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 ... 19
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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

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 :

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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...

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 :,179.msg105546.html#msg105546

Then there was the meltpooling image at,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.

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.

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 :


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.

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.

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 ;)

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.

 ::) 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.

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.

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.
Hey Ho , lets go! That's just fycked yp and totally agaimst whatever we were taught of arctic winter.

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.
"This is not normal weather. In fact all the weather since 1998 hasn't been. Umm. We only see it now since..."

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...

Science / Re: Anthropogenic Existential Risk
« on: March 15, 2017, 09:45:24 AM »
PETM Tropical Dinoflagellate story here, I think. Thoughts?

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.

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?

The beloved Trumpistan leader notifies his subjects from this day on use of microwaves is forbidden. Be it cooking, cheffing, or measuring ice with chinese adjusted satellites. Melting is also forbidden. In fact, best you trash your old micro waves and buy a new secure one from the importer daughter. Those are great.

Science / Re: NOAA ESRL Global CO2 Increase Accelerating
« on: March 13, 2017, 05:44:53 AM »
There is an association between El Nino occurrences and increases in yr/yr monthly CO2 emissions rates. The most recent El Nino demonstrates that relationship.

What's more troubling is when one observes a CO2 spike with no associated El Nino. The chart illustrates the relationship between ENSO 3.4 (El Nino La Nina and monthly NOAA/ESRL CO2 increases. There is more at:

Eyeballing this char seems to indicate based on past correlation of spikes that our current spike might not be over nor at its peak. I hope tbat's not the case.

Mauna Loa record would say january global values of change since last year are still large but that february would be a bit lower. Not that the Mauna Loa and Globe are exactly synchronous and of the same magnitude always. It's quite a good proxy for globe but deviations do occur, if I remember correctly. A4R, would it be possible to have the global record extended to the start of Mauna Loa record with some degree of accuracy? Proxy-based extensions of existing records are anyway done on many locations wrt paleoclimate, so this might be applied here too?

Oops, the last of the graphs would state this is already being done.

The rest / Re: Arctic Café
« on: March 12, 2017, 07:23:41 AM »
That's not melt pooling. I had to throw in a piece of wood to see if it splashes. Mind you, the shores had water, runoff from land.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: March 12, 2017, 06:46:19 AM »
What's going on?

The same as in the nearby lake? That is, 1-2 mm of defrosted snow? Lucky watery reflection on the instrument on board?
So, basically, the sat. sees a layer of melted snow, which is now water on top of the ice, instead of the ice underneath, and makes it appear to us that the ice is gone?
That's my guess. It could be the angle of the sun has to be just right for this to happen, and the sat would have to pass in the right time of the day. Not sure. Fairly sure this isn't yet meltpooling, but would be the same thing that happens when frost on grass has melted just a bit.

Science / Re: Milankovitch Cycles doubts
« on: March 12, 2017, 06:41:03 AM »
Posting the link (again) to ScioD for who want extensive reading on the subject. In short, some the latest models DO take post-glacial rebound into account, some are concentrating on the role of WAIS during deglaciations and Dansgaard-Oeschger events, and some are slightly modified Milankovich-style theories.

There are better (most) and poorer (7-8) chapters, but the author gives links on about everything.

All quite interesting. Of course the positions of the planet's glaciers are now different than in the previous de-glaciations, so direct comparisons may not apply.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: March 12, 2017, 06:20:33 AM »
What's going on?

The same as in the nearby lake? That is, 1-2 mm of defrosted snow? Lucky watery reflection on the instrument on board?

Arctic sea ice / Re: Stupid Questions :o
« on: March 12, 2017, 06:16:23 AM »
Does anybody have the NOAA Arctic report card downloaded and could upload it somewhere? The site appears to be down :(

Site is back up. See file attached to post.

Sorry, I don't have the report card. It's possible I've renamed it to something else.

Arctic sea ice / Re: Stupid Questions :o
« on: March 11, 2017, 08:16:05 PM »
Does anybody have the NOAA Arctic report card downloaded and could upload it somewhere? The site appears to be down :(

Might have it on computer, but not going to dig it up right away... Meanwhile ifls has made sort of a summary... Could be Pruitts (equally crazy) minions have been busy demolishing it from the government site proving once again they do not believe in science. Totally incompetent lot, they are.
Link to ifls summary on report card 2016:

The forum / Re: What is Off Topic and What is Not?
« on: March 11, 2017, 07:15:27 AM »
I live a bit south of the southern border of the subarctic climate  ( and have occasionally also had trouble with selecting a proper thread. Mainly this would happen with ecological articles from the popular press, it's easy to open a thread in Science-section if there's a Nature-article to present along with the rest of the text.

There's the 'AGW in general'-guideline on the main page on the forum, thus some of this stuff has gone to 'Consequences' and some to 'The rest' (some personal observations). Some still in the 'Cryosphere' if the thing in question concerns only winter... I'd could suggest opening a 'Changing seasons'-section under 'AGW in general', this could be a place for ecological/agricultural articles round the world. There's still pretty wild nature even in Europe. At least some of my posts would have been in this instead of elsewhere.

I don't care much of the politics, but the politics (rather, 'pollutics') currently (also here in Finland) is such that... (sigh...). Expecting myself to still do some rants of that too, though most of that should likely indeed go to 'foúl language'-thread...

The fact is the Arctic change is still a symptom of the general AGW. That this may change sometime in the future (loss of summer sea ice, permafrost, meltdown of Greenland, changing weather systems) at least for a while, and thus humanity would become a subservient
(could be a wrong word) influence in the equation of planetary radiation balance, doesn't change the fact the changes we started are global in nature. On this forum, this would mean, to me, a large expansion of the AGW in general section but how to do this best is beyond me. For a temporary solution the bolded proposition above could do, at least I could have thrown in there some phenological ( maps and seasonal diagrams of various critters and animals, maybe also of smaller vascular plants and trees. (oo, there's an arctic pine (or was it some other species) in Lapland that has increased it's yearly growth 300% in the 2000s, clearly this means CO2 is good for plants)

Arctic sea ice / Re: Latest PIOMAS update (March)
« on: March 09, 2017, 04:27:18 PM »
Anyway, so the topic doesn't derail again into awful nonsense, I am quoting Wipneus's thickness map updates, which have been lost in the crap:

Here is the animation for February.
This month I present the thickness maps for the last day of the month, instead of the mean monthly map. Should be more relevant.
Here the thickness map for 28 Feb 2017, comparison with previous years and differences with previous years.
What I find quite interesting is that the first year ice in the Beaufort this year is actually thicker than it was last year. Has Beaufort been cooler this year?
if on computer, could you also post the image itself? Thsnk you.

Arctic sea ice / Re: Latest PIOMAS update (March)
« on: March 09, 2017, 01:07:52 PM »
HELP ! Which are the easiest places to get graphs on volume during the month ? (I am a sea ice volume addict and the PIOMAS monthly update fix wears off  too soon).

I think PIOMAS has at least been a once per month product, the reason being they've been cross-checking back and forth various measurements done in the month in question. I don't know how extensively this is nowadays done. Buoy measurements might help in withdrawals. I don't have the link here, check the buoy thread.

Arctic sea ice / Re: Stupid Questions :o
« on: March 09, 2017, 05:25:16 AM »
The n. polar vortex looks split in three @ 10hPa

Has anyone plotted the frequency it changes on, oh maybe, a weekly index?

Ah, the polar night has ended in high stratosphere. The same sort of configuration is not unusual during the change of seasons, but this is a pretty and a clear example. Stratospheric final (hopefully not forever) warming of this spring, please someone correct if that's not it.

Arctic sea ice / Re: Latest PIOMAS update (March)
« on: March 07, 2017, 04:05:41 PM »
<Buddy> at least you should replace all the 'millions' with 'thousands' when talking of volume... But that's an error seen also done by others... Would have to check your points one by one but yes, the situation is such that if not this year then the next high heat year (my guess 2021-2022), however far in the future the next big release of atmospheric insulators (aka greenhouse gases happens (+++ENSO or some other large ocean surface heat anomaly), the Arctic ocean could have ice only in the form of icebergs and spilled icy drinks from the vessels travelling there.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: March 07, 2017, 09:46:23 AM »
I haven't acquainted myself to Ole Humlum' stuff. Presuming he's one of the great number of people who like to think most of everything humans do is 'natural' so he'd be discounting quite a bit of human influence. "I just happened to find this petrol station and my credit card fits in the slot and I get this stuff that burns so brightly i'm blinded by it"-type of denier, possibly. Has someone classified deniers into sub-types? Could be an interesting (thpugh completely futile) intellectual exercise?

Posting this here too, probably this is already referred to somewhere else on the site too. A state of the art public and general lecture on state of climate change study and on metastable icy regions of the planet. Dr. Jim White speaks.

Are we turning to the tailwind or are we on the last turn before that on this climatic journey on spaceship earth?

Science / Re: 2017 Mauna Loa CO2
« on: March 06, 2017, 08:24:03 PM »
Last Week, Feb. 26 - Mar. 4, 2017, 407.37 ppm
1 Year Ago, Feb. 26 - Mar. 4, 2016, 404.08 ppm (+3.29 ppm)
10 Years Ago, Feb. 26 - Mar. 4, 2005, 384.04 ppm

Arctic sea ice / Re: Poll: 2017 PIOMAS Maximum Monthly Figure
« on: March 06, 2017, 02:01:29 PM »
I'll keep my vote  where it is to keep up the reputation of this alarmist site. :D

The rest / Re: Arctic Café
« on: March 06, 2017, 01:35:10 PM »

The rest / Re: Arctic Café
« on: March 06, 2017, 01:19:04 PM »
Next batch of images of ice disturbed by changing sea levels and ship wave action. The floes are c.15cm (6in.) thick but the refrozen stuff is only about 3-4cm (1.5in.) needles to say we didn't try to walk there.

The public beach (3rd image)has received a bit of additional damage.

Arctic sea ice / Re: Poll: 2017 PIOMAS Maximum Monthly Figure
« on: March 06, 2017, 03:58:04 AM »
Changed me vote to expect 1Kkm3 loss between ENSO episodes as 1999 - 2002 were the years of apparent lack of loss since Alaska and Siberia were on the way of ice melt.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 19