Not exact matches
Last year a friend of mine, who is a skeptic, proposed that the loss of
arctic ice was just
part of a 20 cycle.
I am very well aware and have previously blogged that there are multiple factors that determine the degree of
ice lost any given year — but the literature is clear that even in 2007, global warming played «a large
part» (see «What drove the dramatic retreat of
arctic sea
ice during summer 2007?
It seems that
part of the reason for the Holocene was that the Laurentide
ice sheet had not completely melted, surpressing
arctic temperatures.
And remember, the satellite data are one small
part of a vast amount of data that overwhelmingly show our planet is warming up: retreating glaciers, huge amounts of
ice melting at both poles, the «death spiral» of
arctic ice every year at the summer minimum over time, earlier annual starts of warm weather and later starts of cold weather, warming oceans, rising sea levels, ocean acidification, more extreme weather, changing weather patterns overall, earlier snow melts, and lower snow cover in the spring...
When the
arctic is free of
ice, that is a natural and normal
part of a natural cycle.
It is intellectually dishonest to devote several pages to cherry - picking studies that disagree with the IPCC consensus on net health effects because you don't like its scientific conclusion, while then devoting several pages to hiding behind [a misstatement of] the U.N. consensus on sea level rise because you know a lot reasonable people think the U.N. wildly underestimated the upper end of the range and you want to attack Al Gore for worrying about 20 - foot sea level rise.On this blog, I have tried to be clear what I believe with my earlier three -
part series: Since sea level,
arctic ice, and most other climate change indicators have been changing faster than most IPCC models projected and since the IPCC neglects key amplifying carbon cycle feedbacks, the IPCC reports almost certainly underestimate future climate impacts.
I am currently working on my article «Historic variations in
arctic ice -
part two.»
That's a pretty silly claim on Dr. Curry's
part if you consider that in the months the
arctic sea
ice isn't diminished, there's never really so much sunlight as you'd count it against the average, so whatever albedo changes there are during the half of the year that matters, they're when the sun is at its highest angle.