Comments on: Cool that ice nonsense

By: Richard Treadgold

Richard Treadgold — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 21:48:07 +0000

It’s not really about the ocean temperature changing, so no graph of that will assist the story. There’s always warm water about, and if the currents take it under the ice, it’s going to melt.

What “other falsehoods” would you like to point out?

By: SocraticGadfly

SocraticGadfly — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 19:47:58 +0000

So, it’s not about the air, it’s about the ocean. But you don’t present a graph of ocean temperatures. Other than all the other falsehoods …

By: Doug Proctor

Doug Proctor — Mon, 12 Sep 2011 15:52:26 +0000

How can someone look at this graph and still say that the conditions today are unique? Only if you decide to say that CO2 back in 1880 had bizarre power that it doesn’t have now. But wait! CO2 is only supposed to show up after 1965, so ….

Cognitive dissonance. Witchcraft and bad weather. Al Gore and cold snaps ..

Wait again. The Gore/cold is true. So the witch/warlock is Gore?

By: Mike Jowsey

Mike Jowsey — Sun, 11 Sep 2011 08:14:03 +0000

Well said! Can't see any death spiral here.

By: Australis

Australis — Sun, 11 Sep 2011 03:11:57 +0000

As sea ice is 90% submerged, its growth and extent is entirely driven by seawater temperatures. No objective scientist would claim that the extent of Arctic sea ice tells us anything useful about air temperatures.

If the world’s sea ice is diminished, does that support the view that ocean heat is increasing (as a result of imbalance in the global heat budget)? Well, that might be a useful working hypothesis. BUT the establishment never tells us the extent of global sea ice – we only hear about the Arctic.

Antarctic sea ice has increased by 30% over the past 30 years. Just marginally, GLOBAL sea ice acreage has also increased. So,the working hypothesis should be that ocean heat content has decreased in recent times.