BornFromTheVoid

Here's the IJIS October daily extent change from 2002 to 2013, so it's a graph of the (mostly) daily increases in extent, rather than the absolute extent values which you might be accustomed to seeing. 2013 is the thick black line, the daily maximum increase is the blue dash line, the average is green, the lowest increase (occasional decrease) is the orange dashed line, 2007 in the light grey thin line and 2012 in the dark grey thin line So we haven't had the highest daily increase (compared to 2002-2012) yet, but as can be seen all but two (on the 2nd and 3rd) daily increases have been above the 2002-2012 average.

Something to keep me occupied while the NSIDC is out of reach! Here's the IJIS October daily extent change from 2002 to 2013, so it's a graph of the (mostly) daily increases in extent, rather than the absolute extent values. 2013 is the thick black line, the daily maximum increase is the blue dash line, the average is green, the lowest increase (occasional decrease) is the orange dashed line, 2007 in the light grey thin line and 2012 in the dark grey thin line

It looks to me like maxima a struggling today, so I think it's touch and go whether we reach 14.0C or 14.1C on tomorrows update. After that, the 06z GFS op run has the CET at 13.8C to the 12th (11.5) 13.6C to the 13th (10.5) 13.2C to the 14th (8.8] 13.0C to the 15th (10.3) 13.0C to the 16th (12.3) 13.0C to the 17th (13.6) 13.1C to the 18th (13.7) 14.4C to the 10th, gives us the 8th warmest first 10 days of October on record. Yesterday was also the first below average day of the month.

Sounds interesting, and I look forward to seeing what else is discovered. I notice that the article doesn't mention AGW, just that it's warming. I think this thread is another example of how when it comes to climate, some people will perform all kinds of logical acrobatics in order to twist an item into suiting their pre-conceived ideas, and then use it to take a dig at the other side...

Just missed out on a grass frost this morning, min of 3.6C. Another beautiful day ahead by the looks of it.

Was frostyjoe also kimmirut for a while? Anywho, lowest minimum of the season so far, at 5.2C. Beautiful blue skies this morning.

Can't say too much about it without being able to see how they construct the index, but very interesting if it turns out to be correct. Do any of those links explain how the index is created?

Wonderful, cheers!

No single digit temps here since September 18th, though a min of 10.5C on the 5th this month came close. Can feel the chill in the air now!

Any chance that somebody saved the northern hemisphere z500 anomaly charts from 12z CFS on the 7th (shown yesterday)? Have been trying to collect some data on the trends in blocking on the CFS charts since the beginning of the month, but didn't have the time to check yesterday...

I'd agree that we'll be on 15.0C on tomorrows update. After that, the 06z GFS op run has the CET at 14.4C to the 10th (8.5) 14.0C to the 11th (10.0) 13.8C to the 12th (11.8] 13.5C to the 13th (9.9) 13.2C to the 14th (10.0) 13.0C to the 15th (10.2) 12.8C to the 16th (9.8] If we are on 13.0C to the 15th, for the remainder of the month we'd have to average: 11.1C/day to reach 12.0C 9.2C/day to reach 11.0C 8.6C/day to reach 10.7C (81-00 average) 8.4C/day to reach 10.6C (61-90 average) 7.7C/day to reach 10.2C (1901-2000 average) 7.3C/day to reach 10.0C 5.3C/day to reach 9.0C 3.4C/day to reach 8.0C Given that the coldest final 16 days of October was 4.0C back in 1895 and 1926, we can effectively rule out anything below 8.5C. Something a little peculiar, is that the top 5 coldest last 16 days of October all occurred between 1880 to 1926...

I usually post the NSIDC stuff here, but the data has been inaccessible since the US gov shutdown. For doing any decent analysis of the melt season, I'd ideally use the ncep reanalysis data, but alas, that's also currently inaccessible! Hopefully this refreeze season will prove interesting, and the more data will be available soon.

Hi BFTP, those temperatures are just for north of 80N, which is only around a 20% of the Arctic. If you look back through the records on the DMI site here, you can see that they never stray far from average during summer, due to the heat being removed from the air to melt the ice, which holds the temperature just above 0C. There has also been numerous changes to the temperature series, which may make things appear cooler than reality, which you can read here and here. Even in the very warm summers, such as 2007, the DMI 80N graph showed more below than above average temperatures. Looking at the higher levels, such as the 925 or 850hPa temperature for the whole Arctic, like in the NSIDC chart in my previous post, can give a better idea of the actual temperatures. I would have used the ncep reanalysis data to show this, but the sites are offline unfortunately.

While the correlations in and of themselves don't demonstrate a definite causal relationship between sea ice levels and mid-latitude weather (you can find correlations between almost anything) what does make the relationship more convincing are the many different physical mechanisms that have been purported to cause the relationship. We have the connections with the stratosphere, the connection with snow cover, the connection with the reduced thermal gradient and others. We have several mechanisms, with strong foundations in the physical sciences, that may be working together to drive changes in the hemispheric circulation patterns. While we'd all like more time to create more robust correlations, the most important thing to me is that you can make predictions and test them. With all the observational data at our disposal these days, this is very doable, and the the proof can be found in the massive amount of papers being released on this topic and the new connections being discovered. Basically, removing so much reflective sea ice and replacing it with open ocean is going to cause huge changes in terms of heat, moisture and momentum flux, way up through the atmosphere. While finding all the mechanism for the relationship with our weather may take some time, it is extremely improbable that these change could have no impact.

Sorry folks, but this summer the temps in the Arctic were only average/slightly below average. Anyway, what counts is the amount of sea ice, because that dictates how much extra ocean is available to absorb the suns energy, which then gets released during the Autumn/Winter refreeze and may change the meridional temperature gradient enough to influence the jet stream. This year was still the 6th lowest sea ice cover on record, so plenty of extra open ocean to absorb that heat. Much of the high latitudes still have some well above average SSTS And the DMI 80N temperature shows things moving above average as soon as the refreeze began, due to the ocean heat release. Unfortunately, the ncep sites are largely off line due to the US gov shutdown, so lots of important data are inaccessible. But it seems, while not as strongly as recent years, that the reduced thermal gradient/meandering jet stream theory could still have an effect. We also need to take into account the stratospheric impact of reduced sea, as researched by Jaiser et al. here: Stratospheric response to Arctic sea ice retreat and associated planetary wave propagation changes And the other work done by Cohen et al. (of the Snow Advance Index) here (PDF): Warm Arctic, cold continents: A common pattern related to Arctic sea ice melt, snow advance, and extreme winter weather

Most likely on 15.2C on tomorrows update. After that, the 06z op run GFS has the CET at 15.3C to the 8th (15.7) 14.9C to the 9th (11.5) 14.2C to the 10th (8.4) 13.8C to the 11th (9.9) 13.5C to the 12th (10.1) 13.3C to the 13th (11.4) 13.2C to the 14th(11.0) CET to the 6th

I suppose we're all in the middle ground then, seeing as none of us are certain of the magnitude of man's impact on the climate. There will always be things we don't know. But using them as excuses for inaction, or to claim a grand global conspiracy behind a whole branch of science, is rather stretching things. What I find quite amusing are the claims that pro-AGW scientists and organisations ignore natural climate variability, from the people who've gotten most of their data on natural climate variability from the same pro-AGW scientists and organisations they accuse of ignoring it.

Studies, theories and analysis, on different natural feedbacks, natural climate forcings and whatnot. I'm sure you can dig out a little more than that Stew? There are hundreds of pages on the stuff! (I used the last IPCC report because the full physical sciences section for the new one hasn't been released yet). Anyway, the pages upon pages of data stand in contrast to the assumption: I think we are already seeing this unfortunate process play out, and the IPCC missed a good opportunity to seize this chance to be a little more sanguine and balanced in their latest predictions and in doing so therefore demonstrate that they are taking more seriously natural cyclical drivers to make their research and findings much less one dimensional and appear less selective, skewed and biased to suit and match a pre-conceived agenda. Lots of data in the report on natural cycles, and of course, still awaiting the important studies that have been overlooked. Blogs don't count!

Might I suggest reading the (well, some anyway!) IPCC AR4 section 1 full report, Tamara? http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/contents.html Contrary to your thinking, it has loads of data on natural climate process and the different feedbacks (both +ve and -ve). Perhaps if there are important studies that have been overlooked, you could point them out?

Just the two 100k+ gains IBTH! Still, a pretty rapid increase over the last 2 weeks or so.

Perhaps you could respond in this thread http://forum.netweather.tv/topic/76447-natural-climate-cycles-discussion/page-5 What natural cycles do you believe to be responsible for recent warming?

A change to more seasonal weather looking very strong now. From t0, we begin to see the first important steps. First of all, we get the jet stream becoming very amplified and ridging towards Greenland within 24 hours (a feature we were very familiar with in the summers of 2007-2012). You can see the ridge pushing north, starting off just south of Hudson Bay at t0, before moving strong towards Greenland at t24. A strong trough forms in the mid Atlantic also. ...................t0 ...................... .................. t24 By t48, that ridge extends further toward Greenland, while the trough has almost become cut off from the jet stream. This allows a ridge to build up toward Greenland, just west of the Bay of Biscay. Cut off jet loop t48 ............ ......................... upper ridging t48 By t72, the cut off jet loop is clear to see, while the ridging toward Greenland intensifies to our south and west, rapidly pulling the high pressue along our west toward Greenland, putting us on the eastern, cold side of the high pressure. jet loop and ridging t72 .......................... upper ridging to the west t72 ........................... upper air temps t72 After that, we see the ridge continue to push northward and eastward, while a new cut off loop in the jet stream begins to form over Europe, introducing an easterly airflow to the British Isles Ridge pushing north and east .......... ..t96 ...................... .............. t120 New jet stream cut off loop ................. t96 ................................ ......t120 After 5 days out, it seems that the upper ridge becomes dominant and spell of strong northern blocking takes hold, with remarkable agreement from the 8-10 day mean geopotential height anomaly comparison between the GFS and ECM. Looks like the first proper spell of northern blocking and -ve NAO of the Autumn. We haven't seen a -ve NAO month since March, so perhaps it's time for a pattern change?

I presume by "AGW theory cicles" that "climatology" is the meaning. Anyway, is there a general unfair dismissal of Landscheidt's work by climatologists? His peer reviewed solar stuff seems quite good and accurate, but his grasp of climatology, from what I've read, seems far from expert like. We should be hitting the coldest point of the next 2 centuries around 2030 according to Landscheidt, with only the odd El Nino interrupting the downward trend, but we haven't even started cooling yet?

Latest UAH data is out, and September was the joint 3rd warmest on record (+0.37C) with 2012, behind just 2009 (+0.41) and 2010 (+0.45C). The year to date (January to September) is the joint 5th warmest on record Below are Jan to Sep temperatures (red) with the 9 month ENSO 3.4 anomaly (with a 3 month lag) in green. Data here, here and here

While the last few years have had some mixed final weeks, such as the 14.2C in 2002, and the 5.6C in 2008, there has been a remarkable increase in the long term CET for the final week of October, with the 30 year mean (red) increasing by almost 2C since the mid 20th century, from 7.7C in 1950 to 9.5C in 2012.