|
Post by sigurdur on Aug 5, 2015 13:02:55 GMT
If things were as simple as a slow increase , world wide, of temps then we might well adapt nicely but the planet i grew up on does not seem to hang that way? We see predictions for future warming but must remember these are a 'global average' and the responses in the climate system will lead to a period of peturbations before settling into the 'new' climate norm. How many years of failed crops do you think the U.S, can suffer before we start to see social impacts ( esp. with your crazy gun laws)? The Antarctic Peninsula and the Arctic are both warming at a far faster rate than the equator ( as we would expect) and this overheating is having impact toward the Equator ( stuck weather patterns) leading to disruption of society ever more frequently. Graywolf: With all due respect, a few degrees is not going to make crops fail. A few degrees colder? Potentially. A few degrees warmer? Nope. As far as our crazy gun laws, what is crazy about them?
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Aug 5, 2015 16:53:28 GMT
As far as our crazy gun laws, what is crazy about them? Spoken like a true American Sig!
|
|
|
Post by douglavers on Aug 5, 2015 23:22:46 GMT
Antarctic Sea Ice is still above the long term average, but below the levels seen in the last two years. nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/S_stddev_timeseries.pngHowever, regretfully I think this is actually a global COOLING influence. Sea exposed to winds coming off the Antarctic plateau isgoing to be cooled really fast, especially with total darkness. The global system will lose heat. I think the same is true of EL Ninos. They are actually net losers of heat to the planet - all that nice warm exposed water and Stefan-Boltzman's Law. Unfortunately, a lot of the "missing" cold seems to have gone walkabout in OZ, NZ, and South America. Probably explains why I have burnt more firewood this winter than I have ever managed in previous years. Turning to the Arctic, forward temp projections indicate that by the end of August, the North of North America [and Asia] will be starting to freeze. There is still a lot of ice around in the Canadian Arctic Islands, and Hudson's Bay. www.weatheronline.co.uk/cgi-bin/expertcharts?LANG=en&MENU=0000000000&CONT=namk&MODELL=gfs&MODELLTYP=1&BASE=-&VAR=tmp2&HH=372&ZOOM=0&ARCHIV=0&RES=0&WMO=&PERIOD=I would suggest the refreeze this year will be really fast. Also note that summer ice sheet melting in Greenland has been minimal this year.
|
|
|
Post by phydeaux2363 on Aug 5, 2015 23:56:00 GMT
If things were as simple as a slow increase , world wide, of temps then we might well adapt nicely but the planet i grew up on does not seem to hang that way? We see predictions for future warming but must remember these are a 'global average' and the responses in the climate system will lead to a period of peturbations before settling into the 'new' climate norm. How many years of failed crops do you think the U.S, can suffer before we start to see social impacts ( esp. with your crazy gun laws)? The Antarctic Peninsula and the Arctic are both warming at a far faster rate than the equator ( as we would expect) and this overheating is having impact toward the Equator ( stuck weather patterns) leading to disruption of society ever more frequently. Graywolf: With all due respect, a few degrees is not going to make crops fail. A few degrees colder? Potentially. A few degrees warmer? Nope. As far as our crazy gun laws, what is crazy about them? What's crazy about our gun laws is that we have so many, given the clarity of our Constitution on the topic.
|
|
|
Post by walnut on Aug 6, 2015 2:52:58 GMT
Cool-wet causes crop losses much much faster than a little heat, as Sig knows for sure. And we need our guns to protect ourselves from a government which has shown such incredibly poor judgement as to declare that AGW is the greatest threat facing us today. I want fools like that to keep their military machines very far from my neighborhood.
|
|
|
Post by graywolf on Aug 8, 2015 20:30:13 GMT
Well the extent appears to want to cuddle up with the years that began the 2% per decade rebound of Antarctic sea ice???
Is the Antarctic highlighting just how much the 80's/90's temp gains by showing us the globe had negative forcings all along?
Has the flip , last year, of PDO to positive signaled a shift to the warming phase with the 30 yrs of 'natural cooling now over???
Do like the new sunspot number work b.t.w. 18thC blind men at telescopes...... nice....
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Aug 8, 2015 22:02:31 GMT
Well the extent appears to want to cuddle up with the years that began the 2% per decade rebound of Antarctic sea ice??? Is the Antarctic highlighting just how much the 80's/90's temp gains by showing us the globe had negative forcings all along? Has the flip , last year, of PDO to positive signaled a shift to the warming phase with the 30 yrs of 'natural cooling now over??? Do like the new sunspot number work b.t.w. 18thC blind men at telescopes...... nice.... I have observed no credibility evidence that the PDO has switched. What evidence do you have to offer Graywolf?
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Aug 8, 2015 22:35:40 GMT
Well the extent appears to want to cuddle up with the years that began the 2% per decade rebound of Antarctic sea ice??? Is the Antarctic highlighting just how much the 80's/90's temp gains by showing us the globe had negative forcings all along? Has the flip , last year, of PDO to positive signaled a shift to the warming phase with the 30 yrs of 'natural cooling now over??? Do like the new sunspot number work b.t.w. 18thC blind men at telescopes...... nice.... What on earth are u on about Graywolf regarding sunspot numbers?? Genuinely cannot make any sense of that one..... I enjoy monitoring the sun and would love to discuss it!
|
|
|
Post by dontgetoutmuch on Aug 12, 2015 15:26:53 GMT
The problem I have with much of this discussion is that warming oceans and melting studies are assumed to be factual. But whenever someone *cough Graywolf* links a paper or a dataset to support their argument and I follow the link and discover that what the headline says is pretty much the opposite of the data. For example, AGW proponents use the Grace satellite dataset and paper's based on it to show that Antarctica is losing ice. However as we can see here: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0012821X13005797Nasa admits that the raw data from Grace has been "adjusted" based upon expectations derived from climate models. Think about that for a minute. The body that controls the Grace dataset essentially states that whatever the actual real world measurements were, they would be "adjusted" to match the models. This happens all the time when the data is off message. Example two. Sea level rise measurements were not reflecting computer model predictions. To fix reality AGW proponents decided to insert an adjustment called glacial isostatic rebound into the measured data. Not surprisingly, the adjustment to the data brought sea level rise exactly in line with what had been predicted by the models. If everything that AGW proponents say is true WAS ACTUALLY TRUE, some of the predictions made by them would be correct. Instead it turns out that every single TESTABLE prediction made by AGW proponents is wrong. Well, except for the 4 billion dead climate refugees, and the completely melted Arctic, and all of those increased hurricane and tornado victims, and world wide starvation. Has anyone noticed that the AGW croud has not made any testable predictions in years? Instead we are assured that catastrophe is just around the corner. James Hansen has a new prediction out. In as soon as 50 years but maybe not for 250 years the island of Manhattan will be covered by water. Personally I think that before James Hansen gets publicity on his new prediction about Manhattan sinking into the sea, he could explain how something that according to him is already submerged can sink.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Aug 12, 2015 22:22:20 GMT
|
|
|
Post by graywolf on Aug 14, 2015 8:05:28 GMT
Is refreeze over down there? When did we last see 'average' figures in the Antarctic eh? Strange times!
|
|
|
Post by graywolf on Aug 14, 2015 15:16:09 GMT
Well CT area now over 200,000 below average??? Global ice levels also go lower than any 'positive' swing on record? EDIT; Crandles, over on the Sea ice Forum, has worked out some stats from the C.T. data. The past 31 days of ( mid winter) growth put on 228km2 That is less than 7.5km per day!!!!!! over mid winter!!!!
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Aug 14, 2015 15:41:03 GMT
Well CT area now over 200,000 below average??? Global ice levels also go lower than any 'positive' swing on record? EDIT; Crandles, over on the Sea ice Forum, has worked out some stats from the C.T. data. The past 31 days of ( mid winter) growth put on 228km2 That is less than 7.5km per day!!!!!! over mid winter!!!! Aha....now we know where all the anagrams come from!!!
|
|
|
Post by douglavers on Aug 14, 2015 21:49:23 GMT
nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/S_stddev_timeseries.pngAbove graph shows that this year, Antarctic Ice is now at its longer-term average. I have no idea whether that is good, bad, or indifferent. What I do know, is that it means a great deal more Southern Ocean [at -2degC] is being cooled by brutally cold winds off the Antarctic plateau at between -20 degC and -30degC. [or colder] Not to mention direct radiation into space; open sea will lose heat much more quickly than an ice shelf in total darkness. What I am saying long-windedly, is that lower Antarctic Ice this year is likely a net cooling event for the planet. This is supported by the observation that New Zealand, Australia, and a large part of South America have had a remarkably cold winter. I don't know what happened in Southern Africa.
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Aug 15, 2015 5:14:36 GMT
Yes Douglavers and all that in the hottest year ever and a tipping point to the end of all!
|
|