|
Post by sigurdur on Apr 13, 2014 1:38:14 GMT
The net effect is world wide sea ice area is NOT shrinking. Wonder, which model projected this development?
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Apr 13, 2014 8:57:09 GMT
The net effect is world wide sea ice area is NOT shrinking. Wonder, which model projected this development? You may have noticed that 'the gullibles' are now all clustered around the ' new super El Nino' and are not saying anything about ice. I suspect that will continue while the sea ice remains outside of a 'death spiral'. Should the El Nino become a Modoki or fade out I predict that the gullibles will cluster elsewhere probably drought or floods (or both as like any other weather they are both ' caused by human CO2 pollution' of course ) and Agenda 21 Chapter 18 seems to be the focus of the EPA in the USA (muddy fields are wetlands, water runoff VA, delta smelt CA) and the EA in the UK ('making space for water' deliberate flooding of Somerset Levels ) and the DoE in Australia (Wetland care and Ramsar wetlands).
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Apr 27, 2014 18:54:32 GMT
|
|
dresi
Level 3 Rank
Posts: 120
|
Post by dresi on May 1, 2014 8:46:43 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on May 1, 2014 12:56:12 GMT
That is pretty early for sure.
|
|
|
Post by douglavers on May 13, 2014 4:26:02 GMT
weather.unisys.com/surface/sst_anom_new.gifSounding like a well-worn record, that cold area in the North Atlantic seems to be spreading and deepening. Gulf of Mexico seems pretty cool too - I think you need plenty of very warm water to power the North Atlantic Drift, and I don't think it is there any more. Interestingly COI has drifted below its long term average. Methinks there may be much less melting in the Arctic than expected this Summer. ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.phpMore to the point, once again there may be a rather short thawing season in parts North .......................
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on May 14, 2014 2:25:57 GMT
Looks like we will have an El Nino this year, but the actual climate effect could be tarnished by the Atlantic.
There is a lot of colder water around this year.
I still think limited area of Arctic Ice by fall. Too hard to turn Titanic around in a few feet.
|
|
|
Post by douglavers on May 14, 2014 6:17:58 GMT
Article in The Australian today:
"Melting of Antarctic glaciers ‘unstoppable’ GRAHAM LLOYD THE AUSTRALIAN MAY 14, 2014 12:00AM POINT of no return” has been reached in the long-term collapse of glaciers on the west of Antarctica, according to two new reports.
Two papers published this week claim instability of the West Antarctic ice sheet could have a big impact on sea level rises during the next several hundred to 1000 years.
The West Antarctica ice sheet is considered “unstable” because the majority of ice is “grounded” below sea level.
In addition, there is geological evidence that West Antarctica’s ice changed considerably many millennia ago at times when the ice sheet of East Antarctica and Greenland did not.
A NASA study focused on three different lines of evidence to identify the rate of change on the ice sheet, which if fully melted had the potential to raise global sea levels by 1.2m.
These included changes in the flow speeds of the glaciers, how much of each glacier was floating on seawater and the slope of the terrain over which they were flowing.
In conclusion, glaciologist and lead author of the NASA paper, Eric Rignot, professor of earth system science at the University of California Irvine, said: “The collapse of this sector of West Antarctica appears unstoppable.
“The fact that the retreat is happening simultaneously over a large sector suggests it was triggered by a common cause, such as an increase in the amount of ocean heat beneath the floating sections of the glaciers.’’
Scientists claim warmer water is being pulled upward towards the ice sheet by the intensification of winds around Antarctica.
Recent studies have linked increased winds in Antarctica with higher levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide.
The increased winds have also been linked to the growth in Antarctic sea ice, which has continued to set records, increasing by 110,000sq km a day during April to nine million square kilometres.
Meanwhile, a separate study published in the journal Science on Monday found that melting of the Thwaites glacier had begun and could eventually raise global sea levels by 61cm.
Study author Ian Joughin, a glaciologist at the University of Washington, said the melt was expected to take between 200 and 1000 years."
I know I am simple minded, and I don't have access to the journals quoted, but I don't understand how falling Antarctic temperatures, and rapidly increasing and record levels of sea ice, can happen at the same time as the Thwaites glacier melt.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on May 14, 2014 7:45:42 GMT
Article in The Australian today: Study author Ian Joughin, a glaciologist at the University of Washington, said the melt was expected to take between 200 and 1000 years." I know I am simple minded, and I don't have access to the journals quoted, but I don't understand how falling Antarctic temperatures, and rapidly increasing and record levels of sea ice, can happen at the same time as the Thwaites glacier melt. I would expect that the explanation is the melt has been going on for at least 15,000 years already. Seasonal sea ice fluctuations probably do not stem that consistent melt. Bottom line is they are saying perhaps as fast as 200 years which would be an average annual increase of 6mm per year from these glaciers alone so that exposes some CAGW claptrap in this study as sea level has only been increasing at 3.3mm per year from all glaciers for the past 20 years and half that for the past 140 years. Perhaps that 1000 years is reasonable if these glaciers make up a third of all sea level rise.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on May 14, 2014 13:38:09 GMT
My understanding of glaciers is that compacted snow at the source forms ice which then 'flows' slowly eroding a glaciated valley. To speed up the movement of a glacier you add more snow at its source. To melt a glacier results in the retreat of the glacier back toward its source. This paper seems to be claiming that as the speed of the glacier has increased that it is somehow melting, whereas the normal thought would be that the rate of glacier formation was increasing. I suppose increase in snow and glaciation is against the current group think.
|
|
|
Post by douglavers on May 18, 2014 22:49:11 GMT
|
|
|
Post by magellan on May 25, 2014 1:27:03 GMT
Just keep this in mind whenever they talk about glaciers NYT: The Big Melt AcceleratesAnd from the EPA, last updated 6/21/2013, but has been there for at least 3 years; the exact same pictures. Note it says Glaciers all over the world have been melting for at least the last 50 years, and the rate of melting is speeding up. Yes, the last 50 years when the little skulls full of mush kiddie's parents and grandparents began destroying the planet. Of course they leave out this picture from 1950: And of course this map is not included:
|
|
|
Post by magellan on May 25, 2014 1:33:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by douglavers on May 26, 2014 2:01:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by graywolf on May 26, 2014 10:54:18 GMT
For guys who hate climate models you seem pretty much attached to the CFSv2 atm? If you look at the predicted ice levels across the East Siberian sector you'll note that we already have record levels of open water there ( due partly to the record temps across Siberia this past number of weeks )so the model is already busted over that sector ( unless you expect major ice formation there over the coming months...lol) . The wildfires across the tundra regions ( 6 weeks earlier than ever recorded according to the Russian minister dealing with them) are also not helping the east Siberian sector as the smoke is drawn into the basin there coating the ice/snow with soot. Is your CFSv2 taking 'soot' into account with its modelling chappies?
The upcoming reversal of the B Gyre is also of interest as 'throwing the brakes on' will surely serve to rip open the fractures we saw develop in feb/march? With opwn water already present across east Siberia sea there is plenty of room for such fragmentation to flow into ( and so melt). Note also the sst anoms coming in through Bering. The lack of ice across Bering this winter has allowed the Pacific warm pool very early access to the basin from Bering and this will join into the ESS open water ( not good for the submerged permafrost and methane deposits it holds). Also be mindful of the way the Pacific waters work through the basin esp. the branch that takes the NWP deep channel exiting into Baffin. With such elevated temps across the N Pacific (Positive PDO territory) we might also expect to see stronger storms form over the Bering side and into the pacific side of the basin as the temp contrast from warm ocean/land hits any ice cover in the central basin?
As for our side of the basin? Well the ice levels across Barentsz and Greenland Sea tell the tale there with the early season 'drift' flooding ice over elevated ssts through late march/April.
As we approach the 'June Cliff' there appears to be a large amount of ice ripe for the melting?
|
|