Gray-Wolf

Looks like a wet 48hrs in S. Mexico then?

I think 'The Media' have finally picked up on the growing acceptance, within the science, that you cannot see changes as big as we do across the Arctic Basin without it showing impacts ? It is now over 4 years since we saw the first 'science' on the subject and , year upon year, the data has become more compelling. Last years further 18% reduction in ice cover is close tothe 22% drop wesaw in 07' and so I ( that is me and me alone) would naturally expect this to show a similar scale of forcing to those we got in 07' and all the years post 07'?

But it may be that this meeting is, in hindsight,a very important one? Should evidence to please all emerge as to the link between Arctic albedo flip and Errant Jet patterns then it is both important and dynamic. The rate of decline in sea ice/snow cover is dramatic in itself if you look at the changes over the past 10yrs. Such impacts have no 'lag-time' ( look at the temps that occur over snow/ice cover to those that develop over bare earth) and so the impacts on the circulation patterns are also 'near 'instant'. Should we find ourselves 'seasonal' across the Arctic this decade then we will have a very serious situation developing ( scientists agree that once 'seasonal' the time under open water rapidly expands so the jolt of energy the planet receives will sky rocket)? If the post 07' changes caused issues then the post 12' changes will only intensify those issue and any further reductions will also just feed back into the base issue of reduced temp/pressure gradients between pole and equator. I have always maintained that Mother Nature is far more able to rapidly alter climate than mankind. Mankind may well have provided the initial 'push' but the 'Albedo Flip' , currently ongoing across the Arctic, is pushing climate there much harder than mankind's current level of impact? We see how much this will impact by looking at the 'abrupt warmings' as we emerged from previous ice ages once enough ice had reached 'critical levels' and was able to melt out over a single season. such changes have driven 10c temp hikes over a period of decades in past 'warm-ups' and though i do not propose anything as dramatic even a 0.5c temp hike brings us beyond the 2c temp rise that science agrees is 'safe' ( and well beyond the level set for the complete melt out of the northern permafrost).

Did you not get some in your garden back in 06'? Most amazing critters!

There is 'avarage positioning' for peaks and troughs esp. if you are downstream of features that deflect the jet ( Rockies). All you need key in is amplitude and wavelength and you can get a good idea where peaks and troughs lie? this is what Prof francis appears to be showing with her data for the last 15years? It would also explain why the US/Greenland have had a number of years impacted by the 'stubborn H.P.'? and why our 'trough' remained in the same area since 07'? Add a further 'tweak' in the form of the extra energy the pole got last summer from that further 18% drop in cover and you get even less of a difference twixt pole and equator to 'fuel up' the Jet's movement? When you look at current central alaskan /Siberian temps you can see just how 'reduced' the temp Gradient is these days???

I think we all know the 'weighting' that will arise from the meeting? 'unknown/unmeasured solar portion, AMO/PDO/AO/NAO, portion, polar ice loss impacting pressure/temp gradient from pole to equator - main thrust. When you look at both historic impacts of the natural compared to todays observations then it's easy to see that the 'difference' between past and present is the appearance of open water across large areas of the Arctic ocean Basin from June through Oct? Though not a lot of Data for the year so far the 'change' in Jet pattern, esp. the 'stuck weather' generated, is markedly different to the 07-2012 period ( our 'troughing' has gone so we are still dry here with Brierly field being fully dry for the first time in 2 years!!!) so has the 'extra' 18% of the basin open to the air last summer had a further impact on the Jet patterns over winter/spring?

Now there is a post to make me a real green Eyed Monster!!!! Enjoy!!!!

I wonder if they tracked the grey Whale on it's Israel trip?

When I first moved over here from manchester there was a protected nest site that the RSPB had errected to watch the then ,endangered, birds on the nest. since then the Perigrine has moved out to all the quarry cliffs it would appear and is my second highest raptor spot after the kestrel! To watch them 'tumbling' over the craggs is a joy and to watch one drop into a full on stoop breathtaking. I'm just waiting for the first of the red KItes to make it here (from their release sites in sheffield area) as they pick their living from roadkill along the M6/M62 motorways? We also get the odd Buzzard appearence but I wonder why they have also not returned in the numbers that they used to see? Maybe having the Saville Estate Grouse Moor above us kinda answers that question????

Well the 'run up' to Wimbledon is when we normally see the 'European Monsoon' appearing so I'll be pleasantly surprised if this too stays on the continent and the lows forecast track north? Get us through this 'monsoon' period without week long cool deluges and I'm a happy bunny as I still see lots of H.P. on the charts and sooner , or later, this will bring us another settled spell? might not be Med temps but 19c and sunny is pretty good whilst you are in the Sun??? I must also agree with Mushy about cloudy nights 'skewing' temps by impacting lower daylight temps with elevated overnight temps? I think a lot of the temp records , esp. over winter, have been aided by this type of setup?

Thanks Pete, this is what I thought? Though impossible to acribe AGW as a 'cause' for individual weather events the impacts of the changes must have impact within the system to some lesser, or greater , degree (as do all the other 'natural' drivers) Methinks the results of the natter will be 'a bit off both'.......

And what do folk think they will find?

Sorry G.S., I could have been clearer? I cannot compare sea ice to the ice on the waters of Hudson but can compare the fact that it is all seasonal ice that puts on an average thickness that does not show the variance in ice thickness that some surviving 'perennial' ice there would show? The next 'perfect storm' in the Arctic Basin will , I fear, send the basin 'seasonal' and , as such, all of the ice will be a very similar beast with views to how it would act in an 'average weather year' melt season? Some folk were saying , last June, that the ice in The NW Passage was very thick ( 3m+) and that they doubted that the passage could be open that year? I still do not know if this was ; 1/ Wishful thinking 2/ Trolling 3/ A bit of both But the fact that it was surrounded by land and was all 1st year ice did not give it a cat in hells chance of surviving. There is not much 3m FY ice in the central basin any more. NW Passage was open by Aug. If a 'colder position' took 4 weeks longer to fade it would still mean that any ice under 3m+ will just 'fade away' over a melt season? That only leaves The north of Greenland and the upcoming Di-Pole has a helping hand from the low to our NE over the next 2 weeks? EDIT: It's the old 'getting the oil tanker moving' thing? If the Di-Pole breaks the ice free and imparts enough momentum then any more 'persistent Arctic Cyclone's over the pole will just keep that mass of precious ice in motion toward Fram ( I fear?) and lead to a very bad thing happening? EDIT;EDIT: Sorry BFTV but I take it you do not need to see any links to data? I kinda thought so as the folk who are watching the melt season ( and post their beliefs) are all 'singing from the same sheet'? We all follow the data day in ,day out ,week in ,week out? As such folk wishing to 'discuss ' ideas will be up to date? Folk wishing to 'ask questions' can be guided to where to find those answers ( and given a 'view' of how we see it going?) I'm not trying to be 'obtuse' but do feel that it would 'calm ' things here , to a 'sea ice Forum' chill if we could work in such a way? I am not saying anything about this Forum , this season, but you know that 'In the Past' folk have 'trolled', using asinine statements, that just leave the like of You and Me in bother by trying to show our readership that they were just that (and then the culprit whines to management about being treated so?)I wish to continue posting here, I enjoy it? but can see that some 'Scientologist-esque' baiting will draw me into a 'Red Card'?

There is no chance of the Hudson Bay not melting this summer Reef. That said why should vast swathes of the Basin, with ice the same, not also be confidently predicted? EDIT: The sad fact is that the two 'extremes' you mention , 6 and 2 are not both extreme? One is a very frightening possibility and the other would take something very 'extreme ' to enable it to occur? It may well prove to be that the synoptics so far this year have already primed the pack for the 2 million figure where as nothing has occurred that could allow all the older ice plus 1.5 million of the 2m FY ice to survive? As it is the older ice has already been impacted by fram over Winter (and was replaced by Younger than FY ice) and the Di-pole , now setting up looks to take a swathes more?. this means you would be needing upward of 2 million SQ KM of 2m FY ice to survive the whole season? Have you seen the land temps surrounding the basin recently? Have you see the summer forecasts for the lands surrounding the basin? How can the areas within 1,500km not be impacted by these temps? The past few weeks of LP over the central basin has ripped the heart out of the Arctic basin like never witnessed before and we all know how low the volume of the ice this year was and how such figure have dealt with 'average summers' over the past few years? I would suggest that you think on what we have learned since the 07' crash and how the ice has altered over this period allowing 'all' synoptics to find ways of causing large losses? You should not feel as though you are not welcome in the area ( no one should) but you must accept that the debate is robust and will always need folk to bring their 'data' to the table with them?

Back to the ice and some our our posters apparent misconceptions the melt seasons potential this year? The current trend toward a single thickness/ice type will mean alterations to the way we witness the pack disappear. More and more we have been seeing 'the cliff' type melts in June/July, closer to what we see in Hudson Bay each year, and this will encompass more and more of the ice area as FY ice takes more and more of the share of the ice? Folk have been calling a 'slow start' for the ice this year so far but with vast areas FYice and of a thickness that an 'average summer has no problems melting those folk may find themselves stunned later in the season as huge areas (of similar thickness) go critical and 'blink out' over a period of days (as we saw in the FY ice of the NW Passage last July?) The ice is already showing signs of how badly mangled it is on concentration maps so once full melt arrives this 'weakened' ice will begin to 'blink out'. It may end up July and not June (due to a 'slow start') but the ice, just like Hudson's, cannot withstand a season of melt.

You might also want to look at the development of smoke stacks which moved the pollution higher and higher through the period?

Kinda on topic but I do remember a study showing that 'modern day' polution builds up through the week leaving weekends weather blighted....peeing off workers who work through a lovely week only to see cloud/rain for the weekend?

Can't agree with your confidence OSN. Ice of 1m thickness allows a significant amount of energy into the water column below so that central area, normally holding the thickest of the ice all summer, is open to warming that it would not normally see? The u.s. navy model shows thinning, from kara to pole, hinting at open water by june's end? The forecast strong dipole will also make for a busy Fram considering the ice condition behind the straights? The canadian Archipelago is also now showing signs of break up so the LP heading that way is bound to show an effect there? It is also the time that Hudson now sheds it's ice? The American weather service has also put out it's summer forecast an places Alaska, north slope, under anom. high temps all summer. This has implications for that side of the basin. When prof Francis was approached (by Chris Reynolds) not only did she confirm how anomalous the May persistant cyclone was but also the state of the ice and upcoming weather promised us another 'interesting' season across the basin this year. I changed my mind about a 'rebound year' last Nov. and Feb's fracture events only confirmed that to me. Seeing how the pack has reacted to PAC13 I am even more convinced that we will have another year comparable with 2012?

http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh?fm=06&fd=08&fy=2012&sm=06&sd=08&sy=2013 The above is a CT 'comparison' of last June 8th to this June 8th. Whilst we might be feeling that this summers slow melt season bodes well one look at how the ice is doing under the PAC13 (Persistent Arctic Cyclone 13) will bring a sobering reminder of just how messed up the pack is becoming. If last years 'average summer' (no 'perfect storm' as in 07' but a 'mixed bag' of conditions) was able to take that June 8th image and produce records across the board then what will an 'average summer' do to the ice in the condition this June 8th shows???

Hi sparks! I hope you do not have a whirlwind to inherit either!!! I've always maintained that i can only 'deal' with the chaotic nature of climate by 'pulling back' from the picture so as to lose the finer detail but see the larger picture? Not the most scientific way I know but it has served me in my understandings of things?

For those who want to look at data near 'real time' then A4R has a nice site where he kindly puts the data over a global mask; https://sites.google.com/site/a4r2013metop2ch4aprjun/home/2011-airs-ch4-359-hpa-vs-iasi-ch4-970-600-mb Things have looked 'anomalous' all winter and the arrival of the Antarctic input was also a shock for me (folk keep trying to tell me Antarctica is doing fine what with sea ice increases and all?)

So , now let me get this right, folk who 'know/have education' in such things have known this all along ( the clustering?) and have understood that short range weather forecasting cannot be used as an analogy to 'climate modelling' over the century scale? Why is it then that we hear so many folk (having issues with our ability to alter our climate) claiming that we cannot forecast next tues weather so how can 'they' predict long term? Are these folk deliberately trying to obfuscate or are they just unaware of what you have shown us?

This is why I always say i can only cope with the 'larger picture'? If you understand the 'Basics' then you can predict the 'basic' direction of change ( the devil is in the detail?) We know there is an imbalance in the energy the Earth receives, the data shows us all this, but the 'pedant deniers' will try and pin folk down on individual 'model predictions' to prove things are awry? Any fool knows that if you put more energy into a system that the system will respond but 'the devil' is predicting how, when and where. It does not undermine the fact that change must occur by showing some blokes model has failed to predict it??? Sadly I too have little faith in current modelling but I cannot deny that 'Change' is both occurring and on it's way? Data confirms ( it would seem) that some of the modelling is spot on but sadly it is in it's 'extremes' that it appears to be correct? Does the fact that we cannot model our planets workings accurately enough mean that we dismiss the current energy imbalance?

Thanks for that R.R.! Those of us dealing with the 'New Arctic' are fully aware of such but those of us who deny the changes to the basin are so fundamental as deserve a name reflecting the scale of the changes may not? I would assert again that the 'changes' to the basin , over the past 15yrs, are so great as to have altered the way we once knew the basin to operate . I know the pedants will wish to seek clarification, once again, but it is easier for us all ,when looking at the 'changes' to the workings of the basin, if we separate how things 'used' to work to how they work today? The current 'Low' is just such a case. when ice was thick, old and robust then such a low would help keep ice ( and add to it's thickness by snow fall???) but the 'New Arctic' has thin ,young, fragile ice that the low basically rips to bits and flings out into the fringes of the ocean? Snowfall is 'washed off' any flow small enough to be tossed around like a cork and the ravaged pack allows swells to develop that mix the ocean layers below. This is not what a solid, sealed ice pack acted like and until the noughties this is what we had? The worst such a low could offer was export from the basin via Fram, Nares and Bering. Sadly to accept the term 'New Arctic' accepts 'change' in the working/state of the Basin and brings a person closer to accepting AGW's role in the 'changes' we are seeing? If you deny man's role in climate change then you deny such 'name changes' lest it undermines your position?

I get the feeling that once the inner continents have warmed sufficiently we will see a far 'pleasanter' summer than of late with the European monsoon not bringing us the same issues it has over the past number of summers? If the low ice in the Arctic is messing with the Jet then , this time, it'll be central Europe that sits under the nasty trough ( I believe) and we will be enough removed to allow frequent settled conditions? Looking at the jet patterns this spring we see the U.S. under the exact opposite of that which brought them their 'heatwave spring' last year and the current floods in central Europe suggest to me out portion of the jet has also wriggled along by a similar amount? ( results of last years record low ice levels???)