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 - GoSouthYoungins

Pages: [1]
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: June 12, 2019, 03:22:47 AM »
Wipneus describes Fram volume export as near normal for the month based on piomas data.

In volume yes. But the ice around greenland is much thinner than in years past, thus more area exports due to the ice structure's fragility, and the volume ends up about the same.

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: May 30, 2019, 03:10:49 AM »
Screw civility! The adults are gone. Let's tear this thing up!!!

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: May 22, 2019, 04:05:53 AM »

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: May 21, 2019, 04:06:32 PM »
Taking the Pacific side as a whole 2019 currently leads the pack. Compare and contrast with the Atlantic side:

Which is exactly what one would expect once the arctic lost all of its older ice and thus its rigidity. The ice is more free than ever to drift into the atlantic. I think this will get more severe in the coming years until there isn't enough ice left to make its southern journey.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: May 20, 2019, 03:30:42 AM »
OK, so the snow is melting. This happens at this time of year.
Yeah, and the same happens with sea ice, and with the frost in my freezer if I unplug it.
Dumbest thing I read, your entire comment.

 Should we then close the thread and talk about football? Come on, ice is gonna melt, more or less who knows, who cares, hey its freaking normal in summer!!

How snow melts out in May and June, on continents and on ice, is relevant to what’s gonna happen to ice, be it causality or correlation, and I pay good attention to it.

Calma there buddy! I think you are reading Gerontocrat's comment with some weird lenses on.

If everyone could kindly STFU. The Arctic Sea Ice Melting Season 2019 is actually really interesting. Off-topic or irrelevant comments and gripes can be quite easily ignored.

There are currently some fires in northern alberta and maybe the northwestern territories. The smoke is headed towards the caa currently, although it is difficult to tell where it will go in the coming days. If it does end up settling on ice or thick snow, it could really supercharge melt.

A huge amount of open water has opened up in the northern part of baffin. HUGE. Thus the ice that is there is much further south than normal, which pretty much guarantees that baffin melt will stay considerably ahead of schedule.

Most interestingly, the heatwave in the Mackenzie river basin is INTENSE. Starting tomorrow temps are supposed to reach 15C, and then things really start to heat up for the next few days. The permafrost in the area could have a really really bad year.

Consequences / Re: World of 2030
« on: April 15, 2019, 06:28:43 PM »
Assuming BAU:

blah blah blah

Assuming Not BAU:

la la blah

I really don't understand how people think that anything we do today is going to change the outcome of things in the next decade!  In terms of preparedness, that may be true (so fair point), BUT emissions in the next decade will have no significant effect on the climate in the next decade.

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: April 15, 2019, 03:05:06 AM »
Elon went a twitter bender today...accusing the WSJ of shilling for big oil, doubling down of 500k annually, double down on giving the finger to the SEC, claim that super AI is about to super rule, etc.

My interpretation is the suicide by cop theory. He is trying to have the SEC or DOJ or BoD push him out. He likely doesn't want to be at the helm when Tesla becomes the first trillion dollar auto company. He is self-less and is trying to save the world. There is no room for running a successful business.

Musk 2020

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: April 02, 2019, 02:12:56 AM »
Trying to short-term predict a complex chaotic system like the Arctic is a mugs game.

I propose to rename ASIF "Mugs Musings".

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: February 04, 2019, 06:54:11 PM »
... I am not against innovation that aids the ability for humans to live nice yet green lives...I just happen to not think that Tesla doesn't fit the bill or is honest about what they are doing.)

So, to your mind, what company does fit the bill?  Who, or which one, has done more than Tesla to “honestly” wean individuals, companies, utilities, even whole islands, off of fossil fuels?

Beyond Meat, Impossible Foods, Giant Manufacturing, Hero Cycles, Mesta Board, World Centric, Tipa. Any company involved with permaculture or carbon negative farming or earthen construction.


Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: January 31, 2019, 06:07:25 PM »
Tesla's capex is only 65% of depreciation. In layman's terms: their investing for future growth is less than their current wear and tear of their current equipment. So...the are spending enough to shrink in the future, not grow.

Also fun: Musk plans to slowly ramp weekly model 3 production this year from 5k to 7k...for a annual total of 350k to 500k. That is correct, they will be manufacturing cars somewhere between 55 and 85 weeks this year. Very disruptive. I can't believe Ford hasn't thought of this.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018/2019 freezing season
« on: October 22, 2018, 01:13:37 AM »
For all of us seeking a safe place for the collapse or extreme storms...

This is pretty obvious IMO. The northern hemisphere will undergo extreme changes in climate. Every ecosystem will be ****ed.  Mad Max dust storm terribleness most places. The southern hemisphere should be more resilient but it will probably be too hot most places (meaning too much of a deviation from normal for the ecosystem to adapt). Thus being near an ocean will be good cuz oceans won't be able to heat up very easily. Also, being close to Antarctica's ice is another stabilizer. There really is only one place on earth that fits the description: Patagonia. See you there.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018/2019 freezing season
« on: October 21, 2018, 09:14:50 PM »
DMI N 80 average temp hasn't dropped below -8C for about a month and a half longer than normal, which is a record. Next year the only thickish safeish ice will be just north of CAA. Greenland looks set to be the northern hemisphere's center of cold within a decade. Weird weird weather is coming.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018/2019 freezing season
« on: October 14, 2018, 02:17:53 AM »
The shift the past six years is the difference in 20C worth of monthly temps in some months for many regions.

Can you give some examples? This strikes me as quite hyperbolic.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018/2019 freezing season
« on: October 12, 2018, 10:32:03 PM »
100 wm2ish. It is not insignificant.

Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: August 23, 2018, 11:44:32 PM »
“It doesn't help the green-mission one bit to be dogmatically beholden to a for-profit corporation.”

If one really is rooting for EVs and clean energy, it makes zero sense to be against Tesla, the company which has done, and is doing, more to advance the adoption of electric vehicles than any other company.  (See the charts above.)  “For-profit” — of course!  Tesla and Ford are the only U.S. car companies to not have gone bankrupt.  The auto industry is a killer.  Bears continually obsess about Tesla showing a profit — but until this year, Tesla cared more about growing and succeeding.  By the end of the year (some say by the end of August ;) ), Tesla will have all three.

It is not being against Tesla to think that Musk has a cult of personality around him that is dangerous. It is not being against Tesla to think that Musk saying he has secured funding to take Tesla private at $420, when there is not secured funding, is fraud. It is not being against Tesla to think that the a person buying a $100k+ Tesla should not get a $7500 rebate from a government which does not have sufficient tax revenue and must borrow more money, further burdening young people. It is not being against Tesla to think that idolizing 17 hour work days and an ambien addiction is unhealthy. It is not being against Tesla to think that a company intentionally misleading the public about being about to produce a luxury, inexpensive EV is bad. It is not being against Tesla to think that expensive cars are responsible for more ecological damage than inexpensive cars, irrespective of power source. It is not being against Tesla to think Musk claiming that it is easy to live on Mars is a dangerous idea. It is not being against Tesla to think that Tesla has been claiming to be about to be profitable for 7 years, and that maybe this time is just another one of those times. It is not being against Tesla to think that losing a rebate will hurt sales. It is not being against Tesla to think that competition from other auto manufacturers will hurt sales. It is not being against Tesla to think that Tesla is in a precarious financial position.

But the pro-Tesla crowd (on this forum and everywhere else I look) equates every one of those beliefs with being against Tesla and against the green movement, and a spewer of FUD, and against humanity. It is childish simplistic thinking.

Policy and solutions / Re: Policy & Solutions
« on: August 17, 2018, 08:16:48 PM »

Just Chill, please.

You're right. Sorry. Apologies to Steve.

Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: August 17, 2018, 06:42:03 PM »
Musk said, “if you have anyone who can do a better job, please let me know. They can have the job. Is there someone who can do the job better? They can have the reins right now.”

I would like to nominate George. He won't commit securities fraud. He won't accuse anyone of being a pedophile. He won't give unhinged interviews. He won't make impossible promises. He won't nepotistically acquire failing companies. He will only improve employee moral. How do I get in contact with Tesla's board to let them know? Twitter the official channel?

Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: August 15, 2018, 02:06:11 PM »
It is increasingly obvious that every attempt to live the same lifestyle in a sustainable way is a bad joke. Renewable energy isn't green. Every product run on electricity isn't green. The only real option is to significantly change lifestyle. Luckily the internet is the necessary tool to figure that all out. Some transport of durable goods makes sense, and a global communication system makes sense. Everything else is stupendously wasteful.

Food and shelter do not require vast energy inputs. Earthen shelters aren't novel. Growing food isn't complicated.  These things are what humans have evolved to do and the endeavor matches us with our biological needs. Conveniently, a permaculture lifestyle prepares individuals for the societal breakdown that is increasingly likely due to climate change. Installing solar may be sexy, but it's a garden, chickens, and some goats that can actually reduce emissions, make individuals more resilient, and undo the mental and physical health degradation synonymous with a modern industrial life.

Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: August 12, 2018, 12:38:46 AM »
It's certainly starting to feel like you're gonna be negative to Tesla regardless of evidence, rather than an objective discussions of pro and cons and possible reality vs. fraud and fantasy. You start off by saying Li-ion can't work for trucks period, then you ignore the newer analysis by an objective source showing much smaller battery sizes close to the estimates in "pro-Tesla" sources, then you ignore the actual published range of the Tesla semi and quote longer ranges which Tesla is not building so you can claim the impossibility of it all. I may have gotten the wrong impression initially, but this discussion is getting nowhere so I'll stop hogging this thread.

I used to love Tesla. I convinced my parents to plop down the cash (I was in the army and didn't plan on needing a car) for a model S reservation back when that first was a thing. I was giddy about the whole thing. And the test drive was something I'll always remember. It was spectacular.  However, as the years have gone on, I have become increasingly skeptical. And recently Musk has become exponentially erratic.  He makes claims totally detached from reality. He is such a big deal with such a huge platform and cult of personality that these insane statement can do significant damage. The one that really pissed me off recently was "living on mars is easy." It is not just absurdly wrong, but super dangerous. The idea that we could quite easily terra-form another planet gives many people a sense that there a decent chance we will have a way out if we destroy the habitability of EARTH. The antithesis of "the mission."

I always found the fanboydom surrounding Musk UNbeneficial but I had never bothered to comment public about Tesla. Then Musk tweeted, "Am considering taking Tesla private at $420. Funding Secured." Soon after it became clear that he was just shooting from the hip. I realized how dangerous of a person he is. I realized that he never changed from the guy who wanted to be in an exclusive club of exotic car owners. I realized "the mission" was really just about getting himself on the cover of Rolling Stone, which he had said would be "cool". Yet people who want the outcomes that I want, the people who should be my allies in fighting for a different world, are too caught up with Mission Musk.

I hope I'm wrong and in 5 years I can get a sexy, green, affordable car. But when things sound too good to be true, they usually are.  When I was in my early 20s, I was naive and wanted a magic solution where I didn't have to change my expectations for a plush yet ethical lifestyle. I've grown up...some people never do.  I'll quit this thread.

Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: August 12, 2018, 12:20:30 AM »
I have been critical of some of @Elon's alleged humour in the past, but I'm forced to admit that this one made me chuckle:

Short shorts coming soon to Tesla merch

The short shorts are the required attire for employees while they use their flamethrowers to incinerate piles of cash.

Is no one starting to get an unsettling feeling about the state of Tesla? Why would Musk open himself up to civil and criminal charges with the "LBO tweet" if Tesla is in the middle of what will prove to be a profitable quarter?

We now know that the board is beginning talks with banks and legal counsel in regards on their (Musk forced) hope to find a "wide investor pool". Therefore, when Musk tweeted that "Funding secured" he was lying. If desperate times call for desperate measures, and we witness desperate measure, it's a good bet that the times are desperate. All the other red flags are there too: short obsession, attacks on negative journalists, rapid executive turnover, SEC investigations, accusations of employee sabotage. 

I'm not saying it is 100% for sure an imploding fraud. But the amount of certainty that it is 100% not an imploding fraud is stunning. For y'all own mental health, begin to consider the possibility. It will make the outcome less devastating should the chips fall unpleasantly.

Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: August 11, 2018, 11:53:13 PM »
GSY, here is some more data. The 300-mile Semi battery should weigh around 6,500-7,000 pounds. Minus the weight of fuel it's an extra weight of 5,000+ pounds, before savings on engine weight and other components which could bring it close to a normal truck weight. Sorry to say but your 20,000 lbs figure is pure fantasy.

Like I stated some time ago: Lithium ion for short hauls probably makes sense. Trying to stretch that distance out becomes unreasonable. For similar range to diesel trucks, 10,000-20,000 lbs is absolutely the extra weight. 

To be totally honest, lithium ion for freight likely doesn't even make sense for even medium hauls. Even if the weight gets low enough, the battery replacement rate makes the whole thing uneconomical.

And as far as tesla is concerned in the medium hauls realm, they are at least a year behind their competition. The funding source(s) which apparently only Musk is privy to better have a large appetite for debt and cash burn.

Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: August 11, 2018, 05:55:00 PM »
He confirmed that Tesla intends to have the same cargo capacity as diesel trucks – meaning that it should weigh about the same as a diesel truck.

Hi Oren.

People forget, or neglect, that Elon is a trained physicist. He gave us 2 of the 3 variables to solve the F = M A equation during the reveal, and left the solution as an exercise for the class.

He gave acceleration from 0-60 mph at two different masses, 5 sec empty and 20 sec at 80,000 lbs gross weight. And we can assume F or motor force is the same under both tests.

From these two data points, it's trivial to show that the empty weight of the Semi is no more than 5s/20s = 0.25 of the max gross weight, or 20,000 lbs

And this places a limit on the max weight of the semi, since this calculation assumes zero extra rolling resistance from the trailer.  So the semi weighs less than 20,000 lbs. And if we had data for the drag of the trailer, we could estimate the Semi's weight even more accurately 8)

BTW, a standard Class 8 Semi weighs about 19,000 lbs.

There is one part of the equation that you are forgetting.  The energy density of diesel is AT LEAST 10x the energy density of lithion ion batteries.   Diesel semis usually carry at least 200 gallons of fuel weighing a little over 7 lbs per gallon.  So 1400 lbs of fuel in the diesel would require 14,000 lbs of lithion ion battery or over 12,000 lbs more than the diesels fuel weight. Lets say the diesel engine weighs an extra 3000 lbs. Every estimate I make gives serious deference to the Tesla semi, and yet there is still 9000 extra lbs to make up for....somehow. In reality it's probably more than 20,000 lbs.

Or we can just assume that Musk is a wise hero, whose lack of detailed explanation of his breakthroughs are actually just clever math riddles for us non-geniuses to figure out.  And obviously we should ignore that while announcing these impossible specs he also gave an impossible timeline.

Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: August 09, 2018, 05:38:17 PM »

I am unsure why you insist on using such a condescending tone when holding this discussion, and why you keep assuming that the people participating are Musk/Tesla worshipers, rather than just people with opinions different from yours.

Maybe it's unbeneficial. However, I believe it's warranted to try to wake people from the trance. I don't have any special information. I don't know for sure about any of this. But ALL of the signs are there that this could be fraud on a massive scale. The company is the face of the "green tech" revolution, and it will be terrible for whole movement if it all goes sour.

I do not perceive a healthy sense of skepticism. The reason Enron, Theranos, and Madoff were able to run multi-billion dollar catastrophes is that people didn't have enough skepticism. It isn't a bad thing to take a hard and critical look at things. It's healthy. It doesn't actually help Tesla or "the mission" to ignore the red flags.  I go over the top in the other direction to try to balance it out.

The rest / Re: Arctic Café
« on: August 09, 2018, 09:02:23 AM »
I'll come out...uh, I mean, I have this "friend"...he voted for Obama and then supported Bernie but ended up voting for Trump. He thought the Libertarian and Green candidates didn't run serious enough campaigns to warrant a vote. He thought a delusional self-interested criminal who the establishment understood was a delusional self-interested criminal was better than a delusional self-interested criminal who the establishment didn't understand was a delusional self-interested criminal.

How many centuries does paleontology tell us it took to go ice free last time the earth was this warm and warming at this rate?

Seems to me there have been a number of papers indicating sea level changes in the tens of meters in less than a decade.  If you think sea level can rise 30 feet and the Arctic still be ice covered.....

An ice free Arctic Ocean by itself has no impact on sea level rise and what papers are predicting sea level rise of tens of meters in less than a decade?

I am having a hard time following this conversation. It's as if everyone is talking past the others.

Ice free arctic wouldn't directly have an effect on sea level, but greenland melt would probably go into overdrive. Maybe there would be more snow too but melt would probably overwhelm a snow increase.

I agree, we are all talking past each other. I think it speaks to the complexity of the issue. The weight each person puts on different factors.  There really is no way to definitively prove the impact of any given component. Uncharted territory.  This is why I find proclamations that certain things WILL BE a certain way decades or centuries in the future quite annoying.

Arctic sea ice / Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« on: August 07, 2018, 06:22:43 PM »
anyone willing to move to Patagonia with me and maybe die of something other than heat stroke?

That's actually the number one place I'd go to if I was serious about homesteading/Preparing for the apocalypse. But I'm not willing to leave Europe.

Ya, I'm not joking at all. It should be the most livable on earth in a few decades. Mostly for climate reasons, but it is also beautifully isolated, yet connected to a large land mass. And the grandchildren can map the jump the to the Antarctic Peninsula ;)

Arctic sea ice / Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« on: August 07, 2018, 01:18:51 AM »
Can anyone comment on this? Maybe point me towards the data that I'm failing to find...the hidden graphs of applicable knowledge. Also, am I doing my math wrong? Did I move a decimal somewhere?

The big greenhouse gas is H2O.

Can we get a dislike button?

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018 melting season
« on: August 06, 2018, 10:11:40 PM »
This past freezing and melting season seems very unique. Despite the macro headline numbers being mundane by recent standards, I believe the true situation has deteriorated immensely.

Both the Atlantic and Pacific fronts have encroached on the arctic ice. Hundreds of kilometers of retreat have occurred, leaving warmer and saltier water. And in the last few weeks the area of historically thickest ice north of greenland has lifted off leaving open water, which will likely increase salinity in the region for the rapidly approaching freezing months. Thus, 3 of the most important regions for ice growth are anomalously warm and salty.  The freeze has a very uphill battle in front of it. I expect extreme temperature records in the arctic over the coming months.

An anthropomorphized anology would be a war between team white and team blue.  Team white didn't have too many casualties this battle, but the lines were broken through along the main front and the back door as well. The elite white soldiers suffered serious casualties for the first time, and team white appear poised for near defeat in the coming battles. The headline casualty number from this battle aren't noteworthy, but the tactical situation took a major turn.


(we used to talk about a blue ocean event happening in 2100, back in 2006)

By far the most salient quote I've read here in the last few years.

Something I find fascinating is the consistent reversion to the mean mentality people hang onto despite being show in the recent past the drastic incorrectness of these projections. In other words, even the most well informed are not able to adjust their forecast away from the conventional wisdom regardless of REAL WORLD observations proving change FASTER THAN FORECAST by conventional wisdom.

I'd like to make an analogy based from the most different field imaginable: shooting.

External ballistics is a very complicated science. Shooting at far away things is complex and it is difficult to properly integrate all the variables to accurately forecast where a bullet will strike.  After the first shot visibly "splashes" it is possible to figure out how far off you were. However, this doesn't inform you as to the variable(s) which you got wrong.  So you can do new math, and make some new guesses and shoot again (example: maybe it is windier between you and the target than you guess). But if your first bullet splashed 10 feet left, and after your new math, your 2nd bullet splashed 9 feet left, the best thing to do for your 3rd shot is to simply aim 9 feet to the right. It's known as Kentucky Windage.

What I witness on these forms is people land their rounds to the left of the target every time, and simply insist that their math is good and their sights are good, and this next shot will clearly hit the target.  (this is the "we won't lose all the ice until 2200 crowd")

(FYI: in my example adjusting the sights would be akin to coming up with new physics which is not really an option, so I pretended like the sights were fixed.)

Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: August 02, 2018, 03:21:52 AM »
The actual bad news is that if everyone drove a tesla, the world would still fry. Faster actually. There is a reason these guys don't report their info to sustainability groups...they use more energy and pollute more than normal ICE cars...but thats okay cuz their goal is a better future!

Tesla does more harm than good. It distracts the well meaning public with corporate stunts to garner as much attention as possible, towards a product which might one day barely help reduce our emissions.

In reality, Tesla helps ppl hang on to the idea that they can live a lifestyle very similar to the one they currently enjoy and the planet will be okay. Even though its pure BS.

Ive driven a lot of vehicles. Tesla was the most fun. But green. LLOL.

Tesla is so popular cuz they have the strongest hold on one of the last paths in cognitive dissonance for a population which is starting to catch on.

Arctic sea ice / Re: When will the Arctic Go Ice Free?
« on: July 30, 2018, 06:21:47 PM »
The arctic going ice couldn't possibly have less to do with the Paris deal.  The warming we are feeling now is mostly from GHG emissions from decades ago. GHGs are like a lid on a pot; as the lid gets thicker the stuff in the pot gets warmer, but it takes some this case probably 20-30 years. The warming we have seen so far is primarily from emissions up to 1990, so about 350 ppm.

There is also a serious lag due to ice melting. Stable climate conditions that would lead to zero ice wouldn't result in the change occurring in a single year. It would likely take at minimum a decade.  Our current GHG levels are plenty high for an ice free arctic (ocean), but we are in the lag phase.

Of course, we haven't stabilized GHG levels, and plans like the Paris deal only scratch the surface of the necessary solutions.  Unfortunately even people who do pay attention to the climate situation are somehow soothed into believing that if only we adopt Paris and then maybe a little more, we will avoid the worst. 

It is madness. Worse than pure denial of the entire situation. I'm less bothered by those who think it is all an elite globalist ploy to enslave the masses, than I am by those who engage with the data on a daily basis but come to the conclusion that mild solutions will be sufficient to save civilization.  OR for that matter those who think that it is no big deal to change the climate drastically and kill off humanity cuz the earth will bounce back.  Are we really going to successfully prevent nuclear war as everything falls apart? Are we really going to successfully decommission the hundreds of nuclear power plants around the world? Even if you aren't bothered by the collapse of civilization and the horrible deaths of billions of people, the possibility of turning the earth into a planet like venus or mars should give you some pause.

The only genuine solution would be for the entire world to embark on creating a global carbon-negative permaculture landscape. Global knowledge sharing could continue but global trade would be reduced to maybe 1% its current volume.  Ironically, everyone would be happier and healthier, but this is not an option...lets just adopt Paris, pat ourselves on the back, and when it all starts to burn blame somebody else.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018 melting season
« on: July 27, 2018, 06:24:40 AM »

The weather has been no where near bad enough historically for that area to be this disintegrated this summer.

If we do see a dipole anomaly generally the next two weeks.

A huge chunk of blue ocean is opening up

Quite the change of heart. Yes the weather has been favorable, but the progressive march of increasingly unfavorable baseline conditions is overwhelming.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018 melting season
« on: July 26, 2018, 05:19:47 AM »
My prediction:  Black and Grey Sep 1. Black Sep 15   ish

Then a quick but thin and limited refreeze. If next year el ninos, it will be historically bad for ice.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018 melting season
« on: July 03, 2018, 05:45:33 AM »
I suggest (maybe for next season), two concurrent season threads. Thread A: only matter of fact observations and forecast based on well established patterns (maybe how this forum used to be).  Thread B, anything fairly relevant (how the 2018 melting thread is). Everything from thread A should be posted to thread B, but certainly not the other way around.

Pages: [1]