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 - abbottisgone

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
1
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: November 17, 2016, 03:24:05 AM »
If the 2016 graph for extent catches the 2006 graph for extent then I do infact think the 'flatlanders' have a right to express emotion about that.

The truth likes to reveal itself... if they cobble their story together with lies and/or assumption then it becomes all the more telling and entropy takes over.

The media have their backs to the wall now,.. GLOBALLY,.. don't forget!

Saying all that:

 (...I don't think anyone with a brain is in a laughing mood regarding these clowns anymore: I was talking about the skeptics rights under STP conditions!!!)

2
Arctic sea ice / Re: Stupid Questions :o
« on: November 16, 2016, 10:54:43 AM »


Thumbing back through DMI is seems certain that this is so at least since 1958. I haven't even found a close second for either side of the hump.


We live in exciting times. :'(
Terry
I would have said that there are some close examples to what is on the left hand side of the hump, but the right side is certainly unprecedented.

The world is truly watching, you can bet...so, beware of panic I say!

Going thru the years the right side starts to slowly get out of control,... until it just starts to get just a little bit crazier more often:  so I think we are seeing something that has been defined by the past record as indicative of a true signal of things to come.

3
Antarctica / Re: Sea Ice Extent around Antarctica
« on: November 15, 2016, 10:42:57 AM »
Antarctic sea ice has gone missing in action ...




4
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2016/2017 freezing season
« on: November 15, 2016, 05:05:33 AM »


 :'( :'(

5
The rest / Re: Arctic Café
« on: November 13, 2016, 09:27:37 AM »

..
Trump subsequently promised, in an interview with the Wall Street Journal, to consider retaining aspects of Obama’s signature Affordable Care Act “out of respect” to the outgoing president. During the campaign, Trump had promised to “repeal and replace” the reforms but never explained a replacement in detail, nor its funding. And in a second interview with the CBS programme 60 Minutes, Trump said he would ensure that that people with pre-existing conditions and children living with their parents for an extended period were still covered.

“It’ll be just fine. That’s what I do. I do a good job,” he said. “You know, I mean, I know how to do this stuff. We’re going to repeal it and replace it. And we’re not going to have, like, a two-day period and we’re not going to have a two-year period where there’s nothing. It will be repealed and replaced. I mean, you’ll know. And it’ll be great healthcare for much less money.”

<<

..
Trump biographer Gwenda Blair also said the businessman was “entirely likely” to govern like a moderate Republican. “His pronouncements during the campaign were part of a performer’s strategy of always controlling the headlines by saying something and then topping that and topping that,” she said.

“Twitter was technology’s gift to him in that he could keep leapfrogging ahead of any fact check. He’s a dealmaker who always wants to make it happen to his advantage. The gamble the nation has taken is that it will now work to the nation’s advantage.”

source: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/12/donald-trump-campaign-promises-transition-team

 TRUMP IS CHANGING: he's using words like 'amend' so watch this space!

6
Trump apparently was serious about rolling back Obama's climate change executive actions, "cancelling" the Paris accord, and trashing the EPA.


Myron Ebell, fresh from CEI where he fought for smokers rights and wrote that "Higher temperatures are killing those who are likely to die anyway." is Trumps choice to lead the EPA transition team.


https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trump-picks-top-climate-skeptic-to-lead-epa-transition/?wt.mc=SA_Twitter-Share


The Wiki for CEI will make you weep. These guys should be in jail, not leading "transition" teams.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competitive_Enterprise_Institute


This is much worse than I had imagined.
Terry

This can't be true, can it?

7
The linked Rolling Stone article is entitled: "Why Republicans Still Reject the Science of Global Warming", and points-out that is you want to know why the Republican Party denies climate change then you only need to follow the fossil fuel campaign money trail:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/why-republicans-still-reject-the-science-of-global-warming-w448023

Extract: "Only one major political party in the world denies climate change, and it's in charge of the most important political body in the world."
The Liberal Party of Australia also denies Climate Change!

8
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: November 07, 2016, 06:47:32 AM »
May I show the monthly mean for Nov as given by IJIS:

https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/#/extent

This has to be relevant, IMHO!

9
Permafrost / Re: This is not good.
« on: November 07, 2016, 04:02:13 AM »
The thing that gets me is that a good friend of mine, who read physics at university and now works in sophisticated software design and who prides himself on scepticism watched Thin Ice and was contemptuous of the anecdotal evidence of Inuit. He thought it weakened the force of the science and chuntered on about belief in climate change being a religion reinforced by old people going on about "the good old days when I were a lad". To me, it seemed as if his professional training in science (don't get me wrong, I'm all for science, it's the style of training I'm criticising) went much further than making him critical of anecdotal evidence - it made him regard it as the antithesis of science rather than an adjunct. I've come across this a lot with classically educated natural scientists in the UK - a disposition to regard AGW as a religious sect, and inclined to disregard anything that hasn't been scientifically coded and measured.
You often find retired engineers telling you everything follows a predator prey-relationship and thermodynamic principles will balance it all out: they're off the head and very aloof people some of them.

10
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« on: November 04, 2016, 04:16:53 AM »
"I'll have a bourbon on the rocks thanks  :'(

Better make it a double,... on the double while you're at it  :o :o



 - let's go out with a laugh, whaddya say?"

11
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2016/2017 freezing season
« on: November 03, 2016, 07:30:14 AM »
Meanwhile we are over 500k km2 below 2012 for Arctic and now matching 1986 for lowest extent in Antarctica...

And we are still heading strong... into the unknown. SIE is now 670k km2 below 2012, 1.1mln below 2007, and 1.5mln below 2015. Yes, it's obvious that in a few days/weeks the refreeze will resume and get back to "normal", but the new dynamics in the region has been set and we can only hope that there are negative feedback mechanisms that can potentially restore the balance. I wonder how long it would take for our race to realize that once we transition from the unprecedented to the abrupt, it's virtually game over regardless of your location or social status. Does anyone else have a gut feeling that the life as we know it is about to change for all of us? Or am I nuts? And I'm not talking 2100. More like 2020 the latest. Can the global economy take a big impact of a sudden climate change and keep going as usual?
Me, yes: basically I hear you.

The multi year sea ice is falling apart and, symbolism being aside, it means real politik.

12
The rest / Re: Arctic Café
« on: November 03, 2016, 04:49:38 AM »
Pmt111500, thanks. Nice photo.

Music and beauty are all around us. In order to be able to hear and see that - one have to tune into. "Do not throw pearls before swine" strugle comes later .

Quote
What’s a ‘system of systems’?

It’s a system made of many disparate parts, each of which is a complex system in its own right. The biosphere is a system of systems. But so far, people usually use this buzzword for large human-engineered systems where the different components are made by different organizations, perhaps over a long period of time, with changing and/or incompatible standards.

Sklona je sreća vitezu

---

What happened at AGU?
What is going on at Elsevier? (a lot to search/read if one care about)
example from 2007, and 2012, not even read by me - i don't have that time - reality objects -
Other institutions? Can Lamar type freaks win
none said to me that we are declassified to a worms now beat 5?
? Why? Can't  we do better

---

How shallow is your world?

Reshaping tweet of Neil deGrasse Tyson,  Oct 9 2016:
"How I Got Evil Elected while Dismantling the Republican Party "

biti primitivan i biti neobrazovan su neovisne karakteristike

- -

Cool blog about interconnectivity ...: Open and Interconnected Systems

"Interconnection and openness are tightly related. Indeed, openness implies that a system may be interconnected with its environment. But what is an environment but comprised of other systems? Thus the study of open systems becomes the study of how a system changes under interconnection with other systems."

How about complexity of brain stuff, mitochondria,....

Cooperation, not competition, is what prevails in nature, in an ecosystem, human's body included.
How nature does that?

, (abbott thanks!)

its not just that they do not see *our* whole picture,
(God forbid mention of nature whole picture :) they do not see even their whole picture. bustards

No probs: yeh I like stuff and me and Dad talk about this stuff a lot. He was quite concerned the multi-year sea ice in the Arctic would disappear this year and he is professionally involved in the writing of contribution of input to the IPCC reports.

The panic factor is not far away... things will change very soon in the political sense. IT'S ALL TOO REAL NOW!!

 ;)

13
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2016/2017 freezing season
« on: November 02, 2016, 03:08:52 PM »
slow wing: may I say that wrangel island seems to be the pinch point?

14
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: November 02, 2016, 02:31:46 PM »
Dear Neven,

                   

 if a temperature spike during the non winter months indicates a heat release from the oceans: what then does a set of timid temperature psuedo-spikes from anonymously above average temperatures say... "IS IT POTENTIALLY WORTHY OF VOLUMES OF LITERATURE?", is the question?

 ???

signed: curious as mustard  ;)

(NB: I do note that 2007 doesn't suffer from the preconditioning of 2016 but seems to almost end the same up until about now, November 1-ish)

(NBaswell: obviously no one can explain 2012)

15
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2016/2017 freezing season
« on: November 02, 2016, 02:22:44 PM »


2012 didn't show much abnormal temperatures: it was a true anomalie shall we say!



2016, if you check the temp records at dmi for past 80N, are wacko in comparison to all other years.

Curious factors are emerging.... something must bind them however.

Should we just call it advection???
(I should possibly modify my comment by saying 2007



shares a common path in the latter days yet the preconditioning seems quite different,... obviously 2012 is wacked tho!)

 (2009 also seems close...)

16
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: October 31, 2016, 07:29:53 AM »
Personally, I don't want to see 2017!!

17
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2016/2017 freezing season
« on: October 31, 2016, 07:13:17 AM »
I didn't know JAXA had this thickness map. I kind of stumbled onto it.


I hope that map is wrong  :o :o :o :o :o :o

18
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2016/2017 freezing season
« on: October 31, 2016, 04:43:29 AM »
Though less than perfect the HYCOM Thickness model gives a fairly good idea of how things have gone down, starting in 2012. In GIF form.

Thanks for the animation. The ESS is Ground Zero of this poor refreeze season. Once it does refreeze extent will be playing catch-up.
All this open ocean will continue to play tricks with the freeze up.


19
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: October 31, 2016, 03:24:38 AM »
Yes, Tor: you have picked out what I would call a chaotic signal indicated by strange sinusoidal graphology. Some sort of phase change, or shall we even say tipping point, is occurring in front of our very eyes methinks.

The real politik has to come into it eventually. (Tesla shares might be going up very soon!!)


20
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: October 28, 2016, 04:02:07 AM »
Jim, if I take out the yellow and grey lines I see a good trend. The first few averages touched each other but now they are entirely starting to separate.

(Maybe I should keep the grey?!?)


21
Does this :..

"Eight thousand years ago, the Jakobshavn filled the fjord completely, all the way to the moraine. By the mid-nineteenth century, when the first observations were recorded, the position of the calving front had shifted inland by about ten miles. Over the next hundred and fifty years, the front’s position shifted again, by another twelve miles.

Then, suddenly, in the late nineteen-nineties, the Jakobshavn’s stately retreat turned into a rout. Between 2001 and 2006, the calving front withdrew nine miles. Just in the past fifteen years, it has given up more ground than it did in the previous century. The fjord extends for at least another forty miles and deepens as it moves inland. At this point, there doesn’t seem to be anything to prevent the calving front from withdrawing the entire way.

“It appears now that the retreat cannot be stopped,” David Holland, a professor at N.Y.U. who studies the Jakobshavn using seals equipped with electronic sensors, told me. (When the seals surface after a dive, the sensors transmit data about conditions in the fjord.)

Meanwhile, as the calving front has receded, the ice stream has sped up. This appears to be the result of yet another feedback loop. Since the nineties, the Jakobshavn has nearly tripled its pace. In the summer of 2012, it set what’s believed to be an ice-stream record, by flowing at the distinctly unglacial rate of a hundred and fifty feet per day, or more than six feet an hour. The Jakobshavn’s catchment area is smaller than the negis’s; still, there’s enough ice in it to raise global sea levels by two feet."

(link: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/10/24/greenland-is-melting)

 ..perhaps indicate that this glacier could be gone in 10 years?

 If not, then what is the current flow rate of this glacier?

22
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2016/2017 freezing season
« on: October 27, 2016, 06:30:22 AM »
After reaching an early minimum I was ready to relax and let the sea ice recover in peace but it does anything but that.  The season is looking increasingly anomalous as it progresses.  Both extent and area are in new territory.  The most ominous question is - what does it implicate for the next season?
Artful Dodger seems to think the loss of multi-year ice means that can only lead to salty first year ice replacing it which tends to melt very easily.

 Throw a slow freeze up into the next year and it can't be good at all.

 The multi-year sea ice in the Arctic is what people are most concerned about right around the whole world: even in Australia.

 The more open ocean in the Arctic means the more cyclones doesn't it? I think this world is very happy for a La Nina!!

23
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2016/2017 freezing season
« on: October 27, 2016, 05:17:47 AM »


Hahahaha. Nope. He's quite correct.

That's pretty funny though. Greenland dissipating heat from air because it's porous like a radiator. heh heh.

Can I play some type of advocate? (Well, "..can I?" being the ultimate self test hehe!)

I can't help but feel that the more highly organised structure that is The Greenland Ice Sheet, as compared to the Arctic Sea Ice, invites more destructive force.

Looking at the identified importance of surface area we could say that moulins   are flowing water and that means an almost infinite surface area is in effect being presented to the heat filled air : meaning I don't think the numbers are in on this!

ergo: bbr may have a point!


 - sure, my use of the word 'infinite' is most probably a faux pas in someones book but what else is considered argument worthy of proper consideration?

24
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2016/2017 freezing season
« on: October 27, 2016, 04:34:49 AM »
I certainly find it interesting that sea ice takes up more of the heat than air.

It also brings it home how important it is if it also takes up to over a third of what the whole ocean does.

25
The rest / Re: Arctic Café
« on: October 27, 2016, 04:16:21 AM »
The Merchants' Wheel

Now human means transcend
All human measure
And pile up wealth
To impoverish the heart,

Men trace the heights of fear
The depths of pleasure,
Now human means transcend all
Human measure,

Simply to channel this
Blind wave of treasure
Regardless what bonds
Its bright streams wrench apart.

Now human means
Transcend all human measure
And pile up wealth
To impoverish the heart.

(by Les Murray)

26
The rest / Faux-conservative Terrorism
« on: October 26, 2016, 08:07:49 AM »
 The Murdoch empire is about to get a kick up the 'where the moral law don't shine' as donations roll in to fund an anti-anti-Climate-Change-Jibberish assault on the aformentioned media moguls weapons of environmental war.

 http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/wotifs-graeme-wood-backed-2m-strike-at-rupert-murdoch/news-story/dcbdb1ab4dcaec67038642065957b418

 The fake conservatives we all know too well amongst us learn reams of standard attack diatribe against those who seek to save the environment from 500ppm CO2e within a decade.

 http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/milestone-global-greenhouse-gas-levels-accelerate-past-key-marker-20161021-gs888m.html

 Is this not the same as the death cult called ISIS?

 _> Some food for thought:

Now the tragedy about climate change is that we can solve it with a simple, honest approach of a gradually rising carbon fee collected from fossil fuel companies and distributed 100 percent electronically every month to all legal residents on a per capita basis, with the government not keeping one dime. Most people would get more in the monthly dividend than they'd pay in increased prices. This fee and dividend would stimulate the economy and innovations, creating millions of jobs. It is the principal requirement for moving us rapidly to a clean energy future.
15:03
Several top economists are coauthors on this proposition. Jim DiPeso of Republicans for Environmental Protection describes it thusly: "Transparent. Market-based. Does not enlarge government. Leaves energy decisions to individual choices. Sounds like a conservative climate plan."
15:24
But instead of placing a rising fee on carbon emissions to make fossil fuels pay their true cost to society, our governments are forcing the public to subsidize fossil fuels by 400 to 500 billion dollars per year worldwide, thus encouraging extraction of every fossil fuel -- mountaintop removal, longwall mining, fracking, tar sands, tar shale, deep ocean Arctic drilling. This path, if continued, guarantees that we will pass tipping points leading to ice sheet disintegration that will accelerate out of control of future generations. A large fraction of species will be committed to extinction. And increasing intensity of droughts and floods will severely impact breadbaskets of the world, causing massive famines and economic decline.


https://www.ted.com/talks/james_hansen_why_i_must_speak_out_about_climate_change/transcript?language=en

27
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: October 24, 2016, 10:34:37 AM »
I think the next 7 days are crucial: the trend never not flattens out over the next seven days!

28
Arctic sea ice / Re: Latest PIOMAS update (October)
« on: October 22, 2016, 05:04:52 AM »
Procrastination is next to stagnation: 9-11 happened so of course procrastination is over.

The idea of Jevons Paradox is that the more efficiently we learn to use a resource then the more of that resource we will actually use... imagine if we learnt to use our brains!

I would say more than a world war 2 effort awaits with society taking as long as it needs to change.

Instead of letting polar bears go and kill things in the arctic the new artisans will be saying we must lock them up and start breeding programs: no, wait: let us ( a l s o  ::)) give the polar bear peepholes to protect their privacy in the arctic  :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o <very un-lol>

 :'(

29
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2016/2017 freezing season
« on: October 21, 2016, 11:19:13 AM »
bbr,

 so is that  :'( :'(

30
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2016/2017 freezing season
« on: October 21, 2016, 11:18:15 AM »
magnamentis,

 That is a highly interesting visual aid  :o :o :o :o :o

31
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2016/2017 freezing season
« on: October 11, 2016, 06:48:39 AM »
I think from time to time it's well worth to have a look at global sea-ice extent as well :-)

The southern hemisphere decided to copy the 2016 Arctic spring in terms of sea ice area  ;)
Excellent: good call from magnamentis and backed up by tealight! GO TEAM!!

 ;)

I too think the global sea ice pattern is worth looking at and the Antarctic has certainly gone up and down. I think it was wayne that said science generally regards observation before explanation as the preferred timing of events.

 ;) ;)

32
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: October 11, 2016, 06:12:04 AM »
Can this extreme sinusoidality be explained by the mere measurement problem of methodology?

Seriously, it's a serious question I'll have you all know!  (:o :o :o :o :o)

(I am of course riding on the coat-tails of others who have expressed the same in other words over the last few days... ;))

33
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: September 29, 2016, 10:21:10 AM »
I wonder if all the turbulence - egg-whisk style - has brought lower-level (older, earlier) ice to the surface from the multi-year chunks

You'll have to spell this out in more detail, because it seems incoherent to me. As far as I understand it, you seem to be suggesting that a multi-year ice floe is like a layer cake, with old ice at the bottom and new ice at the top, and that the storm might flip over the floes and bring the old ice to the surface.

This isn't how it works.  Yes, you get layering in glaciers and ice caps that are many hundreds or even thousands of metres thick, but not really on the scale of sea ice.  When sea ice grows, it grows both from the bottom (by congelation onto the underside) and from the top (by snow accumulation, melt and refreeze). As it ages during melt seasons, channels form and drain through the ice, homogenising its contents. So you don't have a floe with a "young side" and an "old side", so to speak.


..

 Ok, that was interesting: but you would still have some fairly assymetrical pieces of sea ice wouldn't you?

34
Glaciers / Re: Helheim and Fenris Glaciers
« on: September 13, 2016, 04:01:11 AM »
I think  it might have been Bon Scots last song!??!

35
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: September 13, 2016, 03:47:58 AM »
Whew! I'm very happy the arctic averted catastrophe for one more year. On the other hand, by my calculations, the 2010s average minimum extent (thus far) is 4,290,917 km2. That's nearly 22% less than the 2000s average of 5,479,091, and there are three more years left in the 2010s.
As far as quantified argument goes I think that's quite a telling story.

(It would seem 2012 really messes those numbers up a fair bit, tho..)

36
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: September 09, 2016, 04:14:38 AM »
Were cumulative IJIS extent losses to duplicate any of the years from 2003 through 2015, we'd see a sub 4M km2 minimum (average: 3.88M), and that minimum would occur no fewer than three days (2008), and no more than 15 days (2005), from now, with an average of eight days, or September 14.

I think it is possible to analyse things too much sometimes.
Of course, but there is ALSO something called method that separates us from those that still walk on all fours!

Jim has brought calculative rationale to the conversation and I concur,........ for one.... ;D

37
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« on: September 07, 2016, 09:00:53 AM »
Becoming worst (or better, depending of the person that is writing). Too early for conclusions, but impressive. 1st. lowest on record.
Does the wierd trajectory of 2012 in the early part of the year indicate a lot of trouble with the measuring process that year for some reason?

38
Arctic sea ice / Re: Arctic Image of the Day
« on: September 02, 2016, 10:18:44 AM »
"..they've even got lifeboats!"

39
Arctic sea ice / Re: Ice free predictions and their uncertainty
« on: September 02, 2016, 09:58:39 AM »
Juan,

1 milion sq km would be an abomination: to ask that that condition be repeated three five ( :o :o :o)<headshake> times <!another headshake> before begging the world to do something would in my opinion amount to global genocide!

I know people in level 8 positions concerned about todays long term weather forecast!!!!




40
Arctic sea ice / Re: Latest PIOMAS update (August)
« on: September 01, 2016, 07:17:46 AM »
This open-source paper looks highly interesting (if only because of the authors): Comparison of Arctic Sea Ice Thickness from Satellites, Aircraft, and PIOMAS Data

It seems there are biases to both directions. However, one important sentence from the abstract caught my eye:
Quote
All satellite-retrieved ice thickness products and PIOMAS overestimate the thickness of thin ice (1 m or less) compared to IceBridge

As the Arctic is reverting to thin scattered ice all over the place, I get the feeling PIOMAS is overestimating remaining volume, based on past correlations that are no longer accurate.

Good find by Neven then. Overestimation of volume, as you point out as the corrolary of that abstracted quote,  would have to seem like the worlds most serious problem at the moment I dare say.

Combine that with the well established trend toward zero we have the possibility of REAL panic on our hands sooner rather than later.

MYI disappearing possibly this year was the number 1 water cooler conversation in government departments around the world- including Australia- and that was back in January...




41
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: August 31, 2016, 11:13:42 AM »
<try again in another thread, N.>

42
Arctic sea ice / Re: Ice free predictions and their uncertainty
« on: August 30, 2016, 12:06:23 PM »
Too many feedback systems have kicked in at this point. For just one example, albedo on land, which is being lost earlier in the melt season.

The feedbacks currently operating are mostly the same as have been operating for thousands of years.  In most cases they do not kick in and out, but amplify every change in climate to some extent.  Nearly all The same feedbacks were operating in the little ice age as the medieval warm period as will be operating in another hundred years of AGW.

As an example the land albedo feedback was certainly operating throughout the medieval warm period (less land snow), the little ice age (more snow) and is still operating, but is weaker than it has been at any stage in recorded history.  Modelling shows that the warmer the planet is, the less change in albedo for ice loss for every degree of warming.  Other feedbacks show different behaviours - for instance water vapour feedback gets gradually stronger as the world warms.
Simply wrong!

<snip>

<Slow down, aig. Don't start all over again; N.>

43
Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: Nares Strait Flushing Poll
« on: August 30, 2016, 10:55:57 AM »
fun post of the day  ;D  8)

of course this remains a real possibility, that it will melt before reaching the other side ;)
Do you only do one a day? All my posts are fun!

(Sometimes Neven tells me to slow down,.. and we all know I got a holiday over July but now I just have a more bespoken kind of fun.)

44
Arctic sea ice / Re: Arctic Ice affected by the Jet Stream
« on: August 30, 2016, 10:48:37 AM »
Have you got any numbers associated with your observations?

45
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2016/2017 freezing season
« on: August 30, 2016, 10:45:18 AM »
I appreciate the information I've just received.

No, but seriously, I will try and speak a little more correctly.


46
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« on: August 30, 2016, 10:33:16 AM »
Here is the shadow CT-area report based on calibrated F18 NSIDC sea ice concentration data:

day  CT-date       NH               SH                Global
Sat 2016.6493 -170.0  2.918565  +56.9 14.809784  -113.1 17.728349
Sun 2016.6521 -109.9  2.808624  -40.2 14.769591  -150.1 17.578215
Mon 2016.6548  -52.5  2.756159  +81.7 14.851282   +29.2 17.607441
Tue 2016.6575  -57.9  2.698250  +53.4 14.904697    -4.5 17.602947


Single handed done by the CAB: -64k.

Shadow NSIDC extent is now 4.5373 dropping -172.4k. Done by the CAB (-132k), Chukchi (-29k) and ESS (-24k).

The left Wrangle arm is in flames in the attached delta image.

If this is a compaction event, does anyone know why there is a lack of light blue concentration increases internal to the pack in recent days?  We are even seeing blocs of concentration drops (light red)?

this is not compaction, this is melt out, the term compaction is not accurate IMO to describe current events.


Cannot both? More experienced commenters than us newbies show maps with ice crashed against the shores of North America. That pack is joined closely together. This is the definition of compaction. However, it is more difficult. However, two-dimensional maps aren't able to demonstrate actual melting because meting is a three-dimensional process. Concur?
Did anyone miss the 'if' ???


47
Arctic sea ice / Re: Ice free predictions and their uncertainty
« on: August 30, 2016, 08:52:15 AM »

It is not a linear trend. It has acceleration. And Extent is a good (and the fastest) measure to follow the status of the Arctic sea ice on a daily basis, but it should not be used to make any forecast (IMHO, NSIDC and IPCC are wrong using extent to make a forecast).

To make a forecast, you have to recognize that the Arctic sea ice is also loosing thickness.

What makes you so sure it isn't a case of 'It had acceleration' when thick MYI was being reduced significantlyand was largely no re-growing in winter, but now we are down to most being less than 2m thick, what is lost is largely regrown in the winter so it is decelerating as the models suggest will happen?
.. This is why my favourite graphs are of the MYI  ;)

IMHO they are the sole reason for why the internet exists !

48
Consequences / "Ice melts ever quicker..": thus we panic evermore!!
« on: August 23, 2016, 08:03:16 AM »
Dorian Escanier

Ice melts ever quicker because its surface area grows relative to its shrinking volume. This is a scientific fact that you can prove with a drink and an ice cube.

<<

This was written on a comment page by the aforementioned contributor @ https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2016/aug/22/historical-documents-reveal-arctic-sea-ice-is-disappearing-at-record-speed.


49
Glaciers / Re: Helheim and Fenris Glaciers
« on: August 22, 2016, 09:06:10 AM »
They looked pretty convincing to me Abbott. By the way, welcome back! Because you're from Australia I have to ask, are you "back in black"?
What else would a "Night Prowler" wear?

 :-\  ;)

And here I thought you were an ac/dc fan!


50
Arctic sea ice / Re: Northwest Passage thread
« on: August 22, 2016, 08:55:36 AM »
I think this still looks particularly interesting and relevant to todays discussion!

In which case here is the 2015 equivalent:

Really, I suppose it all comes down to the weather  ;D

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6