Thu, Mar 5, 2015, 1:50 AM EST - U.S. Markets open in 7 hrs 40 mins

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

ADVANCED CELL TECH Message Board

  • lonesome_polecatt lonesome_polecatt Sep 14, 2013 12:10 PM Flag

    Thank God for global warming. Otherwise, this would be much worse. (The sky is falling! The sky is falling! The sky is falling!)

    Earth Gains A Record Amount Of Sea Ice In 2013

    Posted on September 14, 2013 by stevengoddard

    Earth has gained 19,000 Manhattans of sea ice since this date last year, the largest increase on record. There is more sea ice now than there was on this date in 2002.

    Sentiment: Sell

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • hi Catt...

      You on/off the square now?

    • An article from a corrupt organization that the loony left loves.

      Dialing Back the Alarm on Climate Change
      A forthcoming report points lowers estimates on global warming.

      By MATT RIDLEYLater this month, a long-awaited event that last happened in 2007 will recur. Like a returning comet, it will be taken to portend ominous happenings. I refer to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) "fifth assessment report," part of which will be published on Sept. 27.

      There have already been leaks from this 31-page document, which summarizes 1,914 pages of scientific discussion, but thanks to a senior climate scientist, I have had a glimpse of the key prediction at the heart of the document. The big news is that, for the first time since these reports started coming out in 1990, the new one dials back the alarm. It states that the temperature rise we can expect as a result of man-made emissions of carbon dioxide is lower than the IPPC thought in 2007.

      Admittedly, the change is small, and because of changing definitions, it is not easy to compare the two reports, but retreat it is. It is significant because it points to the very real possibility that, over the next several generations, the overall effect of climate change will be positive for humankind and the planet.

      Specifically, the draft report says that "equilibrium climate sensitivity" (ECS)—eventual warming induced by a doubling of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which takes hundreds of years to occur—is "extremely likely" to be above 1 degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit), "likely" to be above 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.4 degrees Fahrenheit) and "very likely" to be below 6 degrees Celsius (10.8 Fahrenheit). In 2007, the IPPC said it was "likely" to be above 2 degrees Celsius and "very likely" to be above 1.5 degrees, with no upper limit. Since "extremely" and "very" have specific and different statistical meanings here, comparison is difficult.

      Still, the downward movement since 2007 is clear, especially at the bottom of the "likely" range. The most probable value (3 degrees Celsius last time) is for some reason not stated this time.

      A more immediately relevant measure of likely warming has also come down: "transient climate response" (TCR)—the actual temperature change expected from a doubling of carbon dioxide about 70 years from now, without the delayed effects that come in the next century. The new report will say that this change is "likely" to be 1 to 2.5 degrees Celsius and "extremely unlikely" to be greater than 3 degrees. This again is lower than when last estimated in 2007 ("very likely" warming of 1 to 3 degrees Celsius, based on models, or 1 to 3.5 degrees, based on observational studies).

      Most experts believe that warming of less than 2 degrees Celsius from preindustrial levels will result in no net economic and ecological damage. Therefore, the new report is effectively saying (based on the middle of the range of the IPCC's emissions scenarios) that there is a better than 50-50 chance that by 2083, the benefits of climate change will still outweigh the harm.

      Warming of up to 1.2 degrees Celsius over the next 70 years (0.8 degrees have already occurred), most of which is predicted to happen in cold areas in winter and at night, would extend the range of farming further north, improve crop yields, slightly increase rainfall (especially in arid areas), enhance forest growth and cut winter deaths (which far exceed summer deaths in most places). Increased carbon dioxide levels also have caused and will continue to cause an increase in the growth rates of crops and the greening of the Earth—because plants grow faster and need less water when carbon dioxide concentrations are higher.

      Up to two degrees of warming, these benefits will generally outweigh the harmful effects, such as more extreme weather or rising sea levels, which even the IPCC concedes will be only about 1 to 3 feet during this period.

      Yet these latest IPCC estimates of climate sensitivity may still be too high. They don't adequately reflect the latest rash of published papers estimating "equilibrium climate sensitivity" and "transient climate response" on the basis of observations, most of which are pointing to an even milder warming. This was already apparent last year with two papers—by scientists at the University of Illinois and Oslo University in Norway—finding a lower ECS than assumed by the models. Since then, three new papers conclude that ECS is well below the range assumed in the models. The most significant of these, published in Nature Geoscience by a team including 14 lead authors of the forthcoming IPCC scientific report, concluded that "the most likely value of equilibrium climate sensitivity based on the energy budget of the most recent decade is 2.0 degrees Celsius."

      Two recent papers (one in the Journal of the American Meteorological Society, the other in the journal Earth System Dynamics) estimate that TCR is probably around 1.65 degrees Celsius. That's uncannily close to the estimate of 1.67 degrees reached in 1938 by Guy Callendar, a British engineer and pioneer student of the greenhouse effect. A Canadian mathematician and blogger named Steve McIntyre has pointed out that Callendar's model does a better job of forecasting the temperature of the world between 1938 and now than do modern models that "hindcast" the same data.

      The significance of this is that Callendar assumed that carbon dioxide acts alone, whereas the modern models all assume that its effect is amplified by water vapor. There is not much doubt about the amount of warming that carbon dioxide can cause. There is much more doubt about whether net amplification by water vapor happens in practice or is offset by precipitation and a cooling effect of clouds.

      Since the last IPCC report in 2007, much has changed. It is now more than 15 years since global average temperature rose significantly. Indeed, the IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri has conceded that the "pause" already may have lasted for 17 years, depending on which data set you look at. A recent study in Nature Climate Change by Francis Zwiers and colleagues of the University of Victoria, British Columbia, found that models have overestimated warming by 100% over the past 20 years.

      Explaining this failure is now a cottage industry in climate science. At first, it was hoped that an underestimate of sulfate pollution from industry (which can cool the air by reflecting heat back into space) might explain the pause, but the science has gone the other way—reducing its estimate of sulfate cooling. Now a favorite explanation is that the heat is hiding in the deep ocean. Yet the data to support this thesis come from ocean buoys and deal in hundredths of a degree of temperature change, with a measurement error far larger than that. Moreover, ocean heat uptake has been slowing over the past eight years.

      The most plausible explanation of the pause is simply that climate sensitivity was overestimated in the models because of faulty assumptions about net amplification through water-vapor feedback. This will be a topic of heated debate at the political session to rewrite the report in Stockholm, starting on Sept. 23, at which issues other than the actual science of climate change will be at stake.

      Sentiment: Sell

    • Elk and his loony pals believe PT Barnum and his "scientists". Real facts mean nothing to these gullible loons.

      Wrong: Al Gore (PT Barnum, "A sucker's born every minute.") Predicted Arctic Summer Ice Could Disappear In 2013

      September 13, 2013 - 12:05 PM

      By Barbara Hollingsworth

      A 2007 prediction that summer in the North Pole could be “ice-free by 2013” that was cited by former Vice President Al Gore in his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech has proven to be off… by 920,000 square miles.
      In his Dec. 10, 2007 “Earth has a fever” speech, Gore referred to a prediction by U.S. climate scientist Wieslaw Maslowski that the Arctic’s summer ice could “completely disappear” by 2013 due to global warming caused by carbon emissions.

      Gore said that on Sept. 21, 2007, "scientists reported with unprecedented alarm that the North Polar icecap is, in their words, 'falling off a cliff.' One study estimated that it could be completely gone during summer in less than 22 years. Another new study to be presented by U.S. Navy researchers later this week warns that it could happen in as little as seven years, seven years from now."

      Maslowski told members of the American Geophysical Union in 2007 that the Arctic’s summer ice could completely disappear within the decade. “If anything,” he said, “our projection of 2013 for the removal of ice in summer… is already too conservative.”

      Sentiment: Sell

      • 2 Replies to lonesome_polecatt
      • Re: "Elk and his loony pals believe PT Barnum and his "scientists". Real facts mean nothing to these gullible loons. …"

        Right, poleo. Your article, here, is another total distortion in the RWNJ effort to continue the horrendous attempts to manufacture reality brought to a peak by their former heroes Bush+Cheney.

        This article is exactly like watching a stock drop from $100 to $30 and then getting excited and talking about total restoration because it has a 30% rally up to $39. Good luck.

        Sentiment: Strong Buy

      • Just think,, Gore could have been POTUS,, not sure why the good lord overlooked us this time,,
        C

        Sentiment: Hold

    • ARCTIC SEA ICE NEARS ANNUAL SUMMER MINIMUM

      Doyle Rice | USA TODAY | September 11, 2013

      Amount of Arctic ice is larger than last year's all-time record low.

      Sea ice in the Arctic will reach its annual minimum "any day now," says Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center, which tracks Arctic ice.

      ALTHOUGH NOT NEARLY AS ICE-FREE AS LAST SEPTEMBER'S ALL-TIME RECORD LOW, THE AMOUNT OF ARCTIC SEA ICE IN THE SUMMER OF 2013 WAS WELL BELOW AVERAGE, AND WILL LIKELY GO IN THE BOOKS AS THE SIXTH-SMALLEST "EXTENT" OF ARCTIC SEA ICE ON RECORD, HE SAYS.

      Sea ice is frozen ocean water that melts each summer and then refreezes each winter. It typically reaches its smallest "extent" in September and largest in March of each year.

      The data center reported Wednesday that the extent of Arctic sea ice shrank to 1.98 million square miles on Tuesday. Last year, at its smallest point, the amount of sea ice shrank to 1.32 million square miles.

      The average minimum Arctic ice extent each summer, based on data from 1979 to 2010, is about 2.37 million square miles.

      DOES THE LARGER ICE EXTENT THIS SUMMER MEAN THAT THE WORLD IS COOLING, AS SOME PEOPLE SKEPTICAL OF CLIMATE CHANGE HAVE CLAIMED IN THE PAST FEW DAYS AS THE ARCTIC NEARS ITS ANNUAL MINIMUM? ABSOLUTELY NOT, REPORTS SERREZE, WHO SAYS THAT THERE WILL BE UPS AND DOWNS IN SUMMER ICE EXTENT EACH YEAR DUE TO NATURAL VARIABILITY IN CLIMATE AND WEATHER PATTERNS.

      HE ADDS THAT THE SEVEN SUMMERS WITH THE LOWEST AMOUNT OF ICE HAVE ALL BEEN IN THE PAST SEVEN YEARS. "THE OVERALL TREND IS DOWNWARD, AND IT WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO," SERREZE SAYS.

      The amount of summer sea ice in the Arctic has been steadily shrinking over the past few decades, due to man-made global warming, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

      "These contrasts in ice extent from one year to the next highlight the year-to-year variability attending the overall, long-term decline in sea ice extent," according to an online report from the ice data center, which is located in Boulder, Colo.

      Overall, SINCE SATELLITE-BASED MEASUREMENTS BEGAN IN THE LATE 1970S, ARCTIC SEA ICE EXTENT HAS DECREASED IN ALL MONTHS AND VIRTUALLY ALL REGIONS. THE ARCTIC CONTINUES TO WARM AT ABOUT TWICE THE RATE COMPARED WITH LOWER LATITUDES.

      "THE ARCTIC WILL BE ICE-FREE IN THE SUMMER IN A FEW DECADES," SERREZE SAYS. "ALL WE'LL HAVE IS WINTER ICE."

      Sentiment: Strong Buy

 
ACTC
6.97+0.17(+2.50%)Nov 13 3:59 PMEST

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.