A question has arisen from ongoing independent general research into world ocean ecosystem devastation and seafood-dependent islander under-nutrition, and solutions.

What percentage of melted polar and glacier ice water evaporates into atmosphere and cloud instead of adding to AGW sea level rise?

JFAus

Ian Plimer has all the answers to the weather/climate/CO2/disappearing islands under the sea hoax.

His latest book 'Heaven And Earth. Global warming. The missing science' is a good read.

The missing science is geology, which records all the natural climate changes that have occurred over time.

Geology is the one way to integrate all aspects of the environment - but there is still little or no geological input into discussion about climate change. Nor do history and archaeology get a look in.

. Climate has always changed and always will
. Sea levels, ditto
. Ice sheets come and go
. Climate is driven by the 'receipt and redistribution of solar energy
. CO2 in the atmosphere is only 0.001% of the total CO2 held in oceans, rocks and soil.

Earth is a "warm wet volcanic greenhouse,which is recovering from glacial times and is naturally warming".

To reduce modern climate change to one variable - CO2 - is not science.

The slogan ‘stop climate change' is an “advertisement” of some people's ignorance of history, archaeology, astronomy, ocean sciences, atmospheric sciences, as well as geology.

Plimer refers to the SOS coming from the hoaxers and investors in renewables - Save Our Subsidies.

ttbn,

Geologists do contribute to climate science (paleoclimatology), particularly in understanding past climates. Their contribution to our understanding of climate change enables scientists to contextualise the current changes. Climate science is interdisciplinary, involving geology, meteorology, oceanography, and atmospheric sciences.

No one denies that the climate is always changing, nor that there are fluctuations in sea levels or ice sheet sizes, but the current rate of change is unprecedented in the context of human history and is largely driven by human activities, particularly the burning of fossil fuels, which increases atmospheric CO2 levels.

The redistribution of the sun’s energy by the atmosphere and oceans is heavily influenced by greenhouse gases. Greenhouse gases, including CO2, trap heat in the atmosphere, affecting the Earth's energy balance and climate. The atmospheric CO2 may only be 0.001% of the total, but the oceans, rocks, and soil only absorb 50% of what we produce, not 99.998%. The other 50% of what we produce is added to the atmospheric CO2.

Natural cycles suggest that Earth should actually be in a cooling phase now. Even if our planet was recovering from glacial times, however, it would not occur anywhere near as fast as what we’ve seen in recent years.

No scientist reduces climate change to just CO2. Multiple other factors are considered and controlled for, such as solar radiation, aerosols, and land-use changes. But if you’re hearing unqualified activists making this claim, then ignore them. Their opinions are as unreliable as Plimer’s ideologically-driven claims.

Meanwhile in news you most definitely WON'T be reading in your ABC, the Great Barrier Reef is showing record levels of coral coverage...

http://x.com/BjornLomborg/status/1808134536854700215

Yes yes I know. the information is provided by people who are persona non gratia in polite company and therefore will be ignored. On;t approved information is .... ahem....approved.

" but the current rate of change is unprecedented in the context of human history"

Well there's actually no evidence for that although its something that is often claimed and repeated by the climate community. There are lots of places to see this, but the best (or at least my favourite) is Marcott et al 2013 in which the author, in supplementary notes, pointed out that the data resolution for past records, while good over longer spans, isn't precise enough to know whether there were other periods in the recent past where temperatures rose as fast as now. We know as a matter of relative certainty that temperature over longer time spans rose higher than the present but cannot say one way or t'other whether they got there by short sharp 1 degree C/ per century rises or took longer.

Either way, it is very clear that definitive statements like 'its unprecedented' are more in the realm of propaganda than established fact.

Incidentally, Marcoot13 was also the paper, among many others, that showed that current temperatures have been exceeded for at least 3000 of the past 12000 years - ie they aren't even close to unprecedented.

"Natural cycles suggest that Earth should actually be in a cooling phase now."

Another of those things that just get said without actual evidence. No question that it can be argued we are in a cooling cycle, but just as many and valid arguments can be made, based on paleo data that we remain in a warming cycle as the earth recovers from the Little Ice Age.