Originally posted by DodgyAgent
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Antarctic Ice Sheet growing
Collapse
X
-
-
Now that we all agree that the ice is up
lets look at something that is down. like the electricity blackouts in South Australia.
unfortunatly for the green eco-loons, the sun wasnt shining and the wind wasn't blowing. A perfect example of green lunacy.
now I'm just waiting for some nut-job to come along and tell me it could all be solved with a bit more subsidy(\__/)
(>'.'<)
("")("") Born to Drink. Forced to WorkComment
-
Originally posted by EternalOptimist View PostNow that we all agree that the ice is up
lets look at something that is down. like the electricity blackouts in South Australia.
unfortunatly for the green eco-loons, the sun wasnt shining and the wind wasn't blowing. A perfect example of green lunacy.
now I'm just waiting for some nut-job to come along and tell me it could all be solved with a bit more subsidy
And the Antarctic sea ice, having achieved record highs earlier this year, is now tanking ...down on last year ....My subconscious is annoying. It's got a mind of its own.Comment
-
Originally posted by pjclarke View PostIt is interesting, the ice sheet has been accumulating slowly over millions of years, previous satellite missions indicated this process had been reversed in recent decades, giving a net loss, due to increased glacier flow, although the IPCC estimate had an uncertainty range from a 200 Gt loss to a 50 Gt gain per year. This more accurate estimate seems to show that the rate of increase has slowed but is still net positive, and may not turn negative for another 20 years.
There goes the 'scientists always suppress results that don't support the narrative' meme. And why is this NASA data considered trustworthy while their temperature results are always described as 'fiddled'?
In other news
Rare tropical cyclone: Yemen, Oman expect eight years of rain in two days as Chapala forms in Arabian Sea
And in that 40 years we now understand the millennial shift of the ice sheets??
I think notComment
-
Originally posted by original PM View PostSo the first weather satellite went up about what 40 years ago?
And in that 40 years we now understand the millennial shift of the ice sheets??
I think not
mentality(\__/)
(>'.'<)
("")("") Born to Drink. Forced to WorkComment
-
Comment
-
Originally posted by WTFH View PostEO, where does all the pollution go?
when I was a yonker, the rivers were filthy and the air was dirty.
that's been mostly sorted.
is that the type of pollution you are asking about ?(\__/)
(>'.'<)
("")("") Born to Drink. Forced to WorkComment
-
Originally posted by original PM View PostSo the first weather satellite went up about what 40 years ago?
And in that 40 years we now understand the millennial shift of the ice sheets??
I think not
The extra snowfall that began 10,000 years ago has been slowly accumulating on the ice sheet and compacting into solid ice over millennia, thickening the ice in East Antarctica and the interior of West Antarctica by an average of 0.7 inches (1.7 centimeters) per year. This small thickening, sustained over thousands of years and spread over the vast expanse of these sectors of Antarctica, corresponds to a very large gain of ice – enough to outweigh the losses from fast-flowing glaciers in other parts of the continent and reduce global sea level rise.My subconscious is annoying. It's got a mind of its own.Comment
-
Originally posted by SpontaneousOrder View PostHas anyone actually presented any science that proves, or even suggest, significant man-made global warming yet?
All i've ever seen presented is models - and models aren't scientific evidence.
Of course it is not enough to say 'the planet should warm and it is doing so: AGW QED'; there is a wealth of detection and attribution studies which look at the fingerprint - spatial and temporal distribution of the changes that a greenhouse warming would produce as opposed to natural factors, for example if an increase in solar radiation was responsible, then the stratosphere should warm faster, if the root cause is an enhanced greenhouse effect, which mainly occurs in the mid-low atmosphere, then the stratosphere should cool, which is exactly what has been observed - in line with model predictions.
Chapter 10 of the most recent IPCC report, AR5, summarises the detection and attribution work. And, yes, I have read it.
Fifth Assessment Report - Climate Change 2013
And regarding your premise see: RealClimate: Is Climate Modelling Science?Last edited by pjclarke; 3 November 2015, 09:59.My subconscious is annoying. It's got a mind of its own.Comment
-
Originally posted by pjclarke View PostThere is abundant evidence for AGW, without reliance on models, and in the scientific community, not much controversy. Nobody disputes the greenhouse effect, or that human activity has increased the abundance of persistent greenhouse gases by about 40% above a range in which it oscillated for at least 600,000 years, and that this has resulted in a net imbalance or forcing in the amount of incoming and outgoing radiation, resulting in an extra 1.6 Watts per every sq metre of planetary surface. Objects in a radiative imbalance have to increase in temperature, according to the laws of thermodynamics. The amount by which the planet will respond to the imbalance, known as climate sensitivity and usually defined as the rise in planetary temperature at equilibrium after a doubling of CO2, is the key area of uncertainty, a low sensitivity, say <1C may mean we don't have much to worry about, >4C and we're in real trouble. The IPCC's estimate is that the value is 'likely to lie in the range 2 to*4.5 °C*(4 to 8.1 °F), with a most likely value of about 3 °C (5 °F).' The evidence for this value does come from a combination of modelling studies, but also paleoclimate work, investigating how the planet has responded to well-constrained forcings in the past.
Of course it is not enough to say 'the planet should warm and it is doing so: AGW QED'; there is a wealth of detection and attribution studies which look at the fingerprint - spatial and temporal distribution of the changes that a greenhouse warming would produce as opposed to natural factors, for example if an increase in solar radiation was responsible, then the stratosphere should warm faster, if the root cause is an enhanced greenhouse effect, which mainly occurs in the mid-low atmosphere, then the stratosphere should cool, which is exactly what has been observed - in line with model predictions.
Chapter 10 of the most recent IPCC report, AR5, summarises the det4ection and attribution work. And, yes, I have read it.
Fifth Assessment Report - Climate Change 2013
And regarding your premise see: RealClimate: Is Climate Modelling Science?
By the way I have never read the bible yet I have come to the conclusion that I do not believe in godLet us not forget EU open doors immigration benefits IT contractors more than anyoneComment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Comment