talent somewhere (else).


So what is your explanation for higher sea temps and melting ice?

[Ben D]

So what is your explanation for higher sea temps and melting ice?

All I know is that sea temperature go up and sea temperature go down, water freezes and ice melts, there is no end to climatic changes.

And the mystic in me says it is all due to cosmic. solar, planetary, and intra-planetary' energy' exchange. .

[Ben D]

No, it is you i am contacting, because you endlessly spout RightThink talking points. Do you get them by email, or go search them out yourself? Cos you are rarely more than a few days behind.

Now how's that for cosmic synchronicity, Nordic just today used the term 'cognitive dissonance' and I had to look it up to see what it meant.

Now you my dear winkler2, have manifested the concept in virtual reality,...for your future unfoldment, please reconsider what you said above above in the context of what your signature is conveying.

**disclaimer - if your worldview presumes allpowerful elites with a unified plan fabricating all the bad news you don't want to hear, then no evidence or discussion is required**

[wintler2]

So what is your explanation for higher sea temps and melting ice?

All I know is that sea temperature go up and sea temperature go down,

Where is your data for arctic sea temp trending up?

water freezes and ice melts,

its melting more than freezing, thats the point, hadn't you heard?

there is no end to climatic changes.

but the changes don't average to zero, hence 'warming'.
If as it seems this is news to you, then all i've heard about Qld is true.

And the mystic in me says it is all due to cosmic. solar, planetary, and intra-planetary' energy' exchange.

Did you cobble that together yourself or get it whole from Nexus magazine?
You can teach a man to type but you can't make him think.

[wintler2]

Fears mount as Arctic melt prompts historic methane rise

* Adam Morton
* November 3, 2008

ATMOSPHERIC concentrations of methane, "a greenhouse gas more than 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide", have risen for the first time in eight years, prompting concern about the pace of climate change.

A global study in Geophysical Research Letters found the first increase in methane levels this century — by about 28 million tonnes since mid-2006 — was in part due to release of gas in and near the Arctic.

CSIRO senior climate scientist Paul Fraser said the data was in line with predictions that rapid melting of Arctic ice would create natural wetlands, one of the most common methane emitters. "This is not good news for global warming," he said. ..
http://www.theage.com.au/national/fears ... -5gat.html

[Penguin]

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/11 ... ioners.php
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2 ... matechange
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terpene

Via Treehugger:

"If you're reading this, I probably don't need to waste my time trying to convince you that trees are great. They absorb carbon dioxide, they can be used to power small remote sensors and they're pretty darn nice to look at too. Now a new study by a team of scientists from Germany and the UK has discovered another beneficial property: they can block out the sun (and not just by providing shade), as The Guardian's David Adam reports.

Terpenes make forests nature's "climate air conditioners"
Boreal trees in countries like Canada, Scandinavia and Russia release chemicals known as terpenes that help thicken the clouds above them, producing an albedo effect that causes more sunlight to be reflected back into space. Terpenes, which are the major components of the essential oils found in many types of plants, have often been used as flavor additives for food, as fragrances for perfumes and in alternative medicine for aroma therapy. Some scientists think the trees may release them to protect themselves from air pollution or even to communicate (!).

Cutting down trees could be a double whammy for the climate
Dominick Spracklen, one of the study's leaders and the author of a forthcoming article in the Royal Society journal Philosophical Transactions A, believes this function makes trees the planet's "air conditioners." As a result, he says that cutting down trees could worsen climate change to a larger degree than was previously thought, and that protecting them, and planting new ones, should be one of our primary climate mitigation measures.

Adam explains the underlying sciences:

The team found the terpenes react in the air to form tiny particles called aerosols. The particles help turn water vapour in the atmosphere into clouds.

Spracklen said the team's computer models showed that the pine particles doubled the thickness of clouds some 1,000m above the forests, and would reflect an extra 5% sunlight back into space.

Discovery means trees could act as negative feedback on the climate
This may not sound like much but, as Spracklen puts it, every little bit helps. Since trees release more terpenes under warmer conditions, Spracklen and his colleagues think forests could act as a negative feedback on climate, weakening the impact of rising temperatures. While mainly found in forests of pine and spruce trees, they said that most other trees produced the chemicals as well (though maybe not as much) so the cooling effect should also be seen elsewhere. "

[rrapt]

Terpenes. One can feel this effect any time simply by walking through a forest or sitting next to a fir tree. Those of us who like to spend time in the woods understand the cooling and the nice odors too. It is interesting to know about the cloud forming part.

[Ben D]

Peace...

BBC SHUNNED ME FOR DENYING CLIMATE CHANGE

SHUNNED: Naturalist David Bellamy

Wednesday November 5,2008

FOR YEARS David Bellamy was one of the best known faces on TV.
A respected botanist and the author of 35 books, he had presented around 400 programmes over the years and was appreciated by audiences for his boundless enthusiasm.

Yet for more than 10 years he has been out of the limelight, shunned by bosses at the BBC where he made his name, as well as fellow scientists and environmentalists.

His crime? Bellamy says he doesn’t believe in man-made global warming.

Here he reveals why – and the price he has paid for not toeing the orthodox line on climate change.

CLANGER: Bellamy says Al Gore has 'no proof' that millions will die due to global warming
"When I first stuck my head above the parapet to say I didn’t believe what we were being told about global warming I had no idea what the consequences would be.

I am a scientist and I have to follow the directions of science but when I see that the truth is being covered up I have to voice my opinions.

According to official data, in every year since 1998 world temperatures have been getting colder, and in 2002 Arctic ice actually increased. Why, then, do we not hear about that?



Link

[Penguin]

According to official data, in every year since 1998 world temperatures have been getting colder, and in 2002 Arctic ice actually increased. Why, then, do we not hear about that?



Link

Because that quote is totally wrong. Its not been getting colder, and the ice has been diminishing all the time. Maybe mr. Bellamy would like to show us some DATA TO BACK THAT CLAIM UP. No?

Ok, this claim has been rejected with data in this very thread several times.
I know Al Gore prolly doesnt have a nice agenda behind his rich buddies warming project, but that doesnt mean that man changing the atmosphere and climate isnt true. The assholes will use this very real catastrophy for their own ends, but its still a very real catastrophe.

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Natura ... ldid=14479
"Northwest Passage open, 2007 -
In 1497, English King Henry VII sent Italian explorer John Cabot to look for this hypothetical route and expeditions from some of the most famous explorers in the centuries that followed—Sir Francis Drake and Captain James Cook among them—met with failure. The combined efforts of a number of explorers eventually uncovered a winding path from the Atlantic to the Arctic and Pacific Oceans through the ice-bound islands of northern Canada. Even in modern times, navigating from the Atlantic to the Pacific through Canada’s Arctic islands has been difficult. The summer of 2007, however, melted enough sea ice in Canada’s far north to open up this long-sought passage."

Peace.

[wintler2]

An undiscussed copynpaste from propolluter coporate media, it must be Ben D again. That reminds me..

All I know is that sea temperature go up and sea temperature go down

Where is your data for arctic sea temp trending up?

[Ben D]

An undiscussed copynpaste from propolluter coporate media, it must be Ben D again. That reminds me..

All I know is that sea temperature go up and sea temperature go down

Where is your data for arctic sea temp trending up?

Well I'll be blowed, it's me ol mate Winkler,..Hi Winkler!

Actually the data doesn't yet exist that satisfies me that the arctic sea temperature movement is on a one way up or down trend.
It sometimes is going up and sometimes going down according to solar and planetary climatic conditions.

What will satisfy me is when there is a non-GW biased scientific consensus in place with an approved methodology of collecting the appropriate and relevant data and the subsequent processing and analysis of such on an annual basis until the trend either up or down for the long term is unambiguously determined. It is pointless to speculate on how long this research would need to be carried out before the long term trend becomes evident as it depends on the reality of the global climate change itself, and this is yet to be known.

The most important first step is to find a funding source whose sponsors have no financial, political, philosophical, or scientific conflict of interest in the result, and unfortunately this would seem pretty unrealistic in the short term.

Peace.

[wintler2]

.. Actually the data doesn't yet exist that satisfies me that the arctic sea temperature movement is on a one way up or down trend.
It sometimes is going up and sometimes going down according to solar and planetary climatic conditions.

I like a good bullshitter, but you are hopeless. You share with us your disatisfaction, but no evidence, your mystical visions, but no coherent argument. Your often offtopic ..contributions.. have no substance at all, this is not some imperceptible and little-studied thing

What will satisfy me is when there is a non-GW biased scientific consensus in place with an approved methodology of collecting the appropriate and relevant data and the subsequent processing and analysis of such on an annual basis until the trend either up or down for the long term is unambiguously determined. It is pointless to speculate on how long this research would need to be carried out before the long term trend becomes evident as it depends on the reality of the global climate change itself, and this is yet to be known.

So you want delay, delay, delay, just what ExxonMobil have been buying for decades. Even tho you make no substantive argument against the existing huge body of evidence supporting anthropogenic global warming. You have yet to find a flaw in e.g. IPCCs reports, yet you insist you know better than them - you are a fantastically egotistical timewaster.

The most important first step is to find a funding source whose sponsors have no financial, political, philosophical, or scientific conflict of interest in the result, and unfortunately this would seem pretty unrealistic in the short term.

Of course it is impossible, which is why it is the fallback argument of the more sophisticated AGW deniers. "We need to study the problem more" they say, as they pump billions of tonnes more carbon into the atmosphere. Polluters by their deceit have written themselves out of the social contract and deserve merciless regulation and litigation.

[Penguin]

"Rise of methane in atmosphere measured in Western Lapland, Northern Finland, At Sammaltunturi observation station (Sammaltunturi = "Moss Fell")
Researcher Tuula Aalto from Finnish Meteorological Institute says that what is noteworthy in these measurements is that air methane levels have stayed stable in the area for a long period, and have now started to rise and seem to be continuing to do so.

"If the reason is that warming of the atmosphere in (the arctic) has caused this, it is very worrying. Our possibilities of influencing that are very limited."

Some researchers believe that the reason for methane level rise is methane clathrates (porous ice that holds methane inside) in the sea floor, that have now started to evacuate as gas. This, once begun, is an irreversible process.

The reason for the results here, could however, be also something else, like a Russian gas pipe leaks, industrialization in Asia, rice growing, or biomass burning. In the light of recent discoveries of methane vents bubbling gaseous methane to the sea surface, however, this is worrying."

Translation from finnish by me, published today in an environmental newsletter.