You know, Woody, I thought the same thing.

If the winters are warmer and the summers are cooler, doesn't that cancel out? Not only that, if there are more days above freezing, I would think that the stuff would melt, not accumulate.

I only had Gen. Chemistry and Organic/Biochemistry. Maybe this part was covered in the advanced curriculum.

Posted by LASunsett at August 26, 2006 05:53 PM

Maybe I can get more ice by leaving the freezer door of my refrigerator open.

Posted by Woody at August 26, 2006 06:52 PM

Actually Woody, your freezer analogy is not bad.

If you left your freezer door open a bit, you might see some melting near the door, but further inside you would get more ice build-up at first (as frost, though, not as ice cubes), because the warm kitchen air carries more moisture which will be deposited as ice when it hits the cold walls (or other freezer objects). However, if you leave your door open too long/too much, then you will overwhelm the refrigeration system and everything will eventually melt.

The same type of process could lead to local areas of glacial ice accumulation (interior regions) as advected warmer air leads to increased local precipitation in the form of snow.

This example, of course, doesn't say anything about the cause of the warming, which is the main GW controversy. After all, the same thing would happen whether you left the door open or there was a mild earthquake that left the freezer door slightly ajar.

Posted by civil truth at August 26, 2006 07:40 PM

Actually, Woody ... The GW fanatics' next move will be to change the name from Global Warming to Global Climate Change (GCC). That way it doesn't matter which way it goes, it will remain in the realm of the snake oil salesman, and all of the corrupt politicians (sorry, that's redundant isn't it) can climb on the band wagon for their own hidden agendas just as they're doing now.

Posted by Vulgorilla at August 27, 2006 08:04 AM

Civil Truth, that was an interestng analysis of yours. Now, you have helped to identify a likely cause of global warming--people are leaving their refrigerator doors open too long.

Vulgorilla, it's interesting that you mention the switch in terminology from "global warming" to "climate change." I had noticed that, too, and now see that playing with words helps the politicians and fanatics to say that they are right whether things warm up or cool down--as recent examples have shown. It's getting a little out of hand.

Posted by Woody at August 27, 2006 02:38 PM

civil truth at least acknowledges complexity in the issue, an attitude few of us are willing to consider.

Posted by Assistant Village Idiot at August 27, 2006 03:58 PM

AVI, the main claims of the global warming enthusiasts are:
1) that global warming is occuring at an alarming and dangerous rate,
2) that will threaten our survival in only a few years,
3) that mankind is responsible for it, and
4) that the United States must pay a substantial adn the primary economic price while other nations like China and India get passes.

Now, they decided on number four before proving one through three, which lends great suspicion to their lack of science but leaves no doubt as to their socialist, anti-capitalist, anti-U.S. politics.

Maybe we could end the global warming hysteria if Al Gore studied the issue from the inside of an abandoned refrigerator.

Posted by Woody at August 27, 2006 07:46 PM

One more thing on the Kyoto Protocol that I read from a link next to the article that I referenced: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4269921.stm

Most climate scientists say that the targets set in the Kyoto Protocol are merely scratching the surface of the problem.

The agreement aims to reduce emissions from industrialised nations only by around 5%, whereas the consensus among many climate scientists is that in order to avoid the worst consequences of global warming, emissions cuts in the order of 60% across the board are needed.

When the GW hysterics say that we must destroy our economy, don't you think that our sacrifices should actually correct the problem--if that is really what they wanted rather than crippling us?

If substantial sacrifices do not help and assuming that there is change in "climate" (one way or the other), our best and most cost effective strategy is to adapt.

Posted by Woody at August 27, 2006 07:57 PM

Woody, I remain skeptical of the political hysteria surrounding the GW issue, particularly when I see people like Al Gore jumping on the bandwagon.

However, just as the GW enthusiasts in their zeal have overstated the scientific evidence, it does no service to the GW skeptics' position to advance specious scientific arguments.

All I tried do was to illustrate by analogy why the glacial growth data does not represent a scientific disproof of data indicating that the globally averaged surface temperature is increasing at the present time.

However, if every discussion of climate science is going to rouse you and your readership to "arrest the usual suspects" (i.e. evoke predicatable comments on the politics of GW), then perhaps I should just ignore your GW columns in the future, or rather view them at a distance as I would view geyser eruptions.

Posted by civil truth at August 27, 2006 09:50 PM

Who is "arresting" you, Civil Truth?
Thus far, I have only read civil discourse.

Posted by Ben USN (Ret) at August 28, 2006 01:24 AM

Civil Truth, a sign of someone being on the left is that he cannot distinguish a joke from a serious statement. I don't think that you're swinging left, so accept that a couple of my comments were tongue-in-cheek. It's just so easy to make fun of global warming backers.

I actually appreciated your explanation of the analogy between glaciers and freezers, and it made sense. That, however, is a theory for that situtation in itself, but it is interesting from a scientific discussion viewpoint. Of course, global warming is a political debate, instead.

As I have observed, some of the glaciers that Al Gore has shown retreating are doing so because of less precipitation while this glacier in question is building because of more precipitation--for which there can be many variables and explanations other than recent global warming. For instance, climate variations caused by El Nino were going on long before Al Gore was born.

Yes, I do tend to discount most hysterical claims from the left, as experience justifies. That can result in me dismissing even legitimate claims--much as the boy who cried "wolf" was doubted. However, please don't ever think that I take your remarks in that same vein, as you bring a lot of knowledge and insight into issues, which I appreciate.

Posted by Woody at August 28, 2006 06:52 AM