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 - magnamentis

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 26
The rest / Re: The Trump Presidency (was "Presidential Poll")
« on: March 15, 2018, 11:50:02 PM »

gulf of st. lawrence is currently showing quite well what i've been trying to say earlier.

even though temps are still around or below zero C ice is shrinking.

i don't know enough to say why, warmer waters from the river (great lakes) or insolation or both but in march ice is shrinking in many places even though when looking at temp. maps as a layman one would guess that it's cold enough for the ice to stay or even to grow.

i'm sure this can be explained by experts, for me it's surprising each year (spring) again.

what this certainly means is that growth on a large scale is mostly out of question, at least not much more/longer than to produce a small blip on the relevant charts.

further the sun's angle is increasing at a very hight speed so to say during the 8 weeks around equinox.

Consequences / Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« on: March 08, 2018, 10:47:15 PM »

What is this, now you're proposing to change the title of the subject because you disagree with the content of Dr. McPherson's message?  Because it's "shocking" so to speak? 

Near term human extinction is the subject being discussed, not human population reduction by a large degree.  That's not what Dr. McPherson proposes, he proposes near term human extinction.

 Dr. McPherson admits that there's going to be survivors in bunkers.

It's the analogy of the last Tasmanian tiger in the zoo - yes, Tasmanian tigers didn't technically go extinct until that last member finally died of unnatural causes in the zoo.  I've posted previously about my personal opinions about how long humans can reliably survive in isolated locations and in bunkers.

The subject seems appropriate considering that we're discussing and debating (hotly at times) the extinction of humans.  In my opinion, there are a couple of posts here that are basically stating  "humans have accomplished so much, and are not like other animals, therefore will be an exception" - that level of reasoning is not ideal, in my opinion.

you may do as you like, it was a friendly proposal to open an important topic to more users.

there won't be human extinction du to the general topic of this forum and if the owner of the thread tells me no i'm totally fine. suggestions are just that, suggestions and they can be considered or not.

i for my part, which is not expected to be mutual understanding, do not like to discuss illusions and/or any other things that will not happen the way they're advertised. it's inefficient, blowing time and energy into the void and leads to arguments, mostly due lack of "good and consistent arguments"

since you're already driving another one of your various aggressive fallouts (by tone) i suggest that you watch your tone by keeping your anger in check, another suggestion that won't be followed up.


Consequences / Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« on: March 07, 2018, 10:17:14 PM »
i know that the title is eye-catching and perhaps that's how it was meant to be :-)

i'm just proposing to consider to change the title into something like: thread to human population or thread for a significant drop in human population.

thing is that is see the tile and command-W it is :-) i'm sure i'm not the only one, while the topic as to which amount human race is threatened by events that could happen or have to be expected, is very interesting indeed.

there will be no human extinction due to global worming or total loss of sea-ice etc there are risks as to feeding and inundations etc. that could indeed reduce the number of humans living on planet earth.

if extinction will happen it would be indirectly, by events that could be triggered or boosted by climat change and it's effects.

i would gladly see this topic discussed further but without spending too much energy on explaining why extinction due to climate change won't happen within reasonable time and beyond that we simply can't see.

too much interaction and unkown feedbacks and/or their significance are part of the game.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017/2018 freezing season
« on: March 07, 2018, 10:06:50 PM »
did not expect such a huge drop
Nullschool forecast for Mar9, Sea of Okhotsk. 2017 again?

which is why i explicitly mentioned that i refer to the state about a week ago, around march 1st.

i did not say or mean much about the future, there can be ups and downs over several days and no-one knows when what happens, while the only thing i said, looking into the future, was that i do no expect significant gains, again looking at things from a point around march 1st.

further ,even if one region will see gains which is well possible considering the amount of open water basically ready to freeze upon any 3-5 days extra cold weather period. there willl most probably be other regions to compensate a big part of it.

result we're around or have already seen max IMO, okhotsk is way to small to impact the overall result on that scale IMO

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017/2018 freezing season
« on: March 06, 2018, 09:00:32 PM »
even though i recently mentioned that i don't expect huge gains anymore this season (gains against the situation about a week ago) development still surprises me right now, did not expect such a huge drop, especially due to the falling temps >80N while looking at the ice which is even there, it in places appears very "swiss cheese" like if the analogy is allowed :-)

further there are a few very good posts in the piomas thread that explain a lot of the gut feeling about the model a lot more better than what i meant when i said that the model needs to be worked over sooner or later. after all we're on record low, coming from low volumes and there was not much freezing momentum during winter that would explain the result IMO.

however general development is as expected and well documented thanks to all the skilled folks in this forum and others.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2018 sea ice area and extent data
« on: March 05, 2018, 08:31:42 PM »
When I see ice enter Greenland I always say 'Tara!'

The same is true for Baffin ( it ain't running back up Nares and into the basin!)

The ragging peripheral areas has been seeing must lead to an amount of 'collapse and spread' before that ice thins to less than 15% cover and blinks out.

There is also the mixing of the waters at the ice edge as swells and waves do their work feeding a constant supply of warmer, saltier water to work on the ice now liberated?

Okhotsk, Baffin,Greenland and Barentsz are all one way tickets to oblivion for the ice.

We may see cold air over the central basin and that may lead to some thickening of the ice there but the peripheral areas will still be plagued by LP systems and ever warmer background temps.

We may see a very slow start to melt season though as , over past years, it was peripheral areas that made up initial losses? This year we are low on peripheral ice ( apart from Baffin/Okhotsk) so losses will be slow until the main basin melt kicks in?

about as you say which will result in an ever longer "quasi-plateau"  lasting from about now till ever later. if it were not for ice once could easily project what happens to an ever flattening curve with an ever longer plateau ;)

The rest / Re: The Trump Presidency (was "Presidential Poll")
« on: March 03, 2018, 09:30:54 PM »
let's see if a bit of fun is ok here ;)

what did the Nazis do when they could see that the war is lost and they cannot conquer the world on the battle field anymore?

they activated their sleepers by funding them to ultimately become president and conquer the (former) world leading nation from the inside.

mission accomplished


even though it's possible it's not probable it's basically a scenario that run through my head spontaneously and i thought it's a bit of fun to share it.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017/2018 freezing season
« on: March 03, 2018, 09:23:11 PM »
There's just one little impediment to forming lots of new ice in Hudson's bay and the Labrador sea under the conditions we'll see over the next 10 days.

this is not a no-but reply but i would like to add something to consider:

this map shows the anomalies and many recent statements like yours were underlined (based upon) anomaly maps because many of us including myself regularly have an look at anomalies because they stick out clearly and are easy to interpret.

as it happens, and i'm on purpose using an example that is a bit wider based than necessary, an anomaly of zero degrees celsius at the end of march can be warmer (probably is) than a huge positive (bad) anomaly at the end of february because temperatures are raising significantly around equinox.

further, the graphs clearly show that around this time the upward trend is starting to struggle to go further up, sometimes still does and in other years did not climb further.

in short, i do not believe, mostly due to water temps, albedo in southerly regions (peripheral) and not to forget the warmer air building up in mid latitues (generally speaking, regionally different) in further significant gains in sea-ice extent.

this does not mean it can't happen, it's just not as clear as it sounds at times here due to anomalies the will perhaps/probably be a bit closer to the norm than they were during most of the winter.

i hope i was able to make my point in a comprehensive manner that wouldn't raise blood pressure of some LOL

nice weekend @all

The forum / Re: Arctic Sea Ice Forum Humor
« on: February 28, 2018, 09:13:08 PM »

you probably mean that if it were not so sad it would be funny ?

partly kidding since we're in the humor thread, of course i got you right and it can't be pointed out too much and no place is "not right" for doing so.

sooner or later we need "gesammelte werke" of that kind, perhaps the amount of such stuff would wake up a few more.

keep goin'

Consequences / Re: Weird Weather and anecdotal stories about climate change
« on: February 28, 2018, 08:50:54 PM »
Just out of curiosity, was the recent 80F weather in the northeast US considered a 1 in 500 year event or something along those lines? 

I'd love to know the last time in the geological record that Greenland experienced 43F days in February.

Has it been millions of years?
No. Harpy, you seem to read overhyped sources. Seriously, weather is variable, and "millions of years" includes several warm climactic periods. Let's focus on what we know well, it's scary enough as it is even when sticking to reliable facts.
What? He is not necessarily wrong.

it was about exageration (overhyped) not about right or wrong, as you remember we have been there about 2 years ago, while i agreed then (and still do) to the general direction of thinking and statement, exageration is giving deniers leverage to doubt and ridicule everything which we can read in some mainstream media every day and the donald is doing it over and over again.

it's important to express opinions and ideas(possibilities) in a way that does not sound factual and to avoid dogmatic approaches. many folks around the world who do not have the resources (any kind of resources one can think of) are easily fooled by those with a message that is made with something evil in mind.

Consequences / Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« on: February 28, 2018, 08:43:39 PM »
How many years with 300 billion worth of natural disasters can the US withstand?

that depends on the definition of "whitstand" and/or which thresholds should be applied.

seen from a objective point of few the "system" including the U.S. or even especially the U.S. is already broke and is kept alive "artificially" / "hangs on the drip"

while naming each ingredient of that drip would reveal nasty details, death tolls in the milliions and destruction of mother nature beyond any chance of repair or unforced turnaround.

the force as opposed to unforced will be total collapse and desaster while i'm not yet sure whether it will be "sudden death" are a long painful downslide.

in case of the U.S. i'm quite positive that the downfall has begun quite a few years ago and is currently accelerating, coming to declared loss of current status in about 150 years from now.

Consequences / Re: Weird Weather and anecdotal stories about climate change
« on: February 21, 2018, 11:01:52 PM »
Already hit 75F to set new February record in Central Park... probably going to be warmest February as well...

and it will be near zero Fahrenheit in Central Europe, the coldest end of a February I remember...

then you're either young or.... LOL, i remember -28 about 20 years ago or let's say munich is now -1 and record is -20C for the 21st of february, don't believe the hypsters from the media, it's just cold and was warm in janaary and already everyone is whining about arctic temps (-1 munich) is only an example, it's definitely far from record low temps in central europe and i've been living and travelling arond there for 40 years before moving east west and south LOL

just choose any middle european city on the temperature map and google it's record low for the day. the above examples applies quasi accross the board with very few exceptions and they're also not on record low just a tiny bit closer than 19C

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017/2018 freezing season
« on: February 21, 2018, 01:18:41 AM »

During the winter, open water also loses heat much faster than frozen-over water.

I also think Albedo effects on the Bering may not be that significant

true that, only that currents and wave actions as well as mixup with deeper layers replace most of the heat that gets more rapidly lost as well as is replaced with warmer waters from the south be it driven by winds and/or currents depending. that makes your conclusion only 100% valid for calm waters without the influence of warm currents and with no (southerly) winds.

as to the significance of albedo i simply disagree, we're haeding towards solstice in large steps and as compared to a almost entirely white ice cover with a snow blanket any insolation at this time of the year is relevant at that latitude IMO.

again if if relevance is reduced in the northern parts of that region, the inflow of waters from the south that were prone to significantly higher insolation will have it's effect.

part of this is fact IMO and part is logical while i'm not the expert to explain in details like currrents speed or their total amount of water heading north through the bering strait, others might have that information readily available.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2018 sea ice area and extent data
« on: February 20, 2018, 01:35:11 PM »
I don't think using the name of a musical instrument is pretentious at all!

Well, in that case, I'm changing my name to Steinway!  ;)

Or Stradivarius.....

those (Stradivarious & Steinway) are brands ;)
Oboe > Violin > Piano it would be then [Just Kidding]

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017/2018 freezing season
« on: February 20, 2018, 01:23:59 PM »
no big freeze possible that way indeed  8)

The rest / Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« on: February 13, 2018, 11:29:06 PM »

a real pleasure to see you coming more and more out of the bushes all over the place LOL

you're getting better and better and i don't only mean in this thread.

always good to see people who bring things to the point and have the gift to word things
so well (other than myself in non-german) it means i can lean back, enjoy the read and
shut up because it's all said.

Arctic sea ice / Re: Arctic Image of the Day
« on: February 09, 2018, 05:45:51 PM »
I may have missed something - but "half an hour after" what? And where?
perhaps Pmt111500 thinks that lots of people knowing where he lives is not a good idea?
Fair enough - and normally I wouldn't have asked, if it wasn't for the implication that the picture was taken after an event that the reader should be aware of?

But of course it doesn't matter at all - the picture is good and it's refreshing to see proper ice and snow every now and then, here in Sicily it's raining and "cold", only 12 degrees!

yeah, matter of factly it looks very much the same like when i was looking out the windown from my cottage in nova scotia once upon a time when i lived there and very much similar like many lakes across canada and te US whle crossing them with skidoos many many years ago ;) so it could be in many places within a certain range of latitued across the north american continent.

always have to be carful not to show too much while sharing images or videos, not a good idea as it was mentioned

closest guess would be somewhere south to the south west of the great lakes, ohio, missouri etc. for one but that's just gaming for the fun of it LOL because there are places in manitoba and ontario looking very much similar like in the "Kenora" Region, thousands of corners like that up there.

Policy and solutions / Re: The Hyperloop
« on: February 07, 2018, 04:43:20 PM »
I have no doubt that someone, somewhere, will build something that they will name using some variation of "Hyperloop".
It won't have much in common with Musk's "White Paper", but it will be some form of higher speed subway, possibly, but not likely, running in a partial vacuum.
The concept is older than our great grandparents, and the snappy new name may help with the financing.
Arguing against Hyperloop is futile simply because Hyperloop morphs into something new whenever the original is shown to be unrealistic.

as mentioned in another context i believe that all trials are ultimately helpful, no matter how big a fail and after alle the word: "hyper" "hype..." sounds great and has it's intended effects on most peoples mind while some people if they hear hyped names get all alarms firing.

last example in a long history (OT i know) is bitcoins, suddenly many people from all over the world felt like to ask me about my opinion and my reply was that the fact that it's in the news and they feel like asking means "hands off" too late, happens with all hypes and hyped stuff, mostly sooner but unfortunately sometimes way toooooo.... late to avoid desasters of various kinds.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017/2018 freezing season
« on: February 07, 2018, 04:34:34 PM »
The latest Arctic Sea Ice News:

January of 2018 began and ended with satellite-era record lows in Arctic sea ice extent, resulting in a new record low for the month. Combined with low ice extent in the Antarctic, global sea ice extent is also at a record low.

this and the lack of extraordinary cold weather above in places where is ice now, more the opposite, it was way warmer than average, i have (like so often before) my serious doubts about sea ice volume numbers. record or close to record lows in area and extent almost permanently and how should the volume be significantly higher than last year? after all the ice which is now in place would have to be much thicker than last year despite the fact that it's permanently as warm or warmer.

i still believe that in the not so far future we shall see massive changes/correction in piomas algorithms, too many times things don't look right or intuitive other than the general trend which is correct but then obvious and undeniable as well.

Arctic sea ice / Re: Northern Sea Route thread
« on: February 06, 2018, 09:32:48 PM »
some modern ice breakers use their propellers to crash the ice depending on thickness and conditions. since your link underlines that why is it not intuitive it's a matter of fact and makes totally sense which is why those vessels exist in the first place.

with propellers i mean they use kind of POD-Systems, not common propellers attached to a rigid drive shaft.

should i have missed the point let me know this is what crossed my mind while reading ;)

Antarctica / Re: Rift in Larsen C
« on: February 05, 2018, 11:44:26 PM »
Ice Island A-68A 'drifted' north about 20 km during the past week.
is that a lot, or is it a little ? I confess I have no knowledge at all about how fast large bergs can move around.

an example from the Harbour Authority Of Twillingate   Twillingate, NL A0G 4M0
An iceberg drifts at about 0.2 m/s or 0.7 k/hr. The speed that an iceberg drifts depend on various factors such as, size, shape, currents, waves and wind.

i think this is very individually different, up there they move relatively fast due to the labrador current while on the other hand the 20km for that huge and specific berg is faster than it has travelled before that. it's all relative :-)

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2018 sea ice area and extent data
« on: February 04, 2018, 07:53:06 PM »
I hope the orthopods were able to put him back together.

i know it's just typo's (one i corrected for better understanding) but i find it funny since orthopods are probably indeed the future (robot surgeons) so perhaps you got it right by accidents because they're already in use for some hyper sensitive bodyparts like brain operations and the likes.

there remains the possibility that you wanted to write the word that way and not orthopedist as i assumed. just had to smile.

Arctic sea ice / Re: Stupid Questions :o
« on: January 31, 2018, 09:08:26 PM »
One of the best indicators for future change is past history.  The following link shows the minimum Arctic sea ice extent during the satellite era.  For the first two decades, the ice declined at a slow rate of about 30K sq. km annually.  Then decline accelerated to over five times that rate for the next decade.  The decline slowed over the past decade, such that the minimum extent has remained fairly constant.  Nothing in the past measurements indicates that sea ice loss is about to go exponential.
If you look just at extent measurements and ignore volume you may come to certain conclusions. But the thickness of the remaining summer ice has gone down by about 50%, so your thick and stable ice is not so thick and stable, when looking at past measurements. And when thickness gets from 5cm to 0cm, all of sudden large swaths of ice can disappear.

Volume has followed a somewhat similar pattern as extent.  Slow loss for the first decade of satellite measurements.  Then accelerated loss for the next two decades.  Since then, volume loss has slowed dramatically.

volume loss will be smallest ever once he volume would be zero ;)

do i have to say more or is it clear what i mean, the less there is the less can be lost, not to forget that we were for a long time on lowest volume last year and won't be far from that at the end of this month.

anyways it evades me what sense it makes to discus such details about a clearly visible obvious trend. the thrend is down and the speed is way higher than anything ever observed except when there was a known reason like volcanic activities and/or impacts from space.

of course i'm aware that one cannot put an entire book into a few sentences which make everthing one writes vulnerable to detailistic arguing which is why i believe that clear trends should not be overly interpreted in on or another way, sooner or later glaciers and ice will be reduced to a very small reminder and it won't take long without yet unknown events that would trigger a turnaround.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017/2018 freezing season
« on: January 30, 2018, 08:11:10 PM »
yeah that's about what i was saying, it has moved but having a quick glance one could get the blue to gray impression. all good, thanks.

Arctic sea ice / Re: Global sea ice area and extent data
« on: January 30, 2018, 08:09:58 PM »
I thought I would step back and have a look at global annual averages over the last few years using JAXA data as relief from the microscope of daily changes.

I think the graph below is OK. Note the dips around 2007 and 2012 (Arctic Sea Ice major losses) and the 2015 high - Antarctic record highs. The overall trend is, obviously - down.
Not so obviously, when you cut the plot about somewhere 2015 and was, "obviously", up.
Unsettled I'd say, which is the same as no freaking idea.

please put into account the time spans we should have in mind here;

what we are observing now withing let's say (arbitrary) 100 years has taken place before over
thousands and at times millions of years so just cutting out a few years that suit a point is not a valid approach to deny the trend which is DOWN of course and obvious as well.

it's really like politics, even though most people are aware what happens and what's to do, the moment one guy comes to the point someone with a basically similar point of view would try to deny that. must be some kind of reflex, based on........ (not saying it)

Policy and solutions / Re: The Hyperloop
« on: January 30, 2018, 07:49:47 PM »
Who has the bigger footprint, Ape or Man?

Who is the smartest?
Joan Pick:
I adopt a [lifestyle] that is consistent with the sustainable management of the world’s resources. Everyone knows we have to have very severe cutbacks to meet that standard
It seems a bit joyless to me (where are the treats?), but Pick isn’t a joyless person; far from it – she’s delightful. I’ve made her late for her daily two-hour run. We walk down the several flights of stairs together (she never uses the lift) and she runs off into the afternoon sunshine.
Or Elon Musk (to get on topic again ;) ):

i believe that really smart (speak wise) people cannot be filthy rich and wouldn't spend all there time for business/making money.

dunno how many know the saying with the camel and the needle eye, just mentioning it to point any readers thoughts into the direction i mean here.

there were many other renown "among the smartest/wisest that were famous for the modest life style ( diogenes for one at least as the saying goes )

then there is something called "physiognomy" not saying much more ;)

sometimes i can't avoid the idea that someone is digging a multi billion dollar grave with unsupported walls, only that before the walls ( think card house) will collapse the idols are untouchable/glorified for/by too many and i'm not talking private wealth, he should be safe but i'm sure we gonna hear one day about who's paying for all the losses or "à fond perdus" projects.

should this have sounded like if i dislike those projects i have to rectify that impression but i as well don't think it's smart/wise to glamorize single entities and/or to put someone on a pedestal. history has proven what happened later with a quota that is too close to  100% to be ignored.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017/2018 freezing season
« on: January 30, 2018, 07:43:15 PM »
Seems like more open water over Bering Sea (Worldview Jan 29 vs Jan 28).

while i agree i assume you are aware that the most part is clouds while indeed the shape below is showing less ice. just wanted to make sure that first glance does not mislead anyone (blue against gray is not ice against ice free ) sorry if that was clear but i had to take a close look to be sure what's showing ;)

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017/2018 freezing season
« on: January 24, 2018, 10:52:27 PM »
Waaay back when I first got interested in climate chaneg science I recall the following as proof of global warming when caused by an intensifying greenhouse effect.

  • the nights will warm faster than the days
  • the winters will warm faster than the summers
  • the poles will warm faster than the equatorial regions

But then I got fascinated by the dramatic sea-ice decline of 2007 and 2012 and forgot about those fundamental proofs.

In my opinion a record hot summer temperate is more exciting but less significant than a record warm winter.  So I am thinking that these record low winter extents may be more significant than record low summer extents.  Not nearly as exciting - sure - there won't be any headlines in the NY Times.  But I am now follwoing  these winter extents with the same fascination I used to follow the summer extents.

you name it, not much else to add, should be bookmarked and posted on each page once the summer discussions about minima are in full swing ;)

Arctic sea ice / Re: Global sea ice area and extent data
« on: January 22, 2018, 10:27:29 PM »
First or second lowest minimum now almost certain.

Fascinating to watch as always....especially now that the Antarctic is heading "south" with a good head of steam over the last couple of years.

Will also be interesting to see how much this impacts the POLITICAL "climate"  ;) in the US and elsewhere.  Let's face it....its not IF most people are going to change their mind on global is WHEN.  There are the early adopters.....and there are the late adopters.

Mathematical and physical FACTS don't go away.  And SLOWLY people are being peeled away from the dark side.  Impacts like new record lows in sea ice continue to beat on the other side.....and they have a LOSING proposition that they are clinging to.   

yeah, i thought along the same lines, trump with his childish tweets about where the climate change is must have seriously pissed of saint peter, at least one could get the impression when looking at the latest development and temp anomalies. (partly kidding the St. P. Part LOL i'm not sure about other countries but here in europe st. peter is the guy responsible for the weather ;) )

Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: January 20, 2018, 08:48:09 PM »
most car fires happen due to broken or leaking fuel tubes and in the process fuel dropping onto very hot parts like exhaust etc.

again most cases are due to an  impact of some kind, i.e. accidents and only in very very rare cases, compared to the total number of vehicles, is there another reason than those mentioned.

US - "3% were due to a car crash or rollover"

the wording was "broken or leaking fuel tubes" I.E. accidents so yes, 3% would make for an example but not for the entire story, true that.

of course there are many more ways like brittle rubber tubes, failing joints and seals, human errors like forgetting to tighten screws of the fuel system etc. and last but not least exhaust touching plastic like it was the case with some porsches a few years ago.

the point was that in most cases it's liquids like oil and fuel on very hot parts like exhaust system, no matter what the cause of the leak was and yes it could be breaking fluid and others stuff like dropping insulation material etc. as well.

Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: January 20, 2018, 05:17:04 PM »
most car fires happen due to broken or leaking fuel tubes and in the process fuel dropping onto very hot parts like exhaust etc.

again most cases are due to an  impact of some kind, i.e. accidents and only in very very rare cases, compared to the total number of vehicles, is there another reason than those mentioned.

Arctic sea ice / Re: Arctic Image of the Day
« on: January 19, 2018, 07:14:10 PM »
Ilulissat, Greenland

simply beautiful


The rest / Re: The Trump Presidency (was "Presidential Poll")
« on: January 15, 2018, 10:52:34 PM »

I wish this forum had a thumbs-up feature now.

Add to this list a fiscal surplus. Instead of national debt, Norway has a sovereign wealth fund.

some of us proposed several times, many reply posts and following quarrels could be avoided by a simple button of apprciation/accordance or however we wanna call it.

however just using the opportunity to thumbup both while shit hole is a bit rood for a nice and great place that got a bit out of hand lately ;)

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017/2018 freezing season
« on: January 14, 2018, 11:31:41 PM »
i don't think that anyone here believes he can alter development or in other words, write ice-history. what we do ist to learn to best read what's going on and there is nothing wrong to develop a best possible interpretation of what's going on. the sooner and the ore people know and are convinced about what going to happen the more people can prepare themselves and/or do something to reduce the possible consequences.

guessing and erring is like learning by doing and nothing is wrong with it while stating the obvious is sound nice and smart while it's nothing but that, the obvious and therefore is not a genuine achievement.

BTW i see one cyclonic front after another beating the arctic from both, the atlantic as well as the pacific side. at least i get this impression while following temp anomaly maps and wind maps.

if it's correct that all those storm fronts contain heat and humidity i cannot entirely understand who we can say that this pattern does not apply to this season. to me it looks very very similar like last season except that it's worse because both sides get battered while last year it was mostly the atlantic side.

i might overlook something like so often ;) but the i'm eagerly looking forward to all the replies that show me what that might be.

Arctic sea ice / Re: Global sea ice area and extent data
« on: January 12, 2018, 05:43:17 PM »
Latest  graph from

A little closer every day?

i'm curious whether we shall see such a steep increase in SIE and SIA in the arctic like last year during February?

should that not happen, the global curve as well as arctic Volume would bring us very close to the imminent record summer minimum that will most probably occur during the next sunny (melt friendly) summer season.

Consequences / Re: 2018 Droughts
« on: January 12, 2018, 05:27:26 PM »
thanks for the useful replies, in general and considering the places with sufficient renewable energy potential to which places like SA, southern spain, israel as well as california belong, it obviously works the way i think but takes a certain effort based on either political will and/or economic benefits which IMO is mostly torpedoed through lobbyism in favour of coal and other dirty energy and therefore feasibility lacks due to not being compatible with subsidized sources.

resume: same story across the board, all that's needed is there but is not profitable or self-supporting due to politically forced use of dirty energy that in fact would be obsolete once
the irresponsible greedy gangsters who call themselves our leaders would do what they were
elect for :-(

EDIT: BTW i simply don't get why to do the right things have to be profitable?

IMO the opposite is the case, it's like real love, who really loves is ready to loose for the best of the loved ones. (i know this is simply put while to see loved ones happy is the greatest possible profit after being happy ourselves hence not a loss at all, perhaps just not the way we want thngs to be which is how we are back to ego-control )

Consequences / Re: 2018 Droughts
« on: January 12, 2018, 02:57:30 PM »
perhaps i simply lack insight but each of such news triggers the same thought:

a) they have wind to produce energy

b) they have plenty of sunshine to produce energy

c) they have plenty of ocean water to make drinkable by osmosis (energy consuming i know)

so why do such regions like CT or Andalucia or other regions with little water but being oceanside
and blessed with either wind, sun or both produce more drinking water from the ocean by through above mentioned method. it exists, it's done but by far not sufficiently to solve their shortages.

perhaps someone who is more savvy in that field of work/sciences can enlighten me so that i can either push more or forget the idea because of (no clue why)

Policy and solutions / Re: Solar Roadways
« on: January 09, 2018, 09:13:58 PM »
let's say it's a indeed a fail while there can still be benefits with the idea in specific cases even though perhaps not snowy winter conditions, i can't see any benefit to ridicule and make fun of
any idea that in itself points into the right direction, better provide alternatives or any other kind of productive criticism. ridicule is not a qualified approach to bring things forward and deal with innovations even once they show flaws. it's discouraging and keeps others from going public with initially flawed but ultimately targetleading ideas.

Snow in the Sahara.

for the third time in 40 years and who knows about earlier records, further independent of this specific spots there are mountainous areas in morocco and elsewhere where snowfall is common.

so it's true but the title as a standalone statement without further information is one of those true statements often used to mislead average people by omitting important details.

The rest / Re: The Trump Presidency (was "Presidential Poll")
« on: January 09, 2018, 06:40:40 PM »

a good one really ;) a real genius will face so many new questions for each answered question that he will never feel like a genius while a moron, stable or not stable doesn't matter so much, will consider each finding as "now i got it" which by the way is a typical adolescent approach as i remember from my own kids when they were younger than 25.

the best proof that someone didn't get it is if he/she thinks she got it once and for all, basically even all the wars with their root in religious disputes are based on the fact that some people think that they have acquired to one and only truth.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017/2018 freezing season
« on: January 04, 2018, 07:28:29 PM »
NH snow cover is also interesting right now:

That is very interesting..., and I'm not sure of the correct way to take it.  Is there less humidity all of a sudden?

not less humidity but perhaps more rain instead of snow ?

The forum / Re: Arctic Sea Ice Forum Humor
« on: December 30, 2017, 10:44:54 PM »
Don't know if already posted, but that one made me laugh:

yep, a great one, especially in reply to trump's tweet about the cold wave in north america while he wasn't able to look up the other side (siberia) and basically the rest of the northern hemisphere ;)

Science / Re: Trump Administration Assaults on Science
« on: December 29, 2017, 04:25:51 PM »
The more I read about the Trump Presidency and perhaps more than anything the assaults on science and environmental protection, the more I realise that Judas Iscariot was an amateur.

interesting analogy that brings us to the "anti-christ" who is expected to be in a powerful position and let loose all kinds of horrible scenarios.

for those who are not privy with the above hinted read the book:

"And His Number Is 666" ( Number Of The Beast )

i'm not saying anything but that it's a good read no matter what someone believes because
independent of believes the general pattern of how humanity "works" applies and is visible all over the place and it's well describe although not holistically :-)

the moment an outright liar, manipulator, sexist and more who is offending 80% of all people or more can be elected by around 50% of people in a developed country i think it's time to raise flaggs stay tuned and very alert. we all know when that happened last and how it ended.

it's such a case with predictions, many things are predictable but not so many times the point in time when they will happen, similarly to the current development of the freezing season.

no surprise indeed but no-one knows when what happens, hence better being alert and  provident.
i personally think that this guy will pass and disappear like GWB did but not if he will be elected a second term. i really hope that many enough U.S.-American fellow humans fully understand what hour the clock of this planet has hit.

Arctic sea ice / Re: Arctic Image of the Day
« on: December 17, 2017, 08:03:53 PM »
A video of a starving polar bear in the Baffin Island

is there any evidence that this bear is not dying according to his age or starving because of injuries or illness. i hope it's clear that i'm totally convinced of man made climate change happening and that there are consequences for fauna and flora but in another article it was claimed that this bear is dying naturally, not climate related and while i can't tell the facts, the question alone implies that such images should only be posted with claiming a climate change relation if there is either evidence and/or founded reason to believe that at least in parts it's related.

i know that whenver i posted such "warnings" in the past they were not helpful so whoever doesn't like this post can save his breath. i strongly believe that half-true or untrue or not proven information will be exploited by the contrarians and not help our cause but damage it.

please remember that the post starts and is a question, followed by the reason to ask, not a statement, hence if anyone knows where is evidence that this image is not out of context but indeed shows a bear, starving BECAUSE of climate change, be so kind and link me there because the purpose of all is to gather knowledge based on facts or reason.

Policy and solutions / Re: Bitcoin mining and other computing energy costs
« on: December 08, 2017, 06:45:44 PM »
the crash of bitcoin will happen as certainly as the amen in the churche, hence we just have to wait till things get cut down and then i'm as certain that regulations or attempts for such are imminent, could even be the or one of the triggers for one or the next crash.

it's a hype that will flatten like all others, only that most probably replacement is in the pipeline as well ;)

Consequences / Re: Effects of Climate Change on the biosphere
« on: December 05, 2017, 06:30:59 PM »
Since people are part of the biosphere, I am posting the following sad news here:

Adam Isen et al. (2017), "Relationship between season of birth, temperature exposure, and later life wellbeing", PNAS, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1702436114

Abstract: "We study how exposure to extreme temperatures in early periods of child development is related to adult economic outcomes measured 30 y later. Our analysis uses administrative earnings records for over 12 million individuals born in the United States between 1969 and 1977, linked to fine-scale, daily weather data and location and date of birth. We calculate the length of time each individual is exposed to different temperatures in utero and in early childhood, and we estimate flexible regression models that allow for nonlinearities in the relationship between temperature and long-run outcomes. We find that an extra day with mean temperatures above 32 °C in utero and in the first year after birth is associated with a 0.1% reduction in adult annual earnings at age 30. Temperature sensitivity is evident in multiple periods of early development, ranging from the first trimester of gestation to age 6–12 mo. We observe that household air-conditioning adoption, which increased dramatically over the time period studied, mitigates nearly all of the estimated temperature sensitivity."

See also the related article:

Title: "Climate Change Might Lower Salaries"

Extract: "The more 90-degree days a fetus or infant endured, the lower his or her earnings in adulthood."

a vast amount of differences in so many fields like mentality, sun-hours, economic conditions, availability  of water etc etc. is so huge that even though the fact my be a fact indeed, it's totally unclear whether:

- one of the many other factors present in warm climate places ( with more hot days logically)
. is/are responsible for the said outcome.

- higher temps reduce the overall economical conditions due to more "siesta" like time etc.
.  less need for winter storage etc. that would make excessive work less necessary to survive etc.

- general conditions present in warm places is responsible for the smaller average income or if
.  what the article suggests is responsible for the general economical and environmental conditions.

what's the cause and what's the result, not that sure while either way the fact remains that people from warmer places who then as a result are exposed to more high temperature exposure as a fetus and/or early childhood earn less the warmer the climate is.

i'm a swiss citizen grown up and working in CH D, PRC, U.S., CND and many other countries in different climate zones before retirement and now living in souther spain and can easily tell that there indeed exists an at times huge difference of income and life style between the people living in countries situated up north and down south where temps are cooler, where winters are colder and longer etc. and i believe that it's the influence of natural conditions, clothing, hours spent outside houses, chances of having a good life without spending money or too much of it, vegetation and it's fruits etc. rather than the exposer to temps themselves. that may as well be a logical coincidence with all other factores, menionend or not mentioned above.

life conditions in parat help form the personality and that again plays a big role n eagerness and need to work and make (more) money.

further there are very cold places where the income drops significantly against people living in places with moderate temps and temp extremes due to other factors like difficulty to move ouside in winter, trouble to be highly productive (efficient) lack of light and reduced vegetation (growth)

i'm quite certain that the same study for temps below -30C exposure as fetus and early chilldhood would procude a simiilar or even worse result.

hence, fact remains but the sugggested cause is not the or at least not the only and or main cause.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017/2018 freezing season
« on: December 04, 2017, 10:05:00 PM »
My question never be answered in a german forum, maybe the question is to complicated, because there are so many factors.
Lets take a scenario.
Lets take the same condition, that occur 20 years agon.
Now  lets replace the arctic ocean water with a fluid with a much lower freezing point.
I have to do this to look for the effect of  ic in the energy flux.
So we have the case, that after low ice minima, ice is growing.
So it seems (at  least on the surface) that the extra energy is lost due to later refreezing, lower insulation etc pp.
Now the question.
What would be the temperature of the arctic ocean say for the nieveau of 1980, if the freezing point of water would be 20 degree lower.
This question is intersting.
Would the ocean be much warmer, no, if so, there would be a massive positive feedback and ice would dissapear faster and faster.
But also this feedback is different at different north, at n80 it may be the case, that ice was warming over the year, but at n 70 it was cooling.
Every discussion is difficult, because arguments of higher temperatures and higher ohc are named, but of course this is the case is arctic is flued with warmer air and the temperatures are higher in general.
The question is more like if there is a decent negative feedback, so that open water or a higher energy input in the arctic at least at n80 has a higher radiaton in winter then the less albedo can compensate.
The only option would be  something like a quicker cooling surface, that outperform the more heat due to summer, but deeper water is warming, so that ohc is still rising.
I dont know, what happens if water gets like an extra heat in summer. After refreeze is the Temperature delta bigger, so that deeper water is warming or is it like.
Ice got later and growth is slower, that also means there is more heat goint to space and also deeper water could adjust.
I dont know.

while i'm not able to answer your question i thought to add the idea that even if all surplus heat will be lost to space, which i don't believe because some of the heat is stored at depth, the later re-freeze will result in thinner ice (less time to build ) and in the process we shall have earlier breakup/melt under same conditions while we had bad melting conditions recently so that the described feedback was somehow not showing. sorry if that's not relevant but it came to my mind while reading your post.

Policy and solutions / Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« on: November 30, 2017, 10:35:15 PM »
"I am sorry for being an idiot ..."

Welcome to the club. We are all idiots, each in our own way.

" ... and I'm aware of it."

First step to wisdom ...


you say it  while i prefer the word ignorant (stupid( over the word "idiot" when it comes to terms. idiots are not able to recognize there ignorance and stupid behaviours while stupid, at least as far as my english allows, is another a way to describe ignorance and ignorance in the meaning of a lack of knowledge can be worked on by learning, while about idiocy there is not much one can do except to hope for a more favorable rebirth, be it as a lesser or no idiot or as an entity where it does not matter ;)

Policy and solutions / Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« on: November 29, 2017, 11:00:51 PM »
Sometimes the US does engage in war to bring freedom democracy.  Is there a clearer example than WWII? 

just replace the word "does with the word "did" in that sentence and keep does for the sentence thereafter "iraq  etc. and we get close to how things ARE. the time when the U.S. did intervene for the right purpose are "PAST" and now and for the last couple of decades intervened for "commodities" and other not so sound reasons.

then we can look further back and analyze what the "U.S", then "colonists" intervened for, namely to kill all bisons and steal the land from the indians.

of course that's all a bit flat but more details would be TLTR and then anyways only make it look worse.

it also has to be mentioned that all this started with british colonial interests. those were financed mostly with the gold and other commondites stolen by the brits from the spanish beforehand and they again stole it from the inkas.

and so on, and so on, however there is very little sound intervention in history from all invaders and not much has changed ever since.

last but not least WWII was not FOR something but AGAINST something, which again is a difference, it was agains nazi germany, adolf hitler a few allies and it was in parts self defence which is not the same motive like bringing freedom to the people. it then is a collateral benefit at best.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 26