Tumblr Icon RSS Icon

Ice Ice Maybe (not) — update

By Joe Romm  

"Ice Ice Maybe (not) — update"

Share:

google plus icon

I wrote about this important American Meteorological Society seminar earlier.

Now, you can access both the video AND the presentations (both HTML and PDF) here. In fact, going through the presentations while playing the video will really bring you up to speed on what is happening now — and what is likely to happen in the future — for both Arctic Sea Ice, the great ice sheets, and sea level rise.

Tags:

‹ The job-creating answer to global warming

Do you want Tucker Carlson’s car? ›

14 Responses to Ice Ice Maybe (not) — update

  1. Joe says:

    Let’s see: “Eleven of the 12 years from 1995 to 2006 were among the 12 warmest years on record,” Is that good news? [Hint: The answer is "no."]

  2. Ron says:

    The last I heard, some of those hottest years were in the 30s. What has changed?

  3. David B. Benson says:

    Yes, Ron, your mis-information source as confused U.S. temperatures with global temperatures.

  4. Joe says:

    Hmm. I just said you folks (i.e. Ron) actually read my posts (like this one — the most viewed post I’ve ever written)….
    Yes, these are global temperatures.

  5. hippie with a pistol says:

    Konrad Steffen:
    If the ice loss continues at the current accelerated rate, sea level rise in 2100 will be >0.5 meter and possibly reach 1 meter or more.

    what, what, whaaaat? not 20 feet?

  6. hippie with a pistol says:

    Ron, be sure to watch the presentation as they do address the warming that occured in the 30′s. you are not misinformed.

  7. Joe says:

    Again, it is a myth that people/Gore said 20 feet by 2100. I have already addressed this. That said, 20 feet by 2100 is possible, albeit unlikely, though more likely if we don’t reverse emissions trends.

  8. Ron says:

    Hippie,

    Technically, Joe is correct about what Al Gore said. In his slideshow, Gore doesn’t really predict 20 feet of sea level rise, but he does give that impression – so much so that you, I, and many others thought that’s what we heard. I’ve gone back and re-watched it and he does insert plenty of ifs, but the way it’s all presented makes it seem much more shocking than just his words should convey.

    Basically, it’s a masterful piece of propaganda. Heck, he got an Oscar AND a Nobel prize for it!

    There’s plenty of other stuff in the movie you can pick apart though: what makes icebergs break off of glaciers; what made Lake Chad dry up; polar bears can actually swim; why does he leave Anarctica off one of his maps? and much more. And let’s not forget his Matt Groening cartoon! [BTW - I have a personal Matt Groening anecdote I might share over lunch someday, Joe]

  9. john says:

    Wow. there’s an increasingly desperate tone to the way folks cling to anything which SEEMS to discredit Gore. When the facts won’t work, folks are resorting to innuendo, inference and just plain misinformation.

    And when that doesn’t work, they just keep asserting phony stuff like the temperature data in the 30′s … even after they’ve been show it’s wrong.

    De Nile. It’s more than a river in Egypt.

  10. Dano says:

    Wow. there’s an increasingly desperate tone to the way folks cling to anything which SEEMS to discredit Gore. When the facts won’t work, folks are resorting to innuendo, inference and just plain misinformation.

    Algore is fat!

    Best,

    D

  11. Ron says:

    John,

    Do you have anything to say except your own innuendo? What, specifically, do you say is wrong in my post above?

    Dano,

    I thought you liked fat boys.

  12. John says:

    Dano — Why yes, he is rather heavy. And your point?

    Ron: It would be more accurate to say there were some hot years in the 30′s.

    The hottest years are all in the last two decades.

    My De Nile comment was addressed to the whole anti-Gore thing and the way several folks above (including you, Ron) mishcaracterize what he said, presumably so they can claim to have discredited his movie.
    Fact is, the scientific community (as opposed to a few journalists) gave it pretty good marks for scientific accuracy.

    And what do you mean by Polar bears can swim? Well, yes. And so can I. But not forever — and when ice flows disappear, that’s the conditions Polar bears face.

    I remain baffled as to why folks reject what is pretty obvious and at its core, pretty simple science — GHGs trap heat; we’re spewing out GHG; Earth is getting hotter. What’s the mystery? Where’s the controversy?

    Yeah, modelling and forecasting how hot by when is tricky, but jeez — there’s no doubt about the trends and relative speed of warming.

    Even the very conservative estimates look bad.

    And if I am guilty of an innuendo, it’s clearly a mistake on my part — I meant to be very direct in my condemnation of folks engaging in gratuitous Gore-baiting.

  13. Ron says:

    So you’re saying I didn’t actually say anything inaccurate, you just don’t like Saint Albert being maligned by innuendo.

    Sorry. I didn’t mean to insult your religion.