Comments by "Old Scientist" (@OldScientist) on "Thom Hartmann Program" channel.

  1. 2
  2. 2
  3. 2
  4. 2
  5. 2
  6. 2
  7. @CaptHiltz  The whole of East and West Antarctica is cooling, and has been for 40 years. East Antarctica has cooled by an impressive 0.7°C per decade. Resulting in an overall substantial and statistically significant decline of 2.8°C since 1980. That's brrrrr-illant 🥶! Get it! So much for "Global" warming. I am referring to a paper by Zhu et al (2021) that looked at the reanalysed ERA5 satellite dataset. Check out table 4. Furthermore, the Antarctic Peninsula ice has since been shown to be on the increase “The eastern Antarctic Peninsula Ice Sheet has grown in area over the last 20 years, due to changing wind and sea ice patterns.” (University of Cambridge, May, 2022.) "Overall, the Antarctic ice shelf area has grown by 5305 km² since 2009, with 18 ice shelves retreating and 16 larger shelves growing in area. Our observations show that Antarctic ice shelves gained 661 Gt of ice mass over the past decade." (Andreasen et al, 2023). It is from a paper entitled "Change in Antarctic Ice Shelf Area from 2009 to 2019". They use MODIS (Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer) satellite data to measure the change in ice shelf calving front position and area on 34 ice shelves in Antarctica from 2009 to 2019. Also, as the mass gain (661Gt) was given, you could calculate the volume of the ice gained using the formula: Volume = Mass ÷ Density (assume Density of glacier ice 0.9167 Gt/km³). This would give you (well not you obviously) an Ice Gain Volume ≈721km³. That's how much extra of the lovely white stuff there is around Antarctica. Imagine standing in the centre of this extra ice. It would stretch beyond the horizon in all directions and would be 45 storeys high.
    2
  8. 2
  9. 2
  10. 2
  11. 1
  12. 1
  13. 1
  14. 1
  15. 1
  16. @Hosni Mubarak  You know I can't give you a graph for temperature from a thousand years ago until now because those pesky medieval peasant forgot to take any readings from the wooden thermometers they carried around with them. However, I can give you some proxy data from around the globe. Are you sitting comfortably? "Reconstruction of Environmental Conditions in the Eastern Part of Primorsky Krai (Russian Far East) in the Late Holocene" (Nazarova et al, 2021). It's got some nice data and graphics showing it was warmer by 1.5°C out there in the Far East around the year 1000. And so we move from the Far East to the Indian Ocean: "Modern and sub-fossil corals suggest reduced temperature variability in the eastern pole of the Indian Ocean Dipole during the medieval climate anomaly" (Yudawati et al, 2021). Check out Figure 7. You're going to love it. Whither next? I hear you ask..."Sea surface temperature seasonality in the northern South China Sea during the middle Holocene derived from high resolution Sr/Ca ratios of Tridacna shells" (Zhou et al, 2021). This shows modern (1994-2004) surface temperatures in the South China Sea are colder now than any time in the last 6000 years. Except for a brief interval ~500 years ago (Little Ice Age?), SSTs have been consistently 2-4°C warmer (including Medieval Warm Period) than today since the middle Holocene. And so to the Southern Hemisphere. "6,000-Year Reconstruction of Modified Circumpolar Deep Water Intrusion and Its Effects on Sea Ice and Penguin in the Ross Sea". (Xu et al, 2021). I think my most favourite part of this paper is Figure 3. It shows it was warmer with less sea ice around 1000 years ago. I won't include any data from the North Atlantic because you think the Medieval Warm Period only happened there. I'm enjoying the cherries blossom 🌸.
    1
  17. 1
  18. @Jess More  I've read plenty and now it's your turn. I'm well aware the NOAA data refers to the Atlantic Basin. It makes no difference if you look at the Pacific. Using data from the JMA 1951-2022 we see typhoon activity trending downwards for over 7 decades. I notice you misrepresent what I said on the Great Barrier Reef. You missed out "recorded". On the matter of reefs, if you look at the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN) data, the WIO (West Indian Ocean) shows 26% hard coral cover in 1985 upto 30% in 2020. South Asia reefs shows a decline around 2000 to below 25% then a regrowth to around 40% (2010) and a decline to 25% (2020). The Red Sea shows no change at around 25% (1995-2020). So the pattern in these three areas show no relationship to each other or to a changing climate. GCRMN data for the most important coral bioregion, the East Asia Seas, with 30% of the world’s coral reefs, and containing the most diverse coral of the ‘Coral Triangle’, show no statistically significant net coral loss since records began. The East Asia region has the biggest human population living in close proximity to reefs, and is located in the Indo-Pacific Warm Pool – the hottest major water mass on earth. As regards extinction, the mathematics is simple, even for someone stupid. The numbers I cite are from IUCN, a source that I imagine even a climate alarmist will accept. The values I use for time and number are set by that organisation. The rate, as previously stated, is very low: 900 known lost species for 2.1 million known species in 500 years, so from observations there are an average of slightly less than 2 species lost every year. Out of a known species total of over 2 million. That gives an annual percentage loss of less than 0.0001%. That's background extinction. At that frequency it will take over 930,000 years to reach 80% extinction of species experienced at the K-T boundary that saw the extinction of the dinosaurs. Of course, extinction is a natural part of the evolution of life on this planet with the average lifespan of a species thought to be about 1 million years (cf 930,000). With temperature, we agree 2016 was the hottest. Looking at UAH v6 global lower atmosphere satellite data from 1979 to the present, the highest temperature was reached in 2016 at 0.7°C above the 1991-2000 temperature average. It has since declined and now (Feb. '23) stands at 0.08°C above the referenced average. In addition I would be interested to know what "average" you are referencing your data points against. N.B. nothing you have written successfully challenged my premise that there is no climate crisis.
    1
  19. 1
  20. 1
  21. 1
  22. 1
  23. 1
  24. 1
  25. 1
  26. 1
  27. 1
  28. 1
  29. 1
  30. 1
  31. 1
  32. 1
  33. 1