pottyprof

Cheers for that.

Where do they get these people from? Too funny.

I agree Pete. What I'm getting at is the fact that we have two things occurring. Both things could potentially be the cause of it. Both things are not understood fully. I'm not saying that a quiet sun is the only cause because there potentially is an effect through less ice. Why would there not potentially be this same effect from a quiet sun considering that it fits the pattern well? Just because we don't fully understand what is happening with it or an answer isn't available doesn't make it an impossibility. @GW I agree with what you say GW. I don't disagree with any of your observations or suggestions at all. All I am saying is that when the sun went wonky and didn't play ball with the solar forecasts, some were saying that this would have an impact on the jet stream. This would have been around 2006/2007. So no matter what anyone says, the quiet sun fits the pattern observed. Even if it isn't the sun causing it, it still fits the pattern.

We've seen a very active sun over the 20th centuary and we've seen temperatures rise. So far this century we've seen the sun settle down for a kip and temperatures have levelled off if you use a 15 year average. If it slumbers away for too long I'd expect temperatures to drop. There has to be some connection with energy output or it's just pure coincidence and I don't believe it's coincidence. As I said earlier, Occam's razor..... What else can you say when presented with obvious facts like that? I do agree that the ice vanishing will have some effect on weather patterns but just the missing ice causing the effect we've seen this winter? Nah, I just don't buy it... unless it's part of the mechanism for the onset of the next glacial cool down?

But we have some basic records from the UK that demonstrate that bitter cold is caused by a quiet sun, at least in this part of the world.

But we have both. Both are causing variance. Both can cause it. We know that a quiet sun causes cold weather. This is obvious. What is it about Occam's razor? Don't get me wrong on this, I admit that the processes that are under way in the Arctic will have an effect. I just think the obvious is being overlooked.

This was also forecast to happen when the sun went quiet. We can't prove if it's the sun or 'climate change' that is causing it at the moment. I'd put my money on the sun though.

And on that note I think we'll close this now.

I'm going to have a go at 3.7 million km2

New thread for the melt season is here..... http://forum.netweather.tv/topic/76273-arctic-ice-discussion-2013-melt-season/ Will leave this open for a few days for conclusions etc.

So, we are reasonably confident that the melt season is beginning and there may be trouble ahead (there's a song in there somewhere). There is talk that we could see the northern polar ice reduce to virtually nothing. There is also talk of a slow melt season. There is also talk of satellites causing cold weather....... As always, I'll keep open the freeze season thread for a few days so any conclusions can be added. Keep it clean and wear a gum shield to avoid injury......

I agree. I wasn't saying anything out of order. There is noise that needs removing from raw data. There's a difference between manipulating data and fudging it to make it fit. It's a new method of collecting data in the whole scheme of things and there will be problems that need ironing out. My view on data has always been this.......... Raw data should always be made available instead of hiding it and deleting it, as was the case with some data sets. This enables anyone with the know how to work with an untouched source of information. By deleting the raw data, it leaves scientists and statisticians open to accusations of fudging the figures. Being open about errors actually gives the project a high level of credibility which nobody can argue with. It's a shame that people held it up as being accurate like the French used to hold up heads after the guillotine and caused problems for the team working on this information. It's very rare I comment on new kinds of data because there will always be something that needs correcting and until we know that everything works correctly then it's crazy to accept it as accurate.

I agree GW. Nothing wrong with the data. It just needs to be manipulated to correct the errors.

Yes it was. Why do you think the projections are way off? I mean in the all singing all dancing reports and charts from the IPCC, not the one from a comic. They projected an always increasing global temperature with the 'odd' year failing to hit forecasts.... not 15 years worth. Or has this now become a sliding scale opt out to save face?

I certainly can't argue with that....

Which have nothing to do with with the subject Pete. We're at 9th warmest globally which makes for an eyebrow lifting 'why?' considering the forecast was for an ever increasing global temperature. This was a forecast from the IPCC not by a newspaper. I think that in itself gives it some credence unless we're now saying the IPCC speaks BS and their material is worth less than that of a newspaper? I'm not saying that there won't be periods where temps flatten out for short periods, I'm saying that a question needs answering. Why are the temps levelling off? It can't be the quiet sun because according to the so called consensus, It doesn't have any real effect. If we can't answer that question, we'll never be able to project temperatures and the whole exercise will become pointless, if it isn't already.

So in another 15 years with no change in temperature, it will still show warming? Of course the trend is still upwards if you base the data on a rolling average of 30 years as we were still warming up until 15 years ago. Are you arguing against the observed figures from the last 15 years? I've commented on this before in the past that some people like to make sure that we use the 30 year average for temperatures but yet a shorter time frame is okay, provided it fits with their argument, admittedly not very often from yourself. If I decide to use a 15 year average, It shows a levelling off of the temperatures at around 15 years ago. Regardless of if all this is down to man or natural, we are still in anomalous state and the planet will want to warm up and become 'normal'. Just out of interest, does anyone know what the average temperature is for the planet based on the temperature reconstructions for the past few hundred millions of years?

They must have heard about our benefits system?.....

I'd volunteer but I'm still struggling with health issues Paul. Got an exam coming up too and I'm making hard work of revision.

I was thinking the same. I'm expecting to read something soon saying they've been struggling financially to keep up with care and maintenance programs. Structures like that don't come cheap. I'm not saying that recent weather is having no effect, just that we need the whole story. Weather does wear things out and our house walls show the damage it does, not that they are showing any worse wear over the last 10 years.

Congratulations on 10 years Paul. Looking forward to some of the new features....

Keith isn't totally wrong to be fair. We know from our 'accurate' mock-up's of past climate that we cool faster than we warm up. I was watching something that I'd recorded a while ago and there is evidence that some glaciers that are currently melting, are known to have been replenished within a time-frame of approximately a decade. Now to me that says we're up one without a paddle IF we are in a period of much reduced solar input regardless of CO2. Don't ask me how it was worked out but they were professors in the field and as I've been told before, I must trust the scientists. The evidence says that we are on that edge looking down, not up as far as the sun is concerned. AGW theory requires that the sun continues to be a constant or there abouts. The sea temperatures may still be warm enough to keep the Arctic ice melting at a fair rate of knots for the next 5 decades... Then what? What if the sun wants to stay quiet for the next century? Fair enough, it's all if's and but's. The original 2000's solar forecasts have been binned though. Projected solar forecasts from this solar peak have been much reduced to virtually nil for the next peak. I guess we'll have to wait and see as it will do as it pleases. I do wish Keith would explain what he means when he posts bits from an article elsewhere on the net. We could all understand where he's coming from. How about it Keith?

That link's not working knocker.....

Well.... A glancing blow and a near miss this last week. Even the collapsing filament that let loose a CME couldn't do a great deal for us with this heading north. It makes it more interesting when the alternative peak for the cycle will be in the next few months (the original was between Feb and April 2012). Going back to this idea that the UK needs to be ready for the next Carrington event...... Since getting my Ham license I've had chance to talk to many people about this and the general feeling is that the current communication system would fail to some degree or other. We're not talking people who play radio on a Sunday morning. These people are trained in emergency communications. Some of these people are part of government bodies. The good news is that there will be a line of communication set up, a bit 1920s at times but at least it would be something. You only have to look at what happened when O2 went down for a few hours and when RIM had the Blackberry glitch to get a feel for what may happen. There is also some concern regarding an Electro-Magnetic Pulse wiping out the communications network. This relates to the idea of a nuclear weapon exploding in the atmosphere as well as from a solar source. It's an interesting subject and probably one we'll be hearing more about over the coming years.

Very much so. Thanks.