Gray-Wolf

That's a sad view AW? It's like the folk saying that the Jet is no longer moveing north just because a new pattern is super-imposed over it? Had the sea ice not gone critical , and superimposed the type of extreme N.Hemisphere climate we've seen since 07', I dare say the MetO forcast would have been spot on. As it is a faster acting facett of AGW has swamped the slower GHG warming synoptics, with this period of 'Global Weirding', and folk are trying to say it disproves AGW???? Let us see what the next 5 years bring us in terms of 'global climate' before we decide to throw out baby,bathwater and all eh? By that time Prof Francis will have plenty of 'evidence' for what is now occuring and we may well be ice free allowing for a more intense version of the 'tweaked weather' to leave folk in no doubt of what has happened. Have no doubt, once this period of extreme climate settles back down the jet (if still there) will be further north , the tropics will be further toward their poles and temp bands will be even further north than we predicted them to be at that time (due to albedo flip impacts).

It's like our moor can be a great damper from heavy rain events but, once saturated, it can also mean greater floods are possible (as we saw last summer). The buried snow acts like a sponge 'mopping up' the surface melt but there is a break point where the sponge is full and the chracter of the snow below acts in a different way to what we are accustomed to seeing? At the end of the day this may well be an important mechanism in the rapid decay of ice sheets?

I blame my meds...and the reasons I need the meds...for all my outpourings......welcome to the pleasuredome..... Back on topic I think science has noted a need for it to be better understood where global climate change is concerned due to this weird situation where it's finding are attackede ,twisted and misrepresented by paid lackies with access to the media that also is part of the 'anti' movement. Though lacking the 'talent ' and resources I do think that science will win over as the subject matter will tend to reinforce what they say and discredit the outpouring of the 'proffesional discreditors'?

Apologies pjl! , I even thanked him for the 'good news' (memory is the first thing to go you know?) but I don't think 10cm extra thickness will prove enough to increase ice levels come sept? BFTV, i do think we can look at how the ice behaved over recent seasons, compare that with the ice we have now and 'average' synoptics to give us a 'ball park figure' for how the ice will be come seasons end? I know were not talking exact science here but it rules out moves in one direction for ice min? I've said earlier in the thread the 'knee Jerk' reaction to last years record losses is to say 'slight recovery' this year (mainly on the back of what we saw in 07'?) but, after thinking on the ice we have today, pretty soon you find that 'recovery' is an increasingly hard direction to think in? I know that the sceptic pedants would take a 10km increase over last years low as some sign of 'recovery around the corner' but we would see that as the vagaries of natural variation and of no significance (would we not?). We know the ice is in poor shape and has a larger share of FY ice than ever before. We can see where the 'best ice' is positioned and we know how each sea are has acted over the post 07' Arctic. Then we have the ongoing fracture event which has rendered some areas into very small floes after repeated fracture event. We can have a stab at the type of synoptics that will dominate the season by looking at the 'new normal' that post 07' basin has seen and see how that has encouraged melt over past years. All in all I think you can make an informed 'guess' about what awaits us in Sept? Then again, in this 'the only way is down' world, another 'perfect storm' years with GAC12 like cyclones thrown in through August and we could be looking at 'ice free' by Sept? That's a shame BFTV, the place needs the 'balance' that a poster like you can bring to the Fouresque dominated postings over there if only for the sake of the Lurkers?

Amazing? though Q' and I have decent natters over there I've not read/heard anything from him that would suggest as much? C'mon pj' , spill the beans. Where I left things we were all a little concerned that 'recovery' was not a flavour on the menu any more and 'similar' is as good as we can expect? My concerns are that ice loss synoptics demand yet another high loss year (even without a further increase in FY ice's percentage of the pack or 'Crackopalypse' event) I'm sorry pj' but saying something is so doesn't make it so?

Again I'd remind folk that every past warming has seen the West Antarctic ice sheet suffer more melt than Greenland and I, personally, can find no good reason why we should depart from this natural process of global melt? We know that we have locked the Antarctic away from general warming for the past 30 odd years due to our putting another 'trace gas' into the atmosphere but that damage is now on the mend and the ozone hole is shrinking so the 'lost years' of warming can now start to find there way back into the continent and the rapid melt of West Antarctica can continue. Should we see another year of record losses from Greenland then I would suggest we expect major melt from West Antarctica as, to act Naturally' it will have a lot of ice to lose over a very short period of time? The other thing is that we get to a point (like we are seeing across Greenland) when the surface layer of ice/snow is so dirty with the dust from the melted out snow that we see albedo collapse and rapid acceleration in mass loss. Further on the margins melt out and bare earth is increasingly exposed leading to the real 'albedo Flip' and the spectre of Rapid warming it brings with it?

Demonise, dehumanise and then deride......sound a familiar tactic? (the cattle trucks are massing....)

LOL! Yes it's just two blocks of ice. Does it not speak to you about the enormous scale of the losses? if it were normal for ice to go up and down by these proportions then we might view it differently but seeing as the 1979 block is already 70% smaller than it would have been in the 50's (when ice levels were kinda 'normal' for our times) you can gauge just how much energy has been used up melting it all (energy now free to do other things) and why folk fear the rapid demise of such a tiny proportion of what summer ice used to be?

This is what i don't get from you faux sceptics, why does everything have to be 'tomorrow' or it's wrong? Past CO2 increases took hundreds of years to raise levels to what we have in mere decades. does this mean the planet will show a 'faster reaction' to the increases? in the past it took thousands of years for the warming impacts to complete? The sudden losss of ice cover in the Arctic was an unexpected 'shock' for scientists working in the field. the impacts on climate that this level of loss were in the climate models from 2080's not 07'. Our recent 'extreme weather patterns' are more linked to the rapid albedo flip than they are to GHG increases. What have the paper to say about weather patterns associated with Albedo flip (seeing as we think newspaper reports constitute 'real science')?

For those who still can't see why the losses are important;

Do you honestly think that there are folk who believe they can change the system by being outside the system 4? Creating goods is not the issue, being honerable is? Capitalism exploits the need for 'things' to favour a minority (IMHO) surely there is a more equitable way to satisfy the public demand and a kinder way to exploit our home?

Hi E.E.S.91 ! I'm starting to think that the 'lack of jet stream', due to ice loss, will allow inner continental highs to grow ever larger (and hotter) over the coming decade and any leach out of heat (in the way we see the cold from such high's over winter) could easily allow 40c to be broken but far sooner than you think it may? If we see the Med. burning again this summer and the Russian high expanded (due to an even more sluggish and convoluted jet on the back of last years record ice losses) with the new S. Greenland high also grown bigger then we may end up with any L.P. systems either kept west of us or tracking to our north. We might see some pretty high July/Aug temps should the Jet allow for us to keep dry this summer? Personally I saw a synoptic switch from 07's mega ice losses so why not a further intensification of those changes on the back of a similar percentage drop last year? (anything but more rain and bloody flooding!!!). Should the pack fail earlier this year (due to the impact of last years losses) then there will be even less of a temp/thickness gradient between pole and equator and so even less energy in the Jet. Inner continental 'Hot' highs will grow outward as the land dries and any low pressure will be forced around these mega blocks. I hope we see both incursions from the Russian High and the Med. High but even the Azores high would be a welcome addition to the party? Keep an eye on L.P. not sitting on the S.W. of the UK (and doing a victory lap over the country) but being stuck out off west Ireland and then tracking to our north. Better still the Icelandic high just moving to the NE whenever an new one forms? Look for 'messy' charts with lower pressure at times but no real 'bullseye' lows over us? Look for High pressure permanently trying to push in from all directions. Should you see such then think '2012 record ice loss', EDIT: Remember the Australian Weathermen had to designate a new temperature colour for their maps this last southern summer as temps reached unheard of levels...why not here?

What troubles me more than Frams cargo is that the bulk of the thicker ice seems destined to end up in waters that , for the past few years, has melted out such thicknesses over 'average summers'? We were supposed to be seeing a 'runt pack' glued to the north shore of Greenland.Canadian Archipelago but if the present motion continues we will see a narrow strip in those areas. Last year Aug. appeared to gobble 3m of ice from along that narrow strip and this year it may have open water to the north and warmed bare rock to the south. We will do a lot of nattering between now and late May but , thereafter, I imagine there will be only one topic of conversation (until the cyclones begin forming....I wonder what four will have to say about them this year??).

Well that's worryingly odd Knocker!

I just can't see it barrel? Paleo history shows that once an albedo flip start to be self controlling then rapid warming follows? Normally the Albedo flip is driven by orbital forcings (so a stronger solar impact) but this time it has been GHG forcing that allowed temps to kick-start the end of the last glaciation back into life (there still being lots of ice on the planet) even though the solar forcing for the north had been waning (due to unfavourable orbital positioning), and temps there falling , for over 1,000yrs?. This de-glaciation will surely lead to further albedo flips as Greenland and the Antarctic react to the warming we have seen up to today, the warming we have already put into the pipeline and the abrupt warming impacts the current albedo flip is driving (permafrost melt etc). We see two things driving warming and cooling in the geological record solar strength (through orbital positioning) and greenhouse gas concentrations. Had we moved our planet closer to the sun would anyone be arguing for a cool-down? We increased the other thing yet folk are saying "it doesn't seem to work" or "We're heading into a cool-down" Daft! , just plain and simply 'Daft!'

When you look at the 'experts' that big oil employed when they began a more vigorous campaign to create doubt about what science was discovering you can see why 'science' came off worse? In the same way that you could not drop the 'PR' men into the top science jobs it is unreasonable to expect scientists to suddenly be expert at 'PR'? When you look at what these 'PR' guru's did for the tobacco industry, even once scientific evidence for the link with cancer proven beyond doubt, you can see why we have such a problem today. As for when politicians saw the potential of 'vote winning' from turning green? Nobody needs that kind of greedy spin thrown into the mix. Though scientists should merely be doing the job they love and are commited to there has been a move ,recently, to help them deal with the attacks they have to deal with in their day to day work so we may see a leveling of that playing field over time? For me the nastiest sign of the time is the sight of the folk who castigate any efforts of the 'Green activists' whilst applauding the behaviour that has scientists suffering threats to home and family? Surely, of all folk, they should fully understand that this is not right or decent behaviour? From my own standpoint 'evidence' will overtake the debate over the coming years but when future generations look back over the past 15yrs they will surely wonder how so many folk chose to be so fooled if not merely to excuse a continuation of lifestyle......and when this decision cost lives then i would expect that we will be judged and found wanting?

My biggest concern, over recent years, is what 'average Arctic weather does to the pack these days? We are bound to get another run of the "Look at the DMI 80N temps, pretty cold across the Arctic this year?" posts later in the season esp. when coastal temps begin to challenge/break records again (as they must as the 'average' temps were part of the time sequence when the coast was ice bound all summer). I'm also very keen to see what impact , if any, the heavy fracturing has on the pack during the early part of the season? I think this 'fracture event' is part of the evolving winter ice pack so it's impacts on the following melt season may prove critical to the 'ice free' stage of arctic change? If the weakened pack does indeed melt out (in bulk) faster than previous years then this gives more time for the melt to focus on the 'rump' of the pack?

I think it would go some way to improving the general publics understanding of the issues but feel that , in the present climate, we would still have groups of folk twisting any info that came out in an effort to discredit the science? Hansen has retired so he can focus solely on 'getting the word out there' but his words have previously been so mangled by the deniers that most folk do not pay any kind of attention to what he says anymore. not good , not good at all.

This is why some of science prefers to call this phase of AGW 'climate Chaos' or 'global weirding'. The folk who were doing the 'new ice age' or new LIA postings in March were warned that the snow would have to endure for any 'albedo impact' to manifest in the climate but still carried on regardless! We had some deep drifting from the late snow and the recent switch from the cold airmass to a more Atlantic dominated regime saw one 7ft drift melt in a day! Folk need remember that the areas of H.P. that grew deep cold over winter will naturally do an about face once spring heat arrives (and days become longer than nights). Should we find ourselves dragging in easterlies in July will we expect them to be cold? Well if Russia experiences another heatwave all summer I'd expect them not to be!!

Sorry guys I was thinking that it was being mentioned as a way to impact warming and not an observation of 'how' it impacts warming? Agreed BFTV, we have managed to 'offset' some of the GHG forcing by the introduction of particulate pollutants so we have been our own 'volcanic eruption' for a good number of years now with only the 70/early 80's seeing impacts from our 'clean air acts' lessening the impacts. Luckily/unluckily the Indo-China economies then went into fossil fuel overdrive and have more than compensated for our 'cleaning up' As with Ozone impacting pollutants mankind will ,and is, going to reduce the amount of pollutants that cause this shielding so we can expect a slow increase in TSI at ground level (compared to that reaching the top of the atmosphere). this might put us in the unusual position of seeing terrestrial TSI increasing at ground level whilst solar output drops of to a maunder like minimum??? It might just be my frame of mind at present but where ever climate seems to turn we see another impact set to increase the rate of changes we have been seeing?

Sure is Hiya! Eventually the oceans 'catch up' with themselves but anomalous heights run all over our oceans. if you think about tidal bulges dragged by the moon or low versus high pressure over areas of the ocean you'll get what I mean? Certain regions are seeing highr rates of sea level rise than others but , obviously, as sea levels rise all the ocean levels rise!

So we don't know enough about our little 'experiment' that we have unleashed on the planet for folk to accept how serious it is becoming but folk want to add another ingredient into the planetary test tube??? I'm sorry but I'd have to say no thanks. We need to stop the experiment as soon as possible and then look at both mitigation and impact reduction. Let the planet heal herself and whilst we do our best to limit the impacts we have unleashed on the biosphere?

Then you'll not like the 'modern polar jet's' influence in forming SSW's Four....cutting edge stuf..... where as , it appears, unless it's dismissing AGW it has to have been accepted science for over 70yrs for you to grudgingly give it credence.......

This is kind of how I see the summer progressing with stubborn inner continental highs profiting from a failing polar Jet allowing high temp/low humidity conditions across major landmasses. The WAA into the Arctic will hasten melt and allow home grown 'Arctic' high temps to evolve (another 'record breaking' year there). The fly in the ointment will be a cool(ish') spring/early summer for the folk recieving air from the Arctic on the left flanks of the HP but , as Arctic temps rise, this should fade as such areas will be inside the H.P. and grown there own heat? The potential , from July onward, for high temp humidity contrast from remnant ice areas to warming 'ice free areas' (with WAA modification) could also promote the formation of strong polar lows (like GAC12) and it is this element (should it arise) that could lead to an ice free ocean late in Aug?

I've never 'liked' them but I also wish them no ill? I've had a number of ladyfriends who would do the silly 'wasp dance' and insisted I ofted them at any opportunity......of course if you do that the pheromone they release just attracts the rest of the colony to attack the attacker........ This time of year they are busy nest building and so are not an issue, you can get quite close to watch them chewing wood into pulp (leaving those 'scrape marks' on fences etc). Only when the nest is full and they get thrown out does the trouble begin.......what do you expect from a bunch of homeless blokes off their faces on sugar????? They are part of the natural balance so try and not be indiscriminate in your hatred for them. A jam butty or bit of orange juice away from where your sitting will keep them happy and occupied (they'll even get stuck in the Jam or drown themselves in the juice if that's your gig?) And 'Yes' I have had a colony take a dislike to me (and my dogs) a couple of summers back. They took the dog to the Vets but I was left to fend for myself........that 'lightheaded' feeling can be a bit disconcerting if on you;re own........