What the Ice Cores Tell Us

Support Climate Denial Crock of the Week -
http://www.climatecrocks.com

Ellen Mosely-Thompson AGU Address
http://www.agu.org/meetings/fm10/lectures/lecture_videos/A42D.shtml

BBC Horizon - The Big Chill
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSb0DUn79dY

Lonnie Thompson and Ellen Mosley Thompson
Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miRC3pf_42U
Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCatVJgOHKg

Climate Central - Eemian Ice Cores
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2Tk5iiVSqc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFPniAYbM5g

History of the Greenland Ice Sheet
http://tinyurl.com/4vjd8ja


Dýravísur - Iceland Folk Song
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vc-pxNyfIlk

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Climate change
• climate
• global warming
• CO2
• carbon dioxide
• climate science
• banned video
• Peter Sinclair
• greenland
• ice cores
• lonnie thompson
• ohio state
• bird polar center
• richard alley
• Crock
• Denial
• Denier
• Climate Denier
• Climate Denial
• crock
• green
• earth
• environment
• atmosphere
• smoking
• tobacco
• 32000
• scientists
• petition
• climate petition
• IPCC
• ozone
• ozone layer
• ice
• arctic ice
• polar
• arctic ocean
• ocean acidification
• NASA

[mduoba]

At 5:35 you propose a very weak straw man argument. So 4 temp records averaged together showing stable temperatures in the past is nothing like the GLOBAL rise in temperatures today? Um. Like newsflash. There is no warming in the USA. No warming in Illinois where I live. No warming in the southern hemisphere And cooling in some states.

[greenman3610]

@mduoba

I propose nothing. I relate what the mainstream scientists at the Byrd Polar center and every other respected institution are telling us.

[greenman3610]

@PissedFechtmeister

the aim of the video is to once again expose the MWP nonsense.

I have 70 other vids that explore the reasons for recent warming - in fact, since you mention it, one of my most popular ---

watch?v=yLYqzIhhT6o

[greenman3610]

@OxAO

the Tibetan ice core's shown would not go back far enough to see the most dramatic effects of the most recent Milankovitch effects.

Clearly, you have caught out The Byrd Polar Center at Ohio State University as part of the global plot. It is your duty to inform them of the conspirators in their midst.

[WaxItYourself]

@david222444 To show that the planet will go into a long term cooling trend as a result of a prolonged solar minimum, which we have already came out of, you're going to have to show that the forcing attributed to solar input is greater than the forcing due to the rise in greenhouse gas concentration and other variables using mathematics based on real world examples. Can you do that?

[WaxItYourself]

@david222444 Look dad...

No kidding? Why do deniers take such a simplistic look at things? Obviously if the Sun goes into a solar minimum there is going to be less energy to provide the greenhouse effect with energy. The decline in solar output will have an effect on temperatures. However, the amount of solar input variability is masked by other variables such as aerosol level or greenhouse gas concentration. How about if you actually try learning something instead of going with gut instinct?

[david222444]

@WaxItYourself  Look son if you turn the heating down it cools.

[WaxItYourself]

@david222444 The Sun's energy is shortwave. The current warming is due to longwave energy. specifically those frequencies of energy I stated within the Earth's black body radiation curve. Solar output has been declining for 50 years now. Again, you have no idea what you're talking about. Look up Griggs et al 2006.

[david222444]

@WaxItYourself Rubbish!! Our Sun drives the climate. Your problem is that the Sun now enters a Grand Solar Minimum and no trace gas is going to stop or offset its cooling effect on the climate.

[WaxItYourself]

@david222444 The Pacific Decadal Oscillation is currently in it's wrong phase to provide warming and works in tandem with the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation. Both provide alternate cooling/warming episodes on the same temporal time scale. Your comment about absorption bands is completely bonkers as that is how we know what is causing the warming.

[WaxItYourself]

@david222444 You've just demonstrated your lack of knowledge in this. CO2's atmospheric concentration is dependent on Henry's Law, Le Chatelier's Principal and oceanic emission/absorption. We are increasing the partial pressure of CO2 above the ocean and the oceans are trying to maintain equilibrium. climate change is based on 30 year trends not "It was colder last year". Oscillations do not matter when discussing the energy imbalance of the planet they just redistribute heat.

[david222444]

@WaxItYourself Forgret Co2 it has never been proven to drive the climate and probably does not have ant effect on it. Today every level of the atmosphere was colder than it was on this day last year. The Planet cooled today by0.24 deg, celcius. The Pacific is in a long negative oscillation and you worry about a tiny amount of trace gas. You absorption bands are of no relevance to the climate.

[WaxItYourself]

@david222444 Both the composition and density matter. CO2's ability to absorb specific frequencies of radiation and what those frequencies are is well understood. Measurements show a decline in those frequencies related to CO2 absorption. Namely in a band centered at 667cm^-1. You are completely ignoring where that initial energy is coming from as well as measurements related to that warming.

[david222444]

@WaxItYourself So what! a trace gas vibrates faster and passes its energy on to the vast amount of non greenhouse gas surrounding it. It is not the composition od the atmosphere that matters it is the density of the atmosphere. Now please go and and think up some more propaganda, there is certainly no science in your hairbrained theory.