Antarctic Ice Discussion

[stewfox]

All time record set for Antarctic sea ice http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2014/09/13/antarctic-sea-ice-extent-sept-13-2014-new-all-time-record/

 

 

Looks like the Antarctica now on the way down after what has been another record year for sea ice.

 

Antarctic Sea Ice Extent Sep 26 2014 – 520,000 sq km Above Old Daily Record

Edited September 26, 2014 by stewfox

[Nights King]

Here she goes again.. 

 

[keithlucky]

 

Looks like the Antarctica now on the way down after what has been another record year for sea ice.

 

Antarctic Sea Ice Extent Sep 26 2014 – 520,000 sq km Above Old Daily Record

 

Cannot keep a good guy down up above20 million mark again.

[jonboy]

We should have another week or so before any real falls

[stewfox]

We should have another week or so before any real falls

 

 

In need and with Global sea ice 250,000 above the normal , and the arctic recovering rapidly we could soon be seeing  some of the highest global sea ice records for this and the last century. 

Edited September 27, 2014 by stewfox

[knocker]

Antarctic Ice Melt Causes Small Shift in Gravity

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/09/29/antarctic_ice_melt_causes_small_shift_in_gravity.html

[Nights King]

Antarctic Ice Melt Causes Small Shift in Gravity

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/09/29/antarctic_ice_melt_causes_small_shift_in_gravity.html

 

 

Seriously... gravity change is the next 'catastrophe' caused of mans co2 contributions?   

 

Surely someone could put a paper out along the lines of such an such a mountain range has an altering gravity field because of increased erosion due to increased rainfall which is of course global warming blah blah.

 

Or heavy snow in Scotland last year has changed the gravity of the highlands temporarily.

 

My own field decreased last year as I lost weight.

[4wd]

It also says sea level will rise 50" by 2100 so you can hardly take it seriously.
That sea level needs to really get cracking doesn't it.

[Nights King]

It also says sea level will rise 50" by 2100 so you can hardly take it seriously.

That sea level needs to really get cracking doesn't it.

 

I have only just seen that you must be concerned knocker living in such close proximity to the sea!

 

If that is the case may I suggest we evacuate lowland Britain and stop wasting money on defending these low lying areas as it is pointless against over 4 foot increase and we need to start putting all our resources into taking co2 out of the atmosphere immediately to reverse this warming altogether....

 

 

Is there really time to stop it or are we doomed?

Edited September 29, 2014 by mullender83

[stewfox]

It also says sea level will rise 50" by 2100 so you can hardly take it seriously.

That sea level needs to really get cracking doesn't it.

 

I see Al Gore has swapped sides following his hockey stick graphs his latest Antarctica ice map chart is attached

[knocker]

Changing Antarctic waters could trigger steep rise in sea levels

 

Current changes in the ocean around Antarctica are disturbingly close to conditions 14,000 years ago that new research shows may have led to the rapid melting of Antarctic ice and an abrupt 3-4 metre rise in global sea level.

 

https://www.climatescience.org.au/content/785-changing-antarctic-waters-could-trigger-steep-rise-sea-levels

[Nights King]

Changing Antarctic waters could trigger steep rise in sea levels

 

https://www.climatescience.org.au/content/785-changing-antarctic-waters-could-trigger-steep-rise-sea-levels

 

 

I am guessing this is to further back up the 4+ meter rise you linked us to earlier?

 

One thing I have noticed is that if you read into the article further you will notice the full paragraph saying "The modelling shows the last time this occurred, 14,000 years ago, the Antarctic alone contributed 3-4 metres to global sea levels in just a few centuries" . Now the term a few to me is by definition 300 - 400 hundred years which is no where near as 'steep' as it first seems and certainly not in as little as one hundred years as the previous link suggested..

[knocker]

I am guessing this is to further back up the 4+ meter rise you linked us to earlier?

 

One thing I have noticed is that if you read into the article further you will notice the full paragraph saying "The modelling shows the last time this occurred, 14,000 years ago, the Antarctic alone contributed 3-4 metres to global sea levels in just a few centuries" . Now the term a few to me is by definition 300 - 400 hundred years which is no where near as 'steep' as it first seems and certainly not in as little as one hundred years as the previous link suggested..

 

You guess incorrectly. it's just that the paper has just been published as you will have noticed with the link.

 

Antarctic contribution to meltwater pulse 1A from reduced Southern Ocean overturning

 

During the last glacial termination, the upwelling strength of the southern polar limb of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation varied, changing the ventilation and stratification of the high-latitude Southern Ocean. During the same period, at least two phases of abrupt global sea-level rise—meltwater pulses—took place. Although the timing and magnitude of these events have become better constrained, a causal link between ocean stratification, the meltwater pulses and accelerated ice loss from Antarctica has not been proven. Here we simulate Antarctic ice sheet evolution over the last 25 kyr using a data-constrained ice-sheet model forced by changes in Southern Ocean temperature from an Earth system model. Results reveal several episodes of accelerated ice-sheet recession, the largest being coincident with meltwater pulse 1A. This resulted from reduced Southern Ocean overturning following Heinrich Event 1, when warmer subsurface water thermally eroded grounded marine-based ice and instigated a positive feedback that further accelerated ice-sheet retreat.

Edited October 1, 2014 by knocker

[stewfox]

You guess incorrectly. it's just that the paper has just been published as you will have noticed with the link.

 

Antarctic contribution to meltwater pulse 1A from reduced Southern Ocean overturning

 

 

The article admits its a theory and they run a few models to see what could happen based on a number of assumptions.

 

--------------------

Although the timing and magnitude of these events have become better constrained, a causal link between ocean stratification, the meltwater pulses and accelerated ice loss from Antarctica has not been proven.

--------------

 

Also what was happening 14,000 years ago we were coming to the end of the last glaciation causing sea levels to rise.

[knocker]

Just to clarify my position concerning my posting in this thread as I am getting the impression from some that it's to support my stance on climate change. This is not the case. I merely post new papers if I come across them as I think they may be of interest (probably incorrectly).

 

I will add this comment.

 

 

Also what was happening 14,000 years ago we were coming to the end of the last glaciation causing sea levels to rise.

 

I could be wrong but there is a chance that the scientists who wrote the paper did realise this.

Edited October 1, 2014 by knocker

[Nights King]

Just to clarify my position concerning my posting in this thread as I am getting the impression from some that it's to support my stance on climate change. This is not the case. I merely post new papers if I come across them as I think they may be of interest (probably incorrectly).

 

I will add this comment.

 

 

I could be wrong but there is a chance that the scientists who wrote the paper did realise this.

 

Fair comment

[Gray-Wolf]

I am guessing this is to further back up the 4+ meter rise you linked us to earlier?

 

One thing I have noticed is that if you read into the article further you will notice the full paragraph saying "The modelling shows the last time this occurred, 14,000 years ago, the Antarctic alone contributed 3-4 metres to global sea levels in just a few centuries" . Now the term a few to me is by definition 300 - 400 hundred years which is no where near as 'steep' as it first seems and certainly not in as little as one hundred years as the previous link suggested..

 

There we go with the 'drip,drip' understanding of ice sheet decay again?

 

Does anyone really believe that this is the way ice sheets decay? Over a 400 year period how do folk feel the 4m rise will pan out? The bulk in the first 200yrs or the second?

[Polar Maritime]

Sea ice surrounding Antarctica reached a new record high extent this year, covering more of the southern oceans than it has since scientists began a long-term satellite record to map sea ice extent in the late 1970s. The upward trend in the Antarctic, however, is only about a third of the magnitude of the rapid loss of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean.

The new Antarctic sea ice record reflects the diversity and complexity of Earth’s environments, said NASA researchers. Claire Parkinson, a senior scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, has referred to changes in sea ice coverage as a microcosm of global climate change. Just as the temperatures in some regions of the planet are colder than average, even in our warming world, Antarctic sea ice has been increasing and bucking the overall trend of ice loss. http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum/#.VDROBPldXfJ

[keithlucky]

 

Sea ice surrounding Antarctica reached a new record high extent this year, covering more of the southern oceans than it has since scientists began a long-term satellite record to map sea ice extent in the late 1970s. The upward trend in the Antarctic, however, is only about a third of the magnitude of the rapid loss of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean.

The new Antarctic sea ice record reflects the diversity and complexity of Earth’s environments, said NASA researchers. Claire Parkinson, a senior scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, has referred to changes in sea ice coverage as a microcosm of global climate change. Just as the temperatures in some regions of the planet are colder than average, even in our warming world, Antarctic sea ice has been increasing and bucking the overall trend of ice loss. http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum/#.VDROBPldXfJ

 

Same NASA scientist who is puzzled by global temperature standstll?

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Science-US-climate-oceans/2014/10/06/id/598864/#ixzz3FSztjETK

Edited October 7, 2014 by keithlucky

[knocker]

And from NOAA

 

 

So as counterintuitive as expanding winter Antarctic sea ice may appear on a warming planet, it may actually be a manifestation of recent warming. "Both the Arctic and the Antarctic are responding to climate change, and both have areas that are warming rapidly," explains NSIDC lead scientist Ted Scambos. "But Antarctic sea ice is responding to wind shifts and ocean changes in an unexpected way, and we're still trying to fully understand it."

 

http://www.climate.gov/news-features/featured-images/antarctic-winter-sea-ice-extent-sets-new-record-2014

[4wd]

 

Sea ice surrounding Antarctica reached a new record high extent this year, covering more of the southern oceans than it has since scientists began a long-term satellite record to map sea ice extent in the late 1970s. The upward trend in the Antarctic, however, is only about a third of the magnitude of the rapid loss of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean.

The new Antarctic sea ice record reflects the diversity and complexity of Earth’s environments, said NASA researchers. Claire Parkinson, a senior scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, has referred to changes in sea ice coverage as a microcosm of global climate change. Just as the temperatures in some regions of the planet are colder than average, even in our warming world, Antarctic sea ice has been increasing and bucking the overall trend of ice loss. http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum/#.VDROBPldXfJ

 

That doesn't seem to be true though does it.

[Midlands Ice Age]

Fwd

Good find the above graph.

I was thinking the statement in PW's reference/article was 'peculiar'.

Perhahps the NASA research worker is talking about volume rather than extent?.

The above graph is interesting it shows a growth in the extent in the period of 1980 to 1989 (a max?)

and then a falloff until around 2010, since when it appears to be on the increase until this winter when it looks as though given an average artic winter we could be heading for the highest total since the report started.

This is particularly true if you look at the mini-peaks (which occur in sept when the Antartic is at a maximum and the artic is at a minimum).. I wonder whether this value should be used as a realistic proxy for world sea-ice extent as it appears to react more quickly downwards (see the period 2000 -2005) and has moved more quickly upwards when conditions changed after 2010.

Infact if you look at the minimum in this value in 2007 it dropped by 20-25% compared to the maximum giving some slight correlation for the NASA claim.

Certainly interesting times at the moment. It looks as though the CAGW mantra for calling the end of sea ice is becoming increasingly unlikely. We will see.

MIA

[Gray-Wolf]

I think it odd that some folk demand that the AGW evidence is amply covered by long term 'natural' cycles yet demand instant proof of anything AGW???

 

The recent paper looking at the 'missed warming' in the Southern Ocean should help to explain the heat we see driving the uptick in mass loss from Antarctica even set against the backdrop leading to higher winds and increased activity in the ocean currents.

 

Just as in the North where sea ice has crashed to two disastrous lows, whilst trending down at an alarming rate, during a period of strong negative forcings which should , in any time period not impacted by AGW, drive cooling and Sea ice hikes.

 

With these elements in place what should we expect when we see the suite of naturals flip to augmenting AGW? No answer needed as we appear to be now entering the period of change leading to that flip.

[knocker]

Antarctic Sea Ice and Global Warming

[Midlands Ice Age]

 

I think it odd that some folk demand that the AGW evidence is amply covered by long term 'natural' cycles yet demand instant proof of anything AGW???

 

The recent paper looking at the 'missed warming' in the Southern Ocean should help to explain the heat we see driving the uptick in mass loss from Antarctica even set against the backdrop leading to higher winds and increased activity in the ocean currents.

 

Just as in the North where sea ice has crashed to two disastrous lows, whilst trending down at an alarming rate, during a period of strong negative forcings which should , in any time period not impacted by AGW, drive cooling and Sea ice hikes.

 

With these elements in place what should we expect when we see the suite of naturals flip to augmenting AGW? No answer needed as we appear to be now entering the period of change leading to that flip.

GW was that aimed at me?

I have demanded no proof from any global warmer in the blog below. I have commented on how actual ice totals (both north and south poles together) have trended upwards in the last 5 years -

 

Fwd

Good find the above graph.

I was thinking the statement in PW's reference/article was 'peculiar'.

Perhahps the NASA research worker is talking about volume rather than extent?.

The above graph is interesting it shows a growth in the extent in the period of 1980 to 1989 (a max?)

and then a falloff until around 2010, since when it appears to be on the increase until this winter when it looks as though given an average artic winter we could be heading for the highest total since the report started.

This is particularly true if you look at the mini-peaks (which occur in sept when the Antartic is at a maximum and the artic is at a minimum).. I wonder whether this value should be used as a realistic proxy for world sea-ice extent as it appears to react more quickly downwards (see the period 2000 -2005) and has moved more quickly upwards when conditions changed after 2010.

Infact if you look at the minimum in this value in 2007 it dropped by 20-25% compared to the maximum giving some slight correlation for the NASA claim.

Certainly interesting times at the moment. It looks as though the CAGW mantra for calling the end of sea ice is becoming increasingly unlikely. We will see.

MIA

 

Perhaps it wasn't aimed at me?

MIA