# Melting the Icecaps **URL:** \ **Category:** Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports\ **Created:** [February 18, 2011, 7:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/melting-the-icecaps/571796 "2011-02-18T07:33:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![vislor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/vislor/32/5933_2.png) [@vislor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vislor)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2011, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/melting-the-icecaps/571796/41 "2011-03-01T14:30:27Z")
> [@SpyOne](#): > > Assuming that what you have presented there is all true, what you have is proof that the climate is changing, but not proof that humans are in any way responsible. > > Which doesn’t mean you are wrong: it is entirely possible to be right and just have failed to \prove\ it. But the only thing you presented that even \implies\ that humans are responsible is that change has taken place (presumably during a period that corresponds with our increased industrialization, and therefore increased CO2 output). I don’t believe that is a coincidence, but it might be, and you have provided no evidence that it isn’t. I must apologize for the lack of citations or real data to refute in my post. It wasn’t a good post because of that. I also can see I wasn’t clear. What my friend convinced me of was that humans have effected the climate, especially in the past one hundred years. However, like everything else, I don’t know what that means in the short or long term. Futher, as SpyOne points out, I might not be understanding what I was told! At the end of the day, I know that climate changes. Everything else, I don’t know. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2011, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/melting-the-icecaps/571796/42 "2011-03-03T00:57:32Z")
> [@SpyOne](#): > > Assuming that what you have presented there is all true, what you have is proof that the climate is changing, but not proof that humans are in any way responsible. There are more than 10 indicators of the empirical evidence that find a distinct human fingerprint on the current climate change: > **[10 Indicators of a Human Fingerprint on Climate Change](https://skepticalscience.com/10-Indicators-of-a-Human-Fingerprint-on-Climate-Change.html)** > > The NOAA State of the Climate 2009 report is an excellent summary of the many lines of evidence that global warming is happening. Acknowledging the fact that the planet is warming leads to the all important question - what's causing global warming?... > [@](#): > > #1 Humans are currently emitting around 30 billion tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere every year (CDIAC). Of course, it could be coincidence that CO2 levels are rising so sharply at the same time so let’s look at more evidence that we’re responsible for the rise in CO2 levels. > #2 When we measure the type of carbon accumulating in the atmosphere, we observe more of the type of carbon that comes from fossil fuels (Manning 2006). > #3 This is corroborated by measurements of oxygen in the atmosphere. Oxygen levels are falling in line with the amount of carbon dioxide rising, just as you’d expect from fossil fuel burning which takes oxygen out of the air to create carbon dioxide (Manning 2006). > #4 Further independent evidence that humans are raising CO2 levels comes from measurements of carbon found in coral records going back several centuries. These find a recent sharp rise in the type of carbon that comes from fossil fuels (Pelejero 2005). > #5 So we know humans are raising CO2 levels. What’s the effect? Satellites measure less heat escaping out to space, at the particular wavelengths that CO2 absorbs heat, thus finding “direct experimental evidence for a significant increase in the Earth’s greenhouse effect”. (Harries 2001, Griggs 2004, Chen 2007). > #6 If less heat is escaping to space, where is it going? Back to the Earth’s surface. Surface measurements confirm this, observing more downward infrared radiation (Philipona 2004, Wang 2009). A closer look at the downward radiation finds more heat returning at CO2 wavelengths, leading to the conclusion that “this experimental data should effectively end the argument by skeptics that no experimental evidence exists for the connection between greenhouse gas increases in the atmosphere and global warming.” (Evans 2006). > #7 If an increased greenhouse effect is causing global warming, we should see certain patterns in the warming. For example, the planet should warm faster at night than during the day. This is indeed being observed (Braganza 2004, Alexander 2006). > #8 Another distinctive pattern of greenhouse warming is cooling in the upper atmosphere, otherwise known as the stratosphere. This is exactly what’s happening (Jones 2003). > #9 With the lower atmosphere (the troposphere) warming and the upper atmosphere (the stratosphere) cooling, another consequence is the boundary between the troposphere and stratosphere, otherwise known as the tropopause, should rise as a consequence of greenhouse warming. This has been observed (Santer 2003). > #10 An even higher layer of the atmosphere, the ionosphere, is expected to cool and contract in response to greenhouse warming. This has been observed by satellites (Laštovi?ka 2006). > [@SpyOne](#): > > Which doesn’t mean you are wrong: it is entirely possible to be right and just have failed to \prove\ it. But the only thing you presented that even \implies\ that humans are responsible is that change has taken place (presumably during a period that corresponds with our increased industrialization, and therefore increased CO2 output). I don’t believe that is a coincidence, but it might be, and you have provided no evidence that it isn’t. Well, since the basis and evidence of the current theories regarding what is driving the recent climate change were more formally mentioned in the 1950’s, one has to say that what you are saying is still part of the huge ignorance that is out there regarding the mountain of evidence that has been gained in the last 60 years. [http://climatecrocks.com/2010/11/08/climate-science-1956-blast-from-the-past/](http://climatecrocks.com/2010/11/08/climate-science-1956-blast-from-the-past/) ---
**Author:** ![SpyOne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/82dd89/32.png) [@SpyOne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SpyOne)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2011, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/melting-the-icecaps/571796/43 "2011-03-08T15:42:34Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > There are more than 10 indicators of the empirical evidence that find a distinct human fingerprint on the current climate change: > > [10 Indicators of a Human Fingerprint on Climate Change](http://www.skepticalscience.com/10-Indicators-of-a-Human-Fingerprint-on-Climate-Change.html) > > Well, since the basis and evidence of the current theories regarding what is driving the recent climate change were more formally mentioned in the 1950’s, one has to say that what you are saying is still part of the huge ignorance that is out there regarding the mountain of evidence that has been gained in the last 60 years. > > [http://climatecrocks.com/2010/11/08/climate-science-1956-blast-from-the-past/](http://climatecrocks.com/2010/11/08/climate-science-1956-blast-from-the-past/) I was quite clear about what I was discussing, I thought: my comments were about, and limited to, the contents of Vislor’s post. There can be mountains and mountains of evidence, that doesn’t change the fact that he presented none. Vislor, no apology necessary: my remarks were intended more as an observation than a criticism. Or perhaps more as criticism than complaint. I was just pointing out that “My friend made a very convincing argument about this that I don’t really remember except that it changed my mind” has an evidentiary weight near zero. It was not inappropriate to share the anecdote, but it was unlikely to convince anyone who did not already agree with you. Anyway, I apologize for making you feel as if you should apologize. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![RDFozz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/977dab/32.png) [@RDFozz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RDFozz)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2011, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/melting-the-icecaps/571796/44 "2011-06-15T02:11:37Z")
Two notes on this column, both at the risk of looking stupid (sorry, I’m behind in my reading): 1. Would grounded ice on the sea floor melting cause the oceans to rise? Because I would think that, just like floating ice is already displacing water, so would ice that’s currently _under_ water. 2. Talk of painting ice black to make it melt seems odd, to me. Personally, one of the most annoying things about melting snow is that it seems like the clean (white) snow all melts first, often leaving mounds of dirty, gross-looking black ice that can take days or weeks longer to go away. Am I missing something? ---
**Author:** ![naita](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naita/32/5862_2.png) [@naita](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/naita)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2011, 8:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/melting-the-icecaps/571796/45 "2011-06-15T08:36:20Z")
> [@RDFozz](#): > > Two notes on this column, both at the risk of looking stupid (sorry, I’m behind in my reading): > > 1. Would grounded ice on the sea floor melting cause the oceans to rise? Because I would think that, just like floating ice is already displacing water, so would ice that’s currently _under_ water. > > 2. Talk of painting ice black to make it melt seems odd, to me. Personally, one of the most annoying things about melting snow is that it seems like the clean (white) snow all melts first, often leaving mounds of dirty, gross-looking black ice that can take days or weeks longer to go away. Am I missing something? 1. If it’s grounded on the sea floor there’s more ice than buoancy can keep afloat. All the “excess” ice that you can melt before the ice starts floating again would contribute to a rise in ocean level. The rest, not so much. 2. If you have a lot of ice and a thin layer of paint or dirt, the dark color will trap more heat and cause the ice to melt faster. If you have a lot of dirt and not much ice, the dirt will function as an insulator and the ice will melt slower. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/melting-the-icecaps/571796.md?page=2)