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 - Pmt111500

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 20
1
Science / Re: 2017 Mauna Loa CO2
« on: Today at 06:07:48 AM »
Some recent numbers without any explanation (the weekly file actually looks like this).
407.48 ppm and
387.49 ppm would be my guesses for the values 1 and 10 years ago unless the site fumbles with the dates as well.
 
 2017   3   5  2017.1740    406.10  2           403.75    383.47    124.86
  2017   3  12  2017.1932    407.06  5           404.69    384.39    125.58
  2017   3  19  2017.2123    406.77  6           405.37    385.28    125.00
  2017   3  26  2017.2315    408.37  7           405.56    385.88    126.29
  2017   4   2  2017.2507    407.60  6           406.19    385.82    125.19
  2017   4   9  2017.2699    408.85  5           408.81    385.82    126.12
  2017   4  16  2017.2890    409.61  6           407.48    387.49    126.59

2
Large part of Southern ocean started to conform wrt sea ice with northern warming which was also very pronounced im the aftermath of large El Nino. The possibility of another high melt year does not mean the southern ocean will behave the same the next southern spring.

I'm not too sure of the future behavior of North Atlantic Drift and Arctic extensions of the same, and the changing snowfall amounts in the northern seas. Still I'm not of the opinion of some scientists arguing this still takes generations.


3
 ::) :o ??? :-\ Given the old ice is gone soonish, the equations of melt and freeze simplify and the correct answer to this maybe read in a letter I'm enclosing now to an envelope to be opened by the future generations... oops... correct that one... and which, if inaccurate will show the openers of the time-capsule what a fool I was... Oops... That might need a correction too.

4
Arctic sea ice / Re: What is a model?
« on: April 16, 2017, 10:22:49 AM »
A model is a small imitation of the original.  Models always lack at least some of the fine details in the original -- otherwise they are called replicas.
The few models that I've met in person all appeared, to my jaded eye, to possess very fine details indeed. ::)


Terry

But what you see of the details are mostly external, my guess is there's f.e. a mechanisn called anorexia nervosa that possibly influences the externally observable attributes. Possibly there are also the so called genes at play here.

5
The forum / Re: Arctic Sea Ice Forum Humor
« on: April 15, 2017, 11:58:25 AM »

6
The rest / Re: The Trump Presidency (was "Presidential Poll")
« on: April 10, 2017, 05:00:27 PM »
There were sine (SOME, gdi this keyb on the phone) glitches with the electronic lists of nominees here, the lists on paper had to be taken on display at least in 3 communes. No knowledge of why electronic lists failed on these communes.
I guess it's entirely normal.

7
The rest / Re: The Trump Presidency (was "Presidential Poll")
« on: April 10, 2017, 08:50:54 AM »
As there is political threads here nowadays which is a bit sad imho, i'll report that The greens made their best result ever in Finnish communal elections and any elections in Finland yesterday. They even got most votes in the 7th largest city. Mind you, they're more sane than Stein party, f.e. not opposing vaccinations. Still they're opposed to nuclear energy, which is regarded somewhat of a sin by the older parties. A bit sad to see that the traditional nature conservation has been a bit marginalized in their politics.

8
Arctic sea ice / Re: Stupid Questions :o
« on: April 06, 2017, 05:25:47 PM »
For the pole the break-even day for radiation is of course the equinox since the orbit, but this is still a good question considering lower latitudes.

Well maybe it's s day or two before equinox for the pole since the light scattering and bending properties of atmosphere but for blackbody. I guess the Moon could serve as a nuce example.


I don't think that's the case. At equinox the sun is right at the horizon... I  find it odd that it would be exactly the same as the net radiation water at 0C radiates out.

Anyway I did a little googling (finding:http://www.applet-magic.com/insolation.htm) and it suggests that the incoming radiation is still 0 at the equinox... which I think is perhaps aggressive rounding, but it's all together too big of an angle to be much energy, anyway. 

So it's not that. :)


Yep, water is no blackbody. Nor is ice. The atmosphere makes this a tricky question.

9
Arctic sea ice / Re: Stupid Questions :o
« on: April 06, 2017, 05:01:44 AM »
As there are some cuts to earth sciences in a country that relies it's science to be developed by immigrant scientists (well there are some natives too) the following stupid question might be in order. Could there be an instrument on the surface that could measure the ghg's in the atmospheric layers without relying to satellite observations for calibration?

10
Arctic sea ice / Re: Stupid Questions :o
« on: April 06, 2017, 04:36:11 AM »
For the pole the break-even day for radiation is of course the equinox since the orbit, but this is still a good question considering lower latitudes.


Are you sure?


Terry
For blackbody, i can't see how constant sunlight could result to a cool surface. Atmosphere of course bends light as seen in sunset and sunrise.

11
Arctic sea ice / Re: Stupid Questions :o
« on: April 06, 2017, 04:16:53 AM »
For the pole the break-even day for radiation is of course the equinox since the orbit, but this is still a good question considering lower latitudes.

Well maybe it's s day or two before equinox for the pole since the light scattering and bending properties of atmosphere but for blackbody. I guess the Moon could serve as a nuce example.

12
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: April 04, 2017, 08:58:46 AM »
IJIS:

13,574,811 km2(April 3, 2017)up 5,037 km2 and 3rd lowest measured for the date.

The rollercoaster is picking up potential energy??
Good analogy. Could Cross-arctic flights use high sulfur fuel durung summers? Will it destroy the engines? Probably it still wouldn't be enough to prevent the ride of the times.

13
Arctic sea ice / Re: Stupid Questions :o
« on: April 03, 2017, 07:23:32 AM »
Most of the towns and villages in Siberia have their own peat-fired power plant.  It has been the primary means of power generation in Siberia for the last hundred years.

The peat fires in Siberia were so bad mainly because the peat bogs were intentionally dried out to provide peat for power generation.

Because of the remoteness of most of these villages, peat-fired local power generation has remained the best option.

Extra-sulfur peat, then :o . Sulfur is one hard bit to even bacteria to metbolize and anaerobic(bacteria)s can't do oxygenation by default.

14
Arctic sea ice / Re: Stupid Questions :o
« on: April 01, 2017, 08:37:12 AM »
Ah, then maybe it's extra cold in there this spring? Or 2016 was extra warm? Then the Russian Federation would have supplied them with very cheap extra-sulfur coal? That almost looks like every mining op and small settlement would burn a bunch of that stuff? Compare to Petropavlovsk city on Kamtchatka.

15
Arctic sea ice / Re: Stupid Questions :o
« on: March 31, 2017, 08:14:53 PM »
Date of the 2016 image missing so not saying anything.

16
Science / Re: Trump Administration Assaults on Science
« on: March 30, 2017, 07:14:53 PM »
The climate office will probably be closed, but in the meantime, the term "climate change" is banned in all internal communication, according to a Politico source.

Energy Department climate office bans use of phrase ‘climate change’; The Office of International Climate and Clean Energy is the only office at DOE with the words ‘climate’ in its name, and it may be endangered as Trump looks to reorganize government agencies. http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/energy-department-climate-change-phrases-banned-236655



Sad to see science disappear from the local politics. Is there any reason to buy anything technical from US anymore?

17
Science / Re: Trump Administration Assaults on Science
« on: March 30, 2017, 05:00:12 AM »
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58dbae95e4b0cb23e65d06f5?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

House Science Committee Chair Says Science Magazine Is Not ‘Objective’


Doh!!!

Translation:
"House Science Committee Chair won't accept any medicines invented after 1930s"

18
Science / Re: 2017 Mauna Loa CO2
« on: March 29, 2017, 01:56:37 PM »
Yep. Email has been sent. You may try yourself too. I just like that site. Thanks for the other link. World needs to watch this.

19
Science / Re: 2017 Mauna Loa CO2
« on: March 29, 2017, 11:38:55 AM »
Weekly CO2 Mauna Loa Observatory | NOAA-ESRL
Period Week Atmospheric CO2
Last Week March 12 - 18, 2017 407.06 ppm
1 Year Ago March 12 - 18, 2016 404.69 ppm
10 Years Ago March 12 - 18, 2005 384.39 ppm

There it still is. 5 -> 7. Now I did check the number from the primary source and it is for the 2007. It does not look good to have the coding error remaining on the site. https://www.co2.earth Hello.

20
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2017 sea ice area and extent data
« on: March 28, 2017, 07:44:50 AM »
Well I guess someone had to be the first to speculate on future behavior of Global sea Ice. Thanks Buddy for being the first bold one to spell out the dreaded 't'-word (tipping point).

Some notes.
1) The August 2016 would be very close to the maximum atmospheric effect of El Nino.
2) Large part of the (imo) naturally impossible deviation of last winter (starting from late October) was due to Antarctic ice melting way faster than usual.
3) Thus there could have been a tipping point for some part of Southern Ocean. I remember there was something odd going on on the region of Weddell Gyre.

This would be the Antarctic area to watch this (northern) spring. Has the Antarctic Circumpolar Current moved to an area it's not previously been? Thus the start of the freeze in Antarctic could be abnormal here as well

4) For me, the Arctic lack of growth in the autumn was pretty much what I'd expect of the WACC (and the theory of J. Francis of the diminishing temperature gradient between tropics and arctic).

5) From all of the previous. I'm not even sure we'll even see the first peak of the global graph clearly. The global graph could flat line all through this summer starting from June as the Siberian melt progresses.

An extreme scenario, but on these days they're necessary to be aware of.  Knowing you're much into politics, Buddy, I'm still of the opinion that Russians as people (and especially Siberian Russians) do not much care if their winters get milder. They might get a couple of ten millions of immigrants from south at some point, but that's an issue for the time it happens.

I'm keeping an eye on the spring progress during this post-El Nino year. I think the more pronounced swings in the extent and area of Arctic Sea ice since 2006 allows the speculations of general tipping points, but  for now i'm thinking these more of a local issue. As the weather gets stuck in one position more easily these days, the serious hobbyist of atmospheric science in me could say, the weather induced events unfolding round the northern hemisphere are of note and interest. I'm rather looking forward the time the idjit possessing The Button and his so called
friends get it. Not too much though, as their other views are also quite repulsive.

21
The rest / Re: Arctic Café
« on: March 26, 2017, 02:04:58 PM »
I would love to hear those sounds. Will be much more noticeable at night..
I think a pretty good imitation cn be achieved by taking a trayful of ice cubes, go to  really quiet place, record it. Then apply various legnths of echo to individual cracks...up to 4 secs, and amp up something like tenfold... I had to stop the recording early since akid asked her mother something 40 meters away. Possibly cannot try again this spring it's in the low 50s F here today

That I can confirm that the harbour is free of ice.

22
The rest / Re: Arctic Café
« on: March 26, 2017, 09:46:31 AM »
Mind you, these are of fresh ice melting in-place. If the river wasn't controlled that would have left for sea alredy. The lake instead is rather natural wrt ice. Tried to record sound of ice cracking but something went wrong. Nice to hear spring is progresaing, though. I haven't visited Baltic shore since the latest imges so don't know what's up in there.

23
Science / Re: Trump Administration Assaults on Science
« on: March 26, 2017, 06:46:36 AM »
And so it begins; the linked article is entitled: "Bill Would Bar Discrimination Toward Climate Change Doubters"; which could make evidence-based scientists guilty of hate crime if say they were to deny a climate change denying scientist (with research funded by the fossil fuel industry) a tenured position.

http://staging.hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CLIMATE_CHANGE_DISCRIMINATION?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-03-22-19-01-38

Well this sort of a bill would be a reason for this thred to be in 'science section. Of course no sensible university would obey this. They really want to dumb down north american citicens. Coal-communism, or fossilic fascism.

24
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: March 23, 2017, 09:33:19 PM »
is there a metric for daily or weekly sea ice mobility anomaly?  this would be very useful when the Arctic turns into a single gyre.
Nevö höörd nevöevö... never heard of such a thing. People still believe thaere's weather.

25
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2017 sea ice area and extent data
« on: March 22, 2017, 07:07:12 PM »
Thank you Wipneus for the graph, it'll be interesting to see if the curve follows the 2016 line for the next 3 months. It almost looks like something broke the previous winter 2016 february to april since the unique form of the curve late april to midsummer.

26
Permafrost / Re: Arctic Methane Release
« on: March 21, 2017, 11:41:13 AM »
Afaik, no systematic surveys of boggy areas have been done (or then they're in russian litterature or within oil companies working there)but some isolated measurement, IIRC, of thickness of some bog in permafrosted west siberia was 80 m. Yes the western siberia might shrink quite a lot.

27
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2016/2017 freezing season
« on: March 21, 2017, 11:18:54 AM »
Great, thanks.
Can't keep up with all the threads.
When do official research centers usually announce such a thing to the press?

Usually in their next month summary (most i know do this second week every month). we're right at the leading edge (pun intended) here!

28
Permafrost / Re: Arctic Methane Release
« on: March 21, 2017, 09:02:59 AM »
'hatrack' at democratic-discussion forum keeps on finding 'delightful' newstories of everysort of environmental issue. This time it's about those permafrost bubbles of ice covered whatevers : http://siberiantimes.com/science/casestudy/news/n0905-7000-underground-gas-bubbles-poised-to-explode-in-arctic/

29
Science / Re: 2017 Mauna Loa CO2
« on: March 21, 2017, 06:00:16 AM »
Last Week, March 12 - 18, 2017,
407.06 ppm
(+2.37 ppm from)
1 Year Ago, March 12 - 18, 2016
404.69 ppm
(2017 is +22.67 ppm from)
10 Years Ago, March 12 - 18, 2005

(sarc) "HAH! they continue to use 2005 not 2007! This proves the hoax! Scientists are not allowed to make typos in automatically generated texts so this action was planned in 1882, now if we could only find the 8remnants of the eruption machine at Capt. Nemo's place in Indonesia" (/sarc)

384.39 ppm


30
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: March 20, 2017, 06:12:24 PM »

2 Don´t do any predictions about the minimum before July


I was just about to do that and happily forget asif totally after that.

I'll try to follow the spring in the big Siberian/Canadian river areas and later hoping to see some ice breaker save Santa Claus from drowning.

31
Science / Re: Validation of GCM Models
« on: March 20, 2017, 05:33:35 AM »
Oh, this was the 'validation of gcms'-thread. Sorry for the last one. Validation of gcms proceeds in many steps. Firstly, you gotta get the normal ghg-effect equations so correct that you get the surface temperature to rise from the non-ghg temperature of -17,5 c (or was it -18,5°C?) to rise to the observed preindustrial temperatures. There was a lengthy explanation of further validation steps somewhere, but not on computer so not going to find and summa4rize it right away.

32
Science / Re: Validation of GCM Models
« on: March 20, 2017, 05:22:26 AM »

(EDIT2: Some students I know are organising a climate lecture in York, UK. They already have a prominent denier and are looking for a climate scientist to counter him. I suggested Kevin Anderson but I don't think he's replied yet. Any other suggestions? I'll see if I can get help with the homework!)

What is the point of debating a Gish galloper?? It is almost futile unless the climate scientist is able for a Gish gallop of his own. Countering one by one the points of a Gish gallop is a waste of time....
Basically it could become a general lecture on AGW with regular disturbances of the stupidest student. This should end up (again) by the stupidest student thinking his views are reinforced, and the listeners (hopefully) thinking this guy should be expelled. The denier will prepare with talking point memo that might have one or two hard to explain points of discussion and the scientist requiring more time than him which the inane idiot will take as break of debate rules. The rest of the memo contains shouts that interrupt explanations of inconvenient truths by the scientist thus disrupting the potential for learning for people who aren't already convinced that renewable(well ok, also nuclear, with way less highly active waste) energy is the only viable option for energy generation and transport if we as a species do not want sea levels of at least 9 meters higher and "who anyway cares what happens in 200 years, and is it 200 or 400 maybe and J.Hansen is a retired loonie."
Oh, the times when talking of car and especially driver performances at the latest wc rally have taken over the discussion at the local bar that only infrequents engineers. I for one was glad to hear about the start of electric drive-train manufacturing start at the local car builder. Oh yeah. Everybody though admits you cannot get as far in a day by electric cars than by internal combustion engine and leasing a car for the summer vacation trip is beyond them. Nice.

This is starting to become a rant so I stop. Thank you for listening and remember the disadvantages of electric rail/cars and the intermittency of wind/solar.

33
Arctic sea ice / Re: Stupid Questions :o
« on: March 20, 2017, 03:43:48 AM »
Thanks Crandles. The base periods are different but I think that's ok.

34
Arctic sea ice / Re: Stupid Questions :o
« on: March 19, 2017, 07:00:17 PM »
Does someone have this sort of image of 2012? Is there a service somewhere still up nd running for making these? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Asian_heat_wave#/media/File%3ATemperature_anomalies_2007.gif

35
Arctic Background / Re: Baltic Images
« on: March 19, 2017, 04:39:20 PM »
There isn't too much sea ice left here in easily accessed places so that couldve been the last image in this spring. Last summer I found a place where I could have taken an overview image of the opening message area, but that, in winter, would involve a 2-mile trek along icy rocks and cliffs so it's not likely I ever get there, in winter...

36
Arctic Background / Re: Baltic Images
« on: March 19, 2017, 02:16:15 PM »
thanks, Neven. I had forgot this thread too so I posted one set of Baltic images to Arctic café : https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,179.msg105546.html#msg105546

Then there was the meltpooling image at https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,179.msg103093.html#msg103093 which is from the same spot (but southwards) than the last image on this thread.

The rest of the images at Arctic Café are of the river and of the lake so 'Baltic' doesn't apply for them.

37
Arctic Background / Re: Baltic Images
« on: March 19, 2017, 11:46:36 AM »
The harbour at the river mouth almost clear of ice. 3 spring rains have passed here since the last image at Arctic café. I guess the next rains take out the rest of ice. Spring is definitely here.

38
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: March 19, 2017, 06:15:19 AM »
Among other places, it looks like there is melting and thinning out of ice within parts of the CAA.


With current temps there, I doubt we are seeing any thinning out in CAA. More like the usual thickening-in I'd say.
Kara otoh is going south pretty quickly this year.

Oh, is the River Ob already in spring and flowing fast to Kara sea? The bay there could be an indication of that. The zero-degree fresh water from the river taking a toll on the -1 degree ice on the bay, possibly? The bay is somewhat brackish : www.researchgate.net/figure/283097363_fig3_Figure-4-Left-salinity-PSU-of-Kara-Sea-and-the-Gulf-of-Ob-in-summer-climatic-atlas

39
Randy,

The majority of the scientists and engineers do not have the skills to be concise,  on target and quick on come backs. It is unfortunate...

Yep, it comes with the job description. Many, coming to science, are hoping to make a big discovery. On one short 'philosophy of science'-course I took the lecturer said on most lessons 'the first thing to doubt is yourself". There were several reiterations of this too.

40
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2017 IJIS extent maximum prediction
« on: March 19, 2017, 03:35:34 AM »
No mine was a fluke

At one stage I thought it was headed for 14m

The melt could be impossible to get a bin for.

Where to begin or end?
Fluke, beginner's luck, sensitive insticnt, lucky shot, call it what you will, but get three in a row as close people will take note... ;) I still remember when my second shot with a bow hit a 9 and the next 10 went right off the target :).

If you get many guesses on any poll someone is bound to be nearest and very close to correct. Or at least among nearest two. Add to that, most of the 127 voters did not announce their exact guess so saying some exact number in correct bin increases the chances to be nearest one.

In this sort of net poll, someone would have to do a list of the exact guesses and calculate the stats from those to get a more fair representation of the chances. Some people said specific descriptions of their guesses like 'low 14-14.25', but the calculation above doesn't note these at all. I just took the midpoints of each category and multiplied by number of votes to get the ASIF average.

41
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2017 IJIS extent maximum prediction
« on: March 18, 2017, 04:30:08 AM »
I chose 13.91 so wasnt far off for a complete novice just picking a number out of increasingly hot air

I included the extreme values with the values 15.125 and 12.375 and got the ASIF average to be 13.699803Mkm2, so that's waay closer. The ASIF erred by 178484 km2 to the low side so as a group this is one of the most accuratest values we've been voting for over the years. But as usual, some individuals (this happens because of statistics, too) are almost on the spot, 31710 km2 (pauldry600) doesn't even fill the State of Maryland! As a group though, we lost an Uruguay-sized chunk of sea ice. Well that happens. So what, if Missouri-sized slab of 2 meter ice goes missing in predictive polling, that's only ~1.3% error. You could say forgetting the Alps is significant, but the Alps are just a one mountain chain in the world, do you remember all the others (and remember to count in Antarctic sea ice max) ?? This result would have been approved to experimental medical testing with humans (death as a side effect has though a higher limit). Not bad I say. (please check this yourself before spreading the message of high accuracy of the forum members.)

(Edit:Hoping I don't have to do that again as the cracking is quite significant up there...

By looking only the past ten year average of c.14.404M the error would have gone up to near 3,8%, in contrast pauldry600 hit within 0.23% of the current maximum number. I know in biological systems this is nearly unattainable accuracy so the conclusion is we're likely dealing with physics.  Stretching to verbal extrapolation, I could say, in this case, physics was at least 2.5% more accurate than history ::) :P ;)

42
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: March 17, 2017, 07:02:40 AM »
The 14-day average change finally went negative so by my own criteria I have to say the maximum has been passed on the extent measure. 13,878,287 km2(March 6, 2017). Of course there's a possibility that export starts so intensively that this "true maximum" will be surpassed yet, but I'll take that as a measurement error.  ;) ;D :P. But that is still a low extent. And the rotation of Beaufort gyre seems to be (at least temporarily) reversed so it might be this maximum still is not the high value for IJIS.

43
 ::) i wonder if they include continental drift in natural variation?  ;) 8) :P thanks for the link to stoat and the paper, always nice to see scientific papers without paywall. I haven't read it yet, but admit that arctic amplification is not entirely anthropogenic. Of course the usual suspects take this on a ride. Wouldn't be surprised if the study does not say what the usual suspects say it says.

44
Science / Re: Anthropogenic Existential Risk
« on: March 15, 2017, 06:29:44 PM »
They actually did.  Devine intervention. You will be surprised what mental blinders and cognitive bias can do to the interpretation of data
Well yes. Ultimtely. Humanity, in this projection has the capability of killing everything (outside bacteria and cyanobacteria inside 20S°-25°N. About. Maybe this is not a clear and present danger the like US/Russian nukes are but it's a possibility and a reaso  to plan for a novel in which humanity has divided in five subspecies.

45
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: March 15, 2017, 05:10:41 PM »
Ice drift forecast for tomorrow, Mar 16. Fram export same as today.
Image: https://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/arctic.html
Hey Ho , lets go! That's just fycked yp and totally agaimst whatever we were taught of arctic winter.

46
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: March 15, 2017, 02:38:14 PM »
Someone needs to explain to them that this "weather" (a pattern we have watched emerge for a decade) is not weather.
Ok.
"This is not normal weather. In fact all the weather since 1998 hasn't been. Umm. We only see it now since..."

47
Arctic sea ice / Re: Stupid Questions :o
« on: March 15, 2017, 02:07:08 PM »
The very real 'melting degree days' variable would be nice to be able to calculate but the oceanic component of warmth entering the icy region of the planet makes this a pretty hard task... who knows what sort of thermo- and halocline breaking swirls develop and in what sort of atmospheric and oceanic weather... Edges of the pack are of course almost constanly attacked during melting season but what of the leads and polynyas of the pack...

48
Science / Re: Anthropogenic Existential Risk
« on: March 15, 2017, 09:45:24 AM »
PETM Tropical Dinoflagellate story here, I think. Thoughts? http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/3/e1600891

49
Science / PETM dinoflagellates suffered plenty (Purdue university))
« on: March 15, 2017, 07:01:16 AM »
Marked decrease of dinoflagellate abundance during PETM observed. As oceans were this warm, it would mean vast areas of tropical continents were too hot for multicellular life at this time. I guess this would mean even the rains were too hot for plants. Sorry no link for the actual paper (partly based on models) but here's the press release and abstract about this. Note that the press release does not estimate the deviation from the preindustrial T.

https://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/releases/2017/Q1/evidence-disproving-tropical-thermostat-theory-global-warming-can-breach-limits-for-life.html

50
Science / Re: 2017 Mauna Loa CO2
« on: March 15, 2017, 06:09:17 AM »
Thanks Crandles for following up the calendar month numbers.

Weekly number for the Last Week
Feb. 26 - Mar. 4, 2017 is
407.37 ppm
which is 3.29 ppm more than Weekly number 1 Year Ago, Feb. 26 - Mar. 4, 2016
404.08 ppm
which in turn is about 5.2% more than Weekly number 10 Years Ago, Feb. 26 - Mar. 4, 2005
384.04 ppm

So 5.2% in nine years. that is 5.7‰/year. That doesn't sound too good. Maybe we should abandon CO2 stocks?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 20