As many know, Mr. Obama made some wild claims about climate at the recent U.S. Coast Guard Academy commencement.
For example:
The world’s glaciers are melting, pouring new water into the ocean. Over the past century, the world sea level rose by about eight inches. That was in the last century; by the end of this century, it’s projected to rise another one to four feet.
Rick McKee shares this epic cartoon on the WUWT Facebook page:
Further reading:
Does the ‘leader’ of the free world really know so little about climate?
Some pushback against Obama’s ridiculous climate remarks at the Coast Guard commencement
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Obama is an idiot.
We live in a pathetic world of lies and fraud. The oceans are rising so fast that municipalities continue to issue building permits on the coast. Collect the money: Building permits, impact fees, future property taxes….
The real question is , What would rising sea levels do to Guam ?
https://youtu.be/cesSRfXqS1Q
robbertvd —
Obviously this man thinks he does his best work on drugs. Got elected in 2007 to an ultra safe democratic district in Georgia and is never going away. I can only say that the people who keep re-electing him must use stronger drugs than he does..
Eugene WR Gallun
Rick McKee’s cartoon is el perfecto! Once again Obama has proven that in the Academics’ de-realized “rhetoric over reality” world of untethered verbiage, the troubled waters can indeed be smoothed – if we all would only repeat exactly what he says and do exactly as he commands “before it’s too late!”….Which also fully qualifies him as a “mainstream” Climate Scientist!
Reblogged this on Climate Change Sanity and commented:
What can you say about a President that maintains that “global warming” is the greatest threat in the world today? The cartoon that accompanies this WUWT posting is better than any words I can put together.
cbdakota
It seems like I have low tolerance for dark humor.
I found this cartoon repulsive.
But not as repulsive as the role the U.S. played in the whole Arab Spring thing and the Iranian crisis that came to nothing good, though.
Even Flashman above didn’t defend Obama’s BS.
Are there *ANY* Libtards left that believe in Obama’s Global Warming BS?
This guy didn’t like it!
http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2015/05/tasteless-and-ignorant-at-wuwt.html
Amazing! I guess the Hot Whopper completely missed the actual ISIS Video: Hot Whopper says, ” the kneeling bearded men (I think they are meant to represent journalists brutally beheaded),” and mockingly says that those bearded men on their knees must be “bearded Buddhist Christians”. Either ignorance is bliss, at least for a Hot Whopper, or it looks like there might be some real life drawbacks to not watching Faux News?
[He’s probably just another “mainstream” Climate Scientist.]
hotwhopper = Miriam O’Brien
http://wattsupwiththat.com/about-wuwt/my-blog-spawn/
Brilliant editorial cartoons fly over her head it seems.
Hard to believe that someone could be so completely unaware of one of the most horrific and brutal and widely publicized events in recent news.
Next we’ll have POTUS explaining how the fall of Palmyra and Ramadi are just tactical set backs and really, the war against ISIS is actually being won.
I hit the link, the author of that post is certainly no fan of Anthony.
That is about all I got out of the screed that followed.
Obsessed. What can you say? Waiting by the phone.
========
I don’t think this is what Churchill meant when he said “We shall fight on the beaches”.
And it is not what JFK meant when he said to NASA, “Because space is there, and we are going to climb it.”
Note to NASA: “climb it,” not “space is there, and we are going to climate.”
::grin::
====
Zeke — good one. Eugene WR Gallun
Back in the real world the ice sheets on Antarctica are disintegrating:
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/348/6237/899
adding to all that sea ice you’re so fond of quoting but totally misunderstanding its significance.
But apparently the climate’s always been changing right? Just like I’m sure it’s merely coincidence or some liberul conspiracy that the Larsen ice sheet that hasn’t melted in 10,000 years and yet is deciding to do so now…
Back in the real world the ice sheets on Antarctica are disintegrating
Back in the real world the doggy’s common sense is disintegrating:
http://tiny.cc/46zjyx
Global ice is now well above its long term average (see the red chart line).
Global ice is increasing because there is no global warming. That is common sense — which isn’t all that common, as we see from the pooch’s comment.
You really don’t understand anything about statistics, physics, or science in general do you?
Do you deliberately repeat the same easily debunked talking points because you are trying to be deliberately misleading or is it because you failed University? (assuming you actually got into University, which to be fair is probably a pretty long stretch). It’s beginning to get tiresome smacking you and your sad middle aged libertarian male colleagues down time and time again.
The appeal to total sea ice cover of course, doesn’t make any distinction between arctic and antarctic sea ice- nor volume of the ice (as opposed to surface area). Arctic sea ice area is at near record low levels and have been on a clear downwards trajectory since satellites started measuring it.
The antarctic is more complex (I know you and your libertarian chumps don’t like complexity) but is qualitatively different since most of the ice mass is on the land not the sea.This means when the ice melts from the land into the sea it decreases the salinity of the sea water, hence raising its freezing temperature and voila, more ice.
Comparing arctic and antarctic sea ice is like trying to compare temperature variability from ice cores versus satellite measurements. It shouldn’t be done naively. Oh wait- you’ve already shown you don’t understand that either.
Siberian
Did you just say the land ice is melting in Antarctica? Seriously?
Have a look at Wikipedia and search for ‘the melting point of ice’. Remember the number. Then look at the May temperatures for Antarctic (pick a spot where the ice is ‘missing’).
Compare the numbers. See if the land temperature is above or below the melting point of ice.
Then meditate on what you have just discovered about the possibility that land ice is melting in Antarctica.
Siberian Husky;
This means when the ice melts from the land into the sea it decreases the salinity of the sea water, hence raising its freezing temperature and voila, more ice.
So by that logic sea ice around Greenland ought to be increasing too?
Dmh: Correct (ish). The sea ice around Greenland is thicker than the rest of the arctic.
Crispin- I’m going to try not to be too unkind. You see, in the Southern Hemisphere, May is approaching winter. So why would I look in May to find high temperatures (unless I was an ignorant USA-centric American)? If you’d watched anything other than Fox News, you’d see that in early 2015 (i.e. Southern Hemisphere summer), Antarctica was experiencing record breaking temperatures:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/03/150331-antarctica-hottest-temperature-climate-change-global-warming-science/
You know, like 15 degrees celsius?
But thankyou for making my case about the intellect of the average WUWT reader.
Siberian Husky May 22, 2015 at 11:11 pm
Dmh: Correct (ish). The sea ice around Greenland is thicker than the rest of the arctic.
It has nothing to do with it being thicker than the rest of the arctic or not. Either it is increasing or it isn’t.
Antarctica was experiencing record breaking temperatures:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/03/150331-antarctica-hottest-temperature-climate-change-global-warming-science/
You know, like 15 degrees celsius?
But thankyou for making my case about the intellect of the average WUWT reader.
From the article you link to, it turns out that none other than Gavin Schmidt himself cautions against reading anything of importance into that isolated event:
It’s hard to draw much conclusion from a single temperature record, cautions Gavin Schmidt, a climate scientist with NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York City. Last year Antarctica also logged a record cold temperature, he notes.
What’s more important are the long-term trends, says Schmidt. And when it comes to Antarctica, he points out, the past few years “have actually been quite complex.”
The world’s ocean has been warming rapidly, absorbing much of the planet’s excess heat. As a result, large glaciers on or around Antarctica that come in contact with the warming water have been melting rapidly. But some other glaciers farther inland on the continent are actually growing.
“That has not been satisfactorily explained,” says Schmidt.
Perhaps you’ll send him an email and tell him he appears just as uneducated at the WUWT readership?
Doggy is full of assertions here.
But that’s all they are. I posted verifiable evidence; doggy posted his pretty much baseless opinions.
Teaching him about the man-made global warming hoax is like teaching algebra. Difficult, to say the least.
No Dmh, I won’t be sending him an email. He doesn’t make stupid statements like more global sea ice means that AGW doesn’t exist/isn’t a problem. Because he’s a real scientist. Not a delusional middle aged man who never finished University.
BTW, it’s great that Hilary is a firm believer in AGW. Hope all you guys enjoy a lady ruling your country for the next 8 years.
…a delusional middle aged man who never finished University.
Don’t be so hard on yourself.
Heh, Man’s Beast Friend pukes up a hairball of sexism after pissing all over his understanding of ice. Don’t eat the yellow snow, even if it smells like Friend not Foe.
====================
Well, my problem is readily apparent. I wasn’t even trying to rhyme the last sentence in that comment.
==================
Siberian Husky May 23, 2015 at 1:29 am
No Dmh, I won’t be sending him an email. He doesn’t make stupid statements like more global sea ice means that AGW doesn’t exist/isn’t a problem. Because he’s a real scientist.
He contradicted your claim right in an article you asserted supported your claim! That leaves you three choices:
1. Admit you were wrong.
2. Prove yourself right by challenging the expert opinion you yourself inadvertantly cited and show that it is wrong.
3. Deflect.
You’ve chosen to deflect, which is just a disingenuous admission that you were wrong.
Siberian Husky
May 23, 2015 at 1:29 am
” BTW, it’s great that Hilary is a firm believer in AGW. Hope all you guys enjoy a lady ruling your country for the next 8 years.”
==============
Come on now, we were playing nice, no need to get so freakishly invective.
We are already having nightmares.
doggy sez:
Do you deliberately repeat the same easily debunked talking points…
That comment was referring to the chart I posted.
If that is an “easily debunked talking point”, maybe Mr. Husky would care to argue the point with the University of Illinois? Because they produced the chart, which is in real time and shows that global ice cover is well above its long term average.
Husky, you’ve been called out and challenged. Put up, as they say, or shut up.
Either you can “debunk” it, or you lose the argument. Good luck.
Siberian, thanks for update on one above ‘record’ temperature that is so meaningless that even GAVIN for heaven’s sake played it down.
Now let’s look at the long term (since 1957) temperature record for Antarctica and lo, it is gently declining. There is even a page provided by Anthony just to track ice and the like in Antarctica.
When we examine the areas you claimed are ‘melting’ I find the average temperature and the high ans low are below zero. That is frigging amazing – melting ice below the freezing point? Now there’s a scientific curiosity.
In summer the penguins incubate their eggs on their little cute webbed feet. Why? Because the ground is frozen!! At sea level. All year. There are melted spots here and there on the coast of Antarctica. But that is not where the land masses are losing their piddly 100 cubic kilometers out of 25,000,000 available. Meanwhile in the east snow accumulation is increasing. You what Gavin blamed that on? Global warming.
Well, when Antarctica had no ice on it, it was a heck of a lot warmer than now. That would be fine by me. If the world was a lot warmer the northern latitudes would be farmable and the Sahara rains would kick in again as they did 10,000 years ago.
Siberian Husky — To all your statements and replies one is forced to answer — you are barking up the wrong tree. I know that is trite but i could not help myself. Reply to the trite with the trite that way I feel i will not get above your level of understanding.
Eugene WR Gallun
The sea rose 8 inches in the last century and billions perished. If the sea rises 1 to 3 feet more in the next hundred years, billions more will perish.
When you look at the decisions and comments, obama must either be an evil socialist genius or the stupidest guy around. At this desperate point in time, I would be more comfortable with him being an evil socialist but it’s highly unlikely.
As we conclude year 7 of our “Dear Leader’s” rule, the worlds evil powers seems to be ready to challenge us militarily before Dear Leader leaves office. With Sunspot Cooling on the way and major crop failures around the corner, the U.S. Needs a real leader now. I’m afraid there is going to be irreversable damage done by the time our Dear Leader leaves office. These are truly scary times!
Obama was right
The projections in the IPCC AR5 report say:
(IPCC AR5 page 1140)
To get the full maximum range in the next century you have to add the 16 mm/year from the middle of the 2081 – 2100 range to the end of the century and subtract the rise from the middle of the 1985 -2005 interval to the beginning of the century.
The maximum of the projections for the 2000 to 2100 interval is then 1.11 meter, or 3 feet 7.7 inches.
The AR 5 continues to say:
We are then well above 4 feet
Whether the projections are right is another issue
/Jan
Wow- an intelligent comment from a WUWT reader. Somebody take a snapshot and frame it.
I notice none of your comments are framed.
The rate is and has been 4 – 8 inches per century. Obama would puke pink froth before announcing that.
============
Sit boy! Now good dog. Lie down and be quiet!
Now try not to be so arrogant and rude and listen and try to learn!!
And quit defending obummer you sycophant.
Siberian Husky — As an WUWT reader at least you are right to imply that you yourself have never made an intelligent comment here — Eugene WR Gallun
May I suggest a name change to Friday Tragic. Too close to the truth.
tasteless rubbish this cartoon and most of the comments here;
dbstealey has nothing more than this: http://tiny.cc/46zjyx ?
I do, see my website
Well, it was barbar to me, but with all the red and rising trends I’ll presume you’re a rabid alarmist. You have my sympathies; the fever will run its course.
============================
Martin van Etten says:
dbstealey has nothing more than this: http://tiny.cc/46zjyx ?
Isn’t that enough, Martin?
It shows you that global ice cover is increasing. It falsifies the alarmist crowd’s ‘disappearing ice’ scare. That’s why you don’t like it.
dbstealey, please explain yourself, what you have is nothing;
you talk about sea ice area and provide a graph without source to begin with;
next to that we need glasses to see any difference in years;
besides that we miss other parameters, thickness;
where do you see the increase in total cubic (kilo)meters or what ever in this graph?
I provided you with a link to my website with hundreds of references to scientific articles about the ice situation;
no reaction from you, again, please explain yourself;
http://www.zeeburgnieuws.nl/nieuws/mb_sea_level_rise.html
Arctic Sea Ice Volume rebounding recently, as might be expected first in a recovery.
=============
Martin says:
dbstealey, please explain yourself
OK, sure, since you said “please”. The graph I posted is sourced in the address bar, as anyone with a knowledge of computers can see.
It is the CRYOSPHERE TODAY graph produced by the University of Illinois. It is in real time, updated daily five days a week. As you can see here, they provide data to the IPCC, so they aren’t skeptics of man-made global warming as you would expect. If they have any agenda at all, it is the same as the IPCC’s (which now admits that global warming has stopped).
The graph clearly shows that global ice cover now exceeds its long term average. And global ice is the only relevant metric when discussing global warming. Wouldn’t you agree? The Arctic is only a region, and changes there are simply regional changes that happen all the time.
As far as the other parameters, the next most important one is ice volume. The Antarctic has 10X more ice than the Arctic, and Antarctic ice has been steadily increasing. That is why global ice is increasing:
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.area.south.jpg
You finish with:
“no reaction from you, again, please explain yourself”
If I have not fully explained the situation, feel free to ask any other questions you have. Keep in mind that the climate alarmist clique is still clinging to the ‘disappearing Arctic ice’ myth, because out of all the many scary predictions they have made, that is the only one that is not 100% wrong. It is only about 97% wrong.
Now it’s time fror you to explain yourself: please answer this question in detail:
What, exactly, would it take to convince you that you are wrong about the “dangerous man-made global warming” narrative? Would it take twenty full years with no global warming? Would it take a new Ice Age, with glaciers covering the University of Illinois a mile deep again?
What, exactly? Or will nothing ever convince you that your ‘dangerous MMGW’ conjecture could possibly be wrong?
@ur momisugly dbstealey
apart from the technical discussion about sea ice or on the subject of manmade global warming that you started, I would like to receive an apology for words as ‘ clique’ and the cartoon and ISIS comparison this website started;
I did’nt bring global warming in the discussion, I mentioned the fact that there is a wealth of articles and scientific information about sea level rise, now circa 3,4 mm a year and increasing;
that is the point the cartoon is denying;
about that subject you did not respond;
since I responded to your Ice graph, I will answer this remark: ” And global ice is the only relevant metric when discussing global warming.”
for me it seems to be completely unscientific to add northpole ice and southpole ice to one pile without any commentary or explanation ;
for instance: it seems that there are glaciers at the southpole that are melting and are bringing million of tons of water into the sea;
where is that in your ‘relevant metric’?
The rate of sea level rise is not accelerating and glaciers at the South Pole are not melting. Now why have I even gone near all the yellow snow?
===================
dbstealey: “The Arctic is only a region, and changes there are simply regional changes that happen all the time.”
NSIDC thinks different:
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/
slope minus 2.4, and that for a long time
Volume, a leading indicator of recovery. I’ve wondered if the location of the most recovery in volume is in line with the Stadium Wave, but suspect that may be expecting too much precision of the method for the wild, wooly, and windy ‘land’ that is the Arctic.
==============
Martin says:
apart from the technical discussion about sea ice or on the subject of manmade global warming that you started…
Martin, you give me too much credit. The discussion about sea ice was started by the climate alarmist crowd, which had predicted that Arctic ice would vanish by now. As with every other alarming prediction they ever made, that one was wrong, too. And if there is man-made global warming (MMGW), please tell us what fraction of global warming is caused by human activity. Post it here, as a percentage of total global warming.
Next:
I would like to receive an apology for words as ‘ clique’
Your desires are too small, Martin. I would like to win the next Powerball lottery that exceeds $200 million.
Maybe this is a language difficulty. I wasn’t trying to insult you. You are part of a clique for this reason: scientists promoting the MMGW scare are far outnumbered (at least in the U.S.) by scientists who dispute that there is a problem. The ones who say there is a problem get something out of their evidence-deficient climate alarmism, whether it’s money, or getting their articles published in professional journals, or tenure, or expense-paid trips to holiday venues. My handy online dictionary defines a “clique” as:
A small group of people, with shared interests or other features in common, who spend time together and do not readily allow others to join them.
That pefectly defines the promoters of the MMGW narrative, no?. Maybe not the mindless lemmings in the general public who are just head-nodding along with the constant drumbeat of news stories. But everyone who benefits from the MMGW alarm is part of the same clique.
Next, regarding your objection to the cartoon, I didn’t produce it or comment on it. But I think it is relevant. You don’t want to be like ISIS, do you? They also object to cartoons.
Finally, you say:
it seems that there are glaciers at the southpole that are melting…
It seems to me you are completely wrong:
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/s_plot_hires.png
That is also an NSIDC graph. Since the Antarctic contains a 10X greater volume of ice than the Arctic does, it is obvious why the regional variability in the Arctic doesn’t matter. Global ice is the correct metric, but your side does not use that because that would be the end of your “Arctic ice is disappearing” scare.
@ur momisugly dbstealey
“which had predicted that Arctic ice would vanish by now”
this is oncorrect, the vanishing should appear at the time of the summer minimum the end of sebtember somewhere between aprox 2015 and 2050;
“regarding your objection to the cartoon, I didn’t produce it or comment on it. But I think it is relevant”
it is reprinted at the wuwt website, that allready is a comment, besides that you call it ‘Friday Funny’;
“it seems that there are glaciers at the southpole that are melting… It seems to me you are completely wrong:”
the graph you provided seems to me extent of sea ice; glacier ice is something different;
please do look here:
http://www.zeeburgnieuws.nl/nieuws/mb_antarctic_melt.html#both_poles_are_loosing_ice_at_increasing_rate
its you who is complete wrong: to talk about glacier ice in the mean time providing a graph about sea ice extent; we are not stupid…;
you did that before: see your comment May 23, 2015 at 12:44 pm
here you write:
“As far as the other parameters, the next most important one is ice volume. The Antarctic has 10X more ice than the Arctic, and Antarctic ice has been steadily increasing. That is why global ice is increasing:”
than you provide a graph called ‘southern hemispher sea ice area’ with the ice calculated in ‘square kilometers’
dbstealey, this is not the volume, the global ice that is increasing, that is just floating sea ice, and not the glacier ice that is being lost at an increasing rate;
dbstealey, please be more accurate;
regards
Arctic ice volume on land and sea is roughly one fifth of the land and sea ice on and around Antarctica. The total volume is increasing and there is no such thing as ‘accelerating ice mass loss’ on the planet. Why would there be? There is no additional warming since about 1998 so why should stable temperature see a loss of lice and snow? That makes no sense.
Sea level rise is not ‘increasing’ either. It is plodding along as it has for ages, maybe slowing a little, maybe stopping. Sea level might rise from fresh water pumping and sea temperature increasing though apparently that claim is shaky at best. There are glaciers melting in Europe but the volume change is piddling.
There just isn’t anything anyone can find that is alarming taking place. Whatever happens, adapt! We are good at it.
@dbstealy
I have transferred the ISIS item to my ‘funny sceptics’ page:
http://www.zeeburgnieuws.nl/nieuws/kv_sceptici_000.html#isis_cartoon_wuwt
So what, are you gonna update us on your next bowel movement also ?
@dbstealey
have a good pentacost;
I even forgot the most recent news from Bristol (UK) and Utrecht (Netherlands) University (mostly Dutch scientists;
( ‘if there is a problem with rising seas, bring in the Dutch…’)
http://www.zeeburgnieuws.nl/nieuws/mb_antarctic_melt.html#livingstone_island
‘Sudden onset of ice loss in Antarctica detected’
see also:
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/348/6237/899
‘Dynamic thinning of glaciers on the Southern Antarctic Peninsula’
where is that ice (water) in your picture?
http://www.skepticalscience.com/2015-SkS-Weekly-Digest_21.html
cartoon of the week
That is very funny, M. Is that your proposed mechanism for the recent increased Southern sea ice extent? Is the cartoonist putting you on?
Naw, that couldn’t happen, but it’s highly amusing to so conjecture.
==========