http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2738653/Stunning-satellite-images-summer-ice-cap-thicker-covers-1-7million-square-kilometres-MORE-2-years-ago-despite-Al-Gore-s-prediction-ICE-FREE-now.html
Posted on 11/30/2014 4:56:35 PM PST by gusopol3
Antarctica's ice paradox has yet another puzzling layer. Not only is the amount of sea ice increasing each year, but an underwater robot now shows the ice is also much thicker than was previously thought, a new study reports.
The discovery adds to the ongoing mystery of Antarctica's expanding sea ice. According to climate models, the region's sea ice should be shrinking each year because of global warming. Instead, satellite observations show the ice is expanding, and the continent's sea ice has set new records for the past three winters. At the same time, Antarctica's ice sheet (the glacial ice on land) is melting and retreating
(Excerpt) Read more at livescience.com ...
I was going to cross link to a thread I’m sure I saw this morning, but now I can’t seem to find it. So I’ll bump your thread anyway.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2738653/Stunning-satellite-images-summer-ice-cap-thicker-covers-1-7million-square-kilometres-MORE-2-years-ago-despite-Al-Gore-s-prediction-ICE-FREE-now.html
|
Global Warming is the “Hands up don’t shoot” meme of the enviro-wackos.
Psssttt...
Hey, eggheads - "global warming" is a hoax.
“global warming” is a hoax.”
No! They’re saying that 2014 will be the warmest year on record!
My head hurts!
I suspected this would happen when the warming fanatics claimed the increasing ice was thin, and not an indication of cooling. It seemed likely that the ice would thicken with continued cooling. My rational is that the one constant in climate science is that the warming fanatics are always wrong, because they work from a flawed theory. Their misplaced faith in anthropomorphic global warming is their undoing.
the thread may have been about the photos from the ‘60’s showing how volatile the amount of ice was then; from record low to record high in two years; nobody was trying to make a living off it then, so they put the photos in a drawer for 50 years.http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3232017/posts
Good thing for the funding stream of the “scientists” that the environmental model, that’s been wrong for 18 years, is funded by the government to keep it alive.
If any private business engaged in a business model of total failure for 18 years, everyone would be gone, the business would be gone.
Danged global climate change warming. Grows that ice faster than the liberals can melt it.
While waiting for rescue, they were playing with penguins and line-dancing in the ice.
Al-Gore is the biggest charlatan ever, economically speaking.
“According to climate models, the region’s sea ice should be shrinking each year because of global warming.”
It is not. The article says it isn’t.
The clear result, to people who are not of blind faith:
The models are wrong...
Unexpected, it was. Unexpected.
Not much of a mystery. The models are crap.
I am old enough to remember back when there was something called the scientific method. You would come up with a hypothesis and a test to disprove your hypothesis. If your hypothesis was disproven then you would move on.
Now science is determined based on a poll of other people who are also collecting grants to study the same thing.
So in essence, the claims of ‘thinner’ ice were pure speculation on the GW alarmist scientists as they were not based on any ‘actual’ measurement.
If the "models" were any good, they could set them to the conditions of 1914, run a 100-year prediction (as they're doing starting from 2014) and have the prediction match the actual observed record for the last century.
If they could, they would have done it and proclaimed their results far and wide.
They haven't done it, because they can't.
Their models are therefore "unvalidated" and useless for predictive purposes.
“Their models are therefore “unvalidated” and useless for predictive purposes.”
Exactly right. To use a model for prediction, it has to be validated. In any complex system, such as the weather, a small unknown feedback loop or variable makes a hash of prediction.
The models start with pre-determined ideas of what the modelers think should happen. Then they adujust the variables so the models show results that they think are “reasonable”. This does not work for predicting things. It works for justifying things with people who do not understand the process.
Most modelers do not see a problem, because they believe that all the solutions, with more government power and regulation, are benign, so there is no harm from bad predictions.
The major problem is to get them to see that their “solutions” have the potential for enormous harm, and that is very difficult to do, because belief in the beneficence of government is one of their core assumptions about reality.
Right.I’m thinking of the painstaking work scientists did all over the world when they measured the transit of Venus in 1761. Undoubtedly they worked off a model and were able to calculate the distance from earth to the sun within 3 m miles. They’d be appalled I’m sure at the slapdash of so many today.
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.
