July 28, 2025
The Incredible Shrinking Climate Change
Timothy Birdnow
This is yuuugggee! Pretty much annihilates the claims made by the Gang Green about the Earth's recent climate history.
Ancient Mud Just Shattered a 750,000-Year-Old Ice Myth
From the Sci Tech Daily article:
We've been told ad-nauseum that the Arctic was ice-covered until just now and that is' all Man's fault because of the release of carbon dioxide through industrial and automotive technology. But now we know ice-free years are as common as the cold and cannot now be used as justification for draconian schemes to "fight climate change".
Basically the researchers found species of algae in mud that corresponds to open-water-only species, species that could not have been there if the Arctic was covered by a heavy ice cap.
But, but, but...there is evidence of heavy ice shelves in the Arctic, is there not?
Well, only to a limited degree:
Apparently freezing and thawing in the Arctic is a normal thing.
This fits with anecdotal evidence from prior eras. Sea Captains have recorded open water in the Arctic in bygone eras, particularly in the eighteenth century (prior to the Little Ice Age) and in the early part of the 20th.
In 1903-05 Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen crossed the Northwest Passage, meaning the whole thing was open at that time. But he was upstaged years before by Adolf Erik Nordenskiold, a Swedish-Finnish explorer and scientist who did the longer Northeast Passage in 1878-79. This was WELL before any rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide. This was before Svante Arrhenius devised his theory of Greenhouse Gas warming (which he theorized in 1896).
And it ignores the fact that the Vikings did quite a bit of sailing through the Arctic during the Middle Ages. Vikings settled along the Arctic Ocean throughout Russia, meaning they had to be able to sail the long coastline.
So this is a discovery that puts yet another nail in the coffin of catastophic climate change theory.
At this point the argument has become rather like the old Midieval "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" debate. It is no longer a serious discussion.
Another story in Sci Tech Daily suggests that much of the observed planetary warming (under 1* F.) is caused by a reduction in ozone in the atmosphere. If that explains half of the 20th century warming (which was the most pronounced) and land use changes explain much of it too, as does decreasing planetary alebedo (cloudiness) what percentage of heating is driven by carbon dioxide, and if little why are we demanding dcraconian cuts in emissions and establishing world organizations to enforce them?
Also, you may want to ponder this.
Apparently low Arctic sea ice has no impact on severe cold weather as has been postulated by the warmiacs.
This is yuuugggee! Pretty much annihilates the claims made by the Gang Green about the Earth's recent climate history.
Ancient Mud Just Shattered a 750,000-Year-Old Ice Myth
From the Sci Tech Daily article:
Evidence of algae growth and climate simulations reveal the Arctic had seasonal ice, not a permanent ice shelf, for much of the past 750,000 years. These insights challenge long-standing theories.
For a long time, researchers have debated whether a thick, continuous ice shelf once blanketed the entire Arctic Ocean during the most extreme ice ages. However, a new study published in Science Advances challenges this theory, finding no supporting evidence for a vast ice shelf approximately 1 kilometer thick.
Instead, the findings suggest that the Arctic Ocean was covered by seasonal sea ice, which would have allowed for patches of open water and conditions capable of sustaining life, even during the coldest periods of the last 750,000 years.
For a long time, researchers have debated whether a thick, continuous ice shelf once blanketed the entire Arctic Ocean during the most extreme ice ages. However, a new study published in Science Advances challenges this theory, finding no supporting evidence for a vast ice shelf approximately 1 kilometer thick.
Instead, the findings suggest that the Arctic Ocean was covered by seasonal sea ice, which would have allowed for patches of open water and conditions capable of sustaining life, even during the coldest periods of the last 750,000 years.
We've been told ad-nauseum that the Arctic was ice-covered until just now and that is' all Man's fault because of the release of carbon dioxide through industrial and automotive technology. But now we know ice-free years are as common as the cold and cannot now be used as justification for draconian schemes to "fight climate change".
Basically the researchers found species of algae in mud that corresponds to open-water-only species, species that could not have been there if the Arctic was covered by a heavy ice cap.
"Our sediment cores show that marine life was active even during the coldest times,” explained Jochen Knies, the study’s lead author from UiT The Arctic University of Norway and co-leader of the Into the Blue – i2B project. "That tells us there must have been light and open water at the surface. You wouldn’t see that if the entire Arctic was locked under a kilometre-thick slab of ice.”
A crucial piece of evidence was the presence of a molecule called IP25, which is produced by algae that live in seasonal sea ice. Its consistent detection in the sediment layers suggests that the Arctic experienced recurring sea ice cycles, rather than being permanently sealed by a solid ice cover.
A crucial piece of evidence was the presence of a molecule called IP25, which is produced by algae that live in seasonal sea ice. Its consistent detection in the sediment layers suggests that the Arctic experienced recurring sea ice cycles, rather than being permanently sealed by a solid ice cover.
But, but, but...there is evidence of heavy ice shelves in the Arctic, is there not?
Well, only to a limited degree:
Some scientists have argued that features on the Arctic seafloor suggest that a huge, grounded ice shelf once covered the entire ocean. But this new study offers another explanation.
"There may have been short-lived ice shelves in some parts of the Arctic during especially severe cold phases,” said Knies. "But we don’t see any sign of a single, massive ice shelf that covered everything for thousands of years.”
One possible exception could have occurred about 650,000 years ago, when biological activity in the sediment record dropped sharply. But even then, the evidence points to a temporary event, not a long-lasting frozen lid over the Arctic.
"There may have been short-lived ice shelves in some parts of the Arctic during especially severe cold phases,” said Knies. "But we don’t see any sign of a single, massive ice shelf that covered everything for thousands of years.”
One possible exception could have occurred about 650,000 years ago, when biological activity in the sediment record dropped sharply. But even then, the evidence points to a temporary event, not a long-lasting frozen lid over the Arctic.
Apparently freezing and thawing in the Arctic is a normal thing.
This fits with anecdotal evidence from prior eras. Sea Captains have recorded open water in the Arctic in bygone eras, particularly in the eighteenth century (prior to the Little Ice Age) and in the early part of the 20th.
In 1903-05 Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen crossed the Northwest Passage, meaning the whole thing was open at that time. But he was upstaged years before by Adolf Erik Nordenskiold, a Swedish-Finnish explorer and scientist who did the longer Northeast Passage in 1878-79. This was WELL before any rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide. This was before Svante Arrhenius devised his theory of Greenhouse Gas warming (which he theorized in 1896).
And it ignores the fact that the Vikings did quite a bit of sailing through the Arctic during the Middle Ages. Vikings settled along the Arctic Ocean throughout Russia, meaning they had to be able to sail the long coastline.
So this is a discovery that puts yet another nail in the coffin of catastophic climate change theory.
At this point the argument has become rather like the old Midieval "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" debate. It is no longer a serious discussion.
Another story in Sci Tech Daily suggests that much of the observed planetary warming (under 1* F.) is caused by a reduction in ozone in the atmosphere. If that explains half of the 20th century warming (which was the most pronounced) and land use changes explain much of it too, as does decreasing planetary alebedo (cloudiness) what percentage of heating is driven by carbon dioxide, and if little why are we demanding dcraconian cuts in emissions and establishing world organizations to enforce them?
Also, you may want to ponder this.
Apparently low Arctic sea ice has no impact on severe cold weather as has been postulated by the warmiacs.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
06:30 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 806 words, total size 6 kb.
1
No use to tell St. Greta of Thunberg about this; it'll go way over her head without even ruffling her braids.
Posted by: Dana Mathewson at July 29, 2025 12:24 AM (551jX)
2
Her and all the rest. They hold global warming as an article of faith, their religious beliefs, not as a scientific theory that requires rigorous testing and proof.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at July 29, 2025 06:30 AM (Fkktn)
27kb generated in CPU 0.1124, elapsed 0.2041 seconds.
37 queries taking 0.1891 seconds, 185 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
37 queries taking 0.1891 seconds, 185 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
