Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?

[rederob]

You just blew all your credibility with that last line of hot air HelloU

You will likely find that he/she uses internet cafes.

 

[HelloU]

You just blew all your credibility with that last line of hot air HelloU

would not dare tell u what to do, or recommend a course of action ........ but relax.
i like to process what peeps are saying, and not focus on what they say. There is a subtle, but quite important difference to me.

and what i mean, of course, is that if peeps take everything literally then they will never understand the difference between a core, and a non-core, promise.

so in that other solar power question - can i assume that there is priority order when supplying for the grid (so when there is excess power it is pre-determined who will miss out)?

 

[HelloU]

just out of interest, how many peeps use a wireless router and just use the default settings and codes?

 

[Smurf1976]

so in that other solar power question - can i assume that there is priority order when supplying for the grid (so when there is excess power it is pre-determined who will miss out)?

In ye olde days it was all based on first meeting the technical requirements and then actual costs which naturally favoured full use of anything with no fuel costs (eg hydro).

These days with multiple competing owners of generation the physical dispatch process is based on current asking price subject to meeting the technical requirements.

Whoever asks the lowest price is sure to be dispatched. Whoever asks the highest price is last on the list.

 

[kahuna1]

I note a new fable from the climate deniers ....imbeciles and idiots ... about Arctic ice ...

Despite pictures ... NASA ... satellite data .... all ignored ...


anyhow the latest for NON FLAT EARTH people.

April reached a new record Arctic low sea ice extent

2019
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

2018 Arctic summertime sea ice minimum extent tied for sixth lowest on record
https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2811/...nimum-extent-tied-for-sixth-lowest-on-record/

NSIDC and NASA showed that, at 1.77 million square miles (4.59 million square kilometers), 2018 effectively tied with 2008 and 2010 for the sixth lowest summertime minimum extent in the satellite record.

One of the most unusual features of this year’s melt season has been the reopening of a polynya-like hole in the icepack north of Greenland, where the oldest and thickest sea ice of the Arctic typically resides.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
at 1.8 million sq miles verses the 1980-2018 ave of 2.4 million sq miles and all measured via satellite ... ALL OF IT ....

1.8 is 75% of 2.4 ...

in other words 25% IS GONE .... v the ave

Alarming ? Well its only been stable for around 800,000 years and the permafrost and frozen plant and matter below it ...

25% Gone, the thing keeping it frozen in 30 years .... hmmm

ONAY

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Smoking is good for you
NASA did not go to the moon
The earth is flat ....
and .... we hate science and ignore it .... Climate denial ....

Not sure humanity has the wisdom to change.
I note even the ANTI vax idiot number one, Trump ... now is changing his tune.

 

[kahuna1]

The past four years (2015-18) have the four lowest maximums in the satellite record.

https://www.arctic.noaa.gov/Report-Card/Report-Card-2018/ArtMID/7878/ArticleID/780/SeanbspIce

Sad and delusional to even postulate ice is growing ... yet here we have it I suspect sooooooonnnnnn

Another conspiracy theory comes to life.

 

[Struzball]

I note a new fable from the climate deniers ....imbeciles and idiots ... about Arctic ice ...

Despite pictures ... NASA ... satellite data .... all ignored ...


anyhow the latest for NON FLAT EARTH people.

April reached a new record Arctic low sea ice extent

2019
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

Not denying any arctic sea ice loss, or how rapid the ice loss at beginning of 2019 is..

However just pointing out this is in fact not a record low arctic sea ice. It’s a record low Arctic sea ice for the month of April. Yet no mention of this fact on their report.
Also curious why the don’t include the whole year in the graph in the nsidc link, which obscures the extent of summer ice loss in 2012.
Seems a bit disingenuous.

 

[kahuna1]

Tobacco is good for you
NASA did not land on the moon
Asbestos fibres are harmless
A Canadian Icebreaker did not sail to the North Pole at 13 knots last summer ... 2018 ...

Ohh sorry ... did I miss your point ?

The earth is flat ...

A favorite ... a person with a degree in political science telling a Nobel Prize winner in science on climate issues he is wrong.

lets argue about chemical reactions ? SADIJJII where are you when we need you ?

I think everyone can see the RED line in the GRAPH above, and the trend ... that it hit an all time low 2012, does that change 25% is gone ? Or maybe the slope of the direction ?

Why would someone discuss something that my 3 year old cousin just told me was a downward slope ?

Maybe discuss it via PM with other believers in the Flat Earth.

 

[rederob]

However just pointing out this is in fact not a record low arctic sea ice. It’s a record low Arctic sea ice for the month of April. Yet no mention of this fact on their report.
Also curious why the don’t include the whole year in the graph in the nsidc link, which obscures the extent of summer ice loss in 2012.
Seems a bit disingenuous.

The data is freely available if you look, and the chart is easily accessible as well:

Note that all data for the past 5 years is lower than the interdecile range for the 1982-2010 median Arctic sea ice extent.
Claims of disingenuity are easily countered with a modicum on ingenuity.

 

[Struzball]

The data is freely available if you look, and the chart is easily accessible as well

Yes, I am aware.

My issue is they are specifically stating as well as suggesting with the attached chart, that it is a record low. When in fact that the record low was in 2012. And their attached chart obscures the 2012 summer low.
What they should be more accurately stating, is that it is a record low for April.

 

[rederob]

My issue is they are specifically stating as well as suggesting with the attached chart, that it is a record low. When in fact that the record low was in 2012. And their attached chart obscures the 2012 summer low.
What they should be more accurately stating, is that it is a record low for April.

Nothing is being hidden or misrepresented if you understand what is shown, and you appear not to.
The record lows are usually expressed as for either annual average extent (or median), monthly extent, of for winters or summers.
They can also be expressed in term of sea ice thickness.
What you claim and what was linked are actually different metrics, and you seem to not understand this.
Seasonal cycles of Northern Hemisphere sea ice extents are given as as daily averages for the years 2007 through 2019 at Figure 5 here.
Not sure why you persist in your ignorance with so much data freely accessible.

 

[Struzball]

Seasonal cycles of Northern Hemisphere sea ice extents are given as as daily averages for the years 2007 through 2019 at Figure 5 here.

Yes, I am aware. I’m simply stating your linked “figure 5” is more meaningful than a graph of January to May, whilst reporting a record low.

Wouldn’t you agree?

 

[rederob]

Yes, I am aware. I’m simply stating your linked “figure 5” is more meaningful than a graph of January to May, whilst reporting a record low.
Wouldn’t you agree?

No.
Different metrics are used to indicate specific features.
It is useful to know that sea ice extents in Arctic winter months are in a greater state of decline over most years since 2012. That's because if there were a cooling trend it would be more likely to appear through the winter months.
Maybe that's not obvious to you?
In any case, climate is more about discernible trends than possible outliers.

 

[Struzball]

It is useful to know that sea ice extents in Arctic winter months are in a greater state of decline over most years since 2012. That's because if there were a cooling trend it would be more likely to appear through the winter months.
Maybe that's not obvious to you?
In any case, climate is more about discernible trends than possible outliers.

So we agree that the 2019 record April low is irrelevant to the trend?

Just as I’m sure we would agree the fact that 2019 had the highest maximum winter sea ice extent of the last 5 years, is irrelevant to the trend?

It’s maximum is an outlier, equally as its minimum.

 

[rederob]

So we agree that the 2019 record April low is irrelevant to the trend?

No!
It's absolute confirmation .

Just as I’m sure we would agree the fact that 2019 had the highest maximum winter sea ice extent of the last 5 years, is irrelevant to the trend?

Again a definitive NO.
That's like saying weather is climate.
It's just a foolish "cherrypick" from you. The month to month variation was from from 5-year highest to lowest in 5 years, rendering your comment irrelevant from a climate perspective.

It’s maximum is an outlier, equally as its minimum.

All the past 5 year's winter data are statistical outliers from the presented ranged averages.
You are not too good at this.

 

[kahuna1]

I am currently debating whether gravity exists.

Whilst also a new member of the flat earth society and about to join the NASA Moon denial group.

It is as always, amazing when discussing this topic about climate change and temperature change and it s impacts, that the forest is ignored whilst looking at the individual trees.

It is of course the whole point for some on this topic.
Ignore that 25% of the ice is gone via area.
Ignore the trend is DOWN and without a doubt down.
Ignore the old ice, is down 80%.
Ignore the thickness of ice is down 70%.
That a Canadian ice breaker steamed at 13 knots all the way to the North pole last summer, is to be ignored. Unthinkable and ice has been surveyed for 70 years mainly via USA navy.
Lets ignore that submarines may want to know how thick it was. Ignore satellites since 1978 and 2 new great ESA ones. Ignore. .. dispute ... deny ... deny ...

Lets discuss gravity and its no existence ?
A discussion about irrefutable facts, ones beyond even reasonable questioning and this topic about arctic ice is beyond that via satellite coverage since 1978, yet here we go again.

Must run, pushing members of the non gravity club off the cliff and see if their theory works for them. It does work for me however .... the results are NOT what the members expected.

They seem unable to voice or communicate their conspiracies after the experiment !!

 

[cogs]

I wouldn't normally participate in such threads, but what is getting at me, is kids demonstrating in cities, crying with fear that the world is going to end very soon. The powers that be who generate the fear mongering (be it true or misleading) have got what they set out to achieve, ie fear.
Now they don't know how to handle the demonstrations, over shot the goal maybe?

 

[Struzball]

LOL rederob

So decreasing ice = climate
Increasing ice = weather

Careful rederob, your bias is showing.

By the way. Re-read my comment. I said it is NOT relevant that 2019 had a 5 year maximum ice extent. NOT relevant. Yet you are reacting as if I was saying it countered the trend.

 

[rederob]

LOL rederob
So decreasing ice = climate
Increasing ice = weather
Careful rederob, your bias is showing.

You are utterly incompetent here.
Your initial claims were not as stated in the linked report - in other words you have problems understanding the science.
When you make further claims which are not about climate trends you suggest I have a bias.
It is true that I have a bias towards knowing what is obvious from the data.
Except that what is obvious to many here is a foreign concept to you and others in the peanut gallery that think as you do.

 

[Sdajii]

I wouldn't normally participate in such threads, but what is getting at me, is kids demonstrating in cities, crying with fear that the world is going to end very soon. The powers that be who generate the fear mongering (be it true or misleading) have got what they set out to achieve, ie fear.
Now they don't know how to handle the demonstrations, over shot the goal maybe?

Making people fear that the end of the world is near is an old way of making it possible to radicalise people. If they think the world is going to end, they're much easier to induce to take extreme actions they otherwise wouldn't be willing to do.