Greenland update for 2010: record melting and a massive calving event

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 2:31 PM GMT on March 04, 2011

Share this Blog
6
+

No humans were present on the morning of August 4, 2010, in a remote fjord in Northwest Greenland, when the air vibrated with a thunderous crack as one of the largest icebergs in world history calved from the Petermann Glacier, the island's second largest ocean-terminating glacier. Where the glacier meets the sea, a 43 mile-long tongue of floating ice existed at the beginning of 2010. On August 4 2010, a quarter of this 43 mile-long tongue of floating ice fractured off, spawning a 100 square mile ice island four times the size of Manhattan, with a thickness half that of the Empire State building. According to Andreas Muenchow, associate professor of physical ocean science and engineering at the University of Delaware's College of Earth, Ocean, and Environment, the freshwater stored in this ice island could have kept the Delaware or Hudson rivers flowing for more than two years, or kept all U.S. public tap water flowing for 120 days. There was speculation that the ice island could find its way into the open Atlantic Ocean in two years, and potentially pose a threat to oil platforms and ships. However, as the ice island made its turn to get from the narrow Petermann Fjord to enter Nares Strait between Greenland and Canada, the mighty iceberg split into thousands of small icebergs that will not pose an unusual threat to shipping when they emerge into the Atlantic.


Figure 1. The 100 square-mile ice island that broke off the Petermann Glacier heads out of the Petermann Fjord in this image taken by NASA's Aqua satellite on August 21, 2010. Image credit: NASA. I've constructed a 7-frame satellite animation available here that shows the calving and break-up of the Petermann Glacier ice island. The animation begins on August 5, 2010, and ends on September 21, with images spaced about 8 days apart. The images were taken by NASA's Aqua and Terra satellites.

Petermann Glacier spawned smaller ice islands in 2001 (34 square miles) and in 2008 (10 square miles). In 2005, the Ayles Ice Shelf, about 60 miles to the west of Petermann Glacier, disintegrated and became a 34 square-mile ice island. The August 2010 Petermann Glacier calving event created the largest iceberg observed in the Arctic since 1962, when the Ward Hunt Ice Shelf on the north coast of Canada's Ellesmere Island calved off a massive 230 square mile chunk. The Ward Hunt Ice Shelf also calved off a huge 21 square mile ice island a few days after the August 2010 Petermann Glacier calving event. According to an article in livescience.com, "Driftwood and narwhal remains found along the Ellesmere coast have radiocarbon dates from roughly 3,000 to 6,800 years ago, implying that the ice has been intact since those remains were deposited." All of the these calving events are evidence that the ice sheets in the Arctic are responding as one would expect to significantly warmer temperatures.

Warmer ocean temperatures cause significant melting of Greenland's glaciers
At a talk last December at the world's largest conference on climate change, the American Geophysical Union (AGU) meeting in San Francisco, glacier expert Eric Rignot of UC-Irvine implicated ocean warming as a key reason for the calving of the Petermann Glacier's ice island. The ocean waters near the glacier have warmed by 1 - 2°C over the past three years, he said, and all of the periphery of Greenland has seen ocean heat increases in recent years, with the result that 20 - 80% of all the mass lost by Greenland's glaciers in recent years could be attributed to melting of the glaciers by warmer waters attacking them from beneath. Ocean temperatures along the southwest coast of Greenland (60N to 70N, 60W to 50W) computed from the UK Hadley Center data set during 2010 were 2.9°C (5.2°F) above average--a truly remarkable anomaly, and far warmer than the previous record of 1.5°C above average set in 2003. Sea surface temperature records for Greenland began in the 1920s. A study earlier this year published in the journal Science (Spielhagen et al., 2011) found that ocean temperatures on the east side of Greenland are now at their warmest levels in at least 2,000 years. The researchers studied a sediment core containing fossil remains of planktic foraminifers, which vary as a function of water temperature. The study noted that not only have the waters flowing northward on the east side of Greenland warmed significantly, the volume of water flowing north has also increased, resulting in a large transport of heat into the Arctic. "Such an increased heat input has far-reaching consequences," they wrote.


Figure 2. Departure of sea surface temperature from average for 2010 from the NOAA Daily Optimum Interpolation SST Anomaly data set for October 2010. Areas colored red are warmer than the 1971-2000 average, areas colored blue are cooler than that average. A large region of record warm water temperatures extended along the west coast of Greenland, leading to record warm air temperatures and record melting along the western portion of Greenland in 2010. Ocean temperatures along the southwest coast of Greenland (60N to 70N, 60W to 50W) computed from the UK Hadley Center data set during 2010 were 2.9°C (5.2°F) above average--a truly remarkable anomaly, surpassing the previous record of 1.5°C set in 2003. Sea surface temperature records for Greenland began in the 1920s. Image credit: NOAA Visualization Lab.

Record warmth and melting in Greenland during 2010
Greenland's climate in 2010 was marked by record-setting high air temperatures, the greatest ice loss by melting since accurate records began in 1958, and the greatest mass loss of ocean-terminating glaciers on record. That was the conclusion of the 2010 Arctic Report Card, a collaborative effort between NOAA and European Arctic experts that comes out each year. Was 2010 the warmest year in Greenland's history? That is difficult to judge. We know it was also very warm in the late 1920s and 1930s in Greenland, but we only have two stations, Godtahab Nuuk and Angmagssalik, with weather records that go back that far (Figure 3.) Godtahab Nuuk set a record high in 2010, but temperatures at Angmagssalik in 2010 were similar to what was observed during several years in the 1920s and 1930s. Marco Tedesco of the City College of New York's Cryosphere Processes Laboratory remarked that last year's record warmth and melting in Greenland began when an unusually early spring warm spell reduced and "aged" the snow on the surface of the ice sheet, so that the snow became less reflective, allowing it to absorb more heat from the sun. This accelerated snow melt even further, exposing the bare ice, which is less reflective than snow and absorbs more heat. This feedback loop extended Greenland's record melting season well into the fall.


Figure 3. Historic temperatures in Greenland for the six stations with at least 50 years of data, as archived by NASA. Three of the six stations set record highs in 2010. However, only two of the six stations (Godtahab Nuuk and Angmagssalik) have data going back beyond the 1930s, which was a period of warmth in Greenland similar to the warmth of the current decade. Godtahab Nuuk set a record high in 2010, but 2003 still ranks as Angmagssalik's hottest year on record.


Figure 4. The 2010 summer melt season was lasted more than 40 days longer (purple colors) than the mean melt season from 1979 - 2007. Image credit: Arctic Report Card.

Why Greenland matters: sea level rise
The major concern with a warming climate in Greenland is melting of the Greenland ice sheet, which currently contributes about 25% of the observed 3 mm/year (1.2 inches per decade) global rise in sea level. Higher sea levels mean increased storm surge inundation, coastal erosion, loss of low-lying land areas, and salt water contamination of underground drinking water supplies. Greenland ice mass loss is accelerating over the long term, according to independent estimates using three different techniques (Figure 5), with more mass being lost each year than the previous year. According to Rignot et al., 2011, ice mass loss is also accelerating in Antarctica, and "the magnitude of the acceleration suggests that ice sheets will be the dominant contributors to sea level rise in forthcoming decades, and will likely exceed the IPCC projections for the contribution of ice sheets to sea level rise in the 21st century." As I discussed in a 2009 blog post, How much will global sea level rise this century?, the IPCC in 2007 estimated that global sea level would rise 0.6 - 1.9 feet by 2100, but several studies since then predict a higher range of 1.6 - 6.6 feet.

During the warm period 125,000 years ago, before the most recent ice age, roughly half of the Greenland ice sheet melted. This melting plus the melting of other smaller Arctic ice fields is thought to have caused 7.2 - 11.2 feet (2.2 - 3.4 meters) of the 13 - 20 foot (4 - 6 meter) sea level rise observed during that period. Temperatures in Greenland are predicted to rise 3°C by 2100, to levels similar to 125,000 years ago. If this level of warming occurs, we can expect sea levels to rise 13 - 20 feet several centuries from now. There's enough water locked away in the ice sheet to raise sea level to rise 23 feet (7 meters), should the entire Greenland ice sheet melt.


Figure 5. Loss of mass from Greenland's ice sheet in gigatons per year from 1992 through 2009, as computed from satellite gravity measurements from the GRACE satellites (red line) and from a mass balance method. The mass balance method computes the amount of snow on the surface, the amount of ice mass lost to wind and melt, and the amount of ice lost computed from glacier velocity and ice thickness. Adding together these terms gives the total amount of ice lost or gained over the ice sheet. The acceleration is given in gigatons per year squared. Another paper by Zwally et al. (2011) used a third method, laser satellite altimetry, to determine Greenland mass loss. Between 2003 to 2007, the ice sheet lost 171 gigatons of mass per year. Between 1992 to 2002, Greenland was only losing only 7 gigatons per year. Image credit: Rignot et al., 2011, Geophysical Research Letters.

References
Rignot, E., et al., 2011: Acceleration of the contribution of the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets to sea level rise, Geophysical Research Letters, in press, doi:10.1029/2011GL046583.

Spielhagen, et al., 2011, Enhanced Modern Heat Transfer to the Arctic by Warm Atlantic Water, Science 28 January 2011: Vol. 331 no. 6016 pp. 450-453 DOI: 10.1126/science.1197397

Zwally, J., et al., 2011, Greenland ice sheet mass balance: distribution of increased mass loss with climate warming; 2003 - 07 versus 19922 - 2002, Journal of Glaciology, Vol. 57, No. 201, 2011.

Wunderground's climate change section has a Greenland web page with detailed information and references.

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: 739 - 689

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22Blog Index

Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
are you still talking


I am just getting started. LOL How you doing, KEEP? I woke up in a bad mood today.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
maybe ya should just post pictures like me
Member Since: July 15, 2006 Posts: 174 Comments: 54639
are you still talking
Member Since: July 15, 2006 Posts: 174 Comments: 54639
Quoting caneswatch:


I'll tell you what, the weather will be nice once I get back home tomorrow. I can't wait to get back.



I don't know if I am allowed to say hello to you. But how was the weather in Colorado. Was there enough snow? Looks like it is going to be an active season. SST's are warming, and scientists may have discovered the possibility of extraterrestrial life. I am not sure if they will ever find intelligent life outside of our solar system, since they have had trouble finding it here.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Post 734


Yes!!!!!!!!!!


:)


Oh, and before I forget....



SQUAWK!!!!!!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:

Aw, that wasn't scolding; just reminding a curmudgeonly regular that it seems a bit boorish to be invited into someone's home for a chat, then only speak up long enough to complain about the host's subject of choice. I've posted a few YT videos myself--and have even been known to say "hello" from time to time.

If folks are short of subject matter, how about this week's Hurricane meeting on Grand Cayman? Changes to the NHC's TWOs? The blob in the CATL? Rising SSTs across the MDR? Projections for the upcoming season (86 days and counting)? Or, outside tropical weather, the exciting possibility of scientists having actually discovered evidence of extraterrestrial life? Or, yes, the quickly vanishing ice around Greenland?


1. You never say hello to me
2. We will have to wait until the conference is completed to discuss what they have presented.
3. I discussed the NHC TWO changes with sunlinepr and a few others the other night. We actually discussed the radar changes and beta programs that were being made and discussed each model individually.
4. I never project on the upcoming season. I just comment on conditions as the season approaches.
5. I read a number of articles on the discovery of evidence of extraterrestrial life. A number of scientists have been studying Titan, one of Saturn's moons for many years on this subject. (Astronomy being one of my great hobbies, if you ever read my bio.)
6. Since I travel to Greenland often, I have seen the retreat of the glaciers first-hand. I also mentioned this in a few blogs this past week and no one commented. (Go back and look for yourself) It would be nice if someone would asks questions of those who have actually lived and studied in these places, but few do.

7. When I once tried to explain to a fellow blogger that Greenland was not named Greenland because it was green when my ancestors settled there, they told me, "please spare me......"

I usually tend to keep to very light subjects because I consider it to be an exercise in futility to discuss a sensitive issue with someone who has no knowledge of the subject, and even less desire to learn. If there is a subject with which I am not familiar (few and far between, if I may add) I try to learn as much as I can from what I am being told. I do not go and make up graphs and charts to disprove them and pretend I have an open mind. In order to avoid an confusion which sometimes occurs on the blog, that latter observation was definitly not directed at you. (However, the former outline was)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:


models continue to depict cold air retreating at the end of the run next system brings snows to lower lakes severe to the south central gulf coasts eastward
Member Since: July 15, 2006 Posts: 174 Comments: 54639
Member Since: July 15, 2006 Posts: 174 Comments: 54639
THIS IS JUST A NOTE

we are going to have the annual hurriane confrence meeting in Grand Cayman with over 70 people will be there including me so I will update my blog so come an visit it meeting will start on monday
the kind of thing that will be discussed are the retirements of names by the WMO and a whole bunch of other thing so remember to check out the blog on monday

Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: July 15, 2006 Posts: 174 Comments: 54639
Member Since: July 15, 2006 Posts: 174 Comments: 54639
725. Skyepony (Mod)
Quoting jasoniscoolman2011:
temperature warming up next to Greenland


I think the ice there has about gave up on refreezing. Not going to reach anywhere near normal this winter.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
724. Skyepony (Mod)
3/6-3/9/1908
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
722. Skyepony (Mod)
I think the swirl in the NE Atlantic (WSW of Spain) will probably end up being more interesting than the one in the C Atl.

93W look pretty tame.

Couple of 6+ earthquake events..Chile & Southern Sandwich Islands..
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting beell:


I thought that one formed in the SW ATL and moved into the Caribbean.
Link
In 1908 a tropical system formed in March,moved from the Bahamas,moved southwest and dissipated near the Lesser Antilles.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
719. beell
Quoting CybrTeddy:


But in March? I doubt it highly.

Would be interesting to see though, there has been to my knowledge no recorded case of a named cyclone forming in the month of March in the North Atlantic. As I mentioned yesterday though, in 1908 a Category 2 hurricane formed in the Caribbean during the month of March. But that was 103 years ago.


I thought that one formed in the SW ATL added: Basin and moved into the Caribbean.
Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Grothar:


After Nea scolded us for posting YouTubes and saying Hi to each other, I guess there isn't much left to say. How you doing cg? Weather nice by you?


I'll tell you what, the weather will be nice once I get back home tomorrow. I can't wait to get back.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
TORNADO WARNING
NCC101-163-191-061730-
/O.NEW.KRAH.TO.W.0001.110306T1633Z-110306T1730Z/

BULLETIN - EAS ACTIVATION REQUESTED
TORNADO WARNING
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE RALEIGH NC
1133 AM EST SUN MAR 6 2011

THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN RALEIGH HAS ISSUED A

* TORNADO WARNING FOR...
NORTH CENTRAL SAMPSON COUNTY IN CENTRAL NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN WAYNE COUNTY IN CENTRAL NORTH CAROLINA
EASTERN JOHNSTON COUNTY IN CENTRAL NORTH CAROLINA

* UNTIL 1230 PM EST

* AT 1129 AM EST...NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE DOPPLER RADAR INDICATED A
TORNADO OVER HOBBTON...OR 11 MILES NORTH OF CLINTON...MOVING NORTH
AT 40 MPH.

* LOCATIONS IMPACTED INCLUDE...
PINE LEVEL...PRINCETON...
MICRO...
KENLY...

PRECAUTIONARY/PREPAREDNESS ACTIONS...

TAKE COVER NOW. MOVE TO AN INTERIOR ROOM ON THE LOWEST FLOOR OF A
STURDY BUILDING. AVOID WINDOWS. IF IN A MOBILE HOME...VEHICLE OR
OUTDOORS...MOVE TO THE CLOSEST SUBSTANTIAL SHELTER. IF NO SHELTER IS
AVAILABLE LIE DOWN IN A LOW LYING AREA. PROTECT YOURSELF FROM FLYING
DEBRIS.

PLEASE REPORT SEVERE WEATHER TO THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE BY
CALLING...1...8 7 7...6 3 3...6 7 7 2 OR NOTIFY YOUR LOCAL LAW
ENFORCEMENT AGENCY.

&&

LAT...LON 3518 7846 3571 7825 3567 7816 3560 7812
3558 7807 3560 7806 3556 7800 3513 7825
3510 7831 3514 7842
TIME...MOT...LOC 1633Z 200DEG 35KT 3520 7834

$$

MWS
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Grothar:


After Nea scolded us for posting YouTubes and saying Hi to each other, I guess there isn't much left to say. How you doing cg? Weather nice by you?

Aw, that wasn't scolding; just reminding a curmudgeonly regular that it seems a bit boorish to be invited into someone's home for a chat, then only speak up long enough to complain about the host's subject of choice. I've posted a few YT videos myself--and have even been known to say "hello" from time to time.

If folks are short of subject matter, how about this week's Hurricane meeting on Grand Cayman? Changes to the NHC's TWOs? The blob in the CATL? Rising SSTs across the MDR? Projections for the upcoming season (86 days and counting)? Or, outside tropical weather, the exciting possibility of scientists having actually discovered evidence of extraterrestrial life? Or, yes, the quickly vanishing ice around Greenland?
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13580
Quoting Grothar:


After Nea scolded us for posting YouTubes and saying Hi to each other, I guess there isn't much left to say. How you doing cg? Weather nice by you?


Good, rainy
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
CybrTeddy-this is what I wanted to hear!At the first time you mentioned only SSTs,which are theorytically enough.
But at the second time you mentioned shear(prohibitive 70 knots),MJO(also prohibitive)and air(prohibitly dry).I'm not a troll ignoring this factors! But remember-there was storms breaking the rules,especially in 2005.So why not now???
Member Since: May 19, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 351
713. Skyepony (Mod)
A wildfire in southwestern China was completely subdued by Saturday morning but not before nine firefighters perished, a local fire official said. It took 1,140 firefighters to put out the deadly blaze on Jianchuan Mountain in Yunnan province. Wan Yong, deputy commander of the provincial forest fire prevention authority, said some firefighters were still monitoring the situation to guard against flare-ups. Local authorities said the doomed firefighters became trapped Thursday when winds reignited an area that had been smoldering. Several others were injured. The fire started accidentally started Wednesday by a woman from Jinchang village, who was burning corn stalks on some uncultivated land surrounded by weeds when gusting winds pushed the flames out of control.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Okeanos Invest,11:00 am CDT
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting cg2916:
Wow, the blog really slowed down.


After Nea scolded us for posting YouTubes and saying Hi to each other, I guess there isn't much left to say. How you doing cg? Weather nice by you?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting PolishHurrMaster:
I'm sorry CybrTeddy,but your comment is unlogical for me. 23C SST is a THRESHOLD for s-trop formation,no matter is it March or September or other month.


But this time of year, there's dry air, downward MJO, and wind shear in its way
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I'm sorry CybrTeddy,but your comment is unlogical for me. 23C SST is a THRESHOLD for s-trop formation,no matter is it March or September or other month.
Member Since: May 19, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 351
I'm sorry CybrTeddy,but your comment is unlogical for me. 23C SST is a THRESHOLD for s-trop formation,no matter is it March or September or other month.
Member Since: May 19, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 351
Quoting CybrTeddy:


But in March? I doubt it highly.

Would be interesting to see though, there has been to my knowledge no recorded case of a named cyclone forming in the month of March in the North Atlantic. As I mentioned yesterday though, in 1908 a Category 2 hurricane formed in the Caribbean during the month of March. But that was 103 years ago.


But it's still interesting to watch... if the blog heats back up.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting PolishHurrMaster:
This system is under 23-25C SSTs...theorytically enough for s-trop formation...but we'll see...


But in March? I doubt it highly.

Would be interesting to see though, there has been to my knowledge no recorded case of a named cyclone forming in the month of March in the North Atlantic. As I mentioned yesterday though, in 1908 a Category 2 hurricane formed in the Caribbean during the month of March. But that was 103 years ago.
Member Since: July 8, 2005 Posts: 259 Comments: 24265
Complete Update





Member Since: October 1, 2007 Posts: 81 Comments: 26511
Oops-two similar comments!Very sorry for that spam,but I written the first comment about 10 minutes before second one...it's not my guilty
Member Since: May 19, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 351


Doesn't look too healthy
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
This system is under 23-25C SSTs...theorytically enough for s-trop formation...but we'll see...
Member Since: May 19, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 351
This subtropical storm is under 23-25C SSTs...theorytically enough for s-trop formation...
Member Since: May 19, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 351
GOES by ESL, Low Cloud Product,Atlantic
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Wow, the blog really slowed down.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Be back later...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
A possible subtropical system in early March? Wow!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting paratomic:
I don't think it's lack of understanding. It's political in nature now.

You can throw all the facts you want at people (who don't run around with their head cut off anytime they hear that the planet is warming) who don't parrot the mainstream views on AGW, but in the end all you will do is inflame both sides. You can't scream rational knowledge into someones head if they've convinced themselves it's not true. You simply have to walk away from it and pray to god or wish upon a falling star that they change for the better. Anger will motivate them once they've already changed to alter how they live. But anger, without change, is not productive and won't change them.

This issue has become political and is no longer about facts. Long ago it might have started on more neutral terms, but it didn't stay that way very long. I could offer some supporting evidence for my views on this, but suffice to say that science has become too dominated by the democrat party. People on the right see this is a threat and in general have learned not to trust science results and have associated liberals with our science and educational systems since their members tend towards the left. If you look at a cartogram of the country and the left/right associations you see that liberals (democrats, independents) tend to live in cities and conservatives (republicans, independents) tend to live in rural and suburb areas. There're more registered democrats in this country than republicans. So despite that science and education are biased to leftwing thinking and people on the right can see this, when you add up the numbers you see that the people on the left have bigger numbers. So they'll win eventually.

It reminds me of hte military. Military support on the right is aggressive but military support on the left is more defensive in nature. People on the right tend to do support the troops events much more often and you see patriotic rallies more often from the right too. This is not to say that democrats are anti-military or not patriotic, but that there's an obvious difference between the parties if you look at it. Everytime I see a lefty mention how it's important for people on the right to realize the threat that climate change poses, I always see in my head a rightwinger saying to a leftwinger that it's important to realize the threat that global terrorism poses. Take something, politically, that you DISAGREE with and examine how you feel when you disagree. This is what people on the right are feeling. If you can do this you will somewhat understand why people on the right do not trust. If the left or democrats can in any way be associated with AGW or anything related then it automatically makes it suspicious. It would be the same for anyone on the left that believes something is associated with those on the right. It goes both ways.

Anyway if the goal is to convince everyone AGW is a threat then we must all study politics.

And then there're the contrarians. They're like chameleons. They disagree to disagree. In a forum they'd be labeled trolls. They're not a part of this discussion because IMHO they're a minority. The larger issue is that there's a political divide in the AGW topic. And until this divide is broken or somehow avoided there will always remain a significant chunk of the population that's disbelieving of AGW or at least skeptical. And you know, maybe it's good that some people are skeptical. It might not be a rational form of skepticism, but maybe nature never intended all skepticism to be rational?


Mixing politics and science is sure way to foster cognitive dissonance, just like mixing religion and science. In fact, politics is more religion than fact (at least these days) where many believe in their "side" so blindly that they will do almost anything to justify their sides statements and positions instead of stepping back and logically analyzing the situation.

What we are seeing with climate change or any science/data/facts that challenge people's beliefs and perceptions is what happens when the the unstoppable force of faith and fantasy collide with the immovable wall of hard facts and cold reality. This usually results is the five stages of grief; denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. This has happened multiple times, with fewer examples more illustrative than when science challenges popular religious views.

Of course, not everyone will reach the acceptance stage. In fact, a fair number just stop at the anger phase and stay there.
Member Since: October 31, 2009 Posts: 0 Comments: 1533
Quoting MrstormX:
So when does the WMO meet for retirements?


The meeting starts tomorrow (Monday) and runs through Friday on Grand Cayman.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13580
Quoting sirmaelstrom:


When I click on each blog title under the "Latest Entry" column it takes me straight to the page with the comments.

I can go to the comments page by clicking on the blurb about Dr. Master's blog on the front page. Of course, I have to scroll through the Doctor's blog to reach the comments. I even pause to read it.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Quoting Jax82:
Hmmm they are calling for an 80% chance of t-storms today, and living in NE FL i dont see anything out there...are they going to pop up this afternoon or something?
You have a cold front dragging through, so expect some showers and scuddy thunderstorms within the coming hours. It doesn't appear to be the right atmospheric conditions for something severe to happen but, one never knows. I think the winds, will be worse then the actual storms...50mph in spots.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting CybrTeddy:
Extremely disorganized, the shear is intense and the SST's are very cool. Doubt the NHC makes a mention of it even, you can tell its still attached to a front even if its making a run to be sub-tropical (or currently is) Still, an interesting feature for March 6th.


The subtopical system is starting to fade, yesturday it was much more impressive with the vort map at 850 MB, but the lower level convergence is building stronger, this is interesting. Although you need vorticity/a circulation to have a storm.
Notice the big blob of yellow nw of caribbean islands.

Check this out: Lower level convergence....

a 15 down to the south...
Upper divergence is building to the south as well...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
WMO
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 739 - 689

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22Blog 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.