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 - Shared Humanity

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: Today at 02:57:45 PM »
Let's hope that PIOMAS comes out with mid-month update so we get a clue about the damage.

I agree with both Neven and Friv that 2012 will be extremely unlikely to beat this year. IMO, that's not the real important thing whether we beat 2012 or not. Remember that 2012 strongly diverged from earlier years by the beginning of August when the strength of the sun is quickly vaning in the high Arctic. And it quickly refroze that fall. It's more concerning that we are getting open seas in (April) May and June, especially over deep seas, that can suck up tons of energy from the sun and delay freezing by fall and winter. I don't want to guess what kind of weather we'll get after next strong El Nino. Then we'll be in serious trouble!

I agree.

It is fun to watch the horse race to the annual minimum but the degradation of the Arctic ice is a long process and I find it far more interesting to watch this happen. The Bering has been opening up earlier and earlier and the effect has been to warm the waters so much through added insolation that it did not really freeze this past winter. This process is occurring in the Chulkchi, Beaufort, ESS and Laptev as well. The longer these seas remain open water, the more heat uptake. The freeze will occur later and the ice will be thinner after the subsequent freeze. Winter max for volume is the measure to watch IMHO.

Look at these peripheral seas in the basin. All are at or near their all time minimums for the date. These seas are melting out earlier and earlier and warming dramatically as a result. Even the CAA is near its minimum for the date which is due to the increasingly early clear out of the Amundsen Gulf which is more an extension of the Beaufort than it is a part of the CAA. This rapid melt in the CAA will slow dramatically as the straits will not melt out as quickly.

Arctic sea ice / Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« on: June 15, 2019, 08:55:41 PM »
You have to give LL credit. He is at least self aware enough to post his comments on this thread.

/vent on/

What is it about having a slew of new people show up in the forums, absolutely intent on telling all of us who've been watching the ice intently for many years, exactly how we've gotten it wrong(tm), and need to follow their better direction?

Color me tired of people long on wind and short on science and data.

/vent off/

Every year ...

I have a very specific way of dealing with this that works for me. When new people start posting, I read every comment very closely. It is usually easy to determine whether they have much to offer (on topic?, insightful?, probing questions?). For those who have little to offer, I just slide past what they write but will occasionally skim a comment to confirm it is not worth reading. Several here have now slipped comfortably into that category for me. You will know you are there when I never respond to anything you write.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: June 13, 2019, 02:57:02 AM »
How about if everyone stays on topic and talks about 2019 sea ice area and extent data? If you think this comment is directed at you, it probably is.

<Exactly! N.>

Consequences / Re: Hurricane Season 2019
« on: June 11, 2019, 01:34:04 AM »

Aside: Accusations of trolling and denial do not advance the discussion. I reply in another thread.

While I have some suspicions about the motives of some who comment here, it serves no purpose to argue. Present your argument, backed up with links, and move on.

I think it may have something to do with periodicity of calving or the changing speed of the glacier or a known period after some artifact? What suspence!
I doubt you are doing anything dirty Espen.

Espen has a close friend who hikes the glacier dropping small, remote controlled IED's into crevasses which Espen detonates by hitting ctrl F7.

Policy and solutions / Re: Coal
« on: June 08, 2019, 07:50:15 PM »
The whole endless growth based economic system might have to change, but I have never heard a credible idea how to pull that off.

BAU will impose a very credible way of doing just that. Nature always has the last word. Her methods may seem unnecessarily cruel but they will prove to be highly effective.

As the flow exits the fjord, is the light color of the water extending outwards all brash ice or is it also due to sediment?

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: June 08, 2019, 06:16:36 PM »
Since melt ponding is dominating, appropriately I might add, this conversation, I thought I would link to research that explains the creation of and persistence of melt ponds, even on thin, briny FYI.

Thanks again AbruptSLR for this research.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: June 02, 2019, 03:39:59 PM »
gerontocrat and Juan

keep doing what you is why I visit this thread daily.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: June 02, 2019, 03:34:29 PM »
Perhaps you would prefer to take this BOE discussion to the "When will the Arctic go Ice Free" thread?,2348.400.html

Good idea. We have a person concerned that the thread should be a bookkeeping thread and then we go off the rails.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: June 02, 2019, 03:30:35 PM »
This is science. I disagree with that statement. I think there are plenty of good reasons to suspect that ice losses will be above average in June.

Great. Rather than telling gerontocrat to quit providing his analysis based on past ice behavior and current temperatures, provide us with reasons why you expect losses to be greater than average. This discussion would help all of us develop a better understanding of the ice.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: June 02, 2019, 07:09:34 AM »

It seems like gerontocrat's daily projection that ice losses will not exceed historical averages belongs in the melting season thread where that point of view can be debated.

This is the bookeeper thread, not the analysis thread.

Without gerontocrat's contribution to this thread, it wouldn't exist.

Science / Re: Magnitude of future warming
« on: June 01, 2019, 03:02:37 PM »
True on both points.  Projecting long term trends using short term data is a questionable practice.  Using an inappropriate dataset makes it worse.

Not sure how the data set collected by the Scripps Institution of Oceanography is inappropriate.

Both of these charts clearly show that the growth rate in atmospheric CO2 is increasing. Between 1960 and 1970, CO2 increased by 1ppm annually. Between 1990 to 2000, it increased by 2ppm annually.

What data set would you use to evaluate the growth rates in atmospheric CO2?

Science / Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
« on: May 29, 2019, 07:14:57 PM »
The simple fact is that this growth system (capitalism) cannot grow indefinitely when it is constrained by a finite resource (the planet). The only solution is to devise a new way to organize human civilization. Given their finite nature, this absolutely requires a more equitable distribution of these resources.

We may even need to talk about adapting to climate change that is largely out of our ability to control.

 :o Words fail me but I will try to respond to this.

Please try to read up on what a 4C or 6C warmer world will look like. There is simply no adaptation possible and to suggest this is beyond belief.

The latest IPCC report got it right. We need to be carbon neutral by 2050.

If someone would have told you 50 years ago how good we would become at predicting the path of a hurricane, you probably wouldn't have believed them.

We're going to get there with SLR.

Predicting the real time path of a hurricane involves understanding a number of small processes (wind sheer, water temperatures, location of lows, highs and fronts) in a very specific time frame. Predicting SLR involves understanding processes that are linked across the planet and occur over decades, an entire systems analysis. One is far more difficult than the other IMHO.

AbruptSLR's research rich posts here certainly demonstrate this complexity.

I visit this thread daily and always struggle to understand the research that AbruptSLR posts. If it were not for the abstracts and plain language summaries, it would be hopeless.

Did you even read my response?

This is a thread about sea level rise. I'm raising an important question about the science of predicting SLR.

Yes you are which is why I actually tried to draw a distinction between the degree of difficulty of understanding these two predictions.

I too value ASLR's contributions here and it is only because there is at least one such insightful and connected person on the topic that I ventured out to ask the question. It was a question which was hoping that there would be some expert insight in response.

We are certainly in agreement here as this is what I said about my reasons for visiting this thread daily.

Nothing personal, but you're not representing yourself as someone who has expertise to shed light on my question yet you are putting yourself in the position of being the arbiter of whether the question is a good one or not.

I am certainly not suggesting the question is not a good one and would not have tried to answer it if I thought this was the case.

Let me take a step back and explain why I'm asking the question. Humanity obviously needs this information to plan and to provide motivation to take action. It is only relatively recently (the past decade or so) that we really began to get understand the situation threat more clearly as being related warm ocean circulation reaching the ice sheets at depth.

Certainly understanding the impacts of oceans warming at depth is crucial but I am of the opinion there are also other crucial things we need to understand (in situ melt of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, etc.) Many of these processes are also not clearly understood.

Regardless of opinion degree of difficulty, the reason we can track hurricanes more accurately is because we recognized it as a priority and applied ourselves to solving it.


Predicting SLR will not be easy, but it is not an insurmountable task. As you indicate, the time dimension of prediction is completely different.

I did not say it was insurmountable. I, in fact, used the term "far more difficult" and, because of this, I do not think we are close to being able to accurately predict SLR. In fact, well informed scientists have very different estimates of SLR by the end of the century for this very reason.

IMO, this is a perfectly healthy and rational topic to inquire about and discuss, yet somehow I feel like I've triggered the ASIF culture police. If you don't like my question, why not just ignore it?

I actually liked your question which is why I responded. And my attempt to do so is certainly not "triggering the ASIF culture police". In the future, I will be more cautious and careful in responding to your posts. It was not my intent to offend.

The water level of the Great Lakes rises and falls seasonally and the longer term trend of the Lake Michigan does not suggest imminent catastrophe.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: May 27, 2019, 01:32:11 PM »
There are posters here who have been here for years and have developed ways to present data that help inform the entire community. Instead of asking for different data, use the data to track conditions and develop insights or questions related to processes.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: May 27, 2019, 05:14:13 AM »
What is most striking to me in looking at these images is not the comparison between 5/26/2019 and 5/26/2012. It is between 5/26/2019 and the final condition of the ice at the end of the 2012 melt season. Since the end of the 2012 melt season, the thickest ice has continued to disappear. We are only one severe melt season away from a BOE.

Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: The Nares Strait thread
« on: May 27, 2019, 02:29:25 AM »
My guess is it disintegrates.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: May 26, 2019, 10:22:41 PM »
Just ban the troll, Neven. He outed himself as an agenda driven troll with this:

Leftists are always duplicitous.

When a brand new visitor comes to a website and immediately calls out everyone here as one thing or another, it does raise suspicions.

bbr2314...I would like to apologize to you for comments I made earlier about wishing this thread included other topics and not just your concerns about reglaciation as if this was somehow your responsibility. If I would like other relevant topics about NH snow cover to be discussed, that is my responsibility.

Thought I would repost this land cover map for Canada that was posted on this thread last fall. It is interesting to see how the land cover map closely matches the permafrost map. I suppose this is not surprising but it does provide us with an idea of how land cover will change as permafrost degrades.

I would like to thank bbr2314 for tracking snowfall since last fall. He has given us a good record for snow cover in relationship to permafrost in NA. I've copied a snow cover depth map that he provided on September 28 and the story it tells is not good for the permafrost in some areas of Canada. Research shows that a foot of early season snow is enough to insulate permafrost from the brutal cold of the northern latitude winters, preventing the surface layer from refreezing. Looking at this map, it is obvious that much of the permafrost in northern Quebec is at risk if this seasonal pattern of heavy early snows in this region is the new normal.

Is there any source for snow cover from a couple of decades ago? Is this heavy snowfall in northern Quebec a new phenomenon?

Arctic sea ice / Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« on: May 26, 2019, 02:32:56 PM »

Sorry for the OT, couldn't resist. This is a stupid comment rather than a stupid question.

HM! Zat you?

NSIDC has good permafrost maps.,,desc/facetFilters=%257B%257D/pageNumber=1/itemsPerPage=25

Would be interesting to track a season of snow fall to see where the heavy early snows fall in relationship to the permafrost.

If you pull up the map on NSIDC website you can magnify the map to see all of the detail.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: May 26, 2019, 12:01:17 AM »
edit: I've just seen the ECMWF forecast and it looks pretty terrible indeed. Anything above 1030 hPa around this time of year, is a disaster for the ice. I'll post the latest forecast this evening.
Can you explain why you say it's bad in reference a pressure? I understand Pa refers to a Pascal. I'm an engineer, and the importance of air pressure rather than temperature is not obvious to me.

High pressure indicates subsidence. This inhibits cloud formation which means that the Arctic regions underneath the high will receive more incoming shortwave radiation.

Seriously? You have to throw the word subsidence in there instead of an actual explanatory few words?

Hi HelloMeteor. Welcome to the site.

Actually answered the question pretty succinctly. I've been here for about 7 years and still find myself having to google terms to understand what some type here. Might be better to try this rather than ridiculing someone trying to answer your question.

Actually googled subsidence before I typed this.


I post a comment with a link to research on the shrinking of glaciers in the Torngat Mountains and you accuse me of rhetoric.

Carry on. I'll periodically visit this thread with additional items to be discussed regarding NH snow in an effort to make this thread useful.

bbr2314... I would like to compliment you on your recent restraint in posting comments on other threads about the threat presented by the rapidly approaching ice age.


Maybe the Torngat Mountains will need more than a couple of seasons of snow surviving before we can declare a reglaciation in progress.

I highly doubt that study incorporates substantial data since 2012. If you were looking through that point, you would be correct. But temperatures last year were substantially below normal, and they have been falling since 2012 in general in northern Quebec.

I am not saying the study is wrong re: what it explicitly covers -- if it had quantified the years over which it purports to measure, I am sure it is probably correct (since I highly doubt it includes the past few years). But my entire argument has been that we have passed a tipping point to where the changes are now beneficial for snowcover retention.

Recent research can fairly precisely quantify that the glaciers in the Torngat Mountains have shrunk significantly from 1950 to 2005.

The trend suggests that these glaciers will eventually disappear due to rising temperatures. It is silly to state that having snow persist for a single season is evidence of an impending reglaciation.

"Technically it wasn't avoided last year, as snow remained extant on the Torngat Mountains through summer. If it continues this year, I would say that (potentially?) legitimately constitutes the commencement of re-glaciation."

What is most frustrating for me is that the subject of this thread which addresses NH snow cover is very relevant. Given the changes in climate and the hydrologic cycle, we should expect to see significant changes in snow cover and patterns as the earth warms. Tracking and analyzing snow cover could provide us with ideas as to what we can expect in the future. It is unfortunate that the thread is used only to amplify your pet theory of the impending reglaciation of the NH.


Maybe the Torngat Mountains will need more than a couple of seasons of snow surviving before we can declare a reglaciation in progress.

Arctic sea ice / Re: When will the Arctic Go Ice Free?
« on: May 24, 2019, 07:21:45 PM »
Can we please stay on topic?

has the new ice age we were expecting in Quebec been avoided again ? b.c.

 ps .. looks like snow in Scotland is a possibility in a week's time ..
Technically it wasn't avoided last year, as snow remained extant on the Torngat Mountains through summer. If it continues this year, I would say that (potentially?) legitimately constitutes the commencement of re-glaciation.

So that would be, I guess, a mini mini ice age?

This is what it looks like...

The word of the street seems to be that not all scientists are fully convinced that marine cliff instability will play out as current models predict. It would help if it could be observed to happen in nature.

It is happening at Jacobshavn.

Arctic sea ice / Re: When will the Arctic Go Ice Free?
« on: May 19, 2019, 02:14:56 PM »
Can this year reach a BOE? Not totally impossible.
I will be highly surprised if a first BOE does not happen by 2030.

And even if we do not reach a true BOE before 2030, there will be little difference between a minimum of 1.8 M km2 vs. < 1.0 M km2 when we consider the impact it will have on climate.

There is no country in the world without socialism. That's a fact.

Even in the US, there are plenty of examples. Socialism is a financing scheme for services needed in a society more than a political ideology.

The very creation of the nation state results in socialism as the state pursues the common good. Ayn Rand proponents would have you believe that absolute personal freedom without constraints in the pursuit of self interest is the perfect state for man. Hobbes more accurately characterized life in this state of nature as "nasty, brutish and short."

Cue BBR entering stage left to warn us of the impending reglaciation of NA.

Christ AbruptSLR...I don't visit for a few hours and you dump a day's worth of reading on me!

Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: The 'Very Big Chunk' poll
« on: May 07, 2019, 06:22:53 PM »
I did not vote and am on record that this thread should not have been created. Sorry guys, I was just cranky >:( but it is clear you guys are having fun here.  8)

I did have something to say about VBC on the Nares thread a couple of days ago.

My point is that, if simply entering a slightly faster current could cleave the VBC in half, it suggests the structural integrity of the entire VBC is suspect. That sucker is going to splinter as it encounters more destructive forces in the strait.

I don't expect to get credit for a vote but the fact this VBC (more appropriately named lots of little pieces knitted together by FYI) splintered and will continue to do so should not be surprising.

Chicago recorded 2 inches of snow from the storm. I live 6 miles from Ohare and this is a photo from my balcony...a beautiful spring morning.

Consequences / Re: Pathogens and their impacts
« on: April 12, 2019, 10:54:39 PM »
Given our inaction with regards to climate change and the accelerating extinction event, a raging global pandemic which kills a couple of billion may be Mother Earth's last best hope. May it be particularly deadly in the most developed nations as this will have the greatest ameliorative impact.

Consequences / Re: Floods
« on: April 12, 2019, 10:47:50 PM »
I wish people could look more clearly and see what's there. Trump is not a King Louis the XIV of France. He's just a front man who by himself makes next to no difference at all. aka Obama and all the rest. It's the people and powers behind the "throne" that really are the movers and shakers. And they are always in power no matter what.

So focusing on Trump, blathering on that he's an idiot, a jackass, or whatever is a waste of breath.

This is absolute bullshit. To suggest there is no difference between Obama and Trump is trolling at its worst.

For me, I feel that weird weather (very severe) is when the measure of the weather is historically unprecedented or highly unusual. The three 500 year floods in Houston over a period of five years as an example and the 50" of rainfall from Hurricane Harvey in Houston 2 years ago.

Record breaking heat or cold, record breaking rains and winds, etc.

Policy and solutions / Re: Coal
« on: April 06, 2019, 08:11:43 PM »
I realize I sound dismissive and flippant in my last three comments. Actually, everything Ken Feldman has posted is good news. It is simply that the only news that matters is the hard data around actual fossil fuel consumption and CO2 emissions.

Is renewable generation of electricity growing rapidly? Absolutely!

Is this having a impact on the consumption of coal? Not quickly enough.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: March 31, 2019, 04:50:09 PM »
I do generally hold the opinion that we should all be a little more circumspect about making definitive statements here as even the most rigorous climate scientists express uncertainty about what we can expect. If someone here chooses to toss aside caution and insist that something is the case, they should expect to be asked to show their research. If they fail to do so, it should come as no surprise if most here discount what they say.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: March 31, 2019, 04:43:33 PM »
I, for one, will be keeping a very close eye on the Kara and Laptev as I am developing a persistent concern about the Atlantification of the Arctic.

Whats the consensus? Is a high snow mass overlaying sea ice a good or a bad thing?

I know that melt-ponding that in turn was partially responsible for the June cliff of 2012, but then again there's an inference for increased protection from top-melt?

I think it depends. If the heavy snow falls early in the freeze season, it will insulate the ice from the cold, preventing it from thickening. If it falls just before the melt season, it may serve to delay the onset of melt.

We are not yet certain what the impacts of our current geoengineering project over the last 200 years will look like and we have been studying this fairly intently for the better part of 40 years. There is no way we can predict fully the effects of future projects. We should expect unintended, unanticipated and quite painful consequences of our hubris in approaching climate change as an engineering problem to be solved.

Never the less, given our refusal to halt the current project, we should expect many increasingly frantic projects, implemented far to quickly in the very near future.

May the Goddess help us.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4