Top climate story of 2008: Arctic sea ice loss

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 4:03 PM GMT on January 12, 2009

Share this Blog
4
+

The top climate story of 2008, as it was in 2007, was the extraordinary summertime sea ice retreat in the Arctic. For the second consecutive year, we experienced the opening of the fabled Northwest Passage through the Canadian Arctic waters. Explorers have been attempting to sail the Northwest Passage since 1497, and 2007 and 2008 are the only known years the passage has been ice-free. In addition, 2008 saw the simultaneous opening of the Northeast Passage along the coast of Russia. This meant that for the first time in recorded history, the Arctic ice cap was an island--one could completely circumnavigate the Arctic Ocean in ice-free waters. Although the summer ice extent in 2008 finished 9% higher than 2007's record minimum, it was still an extraordinary 34% below average, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center. Furthermore, the ice was thinner at the September 2008 minimum compared to 2007, so the total ice volume (thickness times area) was probably at its lowest point in recorded history in 2008.


Figure 1. Daily arctic sea ice extent for September 12, 2008. The date of the 2008 minimum (white) is overlaid on September 16, 2007--last year's minimum extent (dark gray). Light gray shading indicates the region where ice occurred in both 2007 and 008. Image credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center.

The Arctic "perfect storm" of summer weather in 2007 did not repeat in 2008
The summer of 2007 saw a "perfect storm" of weather conditions favorable for ice loss. Unusually strong high pressure over the Arctic led to clear skies and plenty of sunshine. Arctic winds, which usually blow in a circular fashion around the Pole, instead blew from the south, injecting large amounts of warm air into the Arctic. How unusual were these conditions? Well, at last month's meeting of the American Geophysical Union, the world's largest scientific conference on climate change, J.E. Kay of the National Center for Atmospheric Research showed that Arctic surface pressure in the summer of 2007 was the fourth highest since 1948. Cloud cover at Barrow, Alaska was the sixth lowest. This suggests that once every 10-20 years a "perfect storm" of weather conditions highly favorable for ice loss invades the Arctic. The last two times such conditions existed was 1977 and 1987.

The 2008 melting season began in March with slightly greater ice extent than had been measured in previous years, thanks to a relatively cold winter during 2007-2008. However, since so much ice had melted during the summer of 2007, most of the March 2008 ice was thin first-year ice, which extended all the way to the North Pole. The total ice volume in the Arctic in March 2008 was lower than what the record-breaking year of 2007 had seen. This led to speculation that a new record minimum would be set in 2008, and Santa's Workshop would plunge into the ocean as ice melted at the North Pole. However, the "perfect storm" of summertime weather conditions did not materialize in 2008. From May through July, cooler temperatures and winds less favorable to ice loss occurred. When very warm temperatures moved into the Arctic in August, the ice loss rate accelerated to levels higher than in 2007. However, with sunlight waning, ice loss was not able to reach the levels seen in 2007. Arctic temperatures in the summer of 2008 were up to 4°C cooler along the Siberian coast than in 2007 (Figure 2).


Figure 2. Difference in surface temperature (°C) between the summer of 2008 and the summer of 2007. Blues and purples indicate areas where is was cooler in 2008. The biggest change was over the Bering Sea between Alaska and Russia, where exceptionally sunny weather with southerly winds in 2007 caused record-breaking warmth. Image credit: NOAA/ESRL.

The future of arctic sea ice
Climate models have done a poor job predicting the recent record loss of arctic sea ice (Figure 3). None of the models used to formulate the official word on climate, the 2007 United Nations IPCC report, foresaw the shocking drop of 2007-2008. At the December 2008 AGU meeting, Wieslaw Maslowski of the Navy Postgraduate School hypothesized that the reason for this was the models' improper handling of ocean currents and how they transport heat. He blamed 60% of the melting during the past decade on heat brought in by ocean currents, and projected that summertime arctic sea ice would completely disappear by 2016. Dr. Jim Overland of NOAA's Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory was more conservative, projecting a 2030 demise of arctic sea ice. He thought we would be "hanging around where we are for a while", and thought it would take two more unusual summers like the "perfect storm" of 2007 to push the system to an ice-free state. He further noted that while summertime air temperatures have been near record levels the past few years in the Arctic, there has been one period of comparable warmth, in the 1930s and 1940s. The year 1941 still ranks as the warmest year in the Arctic, though 2007 was virtually tied with it. However, the warmth of the 1930s and 1940s was different than the current warming, and was caused by the Siberian High moving unusually far east over Europe, driving warm, southerly winds over Greenland. The warmth in the past decade, in contrast, is associated with a warming of the entire planet, and is not due to an unusual pressure pattern driving warm air into the region. This means that the current warming is accompanied by much warmer ocean waters, which have helped caused much of the arctic sea ice loss the past two years by melting the ice from beneath.


Figure 3. Arctic sea ice extent from observations (thick orange line) and 13 model forecasts used to formulate the 2007 IPCC report (light lines). The thick black line is the multi-model ensemble mean, with the standard deviation plotted as a dashed black line. Image has been updated to include the observed 2007 and 2008 measurements. Image credit: Arctic sea ice decline: Faster than forecast by Stroeve et al., 2007.

The impact on the jet stream
The unprecedented melting of arctic sea ice the past two summers has undoubtedly had a significant impact on the early winter weather over the Northern Hemisphere. Several modeling studies presented at the December AGU meeting showed that sea ice melt on this scale is capable of injecting enough heat into the atmosphere to result in a major shift in the jet stream. Dr. Overland remarked that the early cold winter over North America this winter, and the exceptionally cold and snowy early winter in China last winter, were likely related to arctic sea ice loss. The sea ice loss induced a strong poleward flow of warm air over eastern Siberia, and a return flow of cold air from the Pole developed to compensate. Thus regions on either side of eastern Siberia--China and North America--have gotten unusually cold and snowy winters as a result.

The impact on sea level rise
The loss of arctic sea ice will have little impact on sea level rise over the next few decades. Since the ice is already floating in the ocean, melting it does not change sea level much--just like when ice melting in a glass of water will not change the level of liquid in the glass. In the case of sea ice, there is a slight sea level rise, since the fresh melt water is less dense than the salty ocean water it displaces. If all the world's sea ice melted, it would raise global sea level by only 4 mm. This is a tiny figure compared to the 20 feet of sea level rise that would occur from complete melting of the Greenland ice sheet--which is on land.

The impact on melting of the Greenland Ice Sheet
The big concern with arctic sea ice melt is the warmer temperatures it will bring to the Arctic, which will bring about an accelerated melting of the Greenland Ice Sheet. As the sea ice melts, the resulting warmer average temperatures will increase the amount of dark, sunlight-absorbing water at the pole, leading to further increases in temperature and more melting of sea ice, in a positive feedback loop. As temperatures warm, partial melting of the Greenland Ice Sheet will raise global sea levels. While no one is expecting 20 feet of sea level rise from the total melting of the Greenland Ice Sheet for many centuries, even one meter (3.3 feet) of sea level rise due to the partial melting of the Greenland Ice Sheet can cause a lot of trouble. The official word on climate, the 2007 IPCC report, predicted only a 0.6-1.9 foot sea level rise by 2100, due to melting of the Greenland ice sheet and other factors. These estimates did not include detailed models of ice flow dynamics of glaciers, on the grounds that understanding of the relevant processes was too limited for reliable model estimates. The IPCC estimates were also made before the shocking and unexpected loss of arctic sea ice of the past two summers. In light of these factors, a large number of climate scientists now believe the IPCC estimates of sea level rise this century are much too low. The most recent major paper on sea level rise, published this month by Grinsted et al., concluded that there was a "low probability" that sea level rise would be in the range forecast by the IPCC, and predicted a 0.9 - 1.3 meter (3 - 4.3 feet) rise by 2100. Pfeffer et al. last month concluded that a "most likely" range of sea level rise by 2100 is 2.6 - 6.6 feet (0.8 - 2.0 meters). Their estimates came from a detailed analysis of the processes the IPCC said were understood too poorly to model--the ice flow dynamics of glaciers in Greenland and Antarctica. The authors caution that "substantial uncertainties" exist in their estimates, and that the cost of building higher levees to protect against sea level rise is not trivial. Other recent estimates of sea level rise include 1.6 - 4.6 feet (0.5 - 1.4 meters) by Rahmstorf (2007).

What would 3 feet of sea level rise mean?
Rising sea levels will lead to permanent and intermittent flooding in low-lying coastal areas across the world. A global sea level rise of .9 meters (3 feet) would affect 100 million people worldwide, mostly in Asia. The impact of hurricane storm surges will significantly increase as a result of sea level rise. Given a 3 foot rise in sea level, Hurricane Ike's storm surge would have overwhelmed the levees in Port Arthur, Texas, flooding the city and its important oil refineries. Galveston's sea wall would have been overtopped and possibly destroyed, allowing destruction of large portions of Galveston. Levees in New Orleans would have been overtopped, resulting in widespread flooding there, as well. I'll have a full analysis of who's at risk, and what the risks are, in a series of forthcoming blog posts this year.

What can we do?
One reasonable suggestion, presented by Trish Quinn of NOAA at the December 2008 AGU meeting, would be to limit the amount of crop residue burning that goes on in Eastern Europe and Asia each year. These fires generate large amounts of black soot that blows into the Arctic. These black particles on the white ice leads to a significant amount of warming during the summer months, when the black particles absorb sunlight.

For more information
The wunderground sea level rise page has detailed background info on sea level rise.
The wunderground Northwest Passage page is also a good reference.
realclimate.org has a nice post summarizing the recent sea level research.

I'll have a new blog post Wednesday or Thursday.

Jeff Masters

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 419 - 369

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11Blog Index

Quoting Stormchaser2007:


I have never believed in GW my whole 29 years of life.


Not accusing... I don't believe in it either. They tried to shovel that stuff down my throat when I was in grade school. I never once believed it.... JUNK SCIENCE.
Member Since: August 18, 2007 Posts: 5 Comments: 1807
i'm also skeptical of this kind of talk...

The Ice Age Cometh: Experts Warn of Global Cooling
Member Since: September 14, 2007 Posts: 3 Comments: 3963
The problem I find with some of this hype about temps, sea ice, weather in general is that we're assuming something is wrong without actually finding a problem. Ok, so the ice isn't as thick as it used to be. Could be a natural phenomenon. There is nothing written in the laws of nature that says the arctic cap won't melt. Look at it this way: The North cap is melting while the South cap is building. Quick question: What is the exact tilt of the Earth's axis right now. Is it more or less than normal? If so, this could be the reason for the melting. There has been no evidence to definately conclude that "global warming" is fact.
Member Since: August 18, 2007 Posts: 5 Comments: 1807
401. here is one...hot off of the presses...

Atmospheric CO2 enrichment has been postulated to possess the potential to harm coral reefs both directly and indirectly. With respect to marine life -- and especially that of calcifying organisms such as corals and coccolithophores -- neither increases in temperature, nor increases in atmospheric CO2 concentration, nor increases in both of them together, have had any ill effects on the important processes of calcification and growth. In fact, out in the real world of nature, these processes have actually responded positively to the supposedly unprecedented concomitant increases in these “twin evils” of the radical environmentalist movement.

If there is a lesson to be learned from the materials discussed in this review, it is that people should be paying much more attention to real-world observations than to theoretical predictions. Far too many predictions of CO2-induced catastrophes are treated as sure-to-occur, when real-world observations show them to be highly unlikely or even virtual impossibilities. The cases of CO2-induced coral bleaching and ocean acidification are no different. We have got to realize that rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations are not the bane of the biosphere, but a boon to the planet’s many life forms.


CO2, Global Warming and Coral Reefs
Prospects for the Future
Member Since: September 14, 2007 Posts: 3 Comments: 3963
Quoting fire831rescue:
Oh, yeah. Got to put that in there for the GW freaks who actually believe in that trash.


I have never believed in GW my whole 29 years of life.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Predictions for boreal winter 2008-09 seaice max areal coverage:

14,070,000sq.km on/around March 11th. This would be about 200,000sq.km below the 1979-2000 average.

Decided to post something about arctic sea-ice...

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Oh, yeah. Got to put that in there for the GW freaks who actually believe in that trash.
Member Since: August 18, 2007 Posts: 5 Comments: 1807
Quoting fire831rescue:


Would be 19.99 with GW.


Oh no...not one hundredth of a degree! Lol
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Stormchaser2007:


Im in North Jersey now for the winter becuase my mother is very sick and its about 20 degrees here.


Would be 20.01 with GW.
Member Since: August 18, 2007 Posts: 5 Comments: 1807
Quoting NEwxguy:


Goes on all winter,I'm going to have windchills the next few days -10 to -15,GW is not on my radar.


Im in North Jersey now for the winter becuase my mother is very sick and its about 20 degrees here.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting NEwxguy:


Goes on all winter,I'm going to have windchills the next few days -10 to -15,GW is not on my radar.


Would have been windchills of -10.01 to -15.01 if not for global warming. :)
Member Since: April 5, 2007 Posts: 83 Comments: 12345
Quoting Stormchaser2007:
Wow another GW fight...surprising.


Goes on all winter,I'm going to have windchills the next few days -10 to -15,GW is not on my radar.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Wow another GW fight...surprising.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting barryweather:
Fire

When the cup is full and you put the ice in what happens?

Stan

Does anything else come out besides co2 and water vapor? Do you have measurements of coral growth correlated to co2 consentration from the time that the bluffs were created? Was the Earth warmer and the water higher then? Can the previous periods of Earth history exactly correlate to present time? Might there be different conditions present now that can explain phenomenon we are seeing today?


The problem with your question that the cup isn't full. Look at the coasts of the world. They once used to be seabed and we complain if the water rises. Get over it. It's a natural cycle. It's going to happen whether we're here or not. You know, the funny thing about the earth is, it always has a way of reclaiming anything us humans do to it, unless it's made out of stone. Anything we build and anything we do is always reversed by nature. Look around. Buildings crumble. Metals rust away. Nothing is permanent.
Member Since: August 18, 2007 Posts: 5 Comments: 1807
Fire

When the cup is full and you put the ice in what happens?

Stan

Does anything else come out besides co2 and water vapor? Do you have measurements of coral growth correlated to co2 consentration from the time that the bluffs were created? Was the Earth warmer and the water higher then? Can the previous periods of Earth history exactly correlate to present time? Might there be different conditions present now that can explain phenomenon we are seeing today?
Our "delicate" way of life. Oh, yeah. If it's so "delicate", why are we still here after all we've put ourselves through. Makes me want to cry and hug a tree.... NOT!
Member Since: August 18, 2007 Posts: 5 Comments: 1807
Quoting barryweather:
The fact remains that CO2 is not the only pollutant we release through industry as well as daily transportion. In reducing other pollutants we may be able to reduce our production of CO2 as well. Would that be a bad thing?

I think the globe will warm anyway, but we can all man-up and do our part to try to preserve our delicate way of life. We don't have to wait for 300 - 1000 years of data, do we?


You do know that co2 was the preferred pollutant when they made the emissions laws for things like automobiles. So now cars put out co2 and water vapor, instead of the "harmful stuff"
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
399-when I lived by the Gulf, I did the same. Now, at 58 years old & near the east coast, I'm way more selective.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting barryweather:
Global warming may not be the only reason to slow our carbon dioxide output. Along with the possiblity of less ice at the poles, carbon dioxide absorbtion in the ocean can have very negative affects. This may have been mentioned before but I though I would mention it again for the sake of our discussion. This website is from NOAA and refers to the decrease of calcification in coral reefs. Link

I suggest planting trees and other plants to help absorb your biological carbon output....
and remember CO2 is not the only pollutant.



Sorry Barry,


You need to look to a better source. If coral and mollusks couldn't calcify with higher co2 concentrations then their wouldn't be any of those fossil deposits, like those massive white cliffs in England. Their is much better science on how co2 affects salt water PH. IIRC doubling the co2 will raise the PH of the top .3" of the ocean from 7 to 6.996 or some such nonsense. Needless to say the regional and depth variation it much greater than this.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting barryweather:
Global warming may not be the only reason to slow our carbon dioxide output. Along with the possiblity of less ice at the poles, carbon dioxide absorbtion in the ocean can have very negative affects. This may have been mentioned before but I though I would mention it again for the sake of our discussion. This website is from NOAA and refers to the decrease of calcification in coral reefs. Link

I suggest planting trees and other plants to help absorb your biological carbon output....
and remember CO2 is not the only pollutant.


I understand that CO2 isn't the only pollutant given off by mankind. On the other hand, I'm not gullible enough to believe that sea levels will dramatically rise if a large chuck of ice lands in the ocean. As I've said before, take a glass and fill it half full of ice. Then fill it the rest of the way with water. As the ice melts, it takes up less space. The level in the glass will actually go down, not up. This is basic physical science. 3rd grade physical science, at that. As water freezes, it expands. As it melts, it contracts.

There is no doubt that there are more pollutants than CO2 that are being produced by humans. And yes, they COULD have a negative impact. But the effects of their impact isn't exactly known. As I've said before, I believe in alternative energy. Not only is it clean, but it could be cheaper. However, right now, the cost to produce alternative energy outweigh the energy produced. In other words, you are putting in far more than you are getting out. Take E-85 for instance. Corn alcohol is a bad idea. It takes more energy to produce one gallon of E-85 than the amount of energy gotten out of that gallon. This is the problem with alternative energy. Solar panels, while the prices are coming down, are still fairly expensive. Wind energy takes very large windmills to produce that are inefficient due to friction and heat loss, or energy lost due to heat and friction. Nuclear energy is a clean source, but then you have to deal with the radioactive waste. Water energy, or hydroelectric dams are a good free source but also impacts the environment further down the stream. Greenland has a good idea. Geothermal or the use of volcanic vents to supply steam to generate power. But there lies another problem. Not everyone has a geothermal vent in their back yard. The fact is that there is no such thing as a free ride. We, as humans, need to realize that just existing has an impact. But what then. Oh, I have it... Let's kill off the entire human race. Problem solved.

By the way, I'm not dying for your cause to save a few trees. In fact, I need some wood to build my house. And I'm not selling my 8-cylinder truck for a sissy hybrid. We're having a bonfire tonight. I've got a little trash that needs to be burned. And my cows won't quit farting.
Member Since: August 18, 2007 Posts: 5 Comments: 1807
397. I will suit up for mediocre stuff and stay in for as long as I can no matter how cold.

I have to take what I can get.
The fact remains that CO2 is not the only pollutant we release through industry as well as daily transportion. In reducing other pollutants we may be able to reduce our production of CO2 as well. Would that be a bad thing?

I think the globe will warm anyway, but we can all man-up and do our part to try to preserve our delicate way of life. We don't have to wait for 300 - 1000 years of data, do we?
water temps will dive into the 50's in North Florida-surf would have to be really good with no wind.....
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
395. Any by-product of industrial activity can be considered a pollutant if it is released into the environment. This includes pure water.
CO2 is not a pollutant I made that clear yesterday. Gosh
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
URGENT - WEATHER MESSAGE
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE NEW ORLEANS LA
1048 AM CST WED JAN 14 2009

...ARCTIC COLD AIR INVADES THE CENTRAL GULF COAST THIS WEEK...

.ANOTHER SURGE OF VERY COLD AIR ASSOCIATED WITH AN ARCTIC HIGH
PRESSURE WILL BUILD INTO THE REGION THURSDAY. THIS NEXT ARCTIC
COLD FRONT WILL LIKELY YIELD THE COLDEST TEMPERATURES OF THE
SEASON ACROSS SOUTHERN MISSISSIPPI AND SOUTHEAST LOUISIANA
THURSDAY NIGHT INTO FRIDAY MORNING.
LAZ034>040-046>050-MSZ068>071-077-080>082-150500-
/O.NEW.KLIX.HZ.A.0001.090116T0600Z-090116T1400Z/
POINTE COUPEE-WEST FELICIANA-EAST FELICIANA-ST. HELENA-TANGIPAHOA-
WASHINGTON-ST. TAMMANY-IBERVILLE-WEST BATON ROUGE-
EAST BATON ROUGE-ASCENSION-LIVINGSTON-WILKINSON-AMITE-PIKE-
WALTHALL-PEARL RIVER-HANCOCK-HARRISON-JACKSON-
INCLUDING THE CITIES OF...NEW ROADS...LIVONIA...
ST. FRANCISVILLE...JACKSON...CLINTON...GREENSBURG...MONTPELIER...
HAMMOND...PONCHATOULA...BOGALUSA...FRANKLINTON...SLIDELL...
MANDEVILLE...COVINGTON...LACOMBE...PLAQUEMINE...WHITE CASTLE...
PORT ALLEN...ADDIS...BRUSLY...BATON ROUGE...GONZALES...
DONALDSONVILLE...DENHAM SPRINGS...WALKER...CENTREVILLE...
WOODVILLE...GLOSTER...LIBERTY...CROSBY...MCCOMB...TYLERTOWN...
PICAYUNE...BAY ST. LOUIS...WAVELAND...DIAMONDHEAD...GULFPORT...
BILOXI...PASCAGOULA...OCEAN SPRINGS...MOSS POINT...GAUTIER...
ST. MARTIN
1048 AM CST WED JAN 14 2009
...HARD FREEZE WATCH IN EFFECT FROM LATE THURSDAY NIGHT THROUGH
FRIDAY MORNING...

THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN SLIDELL HAS ISSUED A HARD FREEZE
WATCH...WHICH IS IN EFFECT FROM LATE THURSDAY NIGHT THROUGH FRIDAY
MORNING.

ANOTHER SURGE OF VERY COLD AIR WILL PUSH SOUTH OUT OF CANADA AND
THE HIGH PLAINS AND INTO SOUTHERN MISSISSIPPI AND SOUTHEAST LOUISIANA
THURSDAY. THIS SURGE WILL SERVE TO RE-ENFORCE THE COLD AIR
ALREADY IN PLACE ACROSS THE REGION AND WILL RESULT IN A HARD
FREEZE LATE THURSDAY INTO FRIDAY MORNING. IN GENERAL...A HARD
FREEZE WITH LOW TEMPERATURES IN THE LOWER TO MID 20S WILL OCCUR
LATE THURSDAY NIGHT INTO FRIDAY MORNING ACROSS SOUTHERN
MISSISSIPPI AND THOSE AREAS OF SOUTHEAST LOUISIANA TO THE NORTH OF
A DONALDSONVILLE TO LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN LINE. IN ADDITION...ANOTHER
HARD FREEZE MAY OCCUR LATE FRIDAY NIGHT INTO SATURDAY MORNING.

A HARD FREEZE WATCH MEANS THE POTENTIAL EXISTS FOR LOW TEMPERATURES
TO REMAIN BELOW 26 DEGREES FOR 4 OR MORE HOURS. THESE CONDITIONS
WILL KILL SENSITIVE OUTDOOR VEGETATION...HARM OUTDOOR PETS...AND
HAS THE POTENTIAL TO CAUSE EXPOSED WATER PIPES TO BURST.

IF YOU MUST GO OUTSIDE...REMEMBER THAT SEVERAL LAYERS OF CLOTHES WILL
KEEP YOUR WARMER THAN A SINGLE HEAVY COAT. A HAT IS ALSO IMPORTANT
AS 20 PERCENT OF BODY HEAT LOSS IS THROUGH THE HEAD.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Global warming may not be the only reason to slow our carbon dioxide output. Along with the possiblity of less ice at the poles, carbon dioxide absorbtion in the ocean can have very negative affects. This may have been mentioned before but I though I would mention it again for the sake of our discussion. This website is from NOAA and refers to the decrease of calcification in coral reefs. Link

I suggest planting trees and other plants to help absorb your biological carbon output....
and remember CO2 is not the only pollutant.
Interesting Feature.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
We finally got some nice weather here in SOFL,LOL :)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Brief lookin, just to say the front passed through here around noon, almost 12 hrs late. This morning I was hot - now I'm FREEZING!!!! LOL

Very little rain with this one, BTW, though it's been overcast all morning.
Member Since: October 25, 2005 Posts: 19 Comments: 22307
388. How do you feel about the other pollutants caused by mankind? Should we not limit any possible negative addition to the global system, regardless of what scientists won't be able to completely prove in our lifetime? Do you have children or grandchildren? If a large portion of ice slides into the ocean from one of the major landmasses and sea levels rise dramatically would it convince you that the Earth might be warming just a little?
I want to add to my previous post that it has recently been discovered that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas as previously suspected. However, if you still believe that CO2 is a greenhouse gas that is the sole cause of "global warming", I suggest you stop breathing now because you are polluting my air. Real scientists have discovered that the human impact on the environment is less than 1% of all effects on the environment and is not the cause of "global warming." "Global warming" is some junk science that was brought up in the late 70's based off of less than 80 years of observations. When you compare 80 years of data with the actual age of the earth, it isn't even a snippet of the timeline of Earth. Add to that the fact that we are able to measure more accurately now, the effects that humans are having on the planet than we could back then. I'm considered the idiot but I'm the one who has my facts straight and actually have a grasp on what I am talking about. That's funny.
Member Since: August 18, 2007 Posts: 5 Comments: 1807
Surfmom - my toes are cold too but they are also in - yep - open toe shoes. Best thing for the feet as long as we don't have frostbite to deal with. LOL
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting fire831rescue:


I find it funny that you've accused me of politicizing the "global warming" debate. First, I NEVER politicized it. It has been that way ever since some DEMOCRAT know to the world as AL "I BUY MY CARBON FOOTPRINT" GORE made it a political thing. Second, I never let anyone know of my political affiliation. Third, it is a well-known fact that our government does dirty deeds, including junk science. Next time, before you start ranting and raving about something, get your facts straight. And by the way, learn how to spell.
Way to go Fire!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Liann:
Why would anybody want to get out in public and basic announce that they are paranoid delusion, a freaking insane nutjob?

You do realize that your blathering is on a blog operated by a SCIENTIST whom you have accused of serious crimes???



First of all YOU politicized "Global Warming" by making it a "conservatives versus everybody else" political issue. You did what you accused others of doing. That's paranoid bubba, nutso.

Then you went on to parrot the conservative party line that big gommint is out to control everything through some conspiracy theory that involves scientists, except that conservatives controlled the big gommint during the Reagan-Bush, Bush-Quayle and Bush-Cheney eras, including when Clinton-Gore was controlled by Newt Gingrich conservative-dominated congress and on the ropes with Monica-gate. If there's a gommint plot to control everybody through "GW" then it's headquartered in Fox Newz basement with general Rush Drugbaugh in charge of it because these people have been making people think alike for years. It's amazing how much screwballs think alike about the big gommint conspiracy.

Oh, I have got to admire YOUR USE OF SCARE TACTICS to herd the people into the corral. Yeah, scare 'em about the bad gommint plot, scare 'em about the totalitarian control over their minds, scare 'em to not trust any money-grubbing grant-seeking scientists paid by mostly conservative-controlled congress and White House ever since Reagan fired the Air Traffic controllers in 1980. It was under these conservative mind-controllers that Global Warming became a big worldwide issue, as they doled out easy gommint grants from Newt Gingrich's congress. How do you think these grant-sucking scientists got that easy money out of Reagan, Bush, Bush and Gingrich? Obviously they ALL had to be involved in the plot, didn't they?

Take your meds. The revolution is over. Your side lost. I'm not one of those who believe in humoring the insane. Big gommint has the means to take you out in a pitch black night from 10,000 feet above, or from a remote controlled drone operated thousands of miles away. They don't need a plot -- they already have the power and total control. They don't need GW to keep you docile under their iron fist. All they need is the iron fist, and they have that already. So spare us all your prattle of paranoid delusions.

Science is the only toolkit that you possess which is truly yours, which can determine what is real and what is false. Everybody can do science, that is, everybody can test reality with the same set of tools. YOU can download from the internet instructions to build your own CO2 laser, and big gommint won't stop you from doing that and won't stop you from learning certain important points about CO2 at the same time.

You actually can test and confirm the basic principles of Global Warming theory without owning a billion-dollar laboratory. Local community colleges teach and demonstrate all the basics of science which underlines Global Warming theory. Chances are there is a local community college that you can attend somewhere in your own community which offers night courses.

Stop being an embarrassment in public and an object of ridicule. Your side lost. Get used to defeat. The winners now will proceed to remake the world without a surplus of Hurricane Katrinas -- we had plenty enough of them before we all began making things a lot worse. You don't get to wreck this world -- that's what losing means. Now be a good loser and go get drunk or something. But get it straight: you lost. That's permanent. I'm telling you, not big gommint, that YOU don't get to wreck MY world. Got it, loser?



I find it funny that you've accused me of politicizing the "global warming" debate. First, I NEVER politicized it. It has been that way ever since some DEMOCRAT know to the world as AL "I BUY MY CARBON FOOTPRINT" GORE made it a political thing. Second, I never let anyone know of my political affiliation. Third, it is a well-known fact that our government does dirty deeds, including junk science. Next time, before you start ranting and raving about something, get your facts straight. And by the way, learn how to spell.
Member Since: August 18, 2007 Posts: 5 Comments: 1807
im going to tallhassee for thursday night thru saturday afternoon. what are the low temps going to be?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
373 Leftovers -- you may call them waves... I call that "ferocious moving mountains of water with teeth".

I'm sure the big wave dudes will be thrilled -- should make for some incredible pictures in the surf magazines......

Thank Goodness my boys are here and not there and thankfully don't surf that kind of stuff
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
382. Skyepony (Mod)
It's on...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting ncleclerc:
NEwxguy, take a look at handnpaws.com.Maybe this will help. I did'nt realize that we should not use metal bowls for water durning the freezing temps as their tongues will freeze to the bowl! Good luck!


Thanks for the help,this weather is as dangerous for pets as humans.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
NEwxguy, take a look at handnpaws.com.Maybe this will help. I did'nt realize that we should not use metal bowls for water durning the freezing temps as their tongues will freeze to the bowl! Good luck!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
THANK YOU FOR RESPONSE VORT AND NADIA--MAN THAT SOUNDS SO COOL, LOUNGING ON THE REEF AND GETTING THAT KIND OF CASH TO DO IT.WAVES AND FRESH FISH,COUNT ME IN.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting barryweather:
Sorry I missed more conversation last night. As far as the climate sciences debate goes it is likely that we won't have the funding or time in our short lifetimes to fully grasp the complex systems of the glope. This is true for all science though. Even for the engineers out there. Many mistakes are made and disasters happen. How many times have you heard of a master piece falling years after its creator has died? Even though it was thought at the time that it was completely safe for generations to come. Also, we feel we have come so far yet we still can't match the precision that some ancient cultures have built into their monuments. Some of which still stand though entire civilizations have come and gone since their construction.


Agreed. Something I remind myself of from time to time is that climate science, as well as pertinent in-situ measurements, are both in their infancy. As a discipline, it is essentially brand-spanking new, outside of only a couple of researchers from a hundred years ago.

We have collectively been studying phenomena of our short-term weather systems for hundreds and thousands of years and still learn new things daily.
I am glad you are not so closed-minded (like some around here) to recognize that we do not know all that there is to know. And that discussion/debate is worthy rather than the old party line "the science is settled...nothing to talk about".
Member Since: August 16, 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12461
Stan,I agree,but this seems to be an issue with the snow freezing in between his pads.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting NEwxguy:
Thanks,Bone,its strange,most dogs don't have that problem,I'll just keep coating his feet with the petroleum jelly.temperature here continues to fall,slowly right now,but still going down



One thing I found is ice melt salt is a big part of the issue. See if you can clean their feet when they come in.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Thanks,Bone,its strange,most dogs don't have that problem,I'll just keep coating his feet with the petroleum jelly.temperature here continues to fall,slowly right now,but still going down
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Sorry I missed more conversation last night. As far as the climate sciences debate goes it is likely that we won't have the funding or time in our short lifetimes to fully grasp the complex systems of the glope. This is true for all science though. Even for the engineers out there. Many mistakes are made and disasters happen. How many times have you heard of a master piece falling years after its creator has died? Even though it was thought at the time that it was completely safe for generations to come. Also, we feel we have come so far yet we still can't match the precision that some ancient cultures have built into their monuments. Some of which still stand though entire civilizations have come and gone since their construction.
I hear ya NE.

a good way besides insulating the pipes is to leave them dripping.

As for the dog, no idea, my dog hasn't had that problem. Maybe trim the fur around the pads to help.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Bone, the other danger is bursting pipes for unprotected pipes next to the outside walls.I have to be very careful with my dog,has a tough time with snow freezing on the pads of his feet,very painful.Have tried boots for him,but don't stay on.Anyone have any ideas,have been using petroleum jelly with some success.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
370. IKE
AREA FORECAST DISCUSSION
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE TALLAHASSEE FL
930 AM EST WED JAN 14 2009

.DISCUSSION...A VERY DRY AIRMASS HAS FILTERED IN BEHIND THE
THIS MORNING`S COLD FRONT. NORTHERLY WINDS THIS MORNING WILL
SWING AROUND TO THE WEST AHEAD OF THE NEXT FRONT WHICH WILL
USHER IN THE COLDEST AIRMASS THAT WE HAVE SEEN IN SEVERAL YEARS
ACROSS THIS REGION. SEVERAL MINIMUM TEMPERATURES ARE SURE TO BE
BROKEN FRIDAY AND SATURDAY MORNING. THE FOLLOWING ARE SOME
HISTORICAL CLIMATE INFORMATION FOR JANUARY AT TALLAHASSEE:

..........JANUARY TLH CLIMATE 1892-2008 (116 YRS)..........

RECORD LOW = 6F 1985
DAYS BELOW 15 F = 11
DAYS BELOW 20 F = 70

PROBABILITIES FOR TLH:

% CHANCE OF A JANUARY TEMPERATURE DROPPING BELOW 15 F = < .2%
% CHANCE OF A JANUARY TEMPERATURE DROPPING BELOW 20 F = < .5%
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Cold without snow is kind of a drag. It hasn't snowed in P-cola in a long long time.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 419 - 369

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11Blog Index

Top of Page

About

Jeff co-founded the Weather Underground in 1995 while working on his Ph.D. He flew with the NOAA Hurricane Hunters from 1986-1990.