Please support this Forum and Neven's Blog

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - magnamentis

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 23
1
Arctic sea ice / Re: Volume vs extent, by the numbers
« on: Today at 06:15:17 PM »

This is why I see the possibility of a volume near 0% with extents near 100% -- maybe, for a year or two -- although I see it just as likely that the volume and extent both crash to near 0 year round in the same year.

this is an interesting theory of yours even though i don't think so, at least not far south hudson compared to high arctic which is in the dark for months. however every theory as long as it's not proven faulty is worth to be considered a possibility and i by far can't tell. perhaps more profound input will show by the pros in this forum, oceanographers as well as by weather and climate scientists. not sure whether this topic has been explored to a level that allows for a final answer, interesting it remains.

2
Arctic sea ice / Re: Volume vs extent, by the numbers
« on: Today at 05:27:28 PM »
Why do I believe that year round ice free is a long way off?

Hudson Bay is ice free annually but freezes over each winter despite being at a much lower latitude than the CAB. The Bering Sea is even a better example. Despite being very stormy and subjected to warm Pacific Ocean waters, portions of it continue to freeze each winter. The CAB will behave in a similar fashion for decades, IMHO.

there are only 2 or 3 users who ever seriously mentioned all year ice free and i'm not even sure whether they really meant winters included or it was a lapsus. that said of cours i think it's nothing like going out to a limb to say that it will probably take centuries for that to happen if not much longer. after all, whenever things happened in the past it took thousands or millions of years and i do not believe that humans can heat up the planet much beyond a certain point. either they will vanish and nature takes over again or the amount of energy needed will exeed any imaginable pollution.

3
Arctic sea ice / Re: What the Buoys are telling
« on: Today at 05:23:45 PM »
Several republicans I know would still be out there on their snowmobiles! (... evolution in action, I suspect )

Only if it's pre-breeding.

Well, in any case, it does look like my hope for the buoy making it out to the Labrador Sea before dying is all but lost. Now I am thinking it would be nice if it could make it down into Terror Bay off King William Island. Perhaps on the way we could get a webcam shot of the Crystal Serenity.

since i really like optimistic people my congrats for you very strong optimism, i'd never have thought it could make it that far while like you, i initially thought it would take the way down through baffin and davis. i dunno enough about currents in those passages but looking at the ice drift i suspect that surface winds are in charge as to where what floes in that area.

4
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: Today at 04:51:02 PM »
a further extent stall in the making that at the same time will prime the reminder of the then illusionary large extent for the "coup de grace" ;)

5
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: Today at 04:46:39 PM »
this image somehow give a nice outlook how things will probably end up this year, the color scheme is somehow user friendly and easier to interpret than many others.

everyone can easily draw the lines and be impressed, this image somehow implements thickness to extent in a different than the usual way.

6
Science / Re: Trump Administration Assaults on Science
« on: Today at 04:40:46 PM »
"It's been six months, and people are still crying at their desks."

Scott Pruitt's Crimes Against Nature
Trump's EPA chief is gutting the agency, defunding science and serving the fossil-fuel industry
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/scott-pruitt-is-gutting-the-epa-serving-fossil-fuel-industry-w494156


and one the crying stops it's not because they got happy in the mean time but because they were either ousted or have quit by themselves with perhaps a few in hospital with nervous breakdowns

7
Arctic sea ice / Re: What the Buoys are telling
« on: Today at 04:37:39 PM »
o-buoy made quite some headways to the south, is now located at around 72.9 North, no significant change in longitude though. further south it will take only a few days of sunshine to change the scene significantly, we gonna see that soon, interesting times like so often with this little friend of ours ;)

8
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: Today at 04:31:46 PM »
I seriously doubt we will approach the 2012 record.  The recent slowing makes even the top 3 look difficult.  I think the cold Atlantic and Greenland will keep ice higher in that area, compensating for the warmth in the west.  I do not think 2017 will make the top 5.

doubts are never wrong till results are final while you probably refer to extent, all was said about the value of extent at this time of the year and there is so much time left that daily and/or even weekly variations in melting speed do not mean that much. as stated earlier we should more keep the bigger picture with various factors in mind than to react and adapt our outlooks to every little up and down in a graph.

finally to remind everyone who could get a false impression, i voted for second lowest, not for lowest with a mention of a lowest still in reach and the weather has a great say in the reminder of this melting season

9
Arctic sea ice / Re: What the Buoys are telling
« on: July 27, 2017, 10:09:35 PM »
Based on past performance 2017B will melt out in the Fram Strait before the year is out.
I'm wondering whether the floe and its surroundings survive to mid-Sep to participate in the minimum figures.

the buoy is moving south very quickly and will soon reach the are where will be open water in a few days from now. hence i would surprised if there would be any ice surrounding o-buoy 14 at the end of the melting seasen, provided of course that the buoy doesn't changer "course"

10
Arctic sea ice / Re: Latest PIOMAS update (mid July update)
« on: July 26, 2017, 06:52:36 PM »

Disclamer:  Wipneus's graph shows the trends.  Weather will determine the details.  :)

this while one day bottom melt will see to a surprise, when? who knows.

Tigertown came up with a nice analogy to termites, the moment it's visible the house falls appart but again, when? no-one can say for sure.

11
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: July 26, 2017, 06:47:47 PM »
Termites come to mind where I live. They eat your wood-frame home out from under you before you know what is happening. By the time anything goes bang, it is usually about too late.

o love that one, great analogy

12
The rest / Re: 2017 open thread
« on: July 24, 2017, 07:13:03 PM »
They are actually looking at data, with all the caveats required.

You have made up your mind as to the outcome and seem to have no goal but to remind people of that.

Which is not to say you will not be correct eventually, but only one of those discussions is in any way interesting.

if you mean me i can tell that the motive (goal) you assume is exactly NOT my goal and is jumping to conclusions if i may say so.

my goal is to remind people to look at the whole picture instead of jumping to conclusions based on a flawed but available method and at the same time adapt their statements to something like daily moves of that graph. those two things combined, following ever little change and making up a september outcome of it and then considering the fact that the value of that method at this time of the year is at least limited (nicely said) leads to a lot of non-sense about a serious topic and most people when getting aware feel .........  while that was never the intention.

there is written a lot of literature about that and as i said, i will further restrain because as stated above it's neither target leading nor wise to do so.

my key point however is that some individuals simply, as it's very common, in case of doubt assume a bad/negative motivation because that's a lot easier and at the same time lessens the value of a statement in favour of their own while i believe to base an analysis on best possible data (foundation) is key to get the most accurate result and even more importantly avoid totally wrong results that would only help those who deny the entire thing.

i'm not sure but i do not want to go beyond certain limits again, hence i think all is said, should you be genuinely interested to find out more don't hesitate to PM, i'm always open to honest and constructive input of any kind

enjoy further

13
The rest / Re: 2017 open thread
« on: July 24, 2017, 06:29:54 PM »
I agree with Cid that the system is dynamic, but I think that an extent based thread is not where this discussion belongs. The Arctic Sea Ice extent is about as meaningless right this moment as it will ever be. It doesn't even have the usual value in regard to albedo because so much is so thin that the sun's rays pass right through it.

Anyway, extent has been used so much everyday of every year, it has become a stumbling block. We need to look at the overall picture, and on a large enough high res. screen, not a tiny phone.

once more you nailed it down. unfortunately it's not wise to discus the flaws of a widely adopted or only available method in a forum/thread/group that is dedicated to exactly that method. emotional "head-wind" is unavoidable and as we all know i regularly fall into such traps because my way of thinking is simply to straight forward to consider typical human reactions at any given moment.

of course i'm of the opinion that the shortcomings of a method should be discussed exactly there because the audience is right, but as history and experience show, that simply does never lead to anything positive but a lot of back and forth bickering, hence it's "not wise" to go there.

recent events once more showed me that and once ones voice is not listened to anymore, one could know who god is and remain unheard ;) which finally is to no-ones benefit. many enough were/are killed simply for telling to truth or a believe that is not convenient to the establishment or that's against the actual main stream. the subconscious mind is a huge force.
 
since this is the open thread i hope that's within range, your post just inspired me :-)

14
Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: The Nares Strait thread
« on: July 24, 2017, 03:49:44 PM »
Here is an example of fast ice in Kane Basin, attached to the Humboldt Glacier front. It has been subjected to above-zero temps for a long while, and the effects are showing - breakage, melt ponds, draining of ponds, more breakage. The high temps couldn't melt it all yet, though it's quite certain it will disappear by the time the melting season ends.
The animation runs from May 16th to July 21st, skipping 3-5 days at a time except at crucial points or where clouds prevent it. Please forgive the very crude date labels.

Oren , that is not fast ice it is ordinary sea ice.

thanks, we never learn out, what then is the correct definition of fast ice, i thought the same like @oren

15
Arctic sea ice / Re: What the Buoys are telling
« on: July 23, 2017, 06:34:53 PM »
that's O'buoy 14's current location, not much longer and ti will reach the great melting zone or better, the melting zone will reach the buoy ;)

16
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: July 23, 2017, 06:17:34 PM »
The mistake you and others make is the assumption that this year's ice is anything like previous years.  Or that this year's climate is anything like previous years.   Or that atmospheric circulation or ocean currents and temperatures are anything like previous years.

You can crunch numbers all you want, but if circumstances in the past in no way resemble current circumstances, then it's just GIGO.

You can't treat a transforming system as if it's a static one and derive anything useful.


+1

17
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2017 sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 23, 2017, 12:36:30 AM »
@neven

"not many" does not mean the same than "only"

even though i did not go that far the entire story is not about who is grasping what but about the various reactions of people who as well only go out to a limb without evidence but are repeatedly proven wrong while some of those who are ridiculed have often if not mostly been spot on.

i won't go so far to collect all the post but it's there, in writing and yes there are people who have an eye for the bigger picture and nothing is wrong with it.

further i'm a bit surprised because whenever i'm reading through your posts there is close to 100% the same or a very similar point of view shining through.

this is by no means about content, it's something else and we both know it and this is MY field of work if we wanna talk about expertise. unfortunately this is not the place where we can provide
more information about who is who, hence what remains is to further enjoy the many useful and
great contributions here and accept the fact that "es menschelt" wie überall.

at the end one can easily see this things different and it's your place, hence your opinion counts.
but one thing is totally clear and not disputable, to mock someone because he uses LOL or
emphasizes a compliment by the use of several nice words instead of one is clearly
OT, unnecessary and clearly based on aversion which from the text one can see is
based on an inferiority complex and i dont' mean you, hope that's clear.

i wish you and you folks a nice weekend too

over and out ;)

18
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2017 sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 22, 2017, 10:25:20 PM »
it's probably obvious that i fully concur since i'm blowing this horn since march but then i suggest to be careful to compare hudson with the places (ice) where there is still some ice left by now. reason is obvious as well, hudson is a lot more south and surrounded by land where temps have seen above 20C back in spring the first time, jointly with at times heavy winds coming in over the same land all around it. those conditions will never be happening in the high arctic for many decades to come if ever. the sun up there is waning already, hence water and airflow together with wave action will have to do the job for the rest of the melting season.

you certainly remember that we were in agreement at earlier times and my reply as well was about considering very carefully about extreme terms as well as about comparing apples with pears. the reason should be clear, whoever does not want to see the facts or doesn't like our "noses" and at the same time is looking for arguments  agains, will use those "quick shot" arguments to deny the entire post and get personal (ridicule)  of course only to later join the party once the processes become visible to the naked eye of the last Mohican LOL

BTW now the two of us used LOLs let's see who will complain this time hehe...

enjoy a pleasant weekend

19
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: July 22, 2017, 07:54:01 PM »
I was weeding me environment directory and found a little file dated 8th June on prospects for various outcomes as regards sea ice extent. Below is the table for 21st July. There is not a lot of difference. Mind you, I still think that 2nd lowest is most likely - low volume and warm seas. Also added a graph.

sounds reasonable. i think that most users for the last 3-4 months believe that second lowest is the most probable should nothing extraordinary happen while a better (more ice remaining) or worse result are still possible even though not by a big margin.

extraordinary could be another GAC or a series of rather strong cyclones. another extraordinary event could happen due to much more thin ice than any other year in the past.

the only thing that is catching my eyes almost every day is that most people who refer to 2012 and the GAC somehow seem to deny the possibility that such a GAC can happen again, while i believe that the next of those is imminent and chances are increasing each year.

my point is that we should at least keep that possibility as one of the more probable scenarios and therefore calculate (make forecasts) that include the current almost linear development as well as a new GAC and/or sudden death due to thinness and fragmentation.

one possibility can be added which is the combination of the two. that could bring us very close to what common sense right now sees as almost impossible and of course there is no way to predict any of that.

20
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: July 22, 2017, 07:36:11 PM »
@slow wing

you point would be correct between around 21st of may and 21st of july while in may albedo spoils that mechanism quite a bit.

for the rest of the melting season which i think @hyperion is exactly right because insolation from now on, in places where there still is significant ice, plays an ever smaller role and this very rapidly and almost on a daily basis.

last but not least, it's common knowledge that clouds keep the heat below them once it's there and due to  a lot of energy in the ocean and through open waters the heat IS there by now therefore it can be assumed that less of that heat will escape as long as the skies are cloud covered, at least from now on this effect should overrule insolation IMO.

21
Arctic sea ice / Re: Home brew AMSR2 extent & area calculation
« on: July 22, 2017, 07:28:12 PM »
The ice in Kara shows how fast it can disappear suddenly.

yep, the thinner the ice will be over great areas the more often this will happen in various places and i still expect something like that this year, let's see.

22
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: July 20, 2017, 04:28:12 PM »
Southern Baffin Island has had a cool, cloudy, and rainy July so far, so there's a fair bit more sea ice than normal.
https://www.arcticsealift.com/schedule.php

some more here, some less there ;)

for the south it's true but the, close to land the average shows ice at this time of the year, nothing out of the ordinary really once we look at landlocked ice IMO, just some very local differences.

23
Antarctica / Re: Rift in Larsen C
« on: July 20, 2017, 01:33:32 AM »
thanks, before learning this i thought fast ice is fastened to land which apparently was wrong ;)

24
Antarctica / Re: Rift in Larsen C
« on: July 19, 2017, 11:02:28 PM »
@Tor Bejnar

is "fast ice" the correct term for ice growing between an iceberg and an ice-shelf?

the question is mean seriously not that you think there would be sarcasm or something i just don't know and like to learn about terms as much as i can, this term just did never cross my mind in this context, hence your feedback will be very appreciated.

25
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: July 19, 2017, 10:55:45 PM »
NSIDC area/extent  is disproportionately affected  by melt polds
Because of this, "compactness" is a misleading name for this metric, which combines two distinct phenomena: the ratio of ice to open sea area (bona fide compactness), and the ratio of melt ponds to ice area.

This makes interpreting NSIDC area/extent tricky at best. It is entirely possible that reduced melt ponds due to increased fragmentation may be a negative feedback, slowing melt. Or, it may be the opposite. I haven't seen anything beyond speculation to resolve this important question.

thanks a lot, today adds a lot to my learning curve thanks to many thoughtful feedbacks ;)

@neven

thanks for the links, i'll do as suggested (more comparison and the likes ) ;)

26
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: July 19, 2017, 10:54:16 PM »
magnamentis,
BTW it would be nice if we could have a link of the source for "high compaction" for further assessment of accuracy and reliability of that source.

It says NSIDC on the charts and the percentages are probably correct in and of themselves. I believe the problem may be that the percentage of compactness now compared to what we started out with is not saying much. If we had started the season out with a strong pack and still had a strong percentage of compactness, that would be a whole different situation. I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong on how the NSIDC does their figuring.

good explanation, makes totally sense, thanks a lot, i did not consider that :-)

27
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: July 19, 2017, 05:41:57 PM »
Sea ice compactness at this moment seems to be substantially higher than in 2012, 2015 and 2016.
That is some good news at least. Thanks.
Could slow down the rest of the melt-season. A huge area of icepack towards 'west' side of the NP looks somewhat integrated from looking at Worldview.

would be good news if it were true while the exact opposite is the case IMO. looking at the entire remaining ice as a whole, compactness is poorest ever and meltponds are water ON ice and for that the ice most be relatively homogeneous and "compact" which it is not and besides other factors meltwater is often draining throuch fissures and holes.

ice is fragmented like never before which is the opposite of compact.

according to that the opposite will happen, the ice, despite the relatively cool and often overcast weather, will melt from the bottom and because its thinner than usual (a lot thinner in fact) and then considering that huge areas of ice have a similar thicknes, namely FYI, it could well happen that once zero thickness is reached, that huge areas will be affected quasi overnight.

last but not least we are at all times close to lowest even though the weather and temps are not especially melt-boosting for quite some time now. the worse it will be once that would change again with strong winds and wave action as nasty helpers to destroy ice.

i will happily stand corrected but let's see.

BTW it would be nice if we could have a link of the source for "high compaction" for further assessment of accuracy and reliability of that source.

any good points to proof me wrong are very welcome, facts should prevail ;)

EDIT: it has to be put into account where what happens, since the polar region is not expected to go generally ice-free. it's the latitudes between 77 and 82 north that count, the more southern rest will mostly melt anyways

28
Arctic sea ice / Re: Stupid Questions :o
« on: July 18, 2017, 08:33:25 PM »
@neven

:)

29
Arctic sea ice / Re: Stupid Questions :o
« on: July 18, 2017, 06:07:16 PM »
Mind you, by an ironic conincidence, "less than 1 million km2 of ice extent"  is almost exactly 15% of the average 1990s summer minimum...

nice find and in addition to that, i said that before, once we indeed will have reached sub-one-million km2 nobody will talk about ice-free arctic anymore because there will simply be too much clearly visible ice left to use that term at that time. it will sound non-credible and alarmist would the media talk about ice-free while everyone could see lot's of ice on sat-images.

this currently widely spread interpretation has IMO been made up by people who cannot wait till it happens and hence bended the rules/terms to their liking.

1 mio km2 is definitely NOT ice-free, no matter what anyone tries to tell us.

EDIT: the term alarmist as well has a negative touch which is not justified, i believe that nothing is wrong to be alarmed and the alarms should even be much louder and wider spread. we need more alarms not less.

30
Science / Re: "climate porn" vs. "not alarmed enough"
« on: July 18, 2017, 05:58:54 PM »
@pileus

as i did not have a lucky (skilled) hand in communicating exactly that, the importance as to what and how we communicate to avoid giving to the "on purpose" deniers more "ammunition" to play their dirty game.

often i got angry replies because that was usually in reply to posts and the wording perhaps not so much sophisticated. hence i'm happy that you bring this up again and obviously in a perfect manner that is allows everyone to agree, since your post comes without offending anyone LOL.


31
Arctic sea ice / Re: Latest PIOMAS update (mid July update)
« on: July 18, 2017, 05:53:31 PM »

I kind of expect some of that 1.0m contour to survive, considering how cloudy the last week or so has been. A lot of that depends on where the winds blow the ice over the next month or so, and whether all the rain that Climate Reanalyzer has been showing all over the ice has indeed been rain, rather than snow. If the winds blow the pack over the now open peripheral seas, then a lot of the 1m and even thicker ice will melt too.

Who knows though, maybe large areas of the ice have been absorbing heat and are ready to go poof.

there is not much surface melting needed to deal with a meter in july because as far as i understand, bottem melt will almost eat one meter alone ( at least close to ) hence 1 meter ice in july to my understanding is more or less doomed to a very high degree, even if not 100% in all places, depending on currents and other factors like cyclone paths later in the season.

32
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: July 18, 2017, 05:50:15 PM »
After D2, operational and ensemble runs show a cold, stacked TPV pattern taking over centered directly near/over the pole. This pattern is particularly good at slowing/stalling melt as cold air becomes trapped in the vortex and limited advection and clouds keep the developing air mass from modifying too much. The big angry ridge forecasted to develop near the Bering would help stabilize a ridge/trough couplet and could help keep that TPV stable for up to 2 weeks. If that comes to pass, Rob's forecast for Sept. will be looking pretty good.

As a side note, Slater's sea ice forecast seems to have stabilized somewhere in the neighborhood of 4.5M-5M.

Despite low volume, extent may remain elevated unless a serious turnaround in this persistent +NAO/AO pattern occurs, which doesn't look all that likely.

perhaps i missed something but nobody expects ice over the pole to melt anyways, hence impact on melting season results will be minor to none and if there is cold air rotating over the pole i would suspect that the warm air is banging on those doors all around that vortex which then is not good and as i understand things help melting exactly in places where it will count, in the middle between periphery that melts anyways and high arctic where it won't melt anyways (this year)

don't hesitate to make me better understand in case my interpretation of what you wrote is wrong ;)

33
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: July 17, 2017, 06:30:10 PM »
One of these summers we will have another massive record breaker.  Will it be this one?

No, IMHO. 2nd place in extent and area. Only volume has a chance at 1st which, of course, is the most important metric regarding the state of the ice. This year simply cannot be a "massive record breaker".

This winter should be very interesting.

in area we were very close already last year hence it's very well in the reach, i agree about volume, chance is high, nothing is sure of course. as to extent i agree that dispersion could help avoiding but then 2012 at this time of the year nobody expected what happened later either.

right now doubts whether we reach new lows in all tree are well founded and legit but denying chances for things to happen, now that it will take much less for them to happen then back then when they happened, i'd not sign either.

34
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: July 17, 2017, 06:23:16 PM »
@Shared Humanity

while are d'accord that racism is evil, IMMEDIATE public uproars of the kind seen here are not target leading and almost every war in  human history was based at least in parts of this kind of "phariseeism" ( i know that word will cause reactions but this is what it is IMO.

it's good to be agains racism but it's not necessary to lynch someone on a first "fauxpas" which as well could have been a lapsus or language barrier and could have been handled with a friendly hint and/or asking how it was meant before shooting broadsides at someone who generally posted quite useful stuff. this harsh reactions are not fair without checking on intention and first hint friendly and are as intolerant as racism itself.

aggression has never ever lead to anything good, at least not ultimately, short term satisfaction of feeling just is not the goal but making people understand is. obeying is not based on conviction and therefore won't last.

35
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: July 17, 2017, 04:48:58 PM »
JAXA volume just dropped to about 6,000 km3, which is surprisingly low when you consider the JAXA average thickness of Arctic sea ice.
Compare to PIOMAS average thickness.


as we both know and predict for months; more sooner than later facts will topple all models, it has been obvious, still is obvious and will show soon that due to the state of the ice, especially age and thickness of the same, this year can in almost no way be compared to any other melting season before and especially not so when it comes to comparison of SIE.

i'm still looking for what i've overlooked, at least i hope i did, because pacific side will soon collapse and the atlantic side will most probably/certainly retreat to at least usual boundaries, hence there is not much room for error when saying we gonna have to deal with an extraordinary rest of the melting season. still hope that i'm totally off but all your posts just confirm that impression

36
Antarctica / Re: Can ice mass change rotational axis of earth
« on: July 16, 2017, 09:52:31 PM »
Can a massive drifting ice shelf change the axis the Earth rotates on?

the way you ask the answer would be yes while there are a few less probable conditions that would have to be met.

- mass of that shelf would have to be huge for a measurable (significant) impact, even more so that it would start to melt once heading south, hence the original mass would have to be even bigger.

- speed of the drift to make sure enough of the orginal mass would reach where it has to in time to have an effect

- the necessary kind of shelf does currently not exist

- it would have be stay within certain boundaries of longitude. as long as it would for example float with the westwind drift in the souther ocean and travel around the axis the effect would be neutralized, keyword "moon" one cans extract some of the answer from the well studied impact of mass shifts, the moon is nothing else than a mass with an impact that changes it's location, while if it would stay in one place at all times many many things would be entirely different, including rotation speed of the earth, water distribution etc etc.

37
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: July 16, 2017, 09:07:25 PM »
@jdallen

sure, as to the importance we subjectively give to various factors it's totally ok that there are some differences in assessment :-)

i think the things more or less are on the table and now we shall wait and see how it goes, interesting and always good to learn other users views and opinions, all this adds to everyone's learning curve in one or another way, thanks for sharing yours  8)

38
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: July 16, 2017, 08:32:12 PM »
@jdallen

an understandable point of view which probably won't be totally off but the there are few things
to consider:

a) it's colder in the cab than in the barnetz

b) there is less insolation in the cab than in the barentz

c) there is less open water (wave action and energy) in the cab than in the barentz

d) there is less heat close by, be it water bound or in the air

e) the surrounding ice is more mass than further south.

all this will make it not THAT easy and not THAT certain but still there will be some huge holes in the ice which were not that many and smaller in the past, hence i share you general direction of thinking, just thought to mention that the cab and the barentz cannot really be compared when it comes to how similar and/or same ice patterns evolve over time, especially since we are looking at different moments in the season, around solstice and quite a bit after solstice and further north for example etc.

39
Walking the walk / Re: Trash
« on: July 16, 2017, 04:21:46 PM »
numerobis, thank you for sharing this. My experiencevwith trash is that when the place is clean, people tend more to avoid littering it. So starting the change can get some positive feedback going.

+1 good and very important point, psychology cannot be underrated, what you said is a general facts and applies even to each private household, clean places are more often kept clean while messy places get messier by the hour ;)

40
Science / Re: "climate porn" vs. "not alarmed enough"
« on: July 16, 2017, 04:19:06 PM »
@TeaPotty

i don't see much major disagreement in our points, some wording perhaps, a minor misunderstanding from my side and then i'm an old man for whom the 90ie's are an integrated part of my life experience, hence  the "excuse" which indeed nowadays is not valid anymore as well as i think it's less frequent, means things have been slightly improving on the front IMO,

thanks for the additional explanations ;)

41
Science / Re: "climate porn" vs. "not alarmed enough"
« on: July 15, 2017, 08:37:01 PM »
generally very good points and a good read, just want to add a few small things:

about who cares what deniers say i disagree to the point that:

- if they are leaders of major enterprises or even POTUS it matters, whether we like it or not

- most people are prone to influence from their human environment, friends and business colleagues and cannot or don't want to think of their own which leeds to a still by far to great a number of people who "blindly" push the uncomfortable thoughts that would force them to take consequences out of their mind. the bad should never be underestimated, even though i strongly believe that reason will ultimately prevail, in this case perhaps too late to get away with out harm.

about the "on purpose thing" related to scientists. this i would not sign. i believe that most scientist are doing their best while they are dependent (funding etc.) on their masters and have to be careful not to overshoot. thinking a bit back and even now not all feedbacks and consequences were the kind of obvious that an employee could easily lean out of the window and offend his boss or paymaster. could even be counterproductive since less funds means less data means even more time lost. not just like that but at least a possible negative impact cannot be totally denied.

for the rest, independent of wording and details which i'm anyways not the best at LOL, i fully agree with you general direction of pushing things,

thanks for taking the time to put all this a bit into context and make it accessible as some kind of resume.

42

Thanks for re-posting this instead of tossing it, as I wanted to read it again.

+1 i indeed like to read K's posts as well and don't have a problem with their length, hence it is good we got a dedicated thread for those. keep going, a lot of valuable input for laymen like me.

43
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: July 15, 2017, 06:45:03 PM »

Voila, there's that Blue Ocean Event.

only that this rate is not realistic due to lessening insolation and cooling of the high arctic starting in mid/end august already, et voilà, there goes the blue ocean event, perhaps next year ;)

but then however it will be, who knows really, i don't, hence we can only talk about likeliness/probabilities, based on earlier years which may as well mean nothing this or in future years, let's see ;)

44
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: July 14, 2017, 11:22:13 PM »
Magna, area/concentration is measuring the thing you are talking about, and I find your statement untrue. Area is currently third begind 2012 and 2016 in Wipneus' AMSR2 thread, providing the most accurate and highest-resolution measurement.

no problem, it's always good to have different opinions to consider, i just think that that what you find untrue is the reason why extent is not showing the current state of the melting season but we shall see. should there be widely spread sudden drops or even a new low this year this despite the fact that extent doesn't indicate that right now, i think it was true, else i will remember your point of view and eventually correct my opinion.

enjoy further and a have nice weekend

cheers

45
The rest / Re: Article links: drop them here!
« on: July 14, 2017, 04:37:14 PM »
Southern Europe swelters as heatwave sparks wildfires and closes tourist sites
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/13/southern-europe-swelters-heatwave-sparks-wildfires-spain-greece-italy


sounds more like Sicily than souther europe, no such thing here in andalucia, we had fog for the second day and cool night temps on costa del sol. i know you see things right but newspaper headlines rarely serve to draw the right picture of events which is why they're headlines, made to catch peoples eyes for spontaneously purchasing the paper :-) or read online with adds.

until now this is a very pleasant summer with zero days beyond 36C at the coast east of tarifa while this does not apply to costa del la luz, seville and cadiiz as well as parts portugal. those had their heat events this year, interstingly on the atlantic side (which is normally way cooler than the mediterranean side in mid/late meteorological summer )

EDIT: furthermore it's much more humid than normally. we had rain in july, very rare as well as folg and high relative humidity while the norm would be dry air between 28 and 50% rel. hum. depending on the time of the day.

46
Just bumping this thread as we get closer to ice max down there. We have been seeing low extent for the whole of the season so far and so it looks like another year highlighting 'a change' in the Sea ice behaviour we had become used to seeing?

Of course this is also allowing record low global sea ice extent/area to also occur.

i think we safely can add "volume" to that group too ;)

47
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: July 14, 2017, 04:21:09 PM »
Wow, a solid century and loss of position!  Some of us thought, a couple month ago, that 2017 would be dancing in 1st place at this time.  It looks like it would take three consecutive double centuries to bring 2017 into 2nd place, and three more after that to reach 1st place.  (And double IJIS centuries are hen's teeth rare.)

i know that you are one of those who are aware of the dispersion thingy that all the years with lower extent on this given day did not have. if we virtually push the ice together into a solid floe we would be 1st place by far, not even putting thickness into account.

what we currently see is a two-dimensional illusion that is tempting for some to commit a three-dimensional error. ;)

as i said, i know you know, just to round up for those who forget about that more often.

48
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: July 14, 2017, 04:12:09 PM »
Aww so close to a double

Anyways a lot of the easy ice of past few days melted in the past 3 so now it may take more work to melt the next sections.

So even if we get another century i forsee some 60 to 80k  melts in the offing and then perhaps a few more centuries

without naming a final point in time this prediction certainly becomes true ;)

60-80ies i can't think of while everything always remains possible. IMO the question will be whether we shall see the usual series of centuries or a few doubles above what we've encountered in previous years. more doubles will certainly happen, question is whether it will happen now or not because the extremes are wheather related.

49
The rest / Re: Russiagate
« on: July 14, 2017, 01:22:52 AM »
@neven

about corruption:

corruption is inevitable once a person involved in a business of a greater than a certain size gets into any high ranking office.

imo there should be more restrictions in the upper as well as the lower end as to who is eligible.

trump f. the upper and reagan f. the lower end examples. same for income levels.

more of this could fill libraries so i keep it short and look foeward to leaen your opinion on the thought in general.

50
Antarctica / Re: Rift in Larsen C
« on: July 13, 2017, 08:47:39 PM »

Time to lock this thread....:)?

better to amend the name as it was done with the US election thread so that the content remains accessible within the same thread and the discussion will continue seamlessly, this is my proposal, others will make the choice.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 23