Posted on 04/12/2015 8:19:09 AM PDT by Signalman
Associate Professor in Organic Chemistry Maurie Trewhella, of Victoria University (Australia), has just made a stunning claim about global warming, in a letter to the editor.
According to Trewhella;
Ian Dunlop’s warning (Comment, 7/4) is especially sobering. The slowing of atmospheric temperature rise over the past 15 years or so, used by climate change sceptics to debunk the work of the IPCC, is, on the contrary, evidence that the solar energy delivered to the Earth is being absorbed by the oceans. The Arctic and Antarctic ice sheets are acting as giant dampers to contain temperature rise in the oceans. When both of these ice sheets melt away in the next decade or so, the rise in both ocean and atmospheric temperatures will accelerate rapidly and demonstrate that the passing of the tipping points that Dunlop expresses concern about has, indeed, occurred. …
I’m not certain which article by Ian Dunlop Professor Trewhella was responding to, but this article, full of alarmist claims about tipping points and the “dangers” of economic growth, seems fairly typical of Dunlop’s writing.
Professor Trewhella is a person of substance within Australian academia. The press release Ephedrine’s green dream details advanced work being performed by Associate Professor Trewhella and colleagues on yeast, to economically produce important medicines (interestingly their innovation, in this case, involved large quantities of CO2).
To obtain a Chemistry qualification in Australia, you have to study Thermodynamics at an advanced level. Part of being a qualified Chemist in Australia, is knowing how much heat it takes to melt a block of ice.
Does Professor Trewhella really believe that the Antarctic and Arctic ice sheets will “melt away in the next decade”? I hope not. But whatever led to this letter being published, it seems careless to say the least, for the reputation of a man of science, to be associated with such a ridiculous claim.
These are the same clowns that couldn’t predict a 50 degree kickoff temperature ten days prior to the New York City Super Bowl on Feb. 2 2014. And they know what the temperatures will be for the next ten years? Gimme a break! This just broke the needle on my bullsh*t meter.
Again?
Close enough to scare the sheep, far enough to forget when it doesn’t happen.
Guess it’s time to stock up on winter clothing.
“The slowing of atmospheric temperature rise over the past 15 years or so, used by climate change skeptics to debunk the work of the IPCC, is, on the contrary, evidence that the solar energy delivered to the Earth is being absorbed by the oceans”
That is just TOO funny: atmosphere NOT heating up, ergo, the “missing” heat MUST be going into the ocean!
The problem with that ridiculous statement is that the evidence is all to the contrary:
This has been gong on for 40 years. I think last year Antartica had more ice.
All right! I’ve always wanted a home with all sides pointing south!
So it's been that huge nuclear power plant in the sky all along?
Yeah well they better get Lake Superior to melt by May Day first. Do these people ever just look outside?
Thank you.
One of these days -- unless the planet is knocked by an asteroid first -- people (if they're still around) will be able to walk across the English Channel, and Florida will be twice as big as it is now. AGAIN. As sure as sunrise.
God controls the weather. We're just along for the ride.
So! where is it written: there shall be ice in the Arctic...I have been to the Arctic, and fossils indicate a warmer tropical climate....
If this is going to happen on the time scale
they represent, then it should be observable
in the next year or two.
I’ll wait til then.
Good point.
Most littering has no e ological impact. It just looks bad.
Wasn’t this ‘prediction’ already made and didn’t it not come to pass? Deja vu all over again...
Trends are actually in the other direction. Southern hemisphere ice and high latitude temperature trends would suggest expansion of sea ice and no significant melting of land ice in the Antarctic. Any reduction in northern polar ice was more apparent in the decade 1998 to 2007 than in the past eight years. If anything, there has been an overall cooling trend in the arctic since the rather extensive melting event of 2007. The frequency of severe winters has increased in recent years too. Many signs point to the real story being confusion between the natural variability always at work, and the postulated AGW signal which at worst must be much smaller than theorized by many in the period from 1980 to 2010. This is gradually being realized by more people in the atmospheric sciences and you would have to say that the general public had the same basic idea only faster and without as much formal study.
In other words, the AGW hysteria has led to a scientific dead end that will almost certainly be abandoned soon. Now this is not to say that another ice age is imminent. The climate is not cooling significantly, it has reached a sort of steady state or flat line position since about 2007-08. If solar activity picks up or there is a strong El Nino event we could see another interval of warming. But at the rate that technology is already changing, I don’t think there is much to be done other than to accommodate ourselves to the relatively minor changes that all this might bring.
The Antarctic ice will not melt in this century or probably in this millennium. If all the arctic ice disappeared, we could probably offset that with massive desalination projects that would reduce sea levels and provide abundant water. That is the direction we should be going anyway. It is rather ridiculous to see California obsessing about drought when the natural variation in climate pretty much guaranteed that years like these would occur, and then look back to see that almost nothing was ever done to advance desalination projects in the past. What are we waiting for?
There is nothing man can do to stop whatever climate changes are in process from happening. And, yes, there has been massive loss of glacial ice since the 1880s.
There is a very interesting presentation of “before and after” pictures on weather.com, documenting the tremendous recession of glaciers in Alaska since the late 1800s. Yes, the glaciers have receded dramatically at this point.
But, what I didn’t know until I reviewed these pictures is that, by 1927, there was already huge recession of those glaciers. IMO, there is no way that the amount of global industrialization that had occurred by 1927 could have precipitated such a relatively rapid loss of glacial ice. Methinks it might have something to do with the big light in the sky, but what do I know.
And another thing that I was not aware of is how uninhabitable those areas of Alaska were in the late 1800s. There is no vegetation whatsoever, glacial ice and snow everywhere. Even in the captions of the old photos, the Weather Channel repeatedly points out that there is no vegetation visible in the pictures, as if that is somehow a great thing. Conversely, in the images captured this century, vegetation abounds — trees and grasses everywhere, making for a beautiful landscape.
I’m still not clear on exactly how and why the alarmists can claim that this century long period of relative warming is so catastrophic for mankind. It would seem to me that the amount of arable land should be increasing, which would seem to be a boon for crop production and the ability to feed world populations. As to current droughts, haven’t there always been droughts, way before industrialization?
Agreed. But littering is a BIG problem. Everywhere you go, whether hiking Mt. Hood or the Pacific Crest, or walking down a sidewalk in town, people litter. Personally littering is a bigger problem than anthropological global warming. And it is worst in the illegal alien infested areas of the US and in pretty much every Spanish-speaking 3rd world state or country.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.