|
|
Post by stranger on Nov 8, 2010 20:43:55 GMT
Much of the Gulf Stream is making a left turn at Albuquerque - er - Newfoundland, and through the Hudson Strait. This graphic is incomplete, but I'm too lazy to hunt up a proper sea surface temperature chart for the Strait. polar.ncep.noaa.gov/ofs/viewer.shtml?-natl-cur-0-small-rundate=latestI suspect Byz will need to heat his greenhouse for a few months. Stranger |
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Nov 10, 2010 3:40:47 GMT
Trblixler, I see. No response to the NSIDC, or to the JAXA data. More specifically, no comment on 'arctic amplification'. Rather, you suggest some alternative graph. What does this alternative graph indicate about the point of increased arctic surface temperatures this fall resulting from arctic amplification? You're kidding, right? This is likely the coolest autumn in the Arctic since at least 2004. Point and click, my friend: ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.phpYou want a warm fall? Try 1984 on for size. (Or 1972, yikes!) ;D The only thing being amplified is your own alarmism! Woodstove, The US NCIDC recently reported that October 2010 had unusually high surface temperatures in the Arctic nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/"Warm air temperatures. While air temperatures were below freezing over much of the Arctic in October, they were 4 to 6 degrees Celsius (7 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit) higher than normal. The warm conditions resulted partly from regions of open water releasing heat to the atmosphere, and in part from an atmospheric circulation pattern that brought warm air from lower latitudes to the Arctic. " Clicking through to the link you provided ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php The current graph for 2010 appears to be above the average, actually; consistent with the nsidc comments. |
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Nov 10, 2010 4:34:17 GMT
Does anyone have any theories as to why Hudson's Bay water temps remain so anomanously warm? Will those warm temps retard arctic ice growth this winter? Its just circulation changes in the ocean currents. Some of the water from the gulf is going up there. weather.unisys.com/surface/sst_anom.gifpoitsplace, "Its just circulation changes in the ocean currents. Some of the water from the gulf is going up there." and this warm air has been going up there for the past 20 to 30 years and nobody has yet caught on? really? Could you explain why/how? |
|
msphar
Level 3 Rank
Posts: 246
|
Post by msphar on Nov 10, 2010 23:18:51 GMT
Busting through 9 million by tomorrow. Nice recovery from the sailable lows of summer.
|
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Nov 11, 2010 20:32:16 GMT
Clicking through to the link you provided ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php The current graph for 2010 appears to be above the average, actually; consistent with the nsidc comments. The Director of NSIDC, Mark Serreze, is a well-known CAGW propagandist, thus anything coming out of NSIDC has clouded credibility. Breathless warming is the soup du jour from NSIDC. Compare your figure for 2010 to 2009 for example. 2010  2009  NASA also seems to be understating ice to keep the illusion going in disagreement with the NWS. NWS has a far smaller area of less than 20% ice coverage than what NASA is feeding the public as being less than 15%. This will be interesting to watch. NWS is predicting complete closure of the Bering Strait over the next 5 days with a minimum of 30% ice coverage.  |
|
|
|
Post by woodstove on Nov 15, 2010 1:40:36 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Nov 15, 2010 1:55:02 GMT
Clicking through to the link you provided ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php The current graph for 2010 appears to be above the average, actually; consistent with the nsidc comments. The Director of NSIDC, Mark Serreze, is a well-known CAGW propagandist, thus anything coming out of NSIDC has clouded credibility. Breathless warming is the soup du jour from NSIDC. Compare your figure for 2010 to 2009 for example. 2010 2009 NASA also seems to be understating ice to keep the illusion going in disagreement with the NWS. NWS has a far smaller area of less than 20% ice coverage than what NASA is feeding the public as being less than 15%. This will be interesting to watch. NWS is predicting complete closure of the Bering Strait over the next 5 days with a minimum of 30% ice coverage. The Director of NSIDC, Mark Serreze, is a well-known CAGW propagandist, thus anything coming out of NSIDC has clouded credibility. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree. 'Frightening' projection for Arctic meltThe Arctic Ocean could be free of ice in the summer as soon as 2010 or 2015 - something that hasn't happened for more than a million years, according to a leading polar researcher. Imagine that....a meeeelion years. Isn't it great we have all these top scientists telling to us straight? |
|
|
|
Post by hunterson on Nov 15, 2010 2:30:30 GMT
The Director of NSIDC, Mark Serreze, is a well-known CAGW propagandist, thus anything coming out of NSIDC has clouded credibility. Breathless warming is the soup du jour from NSIDC. Compare your figure for 2010 to 2009 for example. 2010 2009 NASA also seems to be understating ice to keep the illusion going in disagreement with the NWS. NWS has a far smaller area of less than 20% ice coverage than what NASA is feeding the public as being less than 15%. This will be interesting to watch. NWS is predicting complete closure of the Bering Strait over the next 5 days with a minimum of 30% ice coverage. The Director of NSIDC, Mark Serreze, is a well-known CAGW propagandist, thus anything coming out of NSIDC has clouded credibility. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree. 'Frightening' projection for Arctic meltThe Arctic Ocean could be free of ice in the summer as soon as 2010 or 2015 - something that hasn't happened for more than a million years, according to a leading polar researcher. Imagine that....a meeeelion years. Isn't it great we have all these top scientists telling to us straight? And yet we know from multiple studies that the Arctic in fact has had less ice than now in the last few thousand years. Odd that the goal for AGW believers is so important that truth is just a cost. |
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Nov 18, 2010 5:41:47 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Nov 18, 2010 5:56:50 GMT
It is useful to consider what should be expected with Arctic Amplification.
Regarding Winter 2011, observered events thus far support Arctic Amplification. This year it looks like a lot of heat has been added to the system yet again.
|
|
|
|
Post by hunterson on Nov 18, 2010 6:04:12 GMT
No, it is just more true believer weenie-itis, confusing daily stats for climate. By the way, winter has not yet started and this year's ice pack will peak around March something, about four months out. Just for grins, do you think an ice-free Arctic will set off a worldwide climate tipping point? |
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Nov 18, 2010 6:12:32 GMT
No, it is just more true believer weenie-itis, confusing daily stats for climate. By the way, winter has not yet started and this year's ice pack will peak around March something, about four months out. Just for grins, do you think an ice-free Arctic will set off a worldwide climate tipping point? hunterson, Huh? nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.pngAgain, right now it looks like the 2010 freeze is well below the norm. hunterson appears to be confused. |
|
|
|
Post by poitsplace on Nov 18, 2010 7:58:28 GMT
It is useful to consider what should be expected with Arctic Amplification. Regarding Winter 2011, observered events thus far support Arctic Amplification. This year it looks like a lot of heat has been added to the system yet again. I don't think you really understand how it works. The arctic NEVER receives as much energy from the sun as it radiates into space. The difference between summer ice albedo and open water is also FAR less than that of winter ice verses open water. FINALLY, the thinning of the ice leads to GREATER heat losses in winter and actually makes the arctic MORE efficient at removing summer heat. So basically...right now the OVERALL feedback from arctic ice is probably very low to neutral. Again, nothing more than alarmist crap for people that will never bother to think for themselves and investigate the matter. But sure, if you assume the (wrong) idea that snow albedo verses ocean albedo is the actual and ONLY feedback involved in arctic ice...I can see how it might look like it had some real feedback potential. |
|
|
|
Post by graywolf on Nov 18, 2010 8:39:49 GMT
And there was I thinking a nice layer of ice blanketed with snow would insulate the waters below? Better tell our special forces to give up on snow holes as refuges from the -40c airs outside....obviously only insulates if you believe it does (or losses heat if you believe it does?)
|
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Nov 18, 2010 10:02:44 GMT
Never thought I would see Graywolf agree with poitsplace
|
|
