<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: New data from Antarctica suggests that the south pole icecap is not warming, as predicted by climate models.	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/new-data-from-antarctica-suggests-that-the-south-pole-icecap-is-not-warming-as-predicted-by-climate-models/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/new-data-from-antarctica-suggests-that-the-south-pole-icecap-is-not-warming-as-predicted-by-climate-models/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 Jun 2012 18:59:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Jim		</title>
		<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/new-data-from-antarctica-suggests-that-the-south-pole-icecap-is-not-warming-as-predicted-by-climate-models/#comment-53644</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jim]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Jun 2012 18:59:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://behindtheblack.com/?p=17979#comment-53644</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Sometimes I go back and read what I posted a few days earlier and I say &quot;Brother, did I really write that?&quot;
Two corrections:
Wording in first sentence should be &quot;That is a great study, for not only its creativity....&quot;
And
AGU is a science organization, not a scientific organization.
Apologies.
Me talk pretty one day.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sometimes I go back and read what I posted a few days earlier and I say &#8220;Brother, did I really write that?&#8221;<br />
Two corrections:<br />
Wording in first sentence should be &#8220;That is a great study, for not only its creativity&#8230;.&#8221;<br />
And<br />
AGU is a science organization, not a scientific organization.<br />
Apologies.<br />
Me talk pretty one day.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jim		</title>
		<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/new-data-from-antarctica-suggests-that-the-south-pole-icecap-is-not-warming-as-predicted-by-climate-models/#comment-53574</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jim]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jun 2012 14:49:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://behindtheblack.com/?p=17979#comment-53574</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[That is a great study, for not only in its creativity (using seals!), but also the results, which as the authors say should lead to refinements in the modeling of ice melt. After all, models are always imperfect and need refining. Its not that the ice cap is NOT melting, it may be that it is melting slower than models have predicted. That&#039;s what the authors say.

But it is also good to see you give credence to the American Geophysical Union and what they have to say. They clearly are not bought off, and they are, after all, interested in science and getting the science right. I wonder if you think this recent study will impact their stance on AGW, which is as follows, and I quote them:
&quot;The Earth&#039;s climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming.&quot;
&quot;With climate change, as with ozone depletion, the human footprint on Earth is apparent. The cause of disruptive climate change, unlike ozone depletion, is tied to energy use and runs through modern society.&quot;
And then most recently this year, from Michael McPhaden, AGU President:
&quot;There are those who would want us to believe that climate change isn’t happening and that human activity isn’t playing a role, but unfortunately wishful thinking won’t make the facts disappear.&quot;
And
&quot;...there are three things they can be assured of: (1) Climate change is real, and in all likelihood is being caused by human behavior; (2) There is wide-spread consensus on this point, with 97 percent of the climate science community agreeing; (3) That consensus is rooted in a foundation of scientific knowledge gained through careful, thoughtful, and thorough research, not political or ideological rhetoric.&quot;
Its a terrific scientific organization, I agree.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That is a great study, for not only in its creativity (using seals!), but also the results, which as the authors say should lead to refinements in the modeling of ice melt. After all, models are always imperfect and need refining. Its not that the ice cap is NOT melting, it may be that it is melting slower than models have predicted. That&#8217;s what the authors say.</p>
<p>But it is also good to see you give credence to the American Geophysical Union and what they have to say. They clearly are not bought off, and they are, after all, interested in science and getting the science right. I wonder if you think this recent study will impact their stance on AGW, which is as follows, and I quote them:<br />
&#8220;The Earth&#8217;s climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;With climate change, as with ozone depletion, the human footprint on Earth is apparent. The cause of disruptive climate change, unlike ozone depletion, is tied to energy use and runs through modern society.&#8221;<br />
And then most recently this year, from Michael McPhaden, AGU President:<br />
&#8220;There are those who would want us to believe that climate change isn’t happening and that human activity isn’t playing a role, but unfortunately wishful thinking won’t make the facts disappear.&#8221;<br />
And<br />
&#8220;&#8230;there are three things they can be assured of: (1) Climate change is real, and in all likelihood is being caused by human behavior; (2) There is wide-spread consensus on this point, with 97 percent of the climate science community agreeing; (3) That consensus is rooted in a foundation of scientific knowledge gained through careful, thoughtful, and thorough research, not political or ideological rhetoric.&#8221;<br />
Its a terrific scientific organization, I agree.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
