Quote Originally Posted by RetiredJedi View Post
I think "it's simply the first time we've been able to observe it":

The Himalayas and nearby peaks have lost no ice in past 10 years, study shows

no global warming since 1995

Arctic Sea Ice thickened since 2007

Piers Corbyn

But that's pretty cool.
Um, those don't look like very reliable sources....and some of them aren't really relevant.

I have no idea why people have it in their heads that climate change means EVERYWHERE GETS WARMER AT ONCE...because it doesn't. It's a rise in GLOBAL AVERAGE TEMPERATURES. In some places, the temperatures go up dramatically, and in others they actually go down. Hotter summers, harsher winters. Disrupted weather patterns.

http://www.esa.int/esaCP/SEMAAW0T1PG_index_0.html
(As you can see, claims that the ice is thicker now are stupid, because we only just started mapping ice thickness accurately last year).

How thick the ice is, is important--it will influence sea levels. The extent of the ice, however, is even more important, and that's severely reduced. You see, ice reflects light back into space--a big white area on the globe acts just like a white roof on your house--it keeps things cooler. Less ice = less reflection = more heat. It's simple. More heat = even less ice...

This is a cycle that CANNOT be broken by ANYTHING we do at this point. It is too late. It would have eventually happened on its own, most likely--we just managed to accelerate it. Now, we cannot stop it. We can barely slow it down. If every human source of carbon pollution were ended tomorrow, it would slow climate change, but it wouldn't stop it. It's already begun.

Perhaps the most important point that people fail to understand is that the weather in any given year is meaningless in terms of global climate change. There will not be a consistent effect. Just as before, some years will be warmer, and some cooler. The trend is moving upward. Next year could be the coldest year on record, and that would still not mean that global climate change is not occurring.

Science, man--it's a good thing.
It's probably in our best interests to reduce carbon pollution, but it's not going to change very much what the world will be like in a few hundred years. Both sides of this issue are lying. The disbelievers will cause issues by NOT PREPARING for the changes that are coming. They're lying to people, and making them complacent. The environmentalists are causing issues by wasting money on pointless exercises in futility. They're lying to people, and making them think we can stop this from happening. They should be working on creating wildlife corridors that will allow species to naturally migrate as the climate around them beings to change. They should be working on long-term plans to save species in areas that will probably be destroyed. Preserving ecosystems as they exist today isn't going to happen. The world doesn't stand still.

We should really be quite happy that we have enjoyed the nice long vacation we've lived through. The earth's weather and climate have always been violent, and we've been in the middle of a long calm period. That's ending now, but it was fun while it lasted.