<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Not Real Climate</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2009/07/not-real-climate/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2009/07/not-real-climate/</link>
	<description>a forum for the discussion of issues concerning the natural environment</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 01:40:32 +1000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Graeme Bird</title>
		<link>http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2009/07/not-real-climate/comment-page-1/#comment-121344</link>
		<dc:creator>Graeme Bird</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 22:43:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/?p=5677#comment-121344</guid>
		<description>Let me quote myself with regards to this annoying foolishness about melting ice in the arctic.  I&#039;ll edit it a bit for swearwords:

&quot;A word about Far North melting. We see that the air temperature peaked in 1998. The solar cycle peak (I THINK) from memory was sometime in 2001, the imbedded oceanic energy peak seems to have been in September 2003….. And yet the arctic ice got to a record minimum cover and thickness around about September 2007. GLOBAL WARMING? Industrial-CO2?

Nothing stands more to reason than the idea that after accumulating a great deal of joules the ocean would continue to help melt the arctic sea ice up North even as the climate more generally was cooling. What on earth could be strange about that? 

Suppose you are running hot water into a cold bath. And you have ice floating up the cold end. And you are working the hot water into the cold with your hand. Suppose you then turn off the hot tap. And you continue moving hot water down to the cold end. Is the ice going to keep melting after the hot tap is turned off? Of course it is. I wish people would not be so stupid about this.

But on the other hand the closest thing we have to the idiotic alarmist model here on earth is the months-long daytime in the arctic summer. So if the CO2 was going to have some effect maybe that would be the place for it.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let me quote myself with regards to this annoying foolishness about melting ice in the arctic.  I&#8217;ll edit it a bit for swearwords:</p>
<p>&#8220;A word about Far North melting. We see that the air temperature peaked in 1998. The solar cycle peak (I THINK) from memory was sometime in 2001, the imbedded oceanic energy peak seems to have been in September 2003….. And yet the arctic ice got to a record minimum cover and thickness around about September 2007. GLOBAL WARMING? Industrial-CO2?</p>
<p>Nothing stands more to reason than the idea that after accumulating a great deal of joules the ocean would continue to help melt the arctic sea ice up North even as the climate more generally was cooling. What on earth could be strange about that? </p>
<p>Suppose you are running hot water into a cold bath. And you have ice floating up the cold end. And you are working the hot water into the cold with your hand. Suppose you then turn off the hot tap. And you continue moving hot water down to the cold end. Is the ice going to keep melting after the hot tap is turned off? Of course it is. I wish people would not be so stupid about this.</p>
<p>But on the other hand the closest thing we have to the idiotic alarmist model here on earth is the months-long daytime in the arctic summer. So if the CO2 was going to have some effect maybe that would be the place for it.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Graeme Bird</title>
		<link>http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2009/07/not-real-climate/comment-page-1/#comment-121343</link>
		<dc:creator>Graeme Bird</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 22:39:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/?p=5677#comment-121343</guid>
		<description>You are such an idiot sod. What was wrong with Rogers statement? Nothing. What do you know?  Nothing.  You tell me right now what was wrong with the statement you quoted of Rogers?

Its terrible that a gentleman and an honest scientist like Roger has to take criticism from unrisen apes such as yourself.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You are such an idiot sod. What was wrong with Rogers statement? Nothing. What do you know?  Nothing.  You tell me right now what was wrong with the statement you quoted of Rogers?</p>
<p>Its terrible that a gentleman and an honest scientist like Roger has to take criticism from unrisen apes such as yourself.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neil Fisher</title>
		<link>http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2009/07/not-real-climate/comment-page-1/#comment-120873</link>
		<dc:creator>Neil Fisher</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 03:05:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/?p=5677#comment-120873</guid>
		<description>SJT says, like many alarmists &quot;look - much less multi-year ice!&quot;. Well DUH! 
It was NOT increased temperatures in the arctic that produced the record low in 2008, it was WIND. It was WEATHER that caused this, NOT CLIMATE. Why can&#039;t you understand the difference? Oh yeah, you do - you understand it well enough to complain when others make this mistake, but you still trot it out. Perhaps it is your preconcieved ideas that distort your perceptions? Perhaps you have an AGENDA?

Look here: http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2009/06/16/historic-variation-in-arctic-ice-tony-b/ for an interesting peek at historical data on arctic ice.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>SJT says, like many alarmists &#8220;look &#8211; much less multi-year ice!&#8221;. Well DUH!<br />
It was NOT increased temperatures in the arctic that produced the record low in 2008, it was WIND. It was WEATHER that caused this, NOT CLIMATE. Why can&#8217;t you understand the difference? Oh yeah, you do &#8211; you understand it well enough to complain when others make this mistake, but you still trot it out. Perhaps it is your preconcieved ideas that distort your perceptions? Perhaps you have an AGENDA?</p>
<p>Look here: <a href="http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2009/06/16/historic-variation-in-arctic-ice-tony-b/" rel="nofollow">http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2009/06/16/historic-variation-in-arctic-ice-tony-b/</a> for an interesting peek at historical data on arctic ice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cohenite</title>
		<link>http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2009/07/not-real-climate/comment-page-1/#comment-120728</link>
		<dc:creator>cohenite</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 13:43:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/?p=5677#comment-120728</guid>
		<description>I have pointed out that there some difficulties with Arctic data;

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/29/what-is-normal-arctic-ice-extent/#more-7433

But no matter;

Arctic air temperature change amplification and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation

By Petr Chylek, C.K. Folland, G. Lesins, M. Dubey and M. Wang 

Abstract

Understanding Arctic temperature variability is essential for assessing possible future melting of the Greenland ice sheet, Arctic sea ice and Arctic permafrost. Temperature trend reversals in 1940 and 1970 separate two Arctic warming periods (1910-1940 and 1970-2008) by a significant 1940-1970 cooling period. Analyzing temperature records of the Arctic meteorological stations we find that (a) the Arctic amplification (ratio of the Arctic to global temperature trends) is not a constant but varies in time on a multi- decadal time scale, (b) the Arctic warming from 1910-1940 proceeded at a significantly faster rate than the current 1970-2008 warming, and (c) the Arctic temperature changes are highly correlated with the Atlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation (AMO) suggesting the Atlantic Ocean thermohaline circulation is linked to the Arctic temperature variability on a multi-decadal time scale

The paper is currently in press in GRL 2009GL038777R</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have pointed out that there some difficulties with Arctic data;</p>
<p><a href="http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/29/what-is-normal-arctic-ice-extent/#more-7433" rel="nofollow">http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/29/what-is-normal-arctic-ice-extent/#more-7433</a></p>
<p>But no matter;</p>
<p>Arctic air temperature change amplification and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation</p>
<p>By Petr Chylek, C.K. Folland, G. Lesins, M. Dubey and M. Wang </p>
<p>Abstract</p>
<p>Understanding Arctic temperature variability is essential for assessing possible future melting of the Greenland ice sheet, Arctic sea ice and Arctic permafrost. Temperature trend reversals in 1940 and 1970 separate two Arctic warming periods (1910-1940 and 1970-2008) by a significant 1940-1970 cooling period. Analyzing temperature records of the Arctic meteorological stations we find that (a) the Arctic amplification (ratio of the Arctic to global temperature trends) is not a constant but varies in time on a multi- decadal time scale, (b) the Arctic warming from 1910-1940 proceeded at a significantly faster rate than the current 1970-2008 warming, and (c) the Arctic temperature changes are highly correlated with the Atlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation (AMO) suggesting the Atlantic Ocean thermohaline circulation is linked to the Arctic temperature variability on a multi-decadal time scale</p>
<p>The paper is currently in press in GRL 2009GL038777R</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sod</title>
		<link>http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2009/07/not-real-climate/comment-page-1/#comment-120711</link>
		<dc:creator>sod</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 12:41:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/?p=5677#comment-120711</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Just think about that. It simply confirms the strong recovery&lt;/i&gt;

your &quot;recovery&quot; is melting away quickly. again. 


http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Extent.png</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Just think about that. It simply confirms the strong recovery</i></p>
<p>your &#8220;recovery&#8221; is melting away quickly. again. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Extent.png" rel="nofollow">http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Extent.png</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: spangled drongo</title>
		<link>http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2009/07/not-real-climate/comment-page-1/#comment-120697</link>
		<dc:creator>spangled drongo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 11:10:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/?p=5677#comment-120697</guid>
		<description>&quot;In 2003, 62 percent of the Arctic’s total ice volume was stored in multi-year ice and 38 percent in first-year seasonal ice. By last year, 68 percent was first-year ice and 32 percent the tougher multi-year ”

Just think about that. It simply confirms the strong recovery</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;In 2003, 62 percent of the Arctic’s total ice volume was stored in multi-year ice and 38 percent in first-year seasonal ice. By last year, 68 percent was first-year ice and 32 percent the tougher multi-year ”</p>
<p>Just think about that. It simply confirms the strong recovery</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SJT</title>
		<link>http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2009/07/not-real-climate/comment-page-1/#comment-120678</link>
		<dc:creator>SJT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 09:06:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/?p=5677#comment-120678</guid>
		<description>If you look at the ice thinning......

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/5774995/Arctic-sea-ice-thinning-dramatically-finds-NASA.html

&quot;Scientists believe overall Arctic sea ice thinned about 7 inches (17.78 cm) a year since 2004, for a total of 2.2 feet (0.67 metres) over four winters.

Their findings were reported in the Journal of Geophysical Research-Oceans. The total area covered by thicker, older ice that has survived at least one summer shrank by 42 percent.

Beyond that, the new satellite data showed that the proportion of tough old ice is decreasing at the same time as the amount of young fragile ice is increasing, information that was hard to discern from earlier data.

In 2003, 62 percent of the Arctic&#039;s total ice volume was stored in multi-year ice and 38 percent in first-year seasonal ice. By last year, 68 percent was first-year ice and 32 percent the tougher multi-year &quot;

You see the problem is not as simple as you have portrayed it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you look at the ice thinning&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/5774995/Arctic-sea-ice-thinning-dramatically-finds-NASA.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/5774995/Arctic-sea-ice-thinning-dramatically-finds-NASA.html</a></p>
<p>&#8220;Scientists believe overall Arctic sea ice thinned about 7 inches (17.78 cm) a year since 2004, for a total of 2.2 feet (0.67 metres) over four winters.</p>
<p>Their findings were reported in the Journal of Geophysical Research-Oceans. The total area covered by thicker, older ice that has survived at least one summer shrank by 42 percent.</p>
<p>Beyond that, the new satellite data showed that the proportion of tough old ice is decreasing at the same time as the amount of young fragile ice is increasing, information that was hard to discern from earlier data.</p>
<p>In 2003, 62 percent of the Arctic&#8217;s total ice volume was stored in multi-year ice and 38 percent in first-year seasonal ice. By last year, 68 percent was first-year ice and 32 percent the tougher multi-year &#8221;</p>
<p>You see the problem is not as simple as you have portrayed it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Biggs</title>
		<link>http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2009/07/not-real-climate/comment-page-1/#comment-120664</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Biggs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 07:28:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/?p=5677#comment-120664</guid>
		<description>The Arctic has probably been ice free in the past e.g.

Recent mapping of a number of raised beach ridges on the north coast of Greenland suggests that the ice cover in the Arctic Ocean was greatly reduced some 6000-7000 years ago. The Arctic Ocean may have been periodically ice free.

”The climate in the northern regions has never been milder since the last Ice Age than it was about 6000-7000 years ago. We still don’t know whether the Arctic Ocean was completely ice free, but there was more open water in the area north of Greenland than there is today,” says  Astrid Lyså, a geologist and researcher at the Geological Survey of Norway (NGU).

NGU: Less ice in the Arctic Ocean 6000-7000 years ago 

The satellite record is short, for extent and thickness, compared to the 12,000 years of the Holocene so far, and the likes of Al Gore are predicting a sea ice free Arctic by 2012. There&#039;s no point creating alarm over Arctic sea ice, when we can&#039;t control it, and it&#039;s actually not unusual during warm periods for ice to be drastically reduced or absent. Meanwhile, Antarctic sea ice hit a satellite record high at the same time as the arctic record low.

Will arctic sea ice vanish by 2012, or will it continue to climb above the 2007 low? I think it is the latter. We won&#039;t have to wait long to find out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Arctic has probably been ice free in the past e.g.</p>
<p>Recent mapping of a number of raised beach ridges on the north coast of Greenland suggests that the ice cover in the Arctic Ocean was greatly reduced some 6000-7000 years ago. The Arctic Ocean may have been periodically ice free.</p>
<p>”The climate in the northern regions has never been milder since the last Ice Age than it was about 6000-7000 years ago. We still don’t know whether the Arctic Ocean was completely ice free, but there was more open water in the area north of Greenland than there is today,” says  Astrid Lyså, a geologist and researcher at the Geological Survey of Norway (NGU).</p>
<p>NGU: Less ice in the Arctic Ocean 6000-7000 years ago </p>
<p>The satellite record is short, for extent and thickness, compared to the 12,000 years of the Holocene so far, and the likes of Al Gore are predicting a sea ice free Arctic by 2012. There&#8217;s no point creating alarm over Arctic sea ice, when we can&#8217;t control it, and it&#8217;s actually not unusual during warm periods for ice to be drastically reduced or absent. Meanwhile, Antarctic sea ice hit a satellite record high at the same time as the arctic record low.</p>
<p>Will arctic sea ice vanish by 2012, or will it continue to climb above the 2007 low? I think it is the latter. We won&#8217;t have to wait long to find out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: steve from brisbane</title>
		<link>http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2009/07/not-real-climate/comment-page-1/#comment-120618</link>
		<dc:creator>steve from brisbane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 04:22:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/?p=5677#comment-120618</guid>
		<description>Janama, people ask serious questions and get serious answers all there the time.  What they don&#039;t tolerate is twits such as those who want to revisit the basics (does CO2 cause warming at all?) ad infinitum.  Those people can have their fun here, where (as I have said before) everything seemingly gets a run as long as it doubts AGW (or ocean acidification, for that matter.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Janama, people ask serious questions and get serious answers all there the time.  What they don&#8217;t tolerate is twits such as those who want to revisit the basics (does CO2 cause warming at all?) ad infinitum.  Those people can have their fun here, where (as I have said before) everything seemingly gets a run as long as it doubts AGW (or ocean acidification, for that matter.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: janama</title>
		<link>http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2009/07/not-real-climate/comment-page-1/#comment-120616</link>
		<dc:creator>janama</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 04:11:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/?p=5677#comment-120616</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;It does make for a readable blog, unlike some of the strings of guff that run on here, for example.

&lt;/i&gt;
only if you agree with their views - if you don&#039;t it reads live a science love fest.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>It does make for a readable blog, unlike some of the strings of guff that run on here, for example.</p>
<p></i><br />
only if you agree with their views &#8211; if you don&#8217;t it reads live a science love fest.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
