No Global Warming in Antarctica
Antarctica isn`t showing evidence of Global Warming.
Of course, every article must try to put spin on these things:
"In some sense, we might have competing effects going on in Antarctica where there is low-level CO2 warming but that may be swamped by the effects of ozone depletion," he said. "The year 2006 was the all-time maximum for ozone depletion over the Antarctic."
Bromwich said the disagreement between climate model predictions and the snowfall and temperature records doesn't necessarily mean that the models are wrong.
"It isn't surprising that these models are not doing as well in these remote parts of the world. These are global models and shouldn't be expected to be equally exact for all locations," he said.
Uh, we have been told ad-nauseum that the polar regions will show evidence of Global Warming first! The poles-especially the South Pole-are the fragile extremes in the climate where we will witness the effects of GW first. Polar bears have been placed on the endangered species list because of the dire influence of GW (despite no verifiable decline in their population), and we have been told that the Ross Ice Shelf is collapsing because of GW. Why don`t temperatures confirm this theory?
It never occurs to these people that the hole in the ozone in Antarctica may, just may, be related to heavy solar activity? Remember, the solar wind hits the Earth`s magnetic field and will, naturally, follow along to where it strikes the Earth-at the magnetic poles. The Arctic is an Ocean, so there is more water vapor in the atmosphere, but the Antarctic is a dry desert so these charged particles have nothing to absorb their energy when they hit the atmosphere. It stands to reason that ozone will thin above Antarctica, because these particles are hitting the ozone at very high velocities.
Wouldn`t ozone depletion mean more ultraviolet radiation, more infrared, more everything? How is ozone depletion keeping Antarctica cooler? If anything, it should be hotter with increased CO2 holding the increased radiative heat down.
Of course, every article must try to put spin on these things:
"In some sense, we might have competing effects going on in Antarctica where there is low-level CO2 warming but that may be swamped by the effects of ozone depletion," he said. "The year 2006 was the all-time maximum for ozone depletion over the Antarctic."
Bromwich said the disagreement between climate model predictions and the snowfall and temperature records doesn't necessarily mean that the models are wrong.
"It isn't surprising that these models are not doing as well in these remote parts of the world. These are global models and shouldn't be expected to be equally exact for all locations," he said.
Uh, we have been told ad-nauseum that the polar regions will show evidence of Global Warming first! The poles-especially the South Pole-are the fragile extremes in the climate where we will witness the effects of GW first. Polar bears have been placed on the endangered species list because of the dire influence of GW (despite no verifiable decline in their population), and we have been told that the Ross Ice Shelf is collapsing because of GW. Why don`t temperatures confirm this theory?
It never occurs to these people that the hole in the ozone in Antarctica may, just may, be related to heavy solar activity? Remember, the solar wind hits the Earth`s magnetic field and will, naturally, follow along to where it strikes the Earth-at the magnetic poles. The Arctic is an Ocean, so there is more water vapor in the atmosphere, but the Antarctic is a dry desert so these charged particles have nothing to absorb their energy when they hit the atmosphere. It stands to reason that ozone will thin above Antarctica, because these particles are hitting the ozone at very high velocities.
Wouldn`t ozone depletion mean more ultraviolet radiation, more infrared, more everything? How is ozone depletion keeping Antarctica cooler? If anything, it should be hotter with increased CO2 holding the increased radiative heat down.
posted by Timothy Birdnow | 4:20 PM
2 Comments:
"It isn't surprising that these models are not doing as well in these remote parts of the world. These are global models and shouldn't be expected to be equally exact for all locations," he said.
As more and more evidence is brought out just exactly where do these models fit?
You burned him, Mike!
Post a Comment
<< Home