This article from EOS science magazine claims that, since 1979, the Antarctic has actually been gaining ice:Study Finds Zero Loss of Antarctica Sea Ice – But BBC Spins as “New Record Low”
The BBC recently copied a headline from the U.S.-based National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) claiming Antarctica sea ice had hit a “new record low”.
Inexplicably missing from the story was the later observation from the NSIDC that since accurate satellite records began in 1979, the trend in the minimum ice extent is “near zero”. Any loss was said to be “not statistically significant”.
According to a recent paper (Singh and Polvani), the Antarctica sea ice has “modestly expanded”, and warming has been “nearly non-existent” over much of the ice sheet. According to NASA figures, the ice loss is 0.0005% per year.
In 2021 [the South Pole] recorded its coldest six-month winter since records began, and last year the temperature was 0.4°C colder than the average over the last 30 years. In addition, the Pole recorded no less than seven new daily temperature lows.
https://dailysceptic.org/2023/02/21...tica-sea-ice-but-bbc-spins-as-new-record-low/
maximus otter
It's that "since records began" thing again.than at any time since we began using satellites to measure it in the late 1970s.
“decadal changes of the Outgoing Longwave Radiation (OLR) as measured by the Clouds and Earth’s Radiant Energy System from 2000 to 2018, the Earth Radiation Budget Experiment from 1985 to 1998, and the High-resolution Infrared Radiation Sounder from 1985 to 2018 are analyzed. The OLR has been rising since 1985, and correlates well with the rising global temperature.“
Follow the money....If you are being payed to do research and want to carry on being payed you
better make dam sure you get the answer they want.
Who was that 'top climate scientist'?Greta Thunberg deletes 2018 tweet saying world will end in 2023 after world does not end
"A top climate scientist is warning that climate change will wipe out all humanity unless we stop using fossil fuels over the next five years." Thunberg's post read from 2018.
https://thepostmillennial.com/greta...rld-will-end-in-2023-after-world-does-not-end
View attachment 64237
That quote from Greta doesnt say what those other two think it does. It's basically saying that climate change will reach an irreversible tipping point within 5 years, not that after 5 years we have some The Day After Tomorrow style insta-death on the countdown clock.Greta Thunberg deletes 2018 tweet saying world will end in 2023 after world does not end
"A top climate scientist is warning that climate change will wipe out all humanity unless we stop using fossil fuels over the next five years." Thunberg's post read from 2018.
https://thepostmillennial.com/greta...rld-will-end-in-2023-after-world-does-not-end
View attachment 64237
They are indeed named. Second sentence of the page Greta linked actually, the scientist is James Anderson.Indeed. Funny how this 'top climate scientist' isn't named.
as Zach Elwood posted in the article you linked, "you can disagree with her and see that's not what she's saying".That report also warns that permanent arctic sea ice would be gone by now.
It isn't.
I seriously doubt that, but I guess I'll find out."A top climate scientist is warning that climate change will wipe out all of humanity unless we stop using fossil fuels over the next five years.
That report also warns that permanent arctic sea ice would be gone by now.
It isn't.
Both graphs are from the same source but he doesn’t say who he’s talking about when he says ‘as presented by the media’ Which media? Where?
He does not have a university qualification and has no climate credentials other than being a radio weather announcer.
Both graphs are from the same source but he doesn’t say who he’s talking about when he says ‘as presented by the media’ Which media? Where?
I’ll just add that wattsupwiththat is a blog run by a radio weathercaster & non-scientist.
He also appers to be on the payroll of the Heartland Institute.
The most often cited global temperature anomaly graph is from the NASA Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS), showing yearly average temperatures since 1880, as seen in Figure 1 below.
I should look at these things more closely - I’ve only just noticed the temperature scale is different on these graphs. They both show the same thing but a 2 degree increase is very small on a scale of 0 - 120. He’s not arguing about the data, just presenting it differently in order to diminish it.
I'd go beyond doubting it to describing it as total bollocks. I don't personally believe in anthropogenic climate change, but even if such a thing existed there is no possible way it would happen that fast.I seriously doubt that, but I guess I'll find out.
Put simply, surfing is made possible by the interplay of water and wind. Waves form as energy from gusts passes through water and underwater obstacles (shallower ocean floor, coral reefs, even a man-made jetty) trip them up, allowing the top of a wave to crest as the water below the surface slows down. Whether it’s surfable, however, depends on everything from the break’s geography to how high the tide is on any given day.
Models of future wave conditions indicate sea level rise could change the shape of waves that generations of surfers have relied on. A2017 analysis of 105 California surf spots found that 34% are at risk of “drowning” by 2100, meaning the wave will break too close to shore or not at all. Just 5% of the state’s surf spots are expected to improve, the study found.
Erosion, which will alter the shape of coastlines, is partly to blame. But surfing’s precarity also results from the larger volume of water inherent to sea level rise. Many breaks perform best at low or medium tide; but in most places, sea level rise will push high tide higher while rendering low tide unrecognizable.
Accordingly, head of the Surfrider Foundation’s coast and climate initiative Stefanie Sekich said, “millions of people … will have their surf breaks drowned before their eyes.” Sekich herself has already seen a treasured and unnamed pocket break near San Diego swallowed up by erosion.