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 - colchonero

Pages: [1] 2
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019/2020 freezing season
« on: December 23, 2019, 03:34:24 PM »
It is going to get really really cold in Alaska. GFS has it at  20-30c below average on Climate Reanalyzer. :o

 This is the first time in years in winter, I see most CAB in "solid blue" in mid range forecast, for an extended period of time. I don't know though will it hold or not, but it is certainly nice to see, at least.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019/2020 freezing season
« on: November 14, 2019, 07:13:12 PM »
GFS and GEM wind forecast  for today. Look at Chukchi. This shouldn't even be a forecast, it is for today and the time "forecasted" is just 1h after the publication of those runs. And yet there couldn't be more of a difference in wind, direction-wise. Canadians (I know it's them that are wrong, because I looked at all other models, and they are in line with GFS), really have to fix their "wind bug". It is similar to JMA (Japanese model) forecasting 1080-1085hPa over Greenland every other run, when we have high pressure over that region.



Edit: I looked into it right now, it happens only on their NH map, when you click on North America or Europe, it works fine. I mean on N hemi it is forecasting northern winds in the Pacific near Alaska-Canada border, but on just North American map, it has southern winds which is obviously correct, since it is really basic meteorology knowledge, that if there is a cyclone, there will be southern or SW winds on its warmer front side and northern winds o its backside. Because cyclones spin counterclockwise on NH, that means if the cyclone is located west of certain location it will get southern winds, and "warmer" air, and if it is located east, that location will get northern colder winds.



Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019/2020 freezing season
« on: November 14, 2019, 01:29:53 PM »
I hope the current forecast holds, so we can get decent ice formation. In the first couple of days, we have very cold Hudson Bay region, with favorable winds from the northwest, then Chukchi should get going (finally!) with cold weather + wind from the north, and most importantly it looks like the cold could stay there and in the basin as a whole, for a while at least. Kara could close too, but we'll see.

We'll see if SST in Chukchi is still too high to freeze, even with favorable conditions, I hope not.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019/2020 freezing season
« on: November 07, 2019, 01:14:22 PM »
First of all, I said the real  hot zone is the Russian side (which includes ESS and Laptev obviously) because there IS sea ice and snow cover in Siberia, anomaly there is not due the lack of those. The no ice argument was meant mainly for Baffin and Chukchi (I'm not speaking  just of today). There is real warm air advection from the Pacific going on right now. And when I said Arctic as a whole looks faitly average, I didn't mean just CAB but also CAA and Atlantic (Kara, Greenland and Barents seas) That whole side is below average.

P. S. 2m anomalies can't go down THAT much, if there is no ice, it's the opposite to summer months, when DMI shows always 0-1C even if we have 5C temp 850hPa which on the land with that much insolation would result in 20C on a sunny day. Real warm air advections can be followed on a temp850hPa map, but that  also can be tricky due to inversions in winter. It depends how and where the high pressure system is located.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019/2020 freezing season
« on: November 07, 2019, 11:14:00 AM »
I kbow DMI has pole "bias" but I wouldn't disagree a lot with them this time. As we know the pole is centered more towards Atlantic side, so 80N seems to be average. The rest of the Arcric is also fairly average (or even colder where there is ice, hot zones in Chuckchi and Baffin are there because there is no ice yet. We can clearly "see" that ice border on this photo (Nares and eastern CAA in blue Baffin Bay in red). Real " hot zone" is the Russian side. Very much above average there, despite of ice, and btw also over Siberian land.   Very cold CAA. Cold center of the CAB,  aroubd the pole and Svalbard, cold Greenland sea and Atlantic side as a whole (Kara, Barents) except that usual hotspot near Svalbard

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: November 03, 2019, 06:09:22 PM »
Can someone post or give a link to NSIDC daily extent numbers? (not 5 day average)

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019/2020 freezing season
« on: November 03, 2019, 03:25:27 PM »
Well if there is a slow refreeze and no ice, where would that snow fall on? And what thickness would that "protected" ice have?

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: October 27, 2019, 01:08:53 PM »
Is that a record increase? :o

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019/2020 freezing season
« on: October 18, 2019, 02:05:36 PM »
If Jaxa is correct, the most substantial gain today (yesterday) was on the Russian side. Coastal ice is expanding in all 3 seas (Kara, Laptev, ESS). The main pack looks to be just miles away from the Russian coast, at the Kara-Laptev border behind SZ, and there looks to be some ice in the middle of the ocean in ESS. I don't if it will become some kind of ESS arm or will it disappear on radar. I just know I wouldn't rely much on gfs temp anomalies on climatereanalyzer because the model can't include the ice that will probably form in the next days. This is a 10 days out anomaly forecast and you can clearly see an almost perfect ice pack border shape from today, surrounded by red color.

And  if you take the slideshow, red "origin" doesn't move at all, it just expands towards the pole (which is probably real like a normal "heat" wave) and then "destroys" shape of the pack.  I mean anomaly itself is probably correct, it's just the progression (or the lack of) of it that is questionable, since model can't calculate new ice that is forming.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: September 16, 2019, 12:37:10 AM »
Well it's funny when bbr of all the prople, starts talking (read attacking) about somebody else's false predictions, which are according to his words not just honest mistakes (btw nothing the guy said at that point looked like trash that doesn't make any sense, CAB numbers weren't weak, but July was hot and we are still practically tied with 2016.) but trolling. Man you are literally famous for that on this forum, with much more ridiculous "predictions". Every time you see something you "like", you post these 10 day forecasts of every single run that helps your "case".

It's not a denialist mistake to be wrong. Everybody is wrong sometimes with their predictions. It's just a mistake. What do we call people who voted for BOE option THIS YEAR, during this melting season. Or do you think that was more realistic than weatherdude's prediction. They were just wronglike him. That is it. No conspiracies or hidden meanings behind every false prediction. Some are more realistic, some are less.

Please guys stop attacking and bullying people every time there is somebody who has different prediction, compared to yours, even if they are wrong.  Cause you also are wrong a lot., like many people here, including me. Nobody could have predicted such a strong HP during the first half of the summer, especially after last few years (there was a talk last year or 2017 I remember very well, that because of the warming, cloudy cool summers are a new norm). And after all of that, nobody could have predicted such a slow August melt. It was proven dozens of times to all of us that Arctic is almost impossible to predict and full of surprises.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: August 27, 2019, 12:41:40 PM »
"They're always from yesterday obviously and we are aware of it thanks".

No, that's not what I meant. That same data was POSTED yesterday. The data is for August 25th. So please check next time what somebody wanted to say, before trying to put someone down.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: August 27, 2019, 12:21:20 PM »
That is data from yesterday.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: August 26, 2019, 10:04:25 PM »
And that bomb cyclonic event has suddenly disappeared in 12z model runs today.

The rest / Re: Elections 2020 USA
« on: April 18, 2019, 08:58:43 AM »
I think it's more like it doesn't matter what Bernie says because their entire viewing audience will vote Trump regardless.

Any poll showing this? Or is this one of your 'political analysis' '.

Because last FoxNews poll i saw they had Trump losing against Bernie.

It is a poll done by Fox News,like CNN or ABC or whatever. That does not mean they poll their audience only. And bbr was talking about Fox News audience, not whole America.

Daily Kos independent visitor Poll

23210 votes - Who is your preferred candidate for President?

Bernie Sanders  70%
Andrew Yang 12%
Tulsi Gabbard 6%

Harris 3%
Warren 2%
Joe Biden 1%

Well there's a realistic poll ;D 8)

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018/2019 freezing season
« on: January 18, 2019, 10:37:25 PM »
A bit off topic, and I may sound like bbr, but I need to ask. Has anyone seen new EC run for the USA. What a run!!  There is a -28C negative anomaly, and -28C temp 850hPa, as far south as Huntsville AL. For people in Europe reading this, that's much further south than Athens or Gibraltar (38vs36vs34 latitude degrees).  And I'm confident by looking at how large the sub -28C field is, there is even colder air in the middle of it (Minnesota for example), but EC "range" (on meteociel at least) stretches only to -28C.

GFS 12z has greater than -20C anomaly over Hudson in the middle of Winter, and -40C temp850hPa on US-Canada border.

I'm sorry for many photos and a long post, but this really may be 1 in a decade night ( both models have some ridiculous numbers at the same time, especially EC because it's so far south)

I'm posting now, because obviously I don't think it will come true.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018/2019 freezing season
« on: January 16, 2019, 11:23:04 AM »
Current ECMWF op run, which stretches out to Jan 26th, shows no northern blocking over the North Atlantic.

For western Europe, going by these charts, the impact of the late December SSW is quite minimal.
Not that I know the first thing about SSW but the weather in Europe has been pretty wild these last few weeks, with extreme cold reaching all the way down to North Africa, massive amounts of snow in the Alps and elsewhere in central/western Europe, while Iceland had temperatures that would have been more normal in summer than winter, with practically no snow (although that has changed drastically in the last few days).
Actually, the weather has been warmer than average in central Europe this Winter until now. On the other hand, there were cold outbreaks in eastern Europe, with solid amounts of snow all the way down (not just mountains and hills) multiple times.

BTW, after day 5 EC suggests cold may return over Bering, stay over Baffin and Kara, while Atlantic front and especially Okhotsk should see some +ve anomalies.

Antarctica / Re: Sea Ice Extent around Antarctica
« on: December 25, 2018, 06:26:28 PM »
You mean above average ;)?  Well, when we look at the ice concentration, I wouldn't bet on long-term below average losses.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2018 sea ice area and extent data
« on: December 17, 2018, 12:51:48 PM »
Yeah, definitely something wrong with the data, the real increase should have been more like 300k ;D ;D

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018/2019 freezing season
« on: November 28, 2018, 12:02:45 PM »
Yeah, I agree forecasts can be very different from model to model, however that 4d out forecast (I looked at it) seems to be quite odd. Idk what model that is, (GEPS), but when you look at its' 500mb map it's more or less in line with others, but when you switch to 2m anomaly it doesn't make much sense for CAB, at least to me. There are 2 HP, 1 over CAB, another one over Greenland, no ridges and no strong southerlies. Isobars aren't tight either over CAB, so there is no big gradient.

But maybe I'm missing something. Either way, we're approaching double digits (100h-) so it is strange to see a model forecast that vastly differs (in temp anomaly, not 500mb) from ECMWF and GFS' forecasts.  Like I've said, Idk the model and I don't know how usual this is, it just attracted my attention.


ECMWF temp 850 (they don't provide 2m anomaly on this site, but 500mb and temp 850hPa are almost the same as GFS over CAB there is some disagreement elsewhere, but I'm not going to analyze whole N-Hemi ;))

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018/2019 freezing season
« on: November 18, 2018, 11:52:18 PM »
It's not being angry, it's about making important parts more visible, like when you write LATE for example. I can do that either by making it bold, or by using capital letters. But I'll make it bold in the future, so there isn't misunderstanding.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018/2019 freezing season
« on: November 18, 2018, 11:40:00 PM »
The "strong refreeze" narrative is a bunch of nonsense. There is more heat than ever in the high-latitude oceans (Bering and Barents). The refreeze has been led by the situation in Baffin, CAA, and Hudson Bay, and the early refreeze of these regions for reasons that portend a very LATE refreeze in the high Arctic are exactly why this trope is ridiculous. 2018 has seen a quick refreeze of certain peripheral regions due to conditions resulting from the worst-ever anomalies further to the north and this pattern will continue through winter, while numbers may even be higher than 2017 through May, I expect the bottom to fall out by the end of May or June again (mimicking closely what happened in spring 2015).

I know many here have tried to explain to you and it didn't work, but as of this morning there is NO SIGNIFICANT EARLY REFREEZE of Hudson Bay. Look at UH data (at least I think it's UH) that has been posted several times. First significant area uptick (20k+) when you look at NSIDC 5-day average that gerontocrat is posting, was today.  If you keep saying something is happening, that won't make it true. It might happen in the next couple of days (strong gains) but as of now it DIDN'T, despite your constant writing.

Because of that, even some of your points that are valid people won't take seriously, instead they'll think you are spreading misinformation again.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018/2019 freezing season
« on: November 18, 2018, 11:23:13 PM »
The freezing season is very strong of late. After falling to lowest ever 2018 is now in 11th place, exceeding every year since 2006 in ice extent except 2008 and 2014. Can’t be sure what’s driving this since temps in arctic are not below average.

Well at least we don't have extreme anomalies(except in Greenland sea right now, that should hang tere for couple of days), and there was certainly some heat loss caused by late refreeze (the negative side of that was/(still is) will the ice thicken enough before the spring, because of the late freeze.

For example when you look at the mid-range forecast (D3-D7 now, although models have seen this coming in most of the latest runs) it seems to be pretty good for the sea ice, having in mind we are approaching the end of November, which was not that common in the past years.  There is a dominant high pressure over heart of CAB (where ice needs to thicken)  which should result in clear skies, and most importantly it is a relatively cold HP  system (it is not coming from ridging from the south and so it won't bring ridiculous +ve temp850hPa anomalies).   Also, we have normal or even a bit below normal Temp850hPa  over Canadian side reaching Chukchi Sea and Bering Strait (places where ice needs to form yet) and also along the Atlantic "seaboard" (front+Kara&Barents). Not to mention persistent (at least forecasted) northerlies that should push the ice towards Chukchi and also on the Atlantic side, although not that strong. 

But then, Idk if this weather will help much, since the water got really warm especially around Bering Strait and it didn't cool off completely yet. But that's something you always have to count on lately (it would have been a big surprise if the water wasn't this warm, since globally we haven't had a month below normal for a very long time)

Temp 2m anomalies were pretty positive largely (not entirely!) due to lack of ice especially on the Russian side. This time last year (and through whole Winter) we had southerlies all over the place on the pacific side

Ok, I get you when you explain why is there now cold in Siberia and all that. But my question is how did it get that cold for sea ice to form in the first place, cause you've been saying for months PV will be over North America.  Why did it all of the sudden move  to the central Arctic allowing sea ice growth towards Russia? I know why can we have cold now, like you just explained, because main pack is now connected, but I'm asking when looking at your theory why have we seen such a cold weather in the last week allowing sea ice growth, when by your own words PV should have been located over CAA because of lack of ice on the Russian side?

And no, I don't think Bering will max out worse than last year, but I'm not basing that on anything.

The rest / Re: GOP Losing Ground for the 2018 Mid-Term Election
« on: October 27, 2018, 10:37:03 PM »
Ah, some Bannon's friend (Bannon was and possibly still is Trump's friend, u know it's all a show) has shot 8 people in a Synagogue. Wouldn't be surprised if they found out he's a republican.

No comment on this one really. >:( :( :'(

The forecast for a foot of snow in Waterloo, Iowa, posted by bbr2314 on October 22 was not accurate and temperatures over the next few days will be in the low 60F range.

This forecast was a Canadian generated forecast so inaccuracies about Iowa would not necessarily mean similar inaccuracies for Quebec.

bbr2314 -- How has those forecasts for Quebec held up?

The Quebec forecast has actually held up fairly well I believe! It appears you are correct re: previous post / where it is already snowing it is accumulating, where it isn't, it isn't.

We are probably still going to easily end up with #1 October for North American snowfall, however, I suspect the "shift" in continental balance from NOAM -> Eurasia occurred because sea ice has finally rejoined the main pack from the Eurasian side. Until the middle of this month, there was water wayyyy above 0C between the CAB/Laptev and Siberia, which kept all the Greenland /Arctic airmasses (mostly) confined to North America. But, as open ocean has conceded to sea ice (partially), it was like a brand new PV highway re-opening into Siberia, with a direct route from Greenland, which also gave all the cold that had been accumulating in NOAM an exit. At least, that is what I suspect, but I could be wrong!

PS: here is 00z EURO 0 hour accumulated snow-water-liquid-equivalent, re: Quebec etc. By 240 it is much deeper.

No, but BBR you can't say that now. You can't just turn things around, just to hold on to your point. It is not the weather that is becoming cold because of the sea ice, but the other way around. There is sea ice, because the weather got cold. The shift didn't happen because of the sea ice, it's the sea ice growing that happened because of shift. The land cools down much faster than the sea. You've been telling us for months now that because the vortex is over Canada, there won't be sea ice ice in Bering sea and Russian side.. And how the snow anomalies will get worse and the vortex will stay on the American side with Arctic burning. You cannot just switch places of CAUSE and CONSEQUENCE. now that it is not coming true.

P. S. Sorry for typing errors if there are any,
I am on my phone and in the hurry.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2018 sea ice area and extent data
« on: October 27, 2018, 03:28:10 PM »
Just change the second word. It should stand area GAIN not loss :). As to anomalies, I think much of it is/was coming due to open water, cause if you look at the weather patterns, they are really not that bad. No big warm cyclones, no warm AC from lower latitudes, and pretty compact PV. Hopefully it stays so (God let us have 1 cold/close to the average winter in the Arctic again), but I really don't see it. I think it's just the matter of time something collapses, but then again the later the better, so more ice can form until that happens.

The rest / Re: GOP Losing Ground for the 2018 Mid-Term Election
« on: October 26, 2018, 07:47:22 PM »
The early voting numbers are looking surprisingly good at least for now.
For gop.

I hope we will gain some seats in the Senate, and somehow (although I don't see it, to be fair) miraculously keep the house.  But at least not lose majority in the Senate.

The rest / Re: GOP Losing Ground for the 2018 Mid-Term Election
« on: October 26, 2018, 01:45:10 AM »
The early voting numbers are looking surprisingly good at least for now.

 Even if the snow stays whole summer just over the highest mountain peaks of Quebec, I don't see that as a big glaciation threat. I mean this is always the case in the Alps or Himalayas, and there is no big effect for let's say Switzerland in general. I think you can make your case only if the snow stays over large parts of Quebec with lower altitude.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018/2019 freezing season
« on: October 24, 2018, 10:09:56 PM »
The only part of the laptev that's freezing is the distant borders with the central arctic ocean?  I didn't see any ice along the cost. 

Maybe I'm looking at the wrong image?
I think you're looking at the right thing, just it is not an image, it's 4-day animation GIF, you have to click on it, to see progress during that period

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018/2019 freezing season
« on: October 24, 2018, 05:06:46 PM »
Laptev seems to be freezing finally when I look at that animation.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2018 sea ice area and extent data
« on: October 17, 2018, 02:50:02 PM »
Gerontocrat, the graph shows 10k area GAIN in Chukchi today.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2018 sea ice area and extent data
« on: October 16, 2018, 08:11:08 PM »
Gerontocrat stop posting your c**p, we are losing Juan because of you !! ;D ;D All kidding aside, both of you guys give us great information. Juan (for some members in the early morning, for some before going to sleep) gives us a great insight as fast as possible, as soon as the data is released, he tells us how big the increase/decrease was, and where we are in comparison to other years. A bit later Gerontocrat comes with his great analysis and thorough information on how freezing/melting is progressing, and where could we end up with the current pace.  Later that day geronto gives us also NSIDC data, 5 day area average for each sea.

Juan I mean if you have something else to do, or it is becoming boring to write everyday that stuff, then that's obviously something else, but besides that, if you think your comments are not useful, and there is no point, you're 100% wrong.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018/2019 freezing season
« on: October 16, 2018, 02:46:44 AM »
I don't really get cci gfs 2m anomalies. It doesn't seem to match EC and GFS models on meteociel at all. Yeah sure there are some positive Temp 850hPa anomalies on meteociel as well, but nothing dramatic, and there are even some negative fields on the map.

But why should 2m anomalies match anomalies at 850 hPa level (which is approximately at an altitude of 1500m) ? Anomalies can be completely different for example when large anticyclones are at play and a strong inversion sets up at surface level.

With inversions you can have below normal 2m anomalies and above at 1500m the air can be well above normal.

In this case, they should. There is no strong wind, no additional moisture,  no inversion, not much precipitation, not much sunlight to warm lower altitudes so dramatically, no tight Isobars,  no big cyclones, no huge waves. Nothing that extraordinary, EXCEPT NO ICE.  Temperature will stay at or above 0C over open water, even if temp 850hPa drops to -20C, as long as there is no ice coverage.

Edit: In meteorology, there is always a reason, a cause, something is happening, and there is a consequence what will happen shortly after because of the things happening right now. Because of that we can make  forecasts for example for tomorrow. When something changes tomorrow you adjust your forecast for the upcoming days. You can't just say "oh they've decided not to match, just like that, for no reason"
I mean of course they don't have match exactly, but this is 15C+ difference over not insignificant period of time. And there is no event models are currently showing, that would cause that, except there is no ice.

The rest / Re: The Media: Examples of Good AND Bad Journalism
« on: October 15, 2018, 07:28:28 PM »
Ben Shapiro Retweeted

Jeremy Boreing

 34m34 minutes ago
That @SenWarren had the confidence to release a document saying that she MIGHT be 1/1024 Native American knowing that the media would treat it as a victory tells you everything you need to know about everything.
56 replies 724 retweets 2,213 likes

Idk how to post a tweet so I just fully copied it. Sorry for that.

This is exactly what many Americans think about the media, not on this issue only, but the behavior of the media in general. For many of us (excluding base voters) it's not about bashing Trump (Fox defends him on some stupid issues too, for no other than political reasons), but about looking at every single thing from their own perspective (bias), that they have chosen prior to everything. Those titles and texts would have been the same, regardless if it has shown 100% native blood, or 1/5000th native ancestry. Which is madness.

"The White American average genetic makeup is 98.6% European, 0.19% African, and 0.18% Native American. " She might have less Native ancestry than the average White American citizen, so basically every white guy can claim the same. My head is exploding.

And then when some issue comes where for example CNN is spot on, many won't believe it anyway, cause of the way of handling issues like this one on Warren's ancestry.

You can be Idk let's say Breitbart or Buddy (nothing against you, just a good example)  and you write titles in this manner, that is totally fine. They never claimed to be bipartisan, and nobody thinks that of them. But if you are big media house, and you call yourself unbiased, fair and objective, stop with these texts, and (re)gain some respect from average citizens damn it!!

BTW, I know it might be between 1/32 and 1/512 or 1/1024 whatever. Also, I know it is not necessarily native ancestry, but it also might be. It is either Peruvian, Colombian or Mexican. But none of that is the point.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018/2019 freezing season
« on: October 15, 2018, 03:40:34 PM »
I mean if that is the case, on the one hand, it is good news, cause lot of stored heat should go away under this "cold spell", but on the other hand it is really bad news, cause if the area would have been already ice covered it  could have used these weather conditions to thicken a little bit, cause we know how unstable polar vortex is lately, and it is only a matter of time before there is another "attack" from the south. But now even if the ice forms there at the end of this period(7-10days), and that is a big IF, it will be very thin, and very vulnerable if there is another warm air advection from lower latitudes end of Oct or even beginning of Nov.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018/2019 freezing season
« on: October 15, 2018, 01:54:11 PM »
I don't really get cci gfs 2m anomalies. It doesn't seem to match EC and GFS models on meteociel at all. Yeah sure there are some positive Temp 850hPa anomalies on meteociel as well, but nothing dramatic, and there are even some negative fields on the map. While on the other hand when I go to cci GFS it shows half of Arctic "burning in red", especially the Russian side. Now my question is, is that because there is so much open water compared to average there. So the 2m temps stay much higher than they should because there is no ice? Like in May or June when Temp850hPa explode for days but 2m temperature stays around 0C (32F), because of the ice over that area, just the opposite right now? That came to my mind cause the biggest difference between cci temp 2m and meteociel EC, GFS, temp850hPa is on the Russian side (Laptev and ESS) even though we have "pretty stable vortex" (compared to last 5 years), and cold air hanging there. I mean cci has Russian coast (the land) close to the average around day 7 (somewhere below, somewhere above), and it seems to follow meteociel GFS very well, but the seas are "burning".

Comparison, same date, same model (GFS 6z)

I mean look at the Bering Strait 850hPa anomalies, they are the highest on meteociel, but cci 2m seems to follow that very well, perhaps because there shouldn't be ice there anyway, compared to the average?

Walking the walk / Re: Top climate-friendly actions
« on: October 11, 2018, 06:11:15 PM »
 I think Europe has a much bigger chance (though not big at all) of reducing the number of cars on the roads, than we in the US. Since I live in both (depends on the time of the year, and my schedule) I couldn't not notice how much Americans "live on the road" compared to Europe. Living and working in the US without a car is very difficult. You can forget about public transportation excluding subway, mostly in NYC. If you go to the countryside without a car, well good luck with that.

The rest / Re: Elections 2018 USA
« on: October 10, 2018, 04:20:11 PM »
NYT poll (still ongoing) seems to be neck on neck, Cruz has between 5-9% lead, while Tennessee Republicans seem like they are waking up from winter (summer) sleep

ABC 15  AZ Senate poll that came out today, has McSally at 47% and Sinema at 41%.  Senator Whitehouse has 20+ points lead (as of latest poll) in RI Senate race.

The rest / Re: The Trump Presidency (was "Presidential Poll")
« on: October 09, 2018, 05:29:19 PM »
Yeah this is definitely not tick-tick, as mostly lurking already wrote. She has told him about this a long time ago, and Buddy you especially know Trump, and his temperament. He would NEVER write a tweet, an hours before the speech  quote "Big announcement with my friend Ambassador Nikki Haley in the Oval Office at 10:30am."

This is the start of "the next wave out of the White House."  Niki Haley is not going to be the "cause" of Donnie going down.  She is just the next person out ..... and more will follow in coming weeks and months.

The tick tick tick is just the passing time as the day draws nearer that Donnie will indeed be gone (assuming the Mueller investigation is finished ..... and that is not a given).

Nicki had to get out before it was too late for her.  She wants Donnie's job ..... and she has likely already been negatively tainted by association and her policy views.

Tick ..... tick ..... tick....... ;)

Actually, that's exactly what I'm thinking for quite some time now too. I think she will make a bid in 2024, and if he's still hanging in the WH by that time (I know you hope, he won't), I'd guess he would also make ground for her in his last year as POTUS, and endorse her, something like Obama tried to do for Hillary. But of course Trump could lose in 2020, but either way, I think there is a chance that we see Haley as a candidate in 2024 Republican primary, and being on the Trump team, certainly gives her a chance with Trump's base.

The rest / Re: The Trump Presidency (was "Presidential Poll")
« on: October 09, 2018, 05:03:26 PM »
Yeah this is definitely not tick-tick, as mostly lurking already wrote. She has told him about this a long time ago, and Buddy you especially know Trump, and his temperament. He would NEVER write a tweet, an hours before the speech  quote "Big announcement with my friend Ambassador Nikki Haley in the Oval Office at 10:30am."  if he was mad or angry at someone, or if he considered it a bad, unplanned thing. You know how he handled Omarosa, Rosenstein Strzok and others. I wouldn't be surprised if we see Haley on Trump 2020 campaign team.

Speech has started, and he is praising her.

Walking the walk / Re: Top climate-friendly actions
« on: October 09, 2018, 02:21:40 AM »

It's not dogma, it is really far from dogma. Your or everyone else's most important thing, exactly proves my point. How can you develop spirit, or achieve anything how can you have anything important, anything you like or hate, or ANYTHING at all if you don't exist? I' ve said in my comment, of course people can refuse to have a child, you can't and should never be forced to.  It's just the misunderstanding, you are talking from already existent person's POV, I'm talking in general like the third party.  Imagine we talk about something we are not personally involved in. Like bees for example. We have a conversation about what they should do to have a good life and survive as a specie. Of course they should make a home, they should eat, drink, play football to have fun :D :D, but they'll still go extinct if they don't have kids. That's the only way I meant it. The other part is love, happiness, feelings and family, but those things aren't mentioned as Anti-climate.   And I also wrote in the next comment, that I BELIEVE we are (going to be) overpopulated (and why I think having 10 kids is not good), especially in some parts of the world.

It's hard to explain, with just writing it down and not actually speaking, but believe me dogma is certainly not what I meant. Te lo juro :D

Walking the walk / Re: Top climate-friendly actions
« on: October 08, 2018, 09:06:12 PM »
It depends on the spectrum, context, and point of view. BTW I agree there is (too) much of us, but it depends where. As somebody mentioned, wealthier (european) countries don't have more than 2 kids on average. Look for example France vs Germany vs Nigeria comparison. In the 60s Germany had almost 80mil people, France and Nigeria 50-55. Now Germany has 82, France 67, Nigeria 155. Net gain Ger +3 (4%), Fra+10-15 (25%)  Nigeria +100million (200%) in just 50 years. India has population growth of 130 million in just 7 and a half years (maybe more if there are unregistered), while Europe hasn't even gained 15 million in the past 20 years, with all the immigration. Population growth since 2000 in Europe is averaging 0.1 or 0.2% per year.   USA  has gained 150 million since 1960. But a lot of that is due to immigration. However immigrant's children born in USA and fully integrated don't average any significant higher birth rate percentage than kids of born US citizens. That clearly shows that it has nothing to do with race or ethnicity (as some racist might claim), but everything to go with the system, lifestyle and culture  (and maybe religion but I don't know about that, not an expert) in every single country .

The rest / Re: GOP Losing Ground for the 2018 Mid-Term Election
« on: October 08, 2018, 08:58:16 PM »
As a conservative, I feel much better where we stand today than anywhere in the last year and a half, except for the last week. Cruz seems to have gained a couple of points,  RCP average has him at +6,4 last polls have him at +8 +9, the most "critical" one - Emerson that came last time with only +1 now has him at +5. Blackburn seems to have the momentum, North Dakota is now leaning red. Can't wait to see the polls in FL, NV, MT, MO, AZ and IN, and especially in WV. Also, some house races. Although I expect to see a little surge in numbers also for the Democratic candidates, because of the Kavanaugh rage right now, but I think (hope) in the long term (30 days), that Kavanaugh effect will work in a sort of depressing way among some blue voters, cause they'll be disappointed in their leaders, because Kav got confirmed, and President Trump has already 2 SCOTUS seats. I think Democrats have to make a risky decision now, should they continue to "fight Kavanaugh" so that they can keep voter enthusiasm high until the midterms, but also keep republicans motivated, or should they stay quiet and hope the country and especially Republican voters forget a little bit about Kavanaugh, and don't show up in the big numbers, whereas anti Trump voters show to the polls in November.

The rest / Re: The Trump Presidency (was "Presidential Poll")
« on: October 08, 2018, 08:38:39 PM »
New Gallup poll has President Trump at 43%, there was just 1 poll out of 60(if I counted properly) that had him higher since he took the office.  Rasmussen has him at 51%. The last time Rasmussen poll (or any other) had him above 51% was back in February of 2017.

Walking the walk / Re: Top climate-friendly actions
« on: October 08, 2018, 03:00:05 AM »
I notice that refusing to have a child is not on the list ....


That shouldn't be on ANY list (I mean everybody can refuse and that is ok, but lately there is almost constant silent encouraging to not have a child).  Advising people not to have family and experience the greatest love and moment of their lives, and also the most important thing in the world is .... (not gonna use any word to describe). If we advise people (and not let animals too) who are (and why??) we saving the planet for? Isn't the whole point of saving our planet, to give future generations a normal life? And no, I don't think people for example in India having 10 kids is good, but not because of global warming, but because they are not able to give them normal standard of life, so those (not in every family but in many)kids struggle and live in huge poverty, sick and sad instead, and those families have much bigger early death rate. Anyway we should focus on real problems, like deforestation, industries providing too much CO2., too much plastic, and garbage all over the world and some other stuff  that is on the list.

BTW if the President Trump would have had an official list with a goal  6. Educating Girls,  heads on twitter, media, and even some people on this forum, would be exploding right now!!

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018/2019 freezing season
« on: October 05, 2018, 03:50:43 AM »
I think the refreeze should get going next week, by looking at forecasts (EC and GFS).

Antarctica / Re: Sea Ice Extent around Antarctica
« on: October 01, 2018, 08:17:05 PM »
The new yearly maximum was reached today.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2018 sea ice area and extent data
« on: September 13, 2018, 12:24:42 PM »
Does the Wipneus data only have the last 7 years(from starting with 2012)?

Pages: [1] 2