Posted on 09/07/2009 8:24:00 PM PDT by neverdem
The extent of the sea-ice is now half a million square kilometres more than it was this time last year, says Christopher Booker.
BBC viewers were treated last week to the bizarre spectacle of Mr Ban Ki-moon standing on an Arctic ice-floe making a series of statements so laughable that it was hard to believe such a man can be Secretary-General of the UN. Thanks to global warming, he claimed, "100 billion tons" of polar ice are melting each year, so that within 30 years the Arctic could be "ice-free". This was supported by a WWF claim that the ice is melting so fast that, by 2100, sea-levels could rise by 1.2 metres (four feet), which would lead to "floods affecting a quarter of the world".
Everything about this oft-repeated item was propaganda of the silliest kind. Standing 700 miles from the Pole, as near as the stubbornly present ice would allow his ship to go, Mr Ban seemed unaware that, although some 10 million square kilometres (3.8 million square miles) of sea-ice melts each summer, each September the Arctic starts to freeze again. And the extent of the ice now is 500,000 sq km (190,000 sq m) greater than it was this time last year – which was, in turn, 500,000 sq km more than in September 2007, the lowest point recently recorded (see the Cryosphere Today website). By April, after months of darkness, it will be back up to 14 million sq km (5.4 million sq m) or more.
Mr Ban seems equally unaware that, even if all that sea-ice were to melt, this would no more raise sea-levels than a cube of ice melting in a gin and tonic increases the volume of liquid in the glass. If he is relying for his "100 billion tons" on...
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
About 3600 sq. mi.
The scientists refer to that as the aerosol effect; they haven’t decided whether is a negative or positive effect overall but it is not part of the models being used.
The Arctic ice average less than one meter; Greenland’s ice cap around 3,000m; and Antarctica’s closer to 4500m.
That’s a bunch of Slurpees.
Save the Whales
Collect the whole set
I found some statistical data on the Greenland ice somewhere and was able to estimate the volume of a rectangular prism from it, then calculate the effect if it was spread out over 70% of the Earth’s surface. I was very surprised that the climate change idiots had the right numbers. I expected a lie from them. But a lie filled with partial truths is still a lie.
My point was the idea of that ice melting rapidly; if it has taken 30 years to have melted one meter of polar ice, then how many lifetimes will we have to endure to see them gone?
>>The actual area able to be covered with 787 Billion one-dollar bills is about 2/3 the size of Connecticut. (8136 sq.km)
I’ll take all the bills outside Fairfield County. :D
According to NASA, almost 50 percent of all warming in the arctic is due to clean air regulations :-P
NASA GISS suggests aerosols play a large role in Arctic warming
NASA GISS suggests aerosols play a large role in Arctic warming
About the same as the World Wildlife Fund knows.
That’s a good point. 30 years = 1 meter. This is in a liquid environment that has more convection than ice packed in a glacier on land. The water in the Arctic Ocean is warmer than the ice layer, and therefore capable of transferring heat to the ice, and of carrying heat from the oceans in lower lattitudes. The glacial ice under Greenland and Antarctica can’t do that. It’s actually colder than the surface ice due to the lack of solar heating.
I have no idea how to formulate the equations, but it’s worth considering.
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.