Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and 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 - prairiebotanist

Pages: [1]
Consequences / Re: Laurentide II
« on: August 16, 2019, 02:56:38 PM »

Show that rain hitting the ground please.  DrT presented Italy.  I looked at Malta and Palmero.  WeHappyFew presented a logical reconciliation.

This whole thread seems ludicrous to me, but people way smarter than me are engaging.  For that reason I am suspending my personal disbelief.

Somehow you jump wildly to the conclusion there is a denier conspiracy.  I see the exact opposite. 

<edit: spelling, punctuation>

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: August 13, 2019, 09:02:44 PM »
They are both wrong.

And back to the point, we are in some control of where the climate heads although we cannot control the details and we are struggling to understand the complex interactions between the ocean, ice and atmosphere. It's shocking to me that the Arctic ocean is so thinly observed given its key role in earth's climate. The few buoys we have making observations of the upper ocean show heat at about 50m that the Mercator model is missing.

Careful observation of individual floes shows that A-Team is correct that the ice does not directly follow wind streamlines, sea surface height gradients or ocean currents. It is affected by all of them, plus it compresses and forms ridges. Below the surface, we have sparse measurements of the movements of water masses. We're still trying to untangle the effects of the GAC in 2012 on the sea ice because we have don't have dense enough data on Arctic ocean heat content changes through the melting season. And "we" includes the sea ice experts who don't do significantly better at predicting September extent than this ragged group of interested observers. For a variety of reasons, but mainly because we can't predict seasonal weather well, the expert's models don't work very well.

Ironic, isn't it that the one thing we do know pretty well, the effects of CO2 on paleoclimate, has been so poorly explained in this melting thread. Geothermal heat has an inconsequential effect on climate.

Solar heat and all the factors that affect the earth's radiation balance control the climate. Greenhouse gases are among the most important controls and CO2 is the key gas over the past billion years. The modern climate is paradoxical because the sun was cooler in the precambrian than it is now. Of course, we know that declining CO2 levels over the past 25 million years led to the onset of the Pleistocene and the ice ages. Those declining CO2 levels we mostly caused by increased rock weathering rates associated with the continental collision of the Indian plate with the Eurasian plate.

So while we watch the impacts of unprecedented ocean temperatures in the far north Pacific and Atlantic oceans, and shockingly warm Arctic seas, on Arctic weather and sea ice, two proudly ignorant fools are clogging this thread with arguments that ignore the effects of CO2 on climate. Siberia is literally on fire, thunderstorms are approaching the north pole and the Arctic oscillation has been stuck in hot subsidence mode almost all summer and yet some folks here don't seem to get that rapidly increasing CO2 levels are the primary cause of all of it.

Click image to animate. The heat keeps on coming into the Eurasian side of the Arctic.


Three months after leading scientists warned that humans have driven up to 1 million species around the globe to the brink of extinction, the Trump administration has finalized a sweeping overhaul of the Endangered Species Act, weakening one of America’s most important laws for protecting imperiled plants and animals.

The new rules, unveiled on Monday, change how federal agencies implement portions of the conservation law, making it easier to remove recovered species from the protected list and opening the door for more drilling and other development. It also scraps the “blanket section 4(d) rule,” a provision that automatically extends the same protections to plants and animals listed as threatened as the act affords those listed as endangered, and revises how agencies go about designating habitat as critical to species’ long-term survival.

“This effort to gut protections for endangered and threatened species has the same two features of most Trump administration actions: It’s a gift to industry, and it’s illegal,” Drew Caputo, vice president of litigation for lands, wildlife and oceans at the nonprofit Earthjustice, said in a statement about the change. “We’ll see the Trump administration in court about it.”

The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: July 16, 2019, 01:04:55 PM »
If there are alt-right scum on the ASIF I am taking a walk.

The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: July 14, 2019, 06:44:41 PM »
One has to be able to ignore the political discussion. I agree it has become too much but who am I to judge. One I know though, whoever is certain they are right is a hair from becoming dogmatic and one of the same too...

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: June 21, 2019, 06:14:28 PM »
^^^ +1 ^^^

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: June 21, 2019, 05:54:35 PM »
I've tried to keep quiet so as not to contribute to the noise, but please - the off-topic (though intelligent) discussions are cluttering this thread, please move them to the "meaningless season chatter" thread where they belong.
The on-topic discussions and rebuttals of Geron's boilerplate commentary should be held in the melting season thread.
(Neven - please punish me if I'm wrong. Please punish everyone else if I'm right)

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: March 27, 2019, 07:56:08 PM »
How rare is it to see a full 10 day GFS run on the Reanalyzer predicting 2M anomalies in the arctic above 6 deg C (ok, a couple of drops to 5.9) and as high as 7.6? I don't recall seeing as anomalous a forecast as the current one. Or do I just not recall?

November 2016.

Maybe February 2018.

The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: February 16, 2019, 11:54:39 PM »
"hey,easy there kids. make sure you don't get angry. Don't resort to tribalism. Take some time and listen to the democrats and republicans too. I know it sucks that my generation robbed you of your future, but just make sure you maintain decorum"
So fucken well said!


My problem with the polit threads is not the decorum.
I am an advocate and activist of violent communication (and I can take a cordial "fuck you"). Some people in the public space can only be convinced by shame. (However, it is a tightrope: Violent communication is only effective when fact based and logical.) That's why there still is climate denialism and inactivism out there: In the last 20 years of climate "debate" I heard/read the wörd "bullshit" only one single time...

What irks me in the polit forums are the low standards of evidence and truth exhibited by some, incl. Neven. And the radical oversimplification of things (most often from Neven). This isn't about theory (Neven) vs. pragmatism (Martin). Oversimplified theories don't work, period, just like overcomplex theories. And more: the tolerance of bullshit and of known bullshit sources (like Russia Today). Who bullshits in science is dead as a scientist. Not so in the polit forums.

What is desperately needed in today's world is to try to apply the standards of scientific discourse to polit disourse.

Apropos Valentine's Day,

My point?

Two days of brutal cold, even record breaking brutal cold, means nothing more than 2 days of record breaking brutal cold. Anyone here who would suggest otherwise should be working for Hair Furor in the White House.

There is much talk about Warm Arctic, Cold Continents and extreme cold outbreaks. Unfortunately I do not know of a good graphic database which shows extreme temperature deviations globally, so I throw in a sort of "anecdotal", local evidence from Central Europe, where I live. These are the annual low temperatures for Budapest, Hungary. Each dot is the annual low and the black line is a 10 year moving average. As you can see, we had much more extreme winter lows during the first half of the 20th century (it was quite normal to have temps below -15 C and sometimes even below -20 C. That doesn't happen anymore. My point is that the climate (at least here) is becoming less extreme during winter, not more. Also, I attach global winter temps on chart 2, 2009-2018 average temperatures vs 1951-1980 average. It is obvious that winters are uniformly getting significantly warmer in the NH midlatitudes.
Looking at the second chart I guess that my analyisis of winter extreme low temps is most likely true for the whole of Europe!

Consequences / Re: Heatwaves
« on: December 28, 2018, 06:12:56 PM »
the main feedback of water vapor tends to increase the nighttime temperatures and winter temperatures more than those of the summer daytime temperatures.  The impact on high temps is still within the variability range of normal operations (though the trend is higher.

What is much more impactful is the LENGTH of the heatwaves where the temperature doesn't drop below that of a heat wave for weeks and weeks.  This is where the climate signal is really being seen today in Australia and elsewhere.

The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: December 06, 2018, 10:04:34 PM »
I'm glad to see so many experts on activism here. I'm sure you're all very experienced in that field, and know what's best for Neven and this community.  With all these climate change protests erupting lately, you must really get a chance to practice your work.  Telling me and other young people:
"hey,easy there kids. make sure you don't get angry. Don't resort to tribalism. Take some time and listen to the democrats and republicans too. I know it sucks that my generation robbed you of your future, but just make sure you maintain decorum"

I'm also happy in the insistence that we need to give people like Bob and Rob a platform. Their neoliberal agenda is already supported by mainstream media, governments, corporations, and the majority of westerners. they have a monopoly on narrative and discourse, and they are well equipped to silence dissent. What are we accomplishing by giving neoliberals another avenue for propaganda? Unless... our goal is to maintain the status quo

Zizek, I'm sure I'm not much older than you, and I am involved with more than a couple of climate change activist groups currently. I understand your rage; I feel a ton of resentment at being unable to become an adult in many ways, because doing so would require me to buy into a system that I know is destroying so much. I live a life of uncertainty that is often very lonely, and riddled with despair.

That said, right now rage -- though useful to some degree -- is not enough. There will be no revolution, and it's unlikely that a revolution would solve our problems. What older folk do have -- even if they sometimes fail to see what seems obvious -- is an understanding of how difficult it is to change things. China, India and Vladimir Putin are all obstacles to a different world, just as the U.S. BAU model is. There are nothing but massive challenges. There are no quick solutions; we're in serious trouble, quite obviously. Yelling at people online does nothing to move us closer to any of our goals, all it does is threaten to undermine one of the more important climate change related sites on the internet.

Sure, maybe it's important to be loud. But maybe focus on getting young people out and loud in the streets? On this forum, I almost think it's more useful to tell someone like a Rob about your personal story, just as he shared his (which has obviously influenced him greatly). Maybe once the older generation starts hearing what it's like for us, why we feel so angry, they will begin to understand that there's more wrong than they might want to think. Rather than raging on about something happening half way around the world, (which after all we don't know about first hand and often comes down to whose testimony we believe), why not say, "look, I can't even begin to start thinking about having a family. I feel like I'm in a state of war but I don't even have an enemy to shoot at. I have no agency, except when there is an election, but none of the candidates come anywhere close to understanding what it is we are hoping for. etc etc" This will do a lot more than a JD rant, perhaps. At least it can't do less.

And if you really care about change, then efficacy should be your main concern, above being right, or righteous.

The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: December 06, 2018, 05:02:05 PM »
wouldn't it be better to invite the proponents of mainstream thought to either restrict themselves to the Arctic Sea Ice part of the forum that is entirely free of politics, or leave the ASIF?
I don't think so, but this is exactly what has happened.  Rob, Buddy, AbruptSLR, JimD, Bob Wallace and Susan Anderson have left the forum.  So now the echo chamber will consist of you, Lurk, Terry, and Red patting each other on the back.  You want to be an activist, but you're just shrinking your audience.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2018 sea ice area and extent data
« on: December 06, 2018, 09:22:05 AM »
JAXA ARCTIC EXTENT 10,641,797 km2(December 5, 2018)

- Extent gain at 30 k is 46 k BELOW the average gain (2008-2017) on this day,
- Extent is 4th lowest in the satellite record, see Juan's post above for details (and attached table).
- Freezing to date from minimum is 262 k (4.1%) LESS than the 10 year average extent gain,
- On average (last 10 years) 64.7 % of the increase in extent from min to max is done.

An extra line in the table based on average extent increase in the last 5 years has been added. This is because extent gain in 2012-13 was so large (rebound from record low minimum) that it distorts the average. The outcome from using the 10 year average extent gain from now is a maximum of 14.07 million km2 (190k > 2017).  Using the previous 5 years's average extent gain, the resulting maximum is 13.90 million km2, (20k > 2017).

Extent gain from minimum now well below average. For the twelfth day extent gain is again below average, and by a lot. Note a couple of days losses in December is unusual, but not a rarity. Position in table down from 13 to 5, and with 2017 & 2010 in shouting distance. But will this period of well below average gain end as the freeze takes hold in the peripheral seas?

On average (last 10 years) approaching 2/3rds of extent gain from min to max is now done with on average 97 days to maximum. Despite the period of extremely low freezing followed by the reverse and then back to low freezing some are nevertheless brave enough to predict the outcome as at December 31.

GFS indicates that overall the Arctic is at a higher temperature anomaly of around +3 to +4 celsius  for the next few days.
ps: *The 2010's average figure I use in the attached table excludes 2018. I exclude 2018 (from all JAXA and NSIDC tables and graphs) so that the difference of the current year with the 2010's decade to date average is not modified by the current year data.

Pages: [1]