I suppose they haven’t learned anything from the last beat down skeptics gave them on their Statue of Liberty Fiasco
Bjørn Lomborg writes:
National Geographic is at it again. They present the world “if all the ice melted” — and they have the temerity to suggest it will happen with more global warming.
“If we continue adding carbon to the atmosphere, we’ll very likely create an ice-free planet, with an average temperature of perhaps 80 degrees Fahrenheit instead of the current 58.”
This, of course, is only the outcome of continuing ever larger carbon emissions for many hundreds of years, something that no one is realistically expecting.
Could we please have a sensible, non-scare conversation back at the venerable National Geographic?
National Geographic’s last scare: http://on.fb.me/1iJR5t6
And here is their new one: http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/09/rising-seas/if-ice-melted-map
===============================================================
[Anthony] Meanwhile both Arctic and Antarctic ice are within normal parameters of standard deviation:
Arctic is about 1 standard deviation below the average line:
![N_stddev_timeseries[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/n_stddev_timeseries1.png?quality=75)
The Antarctic is above two standard deviations:
![S_stddev_timeseries[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/s_stddev_timeseries1.png?quality=75)
Globally, sea ice is at normal:
![global.daily.ice.area.withtrend[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/global-daily-ice-area-withtrend1.jpg?quality=83)
Related articles
- The ice is not melting, yet still the scaremongers blunder on (junkscience.com)
- National Geographic rising sea level prophecy – cause for concern or absurd fairytale? (wattsupwiththat.com)
Here is an attachment I prepared for a letter to the Editor of National Geographic about a year ago, suggesting Nov 2014 as appropriate for 10 years on from the Nov 2004 issue on global warming. I suggested a sample of mistakes needing correction. There were plenty that are no longer contentious, but in true warmist style they will be left out there, uncorrected, to further prostitute the good name of science.
True scientists publish corrections when they are wrong.
………………………………………
Not hard to predict, I did not receive any response from National Geographic.
http://www.geoffstuff.com/NatGeo_10_YEARS_DRAFT.pdf
I cancelled my subscription about two years ago. NG continued to send reminder notices for twelve months and I found it hard to write them a cease and desist letter because Australia only has a renew address. They were at it again this past week with a special offer. Maybe there have been a lot of lost subscribers. Serves them right.
Next month’s scare : “What if everybody cancelled their subscription?”
It seems to me that the people at the time that NG projects to will think that the climate that they live in is completely normal like we do today in our various climates. Humans will adapt to any and all climates on the earth. We are smart enough to do that. We have been doing so for several hundred thousand years and will continue to do so barring some sort of cataclysm that affects all life on earth. Climate change is slow, on the order of tens to hundreds of generations, and people will move on generation by generation.
Right now I am enjoying the beautiful fall weather (not climate) in Knoxville, Tennessee.
If we keep adding “Carbon” to the atmosphere, then it’s Lucy in the sky with… time.
That map is all wrong, don’t those dunderheads at the Internationale Geographic ever read Mann, or that other nice man, the one who looks like Homer?
If we keep on keeping on with the Carbon addition, then we know (Climate Science TM) that it
will get hotter and hotter until the ice melts, then it gets hotter and hotter until the seas boil,
and then,
then all the liquid on the planet will evaporate into the atmosphere, and there will be gazillions
of miles of dry land, everywhere, and not a drop of drink.
National Geographic is just doing climate porn again.
Its publisher is apparently addicted to the stuff. A venerable magazine is now just an over priced badly written porn pusher.
How sad.
NG Magazine upcoming stories:
“NIBIRU, Planet, Comet or Alien Spacecraft?………………………..”
“Al Gore Credits Lucid Dreaming for Climate Consensus….”
“Carbon Poachers, Fracking Pushes Earth Past the Tipping Point!!!…..”
Actually I favor pre-shipment recycling of NG, it’s the environmentally correct response.
Average summer temperature in Antarctica = 20ºF (12 deg F below freezing)
Average winter temperature = -30ºF (62 deg F below freezing)
At the South Pole, it’s even colder.
Average annual temperature at S. Pole = -55 ºF (87 deg F below freezing)
It’s a HOT day, today, at the S. Pole, in mid-Springtime, with at 8:50 am 11/6/13 EST:
Mostly Cloudy Wind: 14 mph Temperature: -38°F (60 deg F below freezing)
Would somebody please whack Nat’ Geo upside their stupid heads?
The NG is a typical manifestation of the corruption of Main Stream Journalism in trall to the great Man(n) Made Global Warming lie.
I am sitting here looking out to the iconic Bell Rock lighthouse 15 miles from my window, across a pristine Carnoustie bay. Within a couple of years my view will be poisoned by an array of useless offshore windmills dwarfing the lighthouse.
Here in Scotland we have a paranoid leader named Alec Salmond. His stated aim is to supply Scotlands entire energy requirements from ‘renewables’.by 2020. I have yet to read any journal or hear any broadcaster seriously question this harebrained scheme.
On the subject of rising sea level, we have a particular issue in the east of Scotland. The North East of Britain is rising as we are still recovering from the vast amount of ice which melted with the receeding ice age. Meanwhile the south of England is sinking, hence the need for the Thames Barrier flood gates.
Because of the rising up of the land it is impossible to determine if the North Sea is rising – yet we have an organisation called Scottish Environmental Protection Agency which advises insurance companies that we are all threatened with catostrophic inundation.
Recently we had a couple move into a house across the road. They were refused a mortgage on the house because it was situated less that 250 yards from the sea.The refusal was based on the advice given to the insurance company by SEPA. A mortgage is given subject to an insurance policy being issued. They eventually got their mortgage but had to pay an enhanced premium for same.
Below is a little bit of doggerel ‘wot I ‘rote’ recently.
Preffered Lies.
The North Sea is not rising
It’s just steady as she goes,
We’re in an interglacial
We’ve got rid og giant ice flows;
Old fishermen now tell me
That it really is a beach,
Trying to launch their lobster boats
When the sea is out of reach.
This land was once encumbered
Wit a massive load of ice,
Thank God the world is warming
The last ice age was not nice;
I cannot walk on water Like that savant Albert Gore,
I’m glad it’s just a sandwedge
From the sea up to my door.
So come and play Carnoustie
The course runs round the shore,
Some parts below sea level
That should not affect your score;
We have no global warming
You may well prefer your lies,
ThThe locals know their weather
They do not relay on scrys.
And he’s bringing more alarmists on board. NG recently hired away the head of NPR to a top position at NG. He says he moved because he has a chance to make more of a difference there.
I would be far more worried about events like Fukishima, which appears to be getting worse with every day.
Don’t know how accurate , but i read other planets in our neck of the woods are experiencing climate changes as well, if this is true is this just coincidence?
Personally i’m believer in climate change, our little rock has been doing it’s own thing long before we where around, and will continue to do so long after we are gone, i just don’t believe all the propaganda that we humans are responsible for everything , or that a carbon tax would make any difference except to line some peoples pockets and make others poor, with fear mongering, there are people out there making money out of selling fear.
Now the Daily Mail has picked up on the Nat Geo work and put it on the top of their front page as of 6/11/2013 at 19:38 (UK time)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2488452/Map-reveals-devastation-worlds-ice-melted.html
Marcos says:
November 5, 2013 at 8:27 am
Am I the only one that gets frustrated when Warmists use ‘Carbon/Carbon pollution’ in place of CO2? It just screams of trying to make words mean something different than they actually do for propaganda purposes…
No, you are not the only one.
Why would somebody replace carbon dioxide with carbon or “carbon pollution”?
I guess in progressive minds political correct trumps truth, carbon/carbon pollution is the pc replacement for carbon dioxide and shows how bad is it.
Too bad there are still carbon based life forms talking about carbon pollution…
SadButMadLad says:
November 6, 2013 at 11:39 am
Now the Daily Mail has picked up on the Nat Geo work and put it on the top of their front page as of 6/11/2013 at 19:38 (UK time)
I found this pearl on the Dayli Mail site:
“WHAT WAS THE EOCENE EPOCH?
The Eocene epoch was a period of increased global temperatures that lasted from 56 to 34 million years ago.
During this period of time, little to no ice was found on Earth and there was little difference in temperature at the equator compared to the poles.
The planet slowly cooled as carbon dioxide from the air locked inside seafloor sediments.
During this decrease ice began to reappear at the poles, and the Antarctic ice sheet began to expand rapidly.”
I thought the planet cooled once the circumpolar current formed around the Antarctica isolating it from the rest. This is why the Antarctica is much colder then the Arctic.
The frozing started with double CO2 ppm in the atmosphere and the cooling oceans absorbed half of it.
The warmist seem to replace cause and effect again. Maybe in their theory there is a huge CO2 “hole” above the Antarctica causing the freeze?
@dbstealey
“What’s your point? ”
The sea ice section in the above the line post has no relevance for the “what-if” section.
Did you really need that spelled out?
Crazy World!
@sophocles
Volume, Sophocles, volume. It may well be that there is an uptick in global sea ice volume this year, there is still a downward trend. See http://psc.apl.washington.edu/wordpress/research/projects/arctic-sea-ice-volume-anomaly/
(I know this doesn’t include antarctica, but as the sea ice over there is for the greatest part new ice, then there is hardly any increased volume).
kisses!
And if the Sun goes out tonight, it’ll be real dark and cold tomorrow. Film at 11.
Sisi says:
November 6, 2013 at 5:50 pm
False. ALL of the exaggerated CAGW hype about sea ice melting is based on the supposed “extra heat absorbed” by open ocean water compared to that solar energy reflected by pristine sea ice. Supposedly, if the sea ice goes away, more energy is absorbed, the water heat more, more ice is melted, more open ocean is exposed, and more sea is melted.
but that doesn’t happen. After 2007’s very low sea ice extents up north, sea ice in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 increased. NO season-to-season effect.
After the record low 2012 sea ice extents, sea ice in 2013 expanded more than it had been since 2006! The myth of any arctic sea ice death spiral is a lie used to take your money and justify policies that kill people by increasing energy prices and reducing worldwide health, food, and security: food, fuel, fodder, fruit, fiber, and farms.
On the other hand, reduced ice area in the artic occurs in mid-September between 75 and 80 degrees north latitude. At these latitudes at this time of year, the sun is NEVER higher than 15 degrees above the horizon, and most of the time that it is above the horizon, it is between 4 and 10 up. At these solar elevation angles, the albedo of open ocean is 0.30 – 0.40, very close tho that of the melting sea ice (0.65 to 0.060), and sol little difference in heat absorption actually happens. Worse, heat LOSS from the exposed open ocean (evaporation, convection, conduction, radiation) are ALL greater compared to what is lost when sea ice blankets the water.
thus, loss of arctic sea ice in September from the normal COOLS the planet.
but Antarctic sea ice is expanding between 60 degrees and 58 degrees south latitude; There, the sun is much higher in the sky, penetrating much less atmosphere, and IS reflecting much more solar energy!
Thus, exactly contrary to your statement of the CAGW religion, more energy is reflected from the planet by increased antarctic sea ice, more energy is lost from the planet by decreased arctic sea ice … and the planet faces even more cooling.
[SNIP – A valid email address is required here, fake ones don’t cut it – mod]
The current publishers and editors are like teens gifted with a huge inheritance. They have neither wit nor will to build on it, only to spend. But once the credibility account fell far enough, the service fees exceeded interest earned, and the decline accelerated. Closure is now virtually inevitable.
RACookPE1978 says @ur momisugly November 6, 2013 at 7:03 pm
….. exactly contrary to your statement of the CAGW religion, more energy is reflected from the planet by increased antarctic sea ice, more energy is lost from the planet by decreased arctic sea ice … and the planet faces even more cooling.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Excellent, I never put those facts together.
Perhaps you could expand that a bit and make it into an article. It sort of explains how the “reactivation of the bipolar seesaw” may be linked to “glacial inception.”
FROM: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/10/02/can-we-predict-the-duration-of-an-interglacial/
Sisi says:
“I know this doesn’t include antarctica…”
Antarctica has ten times the amount of ice that the Arctic has. But your typical alarmist cherry-picking doesn’t want to acknowledge that.
Next, your cherry-picking of the WAIS is seen in perspective here. The rest of the Antarctic continent is cooling.
In fact, global ice cover is above its 30-year average [red line], so please go peddle your climate alarmism elsewhere. Because here, we know better.
Just how does Australia gain the new inland sea?
I’ve zoomed in and still cannot see a path from the sea. Did they just do a theoretical sea rise DEM, with no thought?