Jump to content
Problems logging in? ×
Snow?
Local
Radar
Cold?

barrel1234

Members
  • Posts

    115
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by barrel1234

  1. Arctic temps at 80 degree north are once again below average..... i didnt expect to see that at this time of year with SST anomalies being so high in the area. http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/plots/meanTarchive/meanT_2013.png edit- typo
  2. Personally it wouldn't bother me one bit if sea ice in the arctic was to become ice-free during the arctic summer- It would just be a case of business and nature dealing with whatever happens- Its probably only had a seasonal pack many times throughout the earths history. The whole AGW thing facinates me, and along with it I find sea ice extent and trends extremely interesting. What I'm trying to say is that I feel i am pretty neutral as regards to what I want to happen in the arctic, but for me I think that Arctic Ice certainly is not doomed and that some people massively underestimate natural forcings.
  3. Could some of the moisture be linked to contrails from a massive increase in air travel over the last 50 years
  4. The cold arctic would have been due to a combination of reduced solar activity, weather patterns and the PDO being in a negative phase- When the AMO gets started and turns negative too then you will see some pretty cold times in the Arctic regions. I can't understand why a relatively minor meteor event could be put before more obvious and hugely more powerful natural drivers. Of course that being said more major meteor/volcanic events will for sure have an impact.
  5. I had a quick flick back through the years and while not a comprehensive check by any means it does appear to be easier to find more periods of below average sst's around the Antarctic than above average. Although as I said its just a quick random check and not done scientifically but it seems to stand out to me as having cooler than average sst's over the years from 1997 Here is a slightly cherry picked one from 2003 when almost all the globes sst is above average except from the area around the Antarctic. There are plenty more like this to cherry pick from....... and there seems rather less to cherry pick from if looking to find warm sst anomalies. http://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/sst/anomaly/2003/anomnight.9.19.2003.gif I'm aware that different companies that monitor sst can and do come up with different anomalies.... I have always used NOAA simply because its the one I started randomly looking at a number of years ago just for browsing interest so its just more familiar to me. to me.
  6. I have been keeping an eye on sst anomalies for quite some time and recently there hasnt been much in the way of warm water around the Antarctic ice. In fact at the moment it seems to be surrounded by water cooler than average http://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/sst/anomaly/2013/anomnight.9.19.2013.gif
  7. Although I acknowledge that the basin is not doing very well (if your an iceophile) I do think that the ice that we have retained this year is in the right place to have a chance of resisting a melt out next year too. the Atlantic side is more likely to be exported south and lost so IMO its best to have the multi year ice more central or over the other side- that way at least its more likely to have to be melted rather than just being exported out. This is why I see this year as being much better in regards to ice retention than 2007 or more obviously 2012
  8. There is always much talk about positive feedbacks in the arctic. As Aboynamedsue touched upon, higer than average sst in the arctic combined with the v cold air of the winter due to start pushing in within the next few months could hugely increase precipitation over the whole arctic region compared to average snowfall. Surely this potentially could act as a big negative feedback? Also what are the melt rates/ tolerability of highly compacted snow/freshwater ice compared to frozen sea water during a melt season?
  9. The basin has been largely without southerly winds so far this melt, however looks like there could be some milder air heading into the basin in the next couple of weeks from the look of the gfs charts. But who knows if this year will mark a step-up from the losses in recent years... we still have to get this melt season out of the way yet and with the fragile state of the pack I dont think we are out of the woods yet regarding ice retention, although it would have to be something pretty catastrophic to get us down to 2012 levels.
  10. There is approximately 33 days to go before before the average minimum....... this is ceratainly going to be interesting...... can the fragile pack hold up and avoid a big nosedive...... I shall be watching with great interest.
  11. With the fragile state of the pack my opinion of why extent hasn't dropped as much as some were predicting is firstly due to low export of ice through Fram, it has been like this for quite a time so positive effects (or less negative effect if you want to see it that way) for those who want to see the ice levels doing well. The second reason why I believe that we are not down at 2012 levels is one that should be quite obvious ..... Temps above 80 degrees north have been below average for quite some time now (approx 100 days) quite surprising considering the very much higher than average sea surface temperatures surrounding the pack, possibly this is just caused my generally much cloudier conditions than what you would see on average during an arctic summer. . It would be interesting to do a study to see if there is a link between amount of sunshine and export of ice through Fram..... maybe the two could be linked through dominant weather patterns? Just a thought. I don't dispute that average global temps have risen in the last 30 years but we still do not know how the arctic could react to a few years of generally favorable conditions for ice growth.
  12. There doesnt seem to be much export out of Fram these days and ice in the Fram straight seems to be extremely low, maybe a little glimmer of good news for icephiles?
  13. Well yes it is, but I'm assuming that better averages can be formed from the data if its not done on a very local scale. That just makes sense to me.
  14. Personally I only trust enso temperature data. Thermometer data for comparison purposes really can be skewed by land uses in the area surrounding the weather station. I wonder how many long standing weather stations have had a change in the surrounding area. However good idea to start a thread on this topic.
  15. Thats just ridiculous, It assumes that all warming has been caused by CO2 and it ignores every other variable.
  16. CO2 is a trace gas. Its 0.04% of the atmostphere - not 0.4%... its 0.04%!!!!!!!!! It's a tiny amount! and there are so many more things that are stronger ''greenhouse gasses'' such as water vapour! How people can blame a trace gas for climate change is completely beyond me......Solar cycles, AMO and PDO will have massive effects compared to a trace gas of 0.04% I know that CO2 has doubled over the modern times but starting from such a small number should leave whole CO2 argument completely without foundation but people keep banging on about it because they are desperately looking for a pattern that fits. I don't deny that CO2 fluctuates with temperature but its been proven in simple lab experiments that cold water can hold much more CO2 than warmer water, and for me it would make far more sense that CO2 has followed temperature rather than causing it....... If man breaks this strict correlation then so what.... Its not going to make any meaningful difference to climate change.
  17. CO2 is a trace gas. that means that there is not a lot of it in the atmosphere and its heat trapping capabilities from the increased concentration are almost negligible compared to water vapour. Concentration has increased but concentrations are so low in its total proportion in the atmosphere that all warming predictions based on CO2 are overblown and in my opinion bordering on nonsense. Just to add, If CO2 is 400ppm that means that the gas occupies only 0.04% of the atmosphere, I would say that this would surely have to put it way down my list on causes of possible warming. How this can be blamed on climate change is absolutely beyond me, things like the AMO and solar cycles would surely have a MASSIVE affect compared to a doubling of a trace gas of such low concentrations.
  18. GW, What range of warming do you expect to see over the next decade? I do get your Albedo argument but I really think that you are not taking AMO switches into account enough. Thats my view of course that doesn't mean that we will agree on it.
  19. Solar activity and the state of the AMO that's what will make the difference in the upcoming decades if the AMO goes negative expect some cold years ahead especially for the N hemisphere.
  20. I expect things to start quickly cooling down in around 5 years and continue cooling for around 20 years before starting to warm up again. I'd call it climate change rather than global warming as I expect my final years the world to be cooler or similar to what it is now.
  21. From what I have seen through ice movements there has almost been a stretching of the ice in that area with some being carried through fram and some being taken in an easterly direction..... that's what I had thought to be happening however that animation looks like its slowly moving in the wrong direction
  22. SST Anomalies seem to differ a fair bit depending on where you get your data from. Its true that there has been some extremely stubborn high anomalies in the arctic in recent years especially earlier this year when there was a line of high anoms all the way across the hight lattitudes of the Atlantic. on this map sst anomalies seem to have calmed down a bit but still has some very high sst anoms over some of the arctic area including south greenland. http://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/sst/anomaly/2013/anomnight.4.22.2013.gif A switch to lower N Atlantic sst temps surely could be a diving force and a very rapid driving force of Ice growth in general for all arctic regions. After watching global sst anoms for quite sometime I have seen pretty big changes happen in relatively short periods of time.
  23. GW I would be interested to hear your thoughts on the AMO and why maybe you think it wont have a big impact when (presumably when and not IF) it shifts because I can't remember if you have touched on this much in the past. apologies if we are going off topic but i would have thought that the AMO would likely be one of the biggest factors or Ice growth/recession in the arctic including glaciers in Greenland and Iceland.
  24. I just watched it and enjoyed it a lot. Fantastic scenes and photography. They are very hardworking and I believe sincere individuals. However, It is based on opinion that C02 is driving climate, and there was no reference to things like solar cycles and solar activity. I feel the featured glaciers from the batch they were recording were cherry picked and there was no reference to any glaciers in his sample that had smaller changes. i don't doubt his glacier research because seeing is believing, but climate is always changing and there is no certainty that the glaciers featured will continue to reduce in size. Few would argue that temps have not increased over the last century but in recent years temps have flat lined if not decreased.... it all depends where you start the data sample! I read that the AMO has around a 50 year cycle so that would fit in very well with whats happening in the arctic. I personally still don't think we have a problem outside natural variability.
  25. The glimmer of light is that in recent months we havnt seen a massive export of multi- year thick ice out of fram. Instead winds have generally pushed it in a clockwise direction around the basin. I have been keeping an eye on speed and direction of drift around fram this year and loss of thicker ice here it doesn't look as bad as previous years to me...... so far.
×
×
  • Create New...