Comments on: The melting Arctic – a disturbing application of math http://www.squarecirclez.com/blog/the-melting-arctic-a-disturbing-application-of-math/1030 Mathematics, learning, computing, travel - and whatever... Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:19:37 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Josh http://www.squarecirclez.com/blog/the-melting-arctic-a-disturbing-application-of-math/1030/comment-page-1#comment-54857 Josh Fri, 05 Dec 2008 22:05:34 +0000 http://www.squarecirclez.com/blog/the-melting-arctic-a-disturbing-application-of-math/1030#comment-54857 And Fred, where's the evidence? I don't want something from the IPCC either...THere are charts that conclusively show that the increase in C02 has done nothing to increase sea levels... Sea levels are increasing very slowly, and they have been increasing for the last 5,000 years or as long as recorded history goes. Sealevels have not changed their level of ascent because Joe decided to use his car instead of his bicycle to go to work... And Fred, where’s the evidence? I don’t want something from the IPCC either…THere are charts that conclusively show that the increase in C02 has done nothing to increase sea levels…
Sea levels are increasing very slowly, and they have been increasing for the last 5,000 years or as long as recorded history goes. Sealevels have not changed their level of ascent because Joe decided to use his car instead of his bicycle to go to work…

]]> By: Josh http://www.squarecirclez.com/blog/the-melting-arctic-a-disturbing-application-of-math/1030/comment-page-1#comment-54856 Josh Fri, 05 Dec 2008 22:02:08 +0000 http://www.squarecirclez.com/blog/the-melting-arctic-a-disturbing-application-of-math/1030#comment-54856 Uhhh, maybe it was true that Artic ice did go decrease a couple of years ago, but as of this year Artic ice has grown by 40%! It appears that it fluctuates over time. Granted, if the ice did melt in such fashion we would be in trouble, but so far such doomsday scenarios have held very little validity. I think that the changes in ice are due to natural factors, especially the Sun. And by the way, CO2 isn't Venus's problem, its way too close to the Sun! Uhhh, maybe it was true that Artic ice did go decrease a couple of years ago, but as of this year Artic ice has grown by 40%! It appears that it fluctuates over time. Granted, if the ice did melt in such fashion we would be in trouble, but so far such doomsday scenarios have held very little validity.
I think that the changes in ice are due to natural factors, especially the Sun.
And by the way, CO2 isn’t Venus’s problem, its way too close to the Sun!

]]> By: zac http://www.squarecirclez.com/blog/the-melting-arctic-a-disturbing-application-of-math/1030/comment-page-1#comment-25910 zac Sat, 17 May 2008 07:36:10 +0000 http://www.squarecirclez.com/blog/the-melting-arctic-a-disturbing-application-of-math/1030#comment-25910 Hi Mohammad I've never seen that spelling for "application" before! Hi Mohammad

I’ve never seen that spelling for “application” before!

]]> By: mohammad http://www.squarecirclez.com/blog/the-melting-arctic-a-disturbing-application-of-math/1030/comment-page-1#comment-25907 mohammad Sat, 17 May 2008 07:01:06 +0000 http://www.squarecirclez.com/blog/the-melting-arctic-a-disturbing-application-of-math/1030#comment-25907 "applecation of math" please “applecation of math” please

]]> By: zac http://www.squarecirclez.com/blog/the-melting-arctic-a-disturbing-application-of-math/1030/comment-page-1#comment-19949 zac Sat, 22 Mar 2008 00:35:59 +0000 http://www.squarecirclez.com/blog/the-melting-arctic-a-disturbing-application-of-math/1030#comment-19949 Thanks for your insights, Fred. You have become rather fatalistic - are you saying that in your view, it is too late to do anything? <b>Please note:</b> Fred's final question is in response to my challenge in <a href="http://www.squarecirclez.com/blog/earth-killer-composite-trigonometry-co2-graph/978" rel="nofollow">Earth killer</a> where I asked... <i>...it is a chicken and egg thing, but in terms of a solution, which should we kill - the chicken?</i> Thanks for your insights, Fred. You have become rather fatalistic – are you saying that in your view, it is too late to do anything?

Please note: Fred’s final question is in response to my challenge in Earth killer where I asked…

…it is a chicken and egg thing, but in terms of a solution, which should we kill – the chicken?

]]> By: Fred Haynie http://www.squarecirclez.com/blog/the-melting-arctic-a-disturbing-application-of-math/1030/comment-page-1#comment-19941 Fred Haynie Fri, 21 Mar 2008 21:28:21 +0000 http://www.squarecirclez.com/blog/the-melting-arctic-a-disturbing-application-of-math/1030#comment-19941 Warming sea water is the major source of CO2. The solubility of CO2 decreases as temperature increases. Conversely. Cold sea water at high latitudes is a strong sink. When sea ice forms and covers the cold water, much of the major sink is lost and atmospheric CO2 levels rise. Sea ice is also a weak source. When the global SST rises, we should expect atmospheric concentrations of CO2 to rise. Ice core data confirms that. It also falls as SST falls. The positive feedback proposed by CO2 contributing significantly to global warming thus suggests that CO2 warms the oceans, producing more CO2 which inturn makes it even warmer until we end up like Venus. In any case, the contribution of anthropogenic sources becomes relatively less and less. So with what bullet are you going to kill either? Warming sea water is the major source of CO2. The solubility of CO2 decreases as temperature increases. Conversely. Cold sea water at high latitudes is a strong sink. When sea ice forms and covers the cold water, much of the major sink is lost and atmospheric CO2 levels rise. Sea ice is also a weak source. When the global SST rises, we should expect atmospheric concentrations of CO2 to rise. Ice core data confirms that. It also falls as SST falls. The positive feedback proposed by CO2 contributing significantly to global warming thus suggests that CO2 warms the oceans, producing more CO2 which inturn makes it even warmer until we end up like Venus. In any case, the contribution of anthropogenic sources becomes relatively less and less. So with what bullet are you going to kill either?

]]>