+ Reply to Thread
Page 20 of 23 FirstFirst 1 10 20 23 LastLast
Results 381 to 400 of 451

Thread: The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?

  1. Link to Post #381
    UK Avalon Member
    Join Date
    10th August 2016
    Age
    56
    Posts
    46
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 132 times in 42 posts

    Default Re: The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?

    Well Antarctic Sea ice has appeared to reach its record minimum whilst the Arctic is still bumping along the bottom of all measures so maybe we've answered the threads question?

    One years data does not prove anything but I suppose it was something that was going to occur as the forcings for extension in Seas ice around Antarctica fell away. If next austral summer sees a similar pattern of losses we will be closer to calling it a real , and not just see it as a weather variable, but a change back to what we were seeing up until the 80's. With CFC's now banned the healing of the ozone hole will reduce the circumpolar winds/currents and so allow the worlds atmosphere/oceans back into the continent. Were this to occur then Antarctica will be playing 'catch up' to where is should have been without the Ozone issues ( the Pacific cycles would still have had impact but they would not have been Augmented/negated by the impacts of the Ozone hole?). Ice shelfs that have been protected by extended Sea ice ( and the dampening out of waves/swells) will also 'reorganise' to new stable ice fronts so we will see a period of high shelf losses which might cause some alarm?

    Anyway all eyes will be on this Arctic melt Season. How close has this winter left the basin to total melt out under 'average' summer Weather? I think we have been blind sided for the last 5 years as the winters took away the strength/durability of the ice. This change booted up a gear on December 27th 2015 when the first of the 'new' high temp, high humidity storms ploughed in and severely restricted the cold going into the ice. A combination of 4 years of severe crackopalypse events and high Fram export over winter has left us with very little 'old ice' in the basin and the last of the thick ice is hanging over the top of Fram. This years Freezing Degree days are massively lower than this time last year and we saw how well that ice did over a pretty poor melt season with the three 'high insolation' months cloudy and cool. If that weather was able to take that ice to second lowest then surely warmer, thinner, highly fragmented ice will fare even worse even over such a poor summer.

    Now if the weather cycles are still in operation and have not been blown away by the changes in the atmosphere we have seen, then this is the first year we could expect the return of the 'Perfect melt storm synoptic' that brought us the shock of 07's record low. I'm sorry but that forcing would leave the basin ice free by August.

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to GrayWolfBG For This Post:

    Bruno (6th March 2017), fourty-two (4th March 2017), Foxie Loxie (3rd March 2017)

  3. Link to Post #382
    UK Avalon Member
    Join Date
    10th August 2016
    Age
    56
    Posts
    46
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 132 times in 42 posts

    Default Re: The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?



    Sadly this is some of our oldest and thickest ice. It calved off the 'ice bridge' at the top of the Nares straight ( in the Lincoln sea North of the Canadian Archipelago/Greenland).

    You can see by the image that this floe is a lose collection of previous ice rubble all glued together by First Year ice. With us about to enter melt season 2017 I have to wonder just how good the 'Glue' is holding last years sea ice min rubble together? By May will we see a broad band of ice rubble surrounding a solid central ice region? What will this mean for absorption of solar over that period?

  4. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to GrayWolfBG For This Post:

    Bruno (6th March 2017), fourty-two (6th March 2017), Foxie Loxie (6th March 2017)

  5. Link to Post #383
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,766
    Thanks
    60,316
    Thanked 95,057 times in 15,475 posts

    Default Re: The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?

    In Dilbert's layperson's words:

    How to Convince Skeptics that Climate Change is a Problem

    By Scott Adams Scott Adams's Blog
    Posted March 8th, 2017 @ 1:32pm in #climate science


    I don’t know much about science, and even less about climate science. So as a practical matter, I like to side with the majority of scientists until they change their collective minds. They might be wrong, but their guess is probably better than mine.

    That said, it is mind-boggling to me that the scientific community can’t make a case for climate science that sounds convincing, even to some of the people on their side, such as me. In other words, I think scientists are right (because I play the odds), but I am puzzled by why they can’t put together a convincing argument, whereas the skeptics can, and easily do. Shouldn’t it be the other way around?

    As a public service, and to save the planet, obviously, I will tell you what it would take to convince skeptics that climate science is a problem that we must fix. Please avoid the following persuasion mistakes.

    1. Stop telling me the “models” (plural) are good. If you told me one specific model was good, that might sound convincing. But if climate scientists have multiple models, and they all point in the same general direction, something sounds fishy. If climate science is relatively “settled,” wouldn’t we all use the same models and assumptions?

    And why can’t science tell me which one of the different models is the good one, so we can ignore the less-good ones? What’s up with that? If you can’t tell me which model is better than the others, why would I believe anything about them?

    2. Stop telling me the climate models are excellent at hindcasting, meaning they work when you look at history. That is also true of financial models, and we know financial models can NOT predict the future. We also know that investment advisors like to show you their pure-luck past performance to scam you into thinking they can do it in the future. To put it bluntly, climate science is using the most well-known scam method (predicting the past) to gain credibility. That doesn’t mean climate models are scams. It only means scientists picked the least credible way to claim credibility. Were there no options for presenting their case in a credible way?

    Just to be clear, hindcasting is a necessary check-off for knowing your models are rational and worthy of testing in the future. But it tells you nothing of their ability to predict the future. If scientists were honest about that point, they would be more credible.

    3. Tell me what percentage of warming is caused by humans versus natural causes. If humans are 10% of the cause, I am not so worried. If we are 90%, you have my attention. And if you leave out the percentage caused by humans, I have to assume the omission is intentional. And why would you leave out the most important number if you were being straight with people? Sounds fishy.

    There might be a good reason why science doesn’t know the percentage of human-made warming and still has a good reason for being alarmed. I just haven’t seen it, and I’ve been looking for it. Why would climate science ignore the only important fact for persuasion?

    Today I saw an article saying humans are responsible for MORE than 100% of warming because the earth would otherwise be in a cooling state. No links provided. Credibility = zero.

    4. Stop attacking some of the messengers for believing that our reality holds evidence of Intelligent Design. Climate science alarmists need to update their thinking to the “simulated universe” idea that makes a convincing case that we are a trillion times more likely to be a simulation than we are likely to be the first creatures who can create one. No God is required in that theory, and it is entirely compatible with accepted science. (Even if it is wrong.)

    5. Skeptics produce charts of the earth’s temperature going up and down for ages before humans were industrialized. If you can’t explain-away that chart, I can’t hear anything else you say. I believe the climate alarmists are talking about the rate of increase, not the actual temperatures. But why do I never see their chart overlayed on the skeptics’ chart so we can see the difference? That seems like the obvious thing to do. In fact, climate alarmists should throw out everything but that one chart.

    6. Stop telling me the arctic ice on one pole is decreasing if you are ignoring the increase on the other pole. Or tell me why the experts observing the ice increase are wrong. When you ignore the claim, it feels fishy.

    7. When skeptics point out that the Earth has not warmed as predicted, don’t change the subject to sea levels. That sounds fishy.

    8. Don’t let the skeptics talk last. The typical arc I see online is that Climate Scientists point out that temperatures are rising, then skeptics produce a chart saying the temperatures are always fluctuating, and have for as far as we can measure. If the real argument is about rate of change, stop telling me about record high temperatures as if they are proof of something.

    9. Stop pointing to record warmth in one place when we’re also having record cold in others. How is one relevant and the other is not?

    10. Don’t tell me how well your models predict the past. Tell me how many climate models have ever been created, since we started doing this sort of thing, and tell me how many have now been discarded because they didn’t predict correctly. If the answer is “All of the old ones failed and we were totally surprised because they were good at hindcasting,” then why would I trust the new ones?

    11. When you claim the oceans have risen dramatically, you need to explain why insurance companies are ignoring this risk and why my local beaches look exactly the same to me. Also, when I Google this question, why are half of the top search results debunking the rise? How can I tell who is right? They all sound credible to me.

    12. If you want me to believe warmer temperatures are bad, you need to produce a chart telling me how humankind thrived during various warmer and colder eras. Was warming usually good or usually bad?

    You also need to convince me that economic models are accurate. Sure, we might have warming, but you have to run economic models to figure out how that affects things. And economic models are, as you know, usually worthless.

    13. Stop conflating the basic science and the measurements with the models. Each has its own credibility. The basic science and even the measurements are credible. The models are less so. If you don’t make that distinction, I see the message as manipulation, not an honest transfer of knowledge.

    14. If skeptics make you retreat to Pascal’s Wager as your main argument for aggressively responding the climate change, please understand that you lost the debate. The world is full of risks that might happen. We don’t treat all of them as real. And we can’t rank any of these risks to know how to allocate our capital to the best path. Should we put a trillion dollars into climate remediation or use that money for a missile defense system to better protect us from North Korea?

    Anyway, to me it seems brutally wrong to call skeptics on climate science “anti-science” when all they want is for science to make its case in a way that doesn’t look exactly like a financial scam.* Is that asking a lot?

    People ask me why I keep writing on this topic. My interest is the psychology around it, and the persuasion game on both sides. And it seems to me that climate scientists are the Hillary Clinton of scientists. They think facts and reason will persuade the public. Even though science knows that doesn’t generally work.

    * Or a Chinese hoax. They look similar.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  6. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    avid (11th March 2017), Daughter of Time (12th May 2017), Debra (10th March 2017), Ewan (10th March 2017), fourty-two (11th March 2017), Foxie Loxie (10th March 2017), Metaphor (1st August 2017), TargeT (2nd August 2017)

  7. Link to Post #384
    UK Avalon Member
    Join Date
    10th August 2016
    Age
    56
    Posts
    46
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 132 times in 42 posts

    Default Re: The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?

    All the answers are out there and , if the information lies outside your own speciality , there are plenty of resourses out there to help you abridge over so as to understand their data and methodology?

    I think you might even find out why there is a need for so many 'climate' models ( lol!) . If you really want to learn then do not be put off with the effort involved to bring you up to speed?

    As far as 'climate change' is concerned I think the next 6 months of 'weather' around the northern Hemisphere will leave you in no doubt that something is now badly awry with our weathers? You will find that Science has covered all of the forcings that are leading to such climate upsets and where our trend is taking us?

    Sadly there has been a concerted 'disinformation' campaign, from paid misinformers that , should you only experience science via the media/forums, has rather muddied the waters I( their intentions) so that most of the time the conclusions you get to see are only the most conservative lest the Climate Change Deniers demand impossible proofs ( not seen in the rest of science?).

    Basically pick an area of research , be it Ocean ,Cryosphere or atmosphere and find out what we are finding out and how the 'proofs' are now amassing ( at the behest of the paid misinformers) as we tumble deeper into this accelerated phase of warming and looking likely to see it take the remaining summer ice cover over the Arctic over the coming years if not this one?

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GrayWolfBG For This Post:

    Ba-ba-Ra (21st March 2017), Foxie Loxie (17th March 2017)

  9. Link to Post #385
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,766
    Thanks
    60,316
    Thanked 95,057 times in 15,475 posts

    Default Re: The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?

    IPCC forgets cloud circulation in Antarctica; vertical farming solutions

    Adapt 2030 You Tube
    Tue, 21 Mar 2017 18:57 UTC




    Antarctica still gaining ice, a look at where underwater volcanoes are melting sea ice and why the IPCC didn't take into account cloud circulation models when doing projections for the continent. Long term 37 year look at global ice concentrations look as they always have.

    Aerofarms vertical farming using aeroponics for micro-greens.

    Sources
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  10. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    avid (21st March 2017), Ba-ba-Ra (21st March 2017), Ewan (22nd March 2017), Foxie Loxie (21st March 2017)

  11. Link to Post #386
    UK Avalon Member
    Join Date
    10th August 2016
    Age
    56
    Posts
    46
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 132 times in 42 posts

    Default Re: The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?

    Now we are past the record low area/extent for Antarctic Sea ice it will be interesting to see how re-freeze progresses? If we have slipped into the opposite natural forcings whilst seeing measured improvement in the Ozone issues we will see poor re-growth and another low max ( at a record early date?)

    If it is 'Naturals swinging positive and ozone healing' then it has taken a few years to build its head of steam but if we are now seeing impacts then those impacts must continue ( as it would take as long to wind down from the forcing as it has to wind it up?) and by the time we are getting into the Naturals swinging back negative I do not see how they can be as impacting? For one the ozone hole will be mended in 2 decades time and the planet will have warmed under the new 'Natural augmented' warming spurt we are entering ( 3 back to back record warm global years with 2017 on track to wipe away the Nino spike 2016 record year???).

    Already we see millions impacted by the warming across East Africa and Southern India has 145 million in the south suffering water shortages again after last years issues. The brightening of the Pacific is leading to high SST anoms which in turn could impact/delay the monsoon and alter rainfall amounts. 2017 will see the first 'Media covered' climate disasters impacting tens of millions. How much will trumplethinskin need to see before realising he needs his climate data to keep the U.S, safe?

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GrayWolfBG For This Post:

    Bruno (22nd March 2017), Foxie Loxie (22nd March 2017)

  13. Link to Post #387
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,766
    Thanks
    60,316
    Thanked 95,057 times in 15,475 posts

    Default Re: The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?

    Greenland Ice Sheet Growing at Record Rate

    By Robert March 24, 2017

    Already above average for the whole year … and it’s still March.

    “Look at those record numbers,” says reader. “It’s already above average for the whole year and it’s still March. Imagine what it’s going to be like at this rate in June? Or will there even be a melt season?”



    “What makes this even more concerning in my eyes because we are probably witnessing the massive glaciation of Greenland and parts of Northern Canada again.”


    Left: Map of the surface mass balance today (in mm water equivalent per day). Right: The average surface mass balance for today’s calendar date over the period 1990-2013.


    Map of the accumulated surface mass balance (in mm water equivalent) from September 1st to now

    http://www.dmi.dk/en/groenland/maali...e-mass-budget/
    Thanks to Kingbum for this info
    Last edited by Hervé; 27th March 2017 at 01:25.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  14. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Ba-ba-Ra (25th March 2017), Bill Ryan (25th March 2017), Daughter of Time (12th May 2017), Ewan (25th March 2017), Foxie Loxie (25th March 2017), meat suit (25th March 2017), TargeT (2nd August 2017)

  15. Link to Post #388
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,766
    Thanks
    60,316
    Thanked 95,057 times in 15,475 posts

    Default Re: The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?

    Oops, Warmists just lost the Antarctic peninsula - it is now cooling

    Anthony Watts Watts Up With That?
    Thu, 27 Apr 2017 18:23 UTC



    A warming trend of 0.32 °C/decade during 1979 - 1997 to a cooling trend of − 0.47 °C/decade during 1999 - 2014.
    [click on picture to enlarge]

    Remember the much ballyhooed paper that made the cover of Nature, Steig et al, "Warming of the Antarctic ice-sheet surface since the 1957 International Geophysical Year", Nature, Jan 22, 2009 that included some conspicuously errant Mannian math from the master of making trends out of noisy data himself? Well, that just went south, literally.

    And it just isn't because the Steig et al. paper was wrong, as proven by three climate skeptics that submitted their own rebuttal, no, it's because mother nature herself reversed the trend in actual temperature data in the Antarctic peninsula, and that one place where it was warming, was smeared over the entire continent by Mannian math to make it appear the whole of the Antarctic was warming.

    The peninsula was the only bit of the Antarctic that suited the Warmists. They gleefully reported glacial breakups there, quite ignoring that the Antarctic as a whole was certainly not warming and was in fact tending to cool. The study below however shows that the warmer period on the peninsula was an atypical blip that has now reversed.
    Highlights
    • We examine climate variability since the 1950s in the Antarctic Peninsula region.
    • This region is often cited among those with the fastest warming rates on Earth.
    • A re-assessment of climate data shows a cooling trend initiated around 1998/1999.
    • This recent cooling has already impacted the cryosphere in the northern AP.
    • Observed changes on glacial mass balances, snow cover and permafrost state
    Recent regional climate cooling on the Antarctic Peninsula and associated impacts on the cryosphere

    M. Oliva et al.

    Abstract
    The Antarctic Peninsula (AP) is often described as a region with one of the largest warming trends on Earth since the 1950s, based on the temperature trend of 0.54 °C/decade during 1951 - 2011 recorded at Faraday/Vernadsky station. Accordingly, most works describing the evolution of the natural systems in the AP region cite this extreme trend as the underlying cause of their observed changes. However, a recent analysis (Turner et al., 2016) has shown that the regionally stacked temperature record for the last three decades has shifted from a warming trend of 0.32 °C/decade during 1979 - 1997 to a cooling trend of − 0.47 °C/decade during 1999 - 2014.

    While that study focuses on the period 1979 - 2014, averaging the data over the entire AP region, we here update and re-assess the spatially-distributed temperature trends and inter-decadal variability from 1950 to 2015, using data from ten stations distributed across the AP region. We show that Faraday/Vernadsky warming trend is an extreme case, circa twice those of the long-term records from other parts of the northern AP. Our results also indicate that the cooling initiated in 1998/1999 has been most significant in the N and NE of the AP and the South Shetland Islands (> 0.5 °C between the two last decades), modest in the Orkney Islands, and absent in the SW of the AP. This recent cooling has already impacted the cryosphere in the northern AP, including slow-down of glacier recession, a shift to surface mass gains of the peripheral glacier and a thinning of the active layer of permafrost in northern AP islands.



    Fig. 1. a. Location of the AP within the Antarctic continent. b. Detail of the South Shetland Islands and its stations. c. Distribution of the stations on the Peninsula and neighbouring islands, with inter-decadal MAAT variations since 1956 across the AP region. [click on picture to enlarge]

    Full paper:
    Science of The Total Environment. Volume 580, 15 February 2017, Pages 210 - 223

    h/t to "Greenie Watch"
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  16. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (11th May 2017), Daughter of Time (12th May 2017), Ewan (27th April 2017), Foxie Loxie (27th April 2017), meat suit (27th April 2017), onawah (27th April 2017), TargeT (27th April 2017)

  17. Link to Post #389
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,766
    Thanks
    60,316
    Thanked 95,057 times in 15,475 posts

    Default Re: The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?

    Cool, someone got pissed off enough to finally have a good look at those NOAA data:

    'Global Warming Surprises'

    Dr. Fred Singer
    Watts Up With That?
    Thu, 11 May 2017 17:23 UTC



    Guest essay by Dr. Fred Singer


    Exploring some of the intricacies of GW [Global Warming] science can lead to surprising results that have major consequences. In a recent invited talk at the Heartland Institute's ICCC-12 [Twelfth International Conference on Climate Change], I investigated three important topics:
    1. Inconsistencies in the surface temperature record.

    2. Their explanation as artifacts arising from the misuse of data.

    3. Thereby explaining the failure of IPCC to find credible evidence for anthropogenic global warming (AGW).
    A misleading graph

    In the iconic picture of the global surface temperature of the 20th century [fig 1, top] one can discern two warming intervals — in the initial decades (1910-42) and in the final decades, 1977 to 2000.

    Although these two trends look similar, they are really quite different: the initial warming is genuine, but the later warming is not. What a surprise! I wouldn't exactly call it 'fake,' but it just does not exist; I try to demonstrate this difference as an artifact of the data-gathering process, by comparing with several independent data sets covering similar time intervals.

    Fig 1 20th century temps; top—global; bottom– US


    The later warming is contradicted by every available dataset, as follows:
    **the surface record for the 'lower 48' [US] shows a much lower trend; [see fig 1, bottom]; presumably there is better control over the placement of weather-stations and their thermometers;

    **the trend of global sea surface temp [SST] is much less; with 1995 temp values nearly equal to those of 1942 [acc to Gouretski and Kennedy, as published in Geophysical Research Letters in 2012];

    ** likewise, the trend of night-time marine air-temperatures [NMAT], measured with thermometers on ship decks, according to data from J Kennedy, Hadley Centre, UK

    ** atmospheric temperature trends are uniformly much lower and close to zero (during 1979-1997), whether measured with balloon-borne radiosondes or with microwave sounding units [MSU] aboard weather satellites [see fig 8 in ref 2].

    **compatible data on solar activity that show nothing unusual happening. [Interestingly, the solar data had been assembled for a quite different purpose - namely, to disprove the connection between cosmic rays and climate change [see here fig 14 of ref 2], assuming that the late-century warming was real. In the absence of such warming, as I argue here, this attempted critique of the cosmic-ray - climate connection collapses.]

    **proxy data also show near-zero trends, whether from tree rings or ice cores, as noted about 20 years ago [see fig 16 in ref 1 and figs 2 and 3 of ref 2; plus those that may have been withheld by Michael Mann]. [If you look carefully at Mann's original 1998 paper in Nature or subsequent copies, you will note that his proxy temps cease suddenly in 1979 and are replaced by temps from thermometers from CRU-EAU, the Climate Research Unit of East Anglia University. This substitution not only supplies the 'blade' of Mann's 'hockey-stick' but enables the claim of IPCC-AR3 [2001] that the 20th century was the warmest in the past 1000 years, surpassing even the high temps of the Medieval Warm Period. In Climategate e-mails this substitution was referred to as "Mike's Nature trick. I can't help wondering if Mann' s original post-1979 proxy data showed warming at all; perhaps that has some bearing on why Mann has withheld these data; it could have killed the blade and spoiled the IPCC claim.]
    On the other hand, the early warming [1910-40] is supported by many proxy data - including temps derived from tree rings, ice cores, etc; unfortunately, we could not find any temperature data of the upper troposphere. However, I bet they would have shown an amplified warming trend - a hot spot.

    A Digression on Hotspot [HSp] and Hockeystick [HSt]

    [Sorry about using these two technical terms.]

    'Hotspot' refers to an enhanced temp trend in the tropical upper troposphere [UT]; it is produced by convection of latent energy through water vapor [WV] and is the dominant agent for heating the UT. In IPCC-AR2 [1996], BD Santer mistakenly identified the HSp as the fingerprint for GH [greenhouse] warming, which has led to much confusion in the technical literature, fostering the mistaken claim that the HSp owes its existence to tropospheric CO2. But according to textbooks, it is merely an amplification of any temp trend at the surface through the 'moist' atmospheric lapse rate. It surely existed during 1910-42 but we lack data to prove it. Virtual absence of the HSp during 1979-97 [see fig 8 of ref 2 ] implies a near-zero surface trend in that interval. This observation also disproves the AGW hypothesis of IPCC-AR2 [1996] that led to the Kyoto Protocol.

    Mann's construction of his hockeystick graph [often referred to as 'Mike's Nature trick'] was explained earlier [see above].

    This recital of data should suffice to convince alarmists and climate skeptics alike that the late 20th-century global warming does not exist. We should note, however, that both IPCC-AR4 [2007] and AR5 [2013] rely on such (non-existing) warming in trying to prove that its cause is anthropogenic.

    Explaining the climate-trend artifact

    Now we tackle, using newly available data, what may have caused the fictitious temperature trend in the latter decades of the 20th century:

    We first look at Ocean data: as seen from fig 2, there was a great shift in the way Sea Surface Temperatures [SSTs] were measured.


    Fig 2 Sources of SST data: Note the drastic changes between 1980 and 2000 as global buoys increasingly replaced bucket sampling of SST – with also important geographic changes.

    Data from floating buoys increased from zero to 60% between 1980 and 2000. But such buoys are heated directly by the sun, as indicated in the cartoon of fig 3, showing a floating buoy in the solar-heated top layer and unheated engine inlet water in lower ocean layers; this combination leads to a spurious rise in SST when the data are mixed together.


    Fig 3 Cartoon showing floating buoy in solar-heated layer and inlet for engine cooling water

    In merging them, we must note that buoy data are global, while bucket and inlet temps are perforce confined to [mostly commercial] shipping routes. Nor do we know the ocean depths that buckets sample; inlet depths depend on ship type and degree of loading. Disentangling this mess requires data details that are not available. About all we can demonstrate is a distinct diurnal variation in the buoy temps.

    The land data have problems of their own. During the same decades, quite independently, there was a severe reduction in 'superfluous' (mostly) rural stations [fig 12 in ref 2] — unless they were located at airports. As seen from fig 4, the number of stations decreased drastically in the 1990's,


    Fig 4 Weather stations at airports © NOAA


    [fig12 of ref 2], but the number at airports declined less sharply, leading to a major rise in the fraction of reporting stations at airports [according to basic NOAA data]

    This led to a huge increase, from 35% to 80%, in the fraction of airport weather stations — producing a spurious temperature increase from all the construction of runways and buildings — hard to calculate in detail. About all we can claim is a general increase in air traffic, about 5% per year worldwide [see fig 19 in ref 1].

    We have however MSU data for the lower atmosphere over both ocean and land; they show little difference; so we can assume that both land data and ocean data contribute about equally to the fictitious surface trend reported for 1977 to 1997.

    The absence of such a warming trend removes all of IPCC's evidence for AGW. Both IPCC-AR4 [2007] and IPCC-AR5 [2013] rely on the 1979-1997 warming trend to demonstrate anthropogenic global warming [see chapters on 'Attribution' in their respective final reports].

    Obviously, if there is no warming trend, these demonstrations fail - and so do IPCC's proofs for AGW.

    ************************************************** ****

    Ref 1: Singer,S.F. Hot Talk, Cold Science. Independent Institute, Oakland, CA, 1997 and 1999.

    Ref 2: Singer,S.F. Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate. Heartland Inst, Chicago, 2008 h

    S. Fred Singer is professor emeritus at the University of Virginia and a founding director of the Science & Environmental Policy Project; in 2014, after 25 years, he stepped down as president of SEPP. His specialty is atmospheric and space physics. An expert in remote sensing and satellites, he served as the founding director of the US Weather Satellite Service and, more recently, as vice chair of the US National Advisory Committee on Oceans & Atmosphere. He is an elected Fellow of several scientific societies and a Senior Fellow of the Heartland Institute and the Independent Institute. He co-authored the NY Times best-seller Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 years. In 2007, he founded and has chaired the NIPCC (Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change), which has released several scientific reports . For recent writings see here and also Google Scholar.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  18. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    avid (11th May 2017), Bill Ryan (11th May 2017), Daughter of Time (12th May 2017), Ewan (13th May 2017), fourty-two (6th July 2017), Foxie Loxie (11th May 2017), meat suit (12th May 2017)

  19. Link to Post #390
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,766
    Thanks
    60,316
    Thanked 95,057 times in 15,475 posts

    Default Re: The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?

    Lowest solar activity in 200 years

    P Gosselin
    No Tricks Zone
    Sun, 18 Jun 2017 23:59 UTC

    Frank Bosse and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt present their monthly solar activity report at their Die kalte Sonne site.

    In May the sun was very quiet as sunspot number was a mere 18.8, which is only 36% of what is typical for the month this far into the cycle. Seven days saw no sunspot activity at all.

    The following chart shows the current cycle, Solar Cycle 24 (red), compared to the mean of the previous cycles (blue) and the similarly behaving SC 5 (black).


    © No Tricks Zone

    It's clear that the current cycle is significantly weaker than the mean and far weaker than the cycles we saw throughout most of the warming 20th century. So far there have been a number of signs indicating that upcoming SC 25 will also be a weak one. Historically periods of weak solar activity are associated with cooler periods and altered weather patterns.

    The current cycle SC 24 has been so quiet that it is in fact the weakest since SC 6, which took place close to 200 years ago.


    © No Tricks Zone

    The above chart shows the accumulated monthly anomaly for each cycle this far into the current cycle. Bosse and Vahrenholt write that SC 24 has a chance, though a very small one, to overtake SC 5 and become the second weakest cycle since observations began in 1755.

    Arctic sea ice remains stubbornly thick
    Arctic sea ice has been surprising many observers lately because it has so far refused to melt like some predicted it would. Tony Heller here writes that the Northwest Passage is "blocked by very thick ice in the Beaufort Sea". Latest sea ice extent chart shows sea ice extent being back into the statistical pack. There are even forecasts that point the melt season may be a slow one, see Weatherbell Weekend Summary.

    Ice blocks Arctic study
    Little wonder that a scientific global warming expedition to the Arctic had to be cancelled - due to excessive ice! James Delingpole at Breitbart reports: "Ship of Fools III - Global Warming Study Cancelled Because of 'Unprecedented' Ice".

    Dr. David Barber, lead scientist on the study, insisted that all the unexpected ice was caused by "climate change" — sort of like blaming obesity on a lack of calories.

    Northern hemisphere snow cover well over normal
    Also surprising in these times of "global warming" is that northern hemisphere snow cover is well above normal as of June 15, according to Environment Canada:


    © Environment Canada

    Snow cover over the northern hemisphere remains more than 1 standard deviation above the mean.

    Greenland is also defying global warming. Kirye at Twitter tells us accumulated surface mass balance as computed by the Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI) is far above the mean:


    Accumulated surface mass balance from September 1st to now (blue line, Gt). © DMI

    El Nino 2017 disappearing before arriving
    At Weatherbell meteorologist Joe Bastardi reports that the forecast El Nino for 2017 has weakened considerably over the past few months. As what appears to be a curve from Scripps, the curve has gone from a powerful projected El Nino to a La Nina in just over the course of a couple of months (watch Joe's Weekend Summary for the details).


    © Cropped from Weatherbell Weekend Summary.

    If the revised forecasts hold, a cooling globe over the coming months is likely.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  20. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (6th July 2017), fourty-two (6th July 2017), Foxie Loxie (20th June 2017), meat suit (19th June 2017), seko (19th June 2017), Wind (19th June 2017)

  21. Link to Post #391
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,766
    Thanks
    60,316
    Thanked 95,057 times in 15,475 posts

    Default Re: The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?

    Looks like Michael ‘Hockey Stick’ Mann has sabotaged his lawsuit against Dr Ball

    By Robert July 5, 2017

    President Trump should love this. It will bolster his claims that climate scare stories are a ‘hoax.”
    “Breaking: Fatal Courtroom Act Ruins Michael ‘Hockey Stick’ Mann,” reads the headline.
    Lawsuit against Canadian Climatologist Dr. Timothy Ball concerning his statement that Michael Mann “belongs in the state pen, not Penn. State" may turn out to be a precise and true statement of fact.
    ______________________________________

    4 July 2017 – “Penn State climate scientist, Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann commits contempt of court in the ‘climate science trial of the century,'” says this article on principia-scientific.org.

    “Prominent alarmist shockingly defies judge and refuses to surrender data for open court examination. Only possible outcome: Mann’s humiliation, defeat and likely criminal investigation in the U.S.”

    The author of the article, John O’Sullivan, expects the 79-year-old Ball to “instruct his attorneys to trigger mandatory punitive court sanctions, including a ruling that Mann did act with criminal intent when using public funds to commit climate data fraud.

    Mann’s imminent defeat … will be both a legal and scientific vindication of U.S. President Donald Trump’s claims that climate scare stories are a ‘hoax.'”
    “President Trump was elected on a mandate to weed out climate fraud so his supporters will point to this legal outcome as vindication for a full purge. It makes a mockery of statements made by Mann last February when PSI’s Hans Schreuder and John O’Sullivan publicly backed their colleague, Dr Ball and endorsed the revelations in his book. ”
    See much, much more of this fine article:
    Breaking: Fatal Courtroom Act Ruins Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  22. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (6th July 2017), fourty-two (6th July 2017), Foxie Loxie (6th July 2017), kerrielea (11th July 2017), Noelle (6th July 2017), StandingWave (7th July 2017), TargeT (2nd August 2017)

  23. Link to Post #392
    UK Avalon Member
    Join Date
    10th August 2016
    Age
    56
    Posts
    46
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 132 times in 42 posts

    Default Re: The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?

    Global Sea ice levels remain record low ( breaking last years record low) as antarctica fails to put on sea ice keeping it lowest in the record since Sea ice min. Arctic sea ice looks awful but extent is still only 3rd lowest for the time of year. If Cryosat2 data is OK ( and the extra WACCy snow did not fool sensors checking the free board of the ice) then we should expect a novel 'cliff' around the end of July/early Aug as that expanse of 1.5m ice melts out completely. As for our oldest ice? Well the last of it sits over Fram and is slowly being fed into the Atlantic.... even the traditional band along the north shore of Greenland/C.A. is now flowing freely along that shore to Fram now all the landfast ice has gone leaving no 'traps' to hold the ice in station?

  24. The Following User Says Thank You to GrayWolfBG For This Post:

    Foxie Loxie (8th July 2017)

  25. Link to Post #393
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,766
    Thanks
    60,316
    Thanked 95,057 times in 15,475 posts

    Default Re: The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?

    Near record ice growth in Greenland

    By Robert July 8, 2017

    “Oh look,” say alarmists. “An Arctic squirrel.”
    ___________________

    Greenland has gained a near record amount of ice this year, and the ice is melting very slowly, says Tony Heller.


    AGW alarmists yell about melting ice but “in fact they lie,” says James Delingpole.
    “Almost all Greenland’s surface is gaining ice.”
    See entire article by James Delingpole:
    http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...ctic-squirrel/

    Thanks to Glenn Cuthbert for this link
    Last edited by Hervé; 11th July 2017 at 15:52.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  26. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    fourty-two (14th July 2017), Foxie Loxie (9th July 2017), seko (9th July 2017), TargeT (2nd August 2017)

  27. Link to Post #394
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,766
    Thanks
    60,316
    Thanked 95,057 times in 15,475 posts

    Default Re: The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?

    The ‘Pause’ Returns As Global Temperatures Plummet, Warming Hiatus To Extend To 20 Years!

    By P Gosselin on 9. July 2017

    It was just reported that Greenland set a new all-time July cold record, where the mercury plummeted to -33°C. Read details here.

    What follows are excerpts from the most recent analysis of global temperature at wobleibtdieglobaleerwaermung.wordpress.com.

    A Greenland record low shouldn’t come as a surprise since in the wake of the recent El Nino global temperatures measured by satellite now continue their freefall. UAH saw it’s lowest measurement in two years, with June coming in with an anomaly of 0.21°K, which was considerably lower than the 0.45°C anomaly recorded in May.



    Especially the southern hemisphere, which comprises 81% of the globe’s water surface, has been cold recently. The surface temperature plummeted by 0.4°K over the course of June, coming in at an anomaly of just +0.09°C. Antarctica, according to NCEP, was especially cold in June 2017:


    A reanalysis of the WMO 1981-2010 2mtemperature anomaly for June, 2017, shows widespread Antarctic cooling. Source: www.karstenhaustein.com/climate.php.


    Also RSS satellite data is showing a clear downward trend since early 2016:


    Global temperature anomaly of the lower troposphere at 1500 meters since early 2016, measured by RSS. Source: www.woodfortrees.org/2016/to:2017.5/trend.


    Warming hiatus to reach 20 years

    As does UAH, RSS shows little or no warming occurring over the past 20 years:


    As RSS temperature continues its retreat from the natural ENSO-caused spike, the warming hiatus will resume and extend. By the end of this year, the hiatus will reach 20 years. Source: www.woodfortrees.org/from:1997.7/to:2016.08/trend.


    Another interesting pint is that mid troposphere temperatures also fell sharply over June and are at the lower range of the spectrum seen over the past 16 years.


    Plot of the UAH-AMSU temperatures at the middle troposphere, 400 hPA (approx. 7.5 km altitude), from January 2002 to July 2017. Source: https://ghrc.nsstc.nasa.gov/amsutemps/.

    Greenland surface ice mass balance has also reached a record high, defying the often heard claims that it’s melting. Greenland’s ice mass so far is showing a surplus of some 700 billion tonnes – a record!



    Arctic surprises the experts

    Arctic sea ice has also surprised many experts, who previously had been predicting record lows, or even its outright disappearance.

    Ironically Arctic sea ice has shown a record May-to-May growth from 2016 to 2017. It was the strongest growth for that period since measurements began in 1979.




    There has also been a sharp drop in troposphere temperatures above the oceans, which explain the global temperatures. Ocean cycles in large part drive the global temperature over year and decadal scales. Last month they fell to just 0.09°K above the WMO 1981-2010 mean, falling from 0.29°C a month earlier.


    Ocean cycles driving global temperature, not trace gas CO2. Source: www.climate4you.com/ here: Sea surface temperature estimates: UAH.

    RSS
    also shows a similar drop in temperature above the world’s oceans, with the anomaly falling from 0.38°K to 0.18°K.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  28. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    avid (14th July 2017), fourty-two (14th July 2017), Foxie Loxie (14th July 2017), guayabal (25th July 2017), kerrielea (14th July 2017), Rocky_Shorz (15th July 2017)

  29. Link to Post #395
    United States Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    15th March 2010
    Posts
    10,068
    Thanks
    12,891
    Thanked 32,308 times in 7,756 posts

    Default Re: The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?

    The Trillion ton iceberg the size of Delaware just broke free...



    The beginning of this world disasters video is on the ice shelf





    Purple is 86

    I can't get legend to copy from this link https://www.seatemperature.org/
    Last edited by Rocky_Shorz; 15th July 2017 at 07:20.

  30. Link to Post #396
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,766
    Thanks
    60,316
    Thanked 95,057 times in 15,475 posts

    Default Re: The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?

    Alaskan glacier advanced ‘faster than a running dog’

    By Robert July 24, 2017

    Pushed the Huna Tlingit* off their land.

    “You should check out the Mendenhall Glacier in Alaska, where a forest existed more than 2000 years ago and the advancing glacier buried it, says reader Rosco Mac. “Now the glacier is retreating again and uncovering the stumps.”

    “Man wasn’t responsible for the lack of ice back then !

    “Climate ‘scientists’ are always “denying there was such a thing as a global Roman warm period yet Alaska – 7000 km from Europe shows warming at the same time !

    http://juneauempire.com/outdoors/201...en-forest-tomb

    Wow! The above article also says that in Glacier Bay, about 60 miles east of Juneau, researchers have found evidence of ice advances occurring more than 5,000 years ago.

    A more recent glacial advance, between 1724 and 1794 A.D., pushed Huna Tlingit off their land, the article continues. Tlingit histories recorded by Richard and Nora Dauenhauer say that glacier was growing and advancing “faster than a running dog.”

    “Today, the Taku Glacier is the only glacier of the 32 from the Juneau ice-field to be slowly advancing, pushing live cottonwoods out of the way.”
    __________________

    Also see my article posted on 7 Aug 2014 entitled “4,000-year-old forests beneath receding glaciers prove that it was much warmer than today.”

    That article tells about an ancient forest emerging from the ice in Switzerland, also proving that it was once much warmer than today.

    Probably not too many SUVs back then.

    https://www.iceagenow.info/4000-year...-warmer-today/
    _________________________

    Note *
    The Tlingit are an indigenous people of the Pacific Northwest Coast of North America according to Wikipedia. They have a matrilineal kinship system, with children considered born into the mother’s clan, and property and hereditary roles passing through the mother’s line.

    I was lucky enough to view some of the Tlingit dances in Haines back when Carl Heinmiller was working with them.
    ____________________________
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  31. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    avid (1st August 2017), Bill Ryan (25th July 2017), Daughter of Time (26th July 2017), Foxie Loxie (25th July 2017), TargeT (2nd August 2017)

  32. Link to Post #397
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,766
    Thanks
    60,316
    Thanked 95,057 times in 15,475 posts

    Default Re: The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?

    Climate Fraud of the Century? – Video [Adapt 2030]

    By Robert July 31, 2017

    Michael Mann, creator of the infamous “hockey stick,” filed suit against Canadian climatologist Dr. Timothy Ball after Ball said Mann “belongs in the state pen, not Penn. State."

    Dr Ball called into question Mann’s research and Dr. Ball showed that CO2 trails global temperatures, not leads them.

    However, Mann refused to show his publicly funded research and how he came up with the “hockey stick” so was slapped with a contempt of court charge.
    . . .

    Mann’s version of history somehow makes the Medieval Warm Period disappear and shows a pronounced rise in temperature in the late 20th century (the ‘hockey stick’).

    Ball’s graph, which used more reliable and widely available public data, shows a much warmer Medieval Warm Period, far hotter than today.
    . . .


    . . .

    Graph source:
    http://principia-scientific.org/brea...ey-stick-mann/

    See also:
    https://www.iceagenow.info/looks-lik...wsuit-dr-ball/

    ___________________________________
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  33. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    avid (1st August 2017), Bill Ryan (1st August 2017), fourty-two (1st August 2017), Foxie Loxie (2nd August 2017), Satori (2nd August 2017), TargeT (2nd August 2017), Wind (2nd August 2017)

  34. Link to Post #398
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    11,151
    Thanks
    27,086
    Thanked 47,701 times in 9,721 posts

    Default Re: The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?

    Could this be what we are being so heavily distracted from?
    Dane Wiggington - Shocking GeoEngineering Climate Roasting
    Aug 1, 2017
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  35. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (6th August 2017), fourty-two (2nd August 2017), Foxie Loxie (2nd August 2017)

  36. Link to Post #399
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,766
    Thanks
    60,316
    Thanked 95,057 times in 15,475 posts

    Default Re: The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?

    More ice in the Arctic now than in 1971

    By Robert August 3, 2017

    “The mainstream press will not report this because they are not interested in facts or real science,” says reader Martin Siebert.

    “There is not much left now, it’s just a matter of time … a little time, and governments are not yet prepared for ‘climate change’ that will lower global temperatures by 1 – 2 ° C.

    “It seems little 1 – 2 ° C less but this is too much for agriculture and already it happened during the minimum of Maunder.”


    When you get to this site (link below), scroll down in order to see the 2017 map superimposed on the 1971 map.

    https://sandcarioca.wordpress.com/20...a-que-em-1971/
    Thanks to Martin Siebert for this link
    ________________________
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  37. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (6th August 2017), Foxie Loxie (6th August 2017), kerrielea (6th August 2017), onawah (6th August 2017), Satori (6th August 2017), TargeT (6th August 2017)

  38. Link to Post #400
    Virgin Islands Avalon Member TargeT's Avatar
    Join Date
    30th June 2011
    Location
    St. Croix
    Age
    40
    Posts
    7,515
    Thanks
    21,385
    Thanked 39,716 times in 7,043 posts

    Default Re: The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?

    Maybe I'll be able to grow Hass avocados soon instead of the crazy big Caribbean ones? I'm cool with that.

    bring it on solar minimum!
    Hard times create strong men, Strong men create good times, Good times create weak men, Weak men create hard times.
    Where are you?

  39. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to TargeT For This Post:

    Foxie Loxie (6th August 2017), Sammy (9th August 2017)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 20 of 23 FirstFirst 1 10 20 23 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts