Arctic ice cap grows by 60% in a year

Daily News Article   —   Posted on September 12, 2013

(by Hayley Dixon, Daily Telegraph) – A cold Arctic summer has led to a record increase in the ice cap, leading experts to predict a period of global cooling.

arctic_2664700bThere has been a 60% increase in the amount of ocean covered with ice compared to this time last year, the equivalent of almost a million square miles.

In a rebound from 2012’s record low, an unbroken ice sheet more than half the size of Europe already stretches from the Canadian islands to Russia’s northern shores, days before the annual re-freeze is even set to begin.

The Northwest Passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific has remained blocked by pack-ice all year, forcing some ships to change their routes.

A leaked report to the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) seen by London’s Mail on Sunday news, has led some scientists to claim that the world is heading for a period of cooling that will not end until the middle of this century.

If correct, it would contradict computer forecasts of imminent catastrophic warming. The news comes several years after the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) predicted that the Arctic would be ice-free in summer by 2013.

Despite the original forecasts, major climate research centers now accept that there has been a “pause” in global warming since 1997.

MoS2 Template Master

The original predictions led to billions being invested in green measures to combat the effects of climate change. [The pause – which has now been accepted as real by every major climate research center – is important, because the models’ predictions of ever-increasing global temperatures have made many of the world’s economies divert billions of dollars into ‘green’ measures to counter climate change. Those predictions now appear gravely flawed.]

The changing predictions have led to the UN’s climate change’s body (UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC]) holding a crisis meeting… The IPCC was due in October to start publishing its Fifth Assessment Report – a huge three-volume study issued every six or seven years. [It will now hold a pre-summit in Stockholm later this month.]  The leaked documents are said to show that the governments who fund the IPCC are demanding 1,500 changes to the Fifth Assessment Report as they claim its current draft does not properly explain the pause.

The extent to which temperatures will rise with carbon dioxide levels and how much of the warming over the past 150 years (a total of approximately 1.4 degree Fahrenheit) is due to human greenhouse gas emissions are key issues in the debate.

The IPCC says it is “95% confident” that global warming has been caused by humans – up from 90% in 2007 – according to the draft report.

However, U.S. climate expert Professor Judith Curry has questioned how this can be true as that rather than increasing in confidence, “uncertainty is getting bigger” within the academic community, and explained “It’s now clear the models are way too sensitive to carbon dioxide. I cannot see any basis for the IPCC increasing its confidence level.”

Long-term cycles in ocean temperature, she said, suggest the world may be approaching a period similar to that from 1965 to 1975, when there was a clear cooling trend. This led some scientists at the time to forecast an imminent ice age.

Professor Anastasios Tsonis, of the University of Wisconsin, said: “We are already in a cooling trend, which I think will continue for the next 15 years at least. There is no doubt the warming of the 1980s and 1990s has stopped.”

The IPCC is said to maintain that their climate change models suggest a pause of 15 years can be expected. Other experts agree that natural cycles cannot explain all of the recorded warming.

[Nonetheless, the belief that summer Arctic ice is about to disappear remains an IPCC tenet, frequently flung in the face of critics who point to the pause.

Yet there is mounting evidence that Arctic ice levels are cyclical. Data uncovered by climate historians show that there was a massive melt in the 1920s and 1930s, followed by intense re-freezes that ended only in 1979 – the year the IPCC says that shrinking began.

Professor Curry said the ice’s behavior over the next five years would be crucial, both for understanding the climate and for future policy. “Arctic sea ice is the indicator to watch,” she said.]

Reprinted here for educational purposes only. From a Telegraph news report, with excerpts added from the Daily Mail article.  May not be reproduced on other websites without permission from the Daily Telegraph. 



Background

Today, 193 of 194 national heads of state say they believe humans are causing dangerous climate change. The IPCC of the United Nations has been remarkably successful in convincing the majority of the world that greenhouse gas emissions must be drastically curtailed for humanity to prosper.

The IPCC was established in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environmental Program. Over the last 25 years, the IPCC became the “gold standard” of climate science, quoted by all the governments of the world. IPCC conclusions are the basis for climate policies imposed by national, provincial, state, and local authorities. Cap-and-trade markets, carbon taxes, ethanol and biodiesel fuel mandates, renewable energy mandates, electric car subsidies, the banning of incandescent light bulbs, and many other questionable policies are the result. In 2007, the IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore shared the Nobel Peace Prize for work on climate change.

But a counter position was developing. In 2007, the Global Warming Petition Project published a list of more than 31,000 scientists, including more than 9,000 PhDs, who stated, “There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.” At the same time, an effort was underway to provide a credible scientific counter to the alarming assertions of the IPCC.

The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) was begun in 2003 by Dr. Fred Singer, emeritus professor of atmospheric physics from the University of Virginia. Dr. Singer and other scientists were concerned that IPCC reports selected evidence that supported the theory of man-made warming and ignored science that showed that natural factors dominated the climate. They formed the NIPCC to offer an independent second opinion on global warming.

Climate Change Reconsidered I (CCR-I) was published in 2009 as the first scientific rebuttal to the findings of the IPCC. Earlier this summer, CCR-I was translated into Chinese and accepted by the Chinese Academy of Sciences as an alternative point-of-view on climate change.

Climate Change Reconsidered II is a 1,200-page report that references more than one thousand peer-reviewed scientific papers, compiled by about 40 scientists from around the world. While the IPCC reports cover the physical science, impacts, and mitigation efforts, CCR-II is strictly focused on the physical science of climate change. Its seven chapters discuss the global climate models, forcings and feedbacks, solar forcing of the climate, and observations on temperature, the icecaps, the water cycle and oceans, and weather.

Among the key findings of CCR-II are:

The science presented by the CCR-II report directly challenges the conclusions of the IPCC. Extensive peer-reviewed evidence is presented that climate change is natural and man-made influences are small. Fifteen years of flat temperatures show that the climate models are in error.

Each year the world spends over $250 billion to try to decarbonize industries and national economies, while other serious needs are underfunded. Suppose we take a step back and “reconsider” our commitment to fighting climate change?

The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change is a project supported by three independent nonprofit organizations: Science and Environmental Policy Project, Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, and The Heartland Institute. (from washingtontimes .com)