How do we understand the GW issue with complete opposite views like the ones below?

Question

One says the Antartic is going to lose ice next because of GW and the other says the ice grew at a record rate last winter?

There are also similar articles concerning the arctic.

Ice free in 2008 or this winter ice growth was the most in 30 years?

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2007/10/antarctica-ice-cap-growth-reaches.html

http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,5143,695276174,00.html

Answer 1

Wanna buy a refrigerator?

Answer 2

Blogs and consensuses are the only things that support global warming, so it is shocking to see an alarmist saying, "it would help if you didn't refer to blogs."  The global warming myth is a mere fantasy with no scientific proof whatsoever.  The evidence is so called absolute but this evidence has never been presented.....  Not even a high school science experiment can prove global warming by CO2.  That is why the only product that you will find with CO2 is a fire extinguisher that COOLS fires.

Answer 3

Global warming requires qualifiers like "could", "possibly", "may", "believe", "probably", "likely", and so forth to describe GW issues.

This gives the believers the ability to scare the lemmings who blindly follow while giving themselves the ability to distance themselves from their predictions when they fail to become true.

These are the same tactics con men have used for centuries.

Answer 4

sea ice has reached unprecedented levels http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=3066

Answer 5

Since drastically more ice melted last year than the models predicted, obviously you will have a record breaking freeze during the winter when the melted area refreezes. Common sense. See if you can find a way to spin this graph:

http://nsidc.org/news/press/2007_seaicem...

Answer 6

Well, a famous scientist, Ben Franklin, put it best, believe none of what you hear, and half of what you see.

This credo applies well to climate studies.  Some scientists looked at only a narrow range of factors and concluded they had it all figured out.  Now long term studies, the hard and tedious part of science, are indicating there is much more the the picture than CO2.  In particular the GRACE, ARGO, and AQUA programs are all returning results that can best be described as unexpected.

It's no wonder, that scientists are losing their target audience, those of us that are educated, and somewhat informed.

Answer 7

Has anyone seen AL Gore's newest book, "Legend in my own mind"  ?

Answer 8

Well, it would help if you stopped looking at blogs, the heartland institute and news reports without references, and instead go to scientific organizations actually doing research.

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/about_bas/pu...

You might find that your links have quotes to actual research, but they probably don't tell the whole story (deseretnews) or may take information out of context to fit their agenda (heartland institute/gatewaypundit).

Cindy W - You are blatantly full of c**p and I mean that. I have never been an "alarmist." At least not so much as you are a denier. And these aren't just blogs or high school kids...

http://www.geosociety.org/positions/posi...

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Library...

http://www.aip.org/gov/policy12.html

http://royalsociety.org/displaypagedoc.a...

http://dels.nas.edu/dels/rpt_briefs/clim...

http://www.agu.org/sci_soc/policy/positi...