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 - Neven

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 66
Policy and solutions / Re: LENR as a new energy source?
« on: March 26, 2017, 07:25:06 PM »
I stopped reading after the words Andrea Rossi, but I must admit that if I had continued to read, I wouldn't have understood any of the science either.

Policy and solutions / Re: LENR as a new energy source?
« on: March 26, 2017, 07:18:44 PM »
They must have at least 6 billion USD in pre-orders now.

Permafrost / Re: Negative Feedback of Positive Snowfall Anomalies
« on: March 26, 2017, 08:57:54 AM »
But that's where the problem is, right? The temperatures will not lower in the foreseeable future.

My point is not that this is not happening today -- it is that the mechanism resulting in increasing fall/wintertime snowcover will soon overwhelm spring/summer snowcover as well, even if it may take another 5-10 years to kick into gear.

The mechanism, ie global warming via CO2 forcing, is going to continue to increase as well and overwhelm fall/wintertime snowcover. At some point snow will turn into rain.

Well done, Rob. Keep us posted, if you can.

Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: March 26, 2017, 08:44:54 AM »
Your profile has been released, Let It Go.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The Buoys Are Back in Town
« on: March 25, 2017, 12:44:10 PM »
Snow surface accumulation: 10 cm
Ice bottom growth : 8 cm

Wow, a whole 8 cm of bottom growth. So much for resistance to disintegration.  ;)

Arctic sea ice / Re: I'm updating the ASIG next week. Any tips?
« on: March 25, 2017, 12:41:25 PM »
I noticed this too the other day. Somehow I thought the comparison maps started in April, but March is in there too. I will soon start updating these. Thanks for the heads-up, Andre.

How do you mention a paper that hasn't even been published yet?

AndrewB, you've made your point. Now don't reiterate it constantly by nitpicking details. Thanks.

And don't tell people to go and do this or that.

Permafrost / Re: Negative Feedback of Positive Snowfall Anomalies
« on: March 24, 2017, 05:14:36 PM »
bbr2314, did you have a look at the Ewing-Donn theory yet, and why it was rejected ultimately?

Okay, enough now. ktonine has a point that we should try not to imply malfeasance or ignorance on the part of scientists. At the same time this paper was spinned by the people who wrote the press release or whatever, and this was then spinned further by those who have nothing to offer but spin. So, it's understandable that people are upset by this.

Either way, back to content. Or just let this fizzle out, as it doesn't mean all that much in the big picture. But let's not fight over this.

The whole forum? Or just one (or a couple) out of 1200+ members?

Consequences / Re: Sea Level Rise and Social Cost of Carbon
« on: March 24, 2017, 07:33:37 AM »
Welcome to the ASIF, Dry_Land_Is_Not_A_Myth, our profile has been released.

As for our question, I also watch the University of Colorado graph (occasionally), but I would expect there are others as well.

So when can we expect this natural variability to flip back again and see a reduction in the rate of Arctic sea ice loss?

Permafrost / Re: Negative Feedback of Positive Snowfall Anomalies
« on: March 23, 2017, 12:25:24 PM »
For those of you who haven't heard about it, you may be interested in reading about the Ewing-Donn theory (Wikipedia) from the 1950's,  which posited that ice ages were caused by this negative feedback of snowfall anomalies. Also read this excellent summary on Spencer Weart's Discovery of Global Warming website that places the theory in historical context.

Glaciers / Re: Barnes Ice Cap / Penney Ice Cap
« on: March 22, 2017, 05:46:18 PM »
I read about this on Climate Central today.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: March 22, 2017, 03:35:33 PM »
Your new profile has been released, sondreb, so you can post freely now.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: March 22, 2017, 10:53:43 AM »
Indeed.  The Kara is just getting hammered and will continue to be for at least the next 10 days.

That to me is the most noteworthy event in the Arctic right now. I've made an animation of the ice retreat south of Novaya Zemlya for the last 8 days:

Given the current wind and temps forecast this is going to continue for at least another week.

And so the big question becomes: Will this freeze over again when the winds reverse?

It did back in 2011 and 2012, but this time the retreat will go further, I expect.



When things closed up again, they stayed that way until mid-May. Still, this could be another unprecedented, amigos.

Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: March 22, 2017, 10:41:58 AM »
Another bery nice graph, señor!

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: March 22, 2017, 09:48:58 AM »
Your profile has been released, Sam.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: March 21, 2017, 02:36:33 PM »
I had to laugh too.  ;)

Arctic sea ice / Re: Barneo 2017
« on: March 21, 2017, 12:38:29 PM »
There already is a Barneo 2017 thread.

The rest / Re: Arctic Café
« on: March 20, 2017, 11:06:26 PM »
How about another series, 'Album covers that resemble Arctic maps':


Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: March 20, 2017, 06:26:30 PM »
Jontenoy, this thread is for the Arctic sea ice melting season specifically. You need to ask the question elsewhere in the Greenland or Antarctica boards.

Arctic sea ice / Re: Arctic Image of the Day
« on: March 20, 2017, 04:39:02 PM »
Welcome, Jontenoy. Your profile has been released now, so you can post freely.  I see that you've asked your question in the SLR thread as well. This one is for Arctic images.

Science / Re: Validation of GCM Models
« on: March 20, 2017, 01:05:36 PM »
Now, that is the intended use of the ASIF.

May I suggest an actual scientific discussion instead?

There will be one if everyone stops jumping on each other, instead of ignoring the stuff that irritates for a while. Makes it easier for me to moderate as well.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: March 19, 2017, 11:37:43 PM »
It might be worth looking into, as there have been so many severe avalanches in that area lately. I would google it myself, but I am on the way out to run errands.

Yes, it might be worth looking into, but that purple area where the Himalayas are, has been on that map for as long as I can remember.

And another funny thing: Here in Austria they say there have been more avalanches in the Alps this year, because snowfall was below average. But I don't know if that's true.

Either way, whether there's a HUGE Snow Water Equivalent or not, I'm quite sure that it will all melt quite quickly. And that's the bottom line.

Walking the walk / Re: Gardening
« on: March 19, 2017, 10:46:06 PM »
How about some old CDs on a string? I never tried it, but I'm still in the process of attracting birds to my 2/3 acre.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: March 19, 2017, 10:15:02 PM »
That purple y shape seems a permanent fixture. I would suspect a period with no data for that area.

Which is why I don't trust that Snow Water Equivalent graph. There's no way there's so much snow in the Himalayas, all of the time.

Of course, there's more precipitation, and so more snow extent and snow depth, but not so much to make that trend line get off the charts. There are quite a few zones with negative anomalies as well.

But, anyway, it's a conclusion I reached last year or the year before. I may be wrong.

Science / Re: Validation of GCM Models
« on: March 19, 2017, 10:09:36 PM »
If I am right, then nothing I/we do now makes a bit of difference.  The war was lost 200 years ago.

Great, so the only reason you post here, is to vent your frustrations. That's not the intended use of the ASIF, so any more denier-mirror Dunning-Kruger BS or disrespect shown to people who engage with you and take the time to refer you to stuff (the 'herd' of persecutors), and I'm putting you under moderation.

Your actions and what you say don't match. A true doomer wouldn't be wasting time on some obscure forum. He'd be listening to Bach and reading Tolstoy. Go punch a bag or something.

Normally I'd PM this, but I've let this go on for long enough.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: March 19, 2017, 06:27:41 PM »
That Snow Water Equivalent graphs has been trending high for as long as I can remember. I'm not sure, but I think there's something wrong with it.

The rest / MOVED: Baltic Images
« on: March 19, 2017, 01:01:34 PM »

Arctic Background / Re: Baltic Images
« on: March 19, 2017, 01:01:27 PM »
Nice thread, Pmt111500, hadn't seen it yet. I'm moving it to Arctic Background.

Welcome to the ASIF, AndrewB. Your profile has now been released.

Arctic sea ice / Re: Poll: 2017 PIOMAS Maximum Monthly Figure
« on: March 19, 2017, 10:25:27 AM »
Gerontocrat, you can modify your own comments. It's a feature for idiots, which I initially installed for myself. But it seems everyone makes use of it now.  ;)

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: March 19, 2017, 10:15:48 AM »
The retreat south of Novaya Zemlya is caused by winds and is bound to continue given the current forecast, with lows stationed over the Siberian side of the Arctic.

I've just called the maximum on the ASIB, and posted an animation of the ClimateReanalyzer GFS temp anomaly forecast for the coming week:

Science / Re: Validation of GCM Models
« on: March 18, 2017, 09:09:38 PM »
So, basically everyone here is part of a herd and is trying to persecute you. And the problems with models is that they aren't showing that there will be a catastrophe, meaning they're not valid and not real science.

Does that about sum up your current grievances?

Science / Re: Validation of GCM Models
« on: March 18, 2017, 12:28:39 AM »
I'm going to leave this open for now, even though it was posted in the wrong category, doesn't clearly state what it's about (models or the validation thereof?), and previous off-topic discussions in other threads showed a lack of nuance, mainly from the thread starter.

But maybe someone has something interesting to say about models that we haven't heard before (we already know the 'all of them wrong, some useful' quote ;) ).

Arctic Background / MOVED: Validation of GCM Models.
« on: March 18, 2017, 12:23:36 AM »

Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: March 17, 2017, 10:12:52 AM »
Yes, this was it. I'm pretty sure of it.

Come on, this isn't a CYA paper. It's a genuinely interesting subject. which wouldn't have garnered nearly as much as attention, if it hadn't been spun and, like Archimid says, most so by that Nature article preview.

The fact is that this just isn't all that exciting. First of all, no one has ever said that all of recent Arctic sea ice loss is caused by AGW. Not because it isn't, but because we can't know for sure (although the downward trend definitely wouldn't be so steep if it wasn't for AGW). Secondly, there have been many more papers trying to pin down the amount of human attribution as compared to the AMO, the PDO, etc.

Climate risk deniers are dumb to spin this, because it automatically means they acknowledge the climate is changing. And Arctic sea ice loss is most probably just going to continue, especially if that 60% figure is wrong (which it might very well be), and so the consequences of this loss will become ever clearer.

Climate risk deniers are sad, old, selfish, white men with an authoritarian streak. It's best to ignore them, and not get worked up too much.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The Slow Transition
« on: March 16, 2017, 06:00:27 PM »
Let's get back on topic or get out of here.

The Forum has a PM (personal message) function, but please stay civil there as well.

The rest / Re: The Trump Presidency (was "Presidential Poll")
« on: March 16, 2017, 02:36:45 PM »
I'm sure this one will be enjoyed:

DEVASTATING: TRUMP More Popular Than Democrats Says New Poll

! No longer available

Below the Carbon Brief article, I have commented:

"The changes in atmospheric circulation in the Arctic, thought to originate in the tropical Pacific, increase the amount of water vapour in the lower atmosphere, the paper explains.  Together with a shift to fewer clouds, this has increased the amount of solar radiation reaching the ice."

So when can we expect this natural variability to flip back again and see a reduction in the rate of Arctic sea ice loss? Is it controlled by the PDO or ENSO?

I thought the high pressure was moving over Greenland because that's the only place cold enough for it to form (Cold Pole)?

I'm also not sure about the shift to fewer clouds, as there's an increase in water vapour over the Arctic, coming from lower latitudes and from the Arctic Ocean itself, because of Arctic sea ice loss. In fact, increased cloudiness in autumn and winter (especially these past two winters) are causing record low maximums, this year for both extent and volume.

All in all, I feel that this is all very theoretical and these scientists aren't paying enough attention to what is happening on the ground. We may have passed the point where our knowledge on the Old Arctic has become moot.

This is a non-story, because no one has said that all of Arctic sea ice loss is 100% caused by AGW*. It might be, but we can't know for sure. It might even be more than 100% if natural variation would otherwise have caused the ice to grow. We don't know. But we do know for sure that the AGW influence is not zero.

Now, if climate risk deniers are acknowledging that 60% of Arctic sea ice loss is due to AGW, they are also acknowledging that this might be killing Chinese people, which in essence means they are no longer climate risk deniers. If they keep lying to their fellow human beings about AGW, they are in fact extra responsible for killing Chinese and many other people. I'm sure they see it differently. And if they didn't, they probably wouldn't care.

* There are a number of papers out there looking at the influence of the AMO and the PDO, etc. Or read this blog post I wrote 4 years ago about Judith Curry, Walt Meier and Ron Lindsay agreeing on the anthropogenic component of Arctic sea ice loss.

BTW, thanks a lot for opening this separate thread, Archimid!

Consequences / Re: The impacts of sea level rise around the world
« on: March 15, 2017, 05:00:41 PM »
There's already a good and long thread on SLR and its costs, here.

Consequences / Re: No Tropical Thermostat during PETM
« on: March 15, 2017, 04:58:49 PM »
Another thread was opened for this study earlier today, here.

Arctic sea ice / Re: Poll: 2017 PIOMAS Maximum Monthly Figure
« on: March 15, 2017, 09:54:08 AM »
Thanks for the reminder, DavidR. I have voted 20.75 - 21.25 K km^3.

PS I'm voting for the April monthly average, right? Not the daily figure that is highest.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 66