Record warmth at the top of the Greenland Ice Sheet

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 9:25 PM GMT on July 18, 2012

Share this Blog
50
+

The coldest place in Greenland, and often the entire Northern Hemisphere, is commonly the Summit Station. Located at the top of the Greenland Ice Sheet, 10,551 feet (3216 meters) above sea level, and 415 miles (670 km) north of the Arctic Circle, Summit rarely sees temperatures that rise above the freezing mark. In the 12-year span 2000 - 2011, Summit temperatures rose above freezing only four times, according to weather records researcher Maximiliano Herrera. But remarkably, over the past week, temperatures at Summit have eclipsed the freezing mark on five days, including four days in a row from July 11 - 14. There are actually three weather stations located at the location--Summit, Summit-US, and Summit AWS. The highest reliable temperature measured at any of the three stations is now the 3.6°C (38.5°F) measured on Monday, July 16, 2012 at Summit-US. A 4.4°C reading at Summit in May, 2010 is bogus, as can be seen by looking at the adjacent station. Similarly, a 3.3°C reading from June 2004 is also bad. Records at Summit began in 1987.


Video 1. A 20-ton tractor attempting to repair a bridge washed out by the raging Watson River on July 11, 2012 in Kangerlussauaq, Greenland gets washed downstream. The driver escaped unharmed. Image taken from an article, Warm air over the ice sheet provides great drama in Greenland, at the Danish Meteorological Institute's web site.

Record heat leads to major flooding in Greenland
The record heat has triggered significant melting of Greenland's Ice Sheet. According to the Arctic Sea Ice Blog, on July 11, glacier melt water from the Russell Glacier flooded the Watson River, smashing two bridges connecting the north and south of Kangerlussuaq (Sønder Strømfjord), a small settlement in southwestern Greenland. The flow rate of 3.5 million liters/sec was almost double the previous record flow rate. The latest forecast for Summit calls for cooler conditions over the coming week, with no more above-freezing temperatures at Summit.

Another huge iceberg calves off of Greenland's Petermann Glacier
A massive ice island two times the size of Manhattan and half as thick as the Empire State Building calved off of Greenland's Petermann Glacier on Monday, July 16, 2012. According to Andreas Muenchow, associate professor of physical ocean science and engineering at the University of Delaware's College of Earth, Ocean, and Environment in his Icy Seas blog, the break-off point has been visible for at least 8 years in satellite imagery, and has been propagating at 1 km/year towards Nares Strait. The same glacier calved an iceberg twice as big back on August 4, 2010--the largest iceberg observed in the Arctic since 1962. The freshwater stored in that 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. “While the size is not as spectacular as it was in 2010, the fact that it follows so closely to the 2010 event brings the glacier’s terminus to a location where it has not been for at least 150 years,” Muenchow said in a university press release. “Northwest Greenland and northeast Canada are warming more than five times faster than the rest of the world, but the observed warming is not proof that the diminishing ice shelf is caused by this, because air temperatures have little effect on this glacier; ocean temperatures do, and our ocean temperature time series are only five to eight years long — too short to establish a robust warming signal.”


Figure 1. The calving of a massive 46 square-mile iceberg two times the size of Manhattan from Greenland's Petermann Glacier on July 14 - 18, 2012, as seen using MODIS satellite imagery. Image credit: NASA.


Figure 2. Look familiar? Two years ago, a 100 square-mile ice island broke off the Petermann Glacier. It was the largest iceberg in the Arctic since 1962. 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.

Related posts

Unprecedented May heat in Greenland; update on 2011 Greenland ice melt

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

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: 630 - 580

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30Blog Index

Quoting BahaHurican:
Morning all...

You know, I really hate the confrontational, contentious, downright bullying tone you are using here. It seems to me posts like this do more to alienate people, to put their backs up, than anything else. I wonder if that isn't your goal in the first place.

Unlike a number of other bloggers here who actively and conscientiously attempt to provide information about global changes, you are simply baiting people who you disagree with. I'm sure there are lots of people out there who, like me, don't appreciate being jeered at or told what to think. If anything, this will just make us even more unlikely to "see things your way". We DO appreciate a reasoned argument, but that is not what you are presenting.

I also don't think it is right - or fair - for you or anybody else to try to force non-AGW supporters off the blog, which is what you seem to be doing here. I personally believe there is a very important role to be played in this debate by those on the dissenting side of this argument, and your baseless arrogance as presented in this post anegates the value of their contribution. Unlike you, I realize that we don't know everything, and serious debate based on factual scientific information is one very effective way of getting at the aspects of climate change we don't as yet understand.

I certainly hope - in fact I encourage you to do so - that you will cease this pompous ranting and make more reasoned, mature contributions to this discussion.




Baha you are out of line. Let me get you straight on a few things I do provide scientific information as I did on a couple of my post this morning, two I never baited anybody as it was just a general question because of all this extreme heat around the globe and very strange wx patterns that have been occuring over the last few years, also I don't care if people see things my way as everybody has their own opinions, and to end this If anyone is starting a fight it is you sir with this outlandish post. My post was not to offend anybody as you were the only one who was offended. Infact everyone on here post like that so deal! What a piece of work this guy is today.
Member Since: October 26, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2651
Still looking very good.

Member Since: April 29, 2009 Posts: 75 Comments: 14406
Quoting jeffs713:

Your awesome post got nuked from orbit, by the way.
that was greatly expected.. i'm a little surprised i'm still able to post currently, but then it really wasn't all That bad ;)
now you, however, quoted it!!
beware...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting jeffs713:

There is this thing... it is called an "analogy". Look it up.

And please, for the love of all that is holy, please stop using the straw man argument.
That hook in your cheek looks painful.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
624. yoboi
Quoting jeffs713:

There is this thing... it is called an "analogy". Look it up.

And please, for the love of all that is holy, please stop using the straw man argument.


you keep saying man is causing the globe to warm fossil fuels are bad....i agree but why do we have all these people at the noth pole with ships tractors airplanes burning fossil fues daily there.....the stuff you preach against they at the north pole doing....makes no sense at all....
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 7 Comments: 2369
Quoting Minnemike:
a lot of petroleum products can be replaced via hemp. a crop that helps the land, the air, and our foreign policy issues.. just saying ;)

just like big cities are putting in light rail on the exact same lines that they ripped out 60yrs ago when cars made trolleys obsolete, so too shall we eventually sew the crop this nation was founded upon!
and no, you cannot smoke it :P

Your awesome post got nuked from orbit, by the way.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
WOW SHARKS AND SARDINES HAVE SWAM TO DR MASTERS BLOG OR IS IT GLOBAL WARMING OR CLIMATE CHANGE TIME WILL TELL
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting hydrus:
The reality is, that we will always need oil and petroleum for manufacturing many different types of products until technology can replace it with other substances.
a lot of petroleum products can be replaced via hemp. a crop that helps the land, the air, and our foreign policy issues.. just saying ;)

just like big cities are putting in light rail on the exact same lines that they ripped out 60yrs ago when cars made trolleys obsolete, so too shall we eventually sew the crop this nation was founded upon!
and no, you cannot smoke it :P
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Severe drought taking over S MI and extreme drought moving in.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting yoboi:



i have been talking about the north pole not Hawaii...

There is this thing... it is called an "analogy". Look it up.

And please, for the love of all that is holy, please stop using the straw man argument.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting jrweatherman:
Just added Joe B. to follow on twitter. Really like his posts.

I really hope you're joking.
Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 32335
Quoting Barefootontherocks:
Possibly if you re-read that, you'll see the "uncommon" refers to the 200-mile error factor. That's the way I read it. Delineation of a Day 8 severe risk area, well, I'd call it uncommon. In this case, looks like it flows from the Day 7 risk area - also uncommon in my experience.

I could be mistaken, but sounds like you are saying a tornado in Sask. is new or unusual. If we are to believe (add: this...)
Doesn't seem to be anything new or unusual about tornadoes in Saskatchewan according to Wikipedia's excellent article about Canadian tornadoes and tornado outbreaks...

"Of all the provinces, Ontario, Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan average the most tornadoes per season, around 15, followed by Quebec with less than 10. New Brunswick and the interior of British Columbia are also recognized tornado zones. All other province and territories have significantly less threat from tornadoes. The peak season in Canada is in the summer months when clashing air masses move north, as opposed to the spring season in the United States southern-central plains, although tornadoes in Canada have occurred in spring, fall and very rarely winter."

Also mentions Canada's most deadly tornado occurred in Saskatchewan in 1912. When looking at tornado occurrence, we need to keep in mind increased population means increased reporting. Better radar over the years aids in ID-ing tors that in the past may have gone unreported.

Balancing act.

(T-62)

I was really tired then so I saw uncommon and just thought so. I re-read the discussion and saw it was the error that is uncommon, my bad. I've only seen like 1 or 2 8 day outlooks before so it is uncommon.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Just added Joe B. to follow on twitter. Really like his posts.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting RitaEvac:


Gonna need $200 oil and major crisis then. May not be too far down the road from the looks of things
It is better this way. They have always said that we would run out of oil anyway. It seems better to find alternatives now then to run out and be scrambling for the solutions to our energy needs later. We are growing, and will have to find other sources beyond oil and coal..It is in my own humble opinion that nuclear fusion reactors will arrive sooner than predicted as long as there are no more wars.
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 21488
613. yoboi
Quoting jeffs713:


Actually, I can, pretty easily.

Global CO2 is measured at Mauna Kea, Hawaii. Which is an island chain in the middle of the Pacific. It is removed from major industrial, residential, and commercial regions by several thousand miles of open water.

Yet it shows a CO2 increase, even as Hawaii as a whole is a very "green" state.

Also, in a more logic-based perspective - Get a tank of water, lets say a 100-gallon fish tank. Make the water circulate throughout the tank (as air does in the atmosphere). Even plant some obstructions, like plastic plants and the treasure chest thingy that opens and closes.

Does it matter where you put 10 drops of food coloring? No. The food coloring will evenly distribute itself via circulation. You can put it in at one spot on the very edge, one spot in the middle, or 10 spots all over the surface of the water. After a few minutes, the food coloring will be evenly dispersed.




i have been talking about the north pole not Hawaii...
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 7 Comments: 2369
Quoting Minnemike:
there are definitely a few master baiters around here.. a reminder that a question is not a statement ;)
(am i on ban watch now...)


I see what you did there...

Well done!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting LargoFl:
Back edge of the rain on the other side of Oakland county. Its been a gloomy day so far.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
The wave over Africa appears to be the next invest. contrary to most analysts nere a few models are showing interest in what promises to be the 1st cape verde disturbance
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
602. Cherry pick a little more, please. And also please explain (with citations) the "global cooling" you say is so evidenced in readings.

I seem to have missed all of the citations in your post, too. Where did your info come from?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
guess there isnt any weather out there,nothing coming from africa
Member Since: August 6, 2011 Posts: 4 Comments: 39638
Quoting BahaHurican:
Morning all...

You know, I really hate the confrontational, contentious, downright bullying tone you are using here. It seems to me posts like this do more to alienate people, to put their backs up, than anything else. I wonder if that isn't your goal in the first place.

Unlike a number of other bloggers here who actively and conscientiously attempt to provide information about global changes, you are simply baiting people who you disagree with. I'm sure there are lots of people out there who, like me, don't appreciate being jeered at or told what to think. If anything, this will just make us even more unlikely to "see things your way". We DO appreciate a reasoned argument, but that is not what you are presenting.

I also don't think it is right - or fair - for you or anybody else to try to force non-AGW supporters off the blog, which is what you seem to be doing here. I personally believe there is a very important role to be played in this debate by those on the dissenting side of this argument, and your baseless arrogance as presented in this post negates the value of their contribution. Unlike you, I realize that we don't know everything, and serious debate based on factual scientific information is one very effective way of getting at the aspects of climate change we don't as yet understand.

I certainly hope - in fact I encourage you to do so - that you will cease this pompous ranting and make more reasoned, mature contributions to this discussion.


Well said. I believe GW is real, and human society is a significant source of GW... and I still think that ST2k's approach is baiting, and trying to force dissent away.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
So far none of the models show anything of significance on the pipe. And GFS which goes already into early August still doesn't have anything. Let's wait and see when the models will start to latch on something.
Member Since: April 29, 2009 Posts: 75 Comments: 14406
Quoting BahaHurican:
Morning all...

You know, I really hate the confrontational, contentious, downright bullying tone you are using here. It seems to me posts like this do more to alienate people, to put their backs up, than anything else. I wonder if that isn't your goal in the first place.

Unlike a number of other bloggers here who actively and conscientiously attempt to provide information about global changes, you are simply baiting people who you disagree with. I'm sure there are lots of people out there who, like me, don't appreciate being jeered at or told what to think. If anything, this will just make us even more unlikely to "see things your way". We DO appreciate a reasoned argument, but that is not what you are presenting.

I also don't think it is right - or fair - for you or anybody else to try to force non-AGW supporters off the blog, which is what you seem to be doing here. I personally believe there is a very important role to be played in this debate by those on the dissenting side of this argument, and your baseless arrogance as presented in this post negates the value of their contribution. Unlike you, I realize that we don't know everything, and serious debate based on factual scientific information is one very effective way of getting at the aspects of climate change we don't as yet understand.

I certainly hope - in fact I encourage you to do so - that you will cease this pompous ranting and make more reasoned, mature contributions to this discussion.



Thank you, Baha. You said it so much better than I when I accidently started the whole thing. Off to Houston, so glad there aren't torrential rains there today!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting hydrus:
Yep.. We have to start somewhere, and once it is set in motion, the rest will most likely join in. There are a lot of people in high places that do not want the green path, because the huge monetary losses it will cost them..The reality is, that we will always need oil and petroleum for manufacturing many different types of products until technology can replace it with other substances. Some people would be amazed at the large percentage of oil that does not go to the gas stations and goes to use in factories. It is high time for the U.S. and other countries to ween off the oil, and go with alternative energy.


Gonna need $200 oil and major crisis then. May not be too far down the road from the looks of things
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Welcome. I will try to give you the answer to the question "is there global cooling?" As you are well aware there is a huge effort around the globe to counter the alleged impact of mankind on the world's climate. If in fact mankind will cause the seas to rise appreciably by causing CO2 induced global warming then certainly let's do something about it. But, what if global warming is not what they say it is? What if the world's temperature is headed in the opposite direction? Global temperatures increased for twenty years from the late 1970s to the late 1990s but have either stopped warming or have begun to cool in the last fifteen years. The global warming and subsequent cooling were even predictable due to hundreds of years of historical trends and observation of the impact of variations in solar activity on global temperature.

Did you know that in the past the Roman Period and Medieval Period were both several degrees warmer than today's temperature. The world then cooled at least four degrees from 1450 to 1850. This period was called the Little Ice Age (a period of glacial advance, the same glaciers that have been in retreat until recently). These temperature variations were not caused by man. They were caused entirely by natural forces.

Quick facts about the U.S. and global climate

U.S. and global Temperatures are not warming



Coldest March ('11) in Australia history link Global temperatures in first 3 months of '11 are the coolest in the past decade link May '11 Australian ski slopes to open early with early cold link Seattle has coldest April in history in 2011 link Darwin Austalia has coldest May and June 2011 temps in history link


Northern Australia has coolest May in history link Record 2011 US snowpacks threaten western states link Record Sierra Mtn snowfall link Record 2011 snowpack in Rockies link


July 2011, South America gripped by brutal winter link July 2011 New Zealand sets record for coldest day ever link Unusual snows hit South Africa in late July 2011 link

August 2011, Auckland New Zealand has coldest temperature in history, and first snow since 1939 link New Zealand worst blizzards in 50 years link


Sept '11 Minnesota has record low temperatures and tie earliest snow record linkParts of the UK have the coolest summer in 20 years, butterfly population suffers link Switzerland has record September snows link


October '11, extremely rare early snow in Germany link Earliest snows in Ireland since 1964 link New York City has largest October snow since the Civil War link Many records set for earliest snow and most snow in the northeast USA for October, millions without power link Many snow records broken in New England. link Colorado ski resorts have ealiest season opening in history link 80% of Australia cooler than normal in first ten months of 2011 link Record 2011 snow in U.S. link


November '11 British Columbia ski resort has earliest opening in its history link record Alaska snow link Russia south hit with record low temps link Northern Hemisphere has record snow cover extent for this date link Fairbanks Alaska has record low temps of -41F, 39 degrees below avg temp. link


December '11, Australia has coolest start to summer in 50 years, Brisbane coldest temps in 126 years link Alps have largest December snows in history link


January '12 Heavy frost damages Kenyan tea crops link Record snow and cold in northern India, 140 dead link Alaskan town digs out from 18 feet of now link Nome Alaska frozen in and running out of oil link Austria hit with heavy snow, rail lines cut link Record cold in Canada link Seattle gets a years worth of snow in a single day link Record snow in northern Japan link India coldest day in 132 years link Artic seal shows up in Seattle link Anchorage smashes snowfall record link


February '12 Europe caught in deadly deep freeze link Coldest temps in Germany in 26 years as Europe's cold temperatures kill over 300 link temps in China drop to - 50 Deg C link record cold in Europe for 3 weeks, many areas 25 degrees below normal, death toll numbers 600 link Sydney Australia experiences record coldest summer link Europe has coldest February in 26 years, and one of the ten coldest in 150 years link Coldest winter in memory in Mongolia, up to 40% of livestock froze to death in temps of -40 to -50 F. link


March '12 Oregon and Washington break all time March snowfall record link Bering Sea has second largest March ice extent on record link Record breaking March cold in Tasmania Australia link Huge snowfall in China kills 90,000 livestock and impacts 25,000 people link First quarter 2012 was very warm in the USA link


April '12 Sydney, coldest day in 80 years. link May '12 UK on track for coldest May in 200 years. link


June '12 Sweden has one of the coldest Junes since records began in 1789. link Rare cold in New Zealand. link Argentina agrigulture frosts lead to crisis link Seattle has third coldest June in history link

July '12, climate emergency in Argentina due to cold, a dozen freeze to death in Chile. Tasmania has record low temperatures. link


The best and most accurate way to measure global temperatures are from satellites that measure atmospheric temperatures. See how atmospheric temperatures have changed since the start of measurement in 1979 link 

Though the 2011/12 Winter temperatures were warm in the U.S. global temps were the 11th coolest in 32 years of satelite measurement link




Total global polar sea ice extent is largely unchanged over the past 30 years

*When adding the sea ice volumes at both poles there is about the same ice as 30 years ago link. Antarctica has 90% of the world's ice and had the most sea ice ever recorded at the end of 2008, over one million square kilometers above the average maximum. The global sea ice extent today (combined sea ice at both Poles) is nearly the same as the average of the last 30 years according to NASA and NSIDC link link View today's Antarctic sea ice extent compared to the 1979-2007 average (National Snow and Ice Data Center) link link While it is true Arctic sea ice volumes have been overall slightly less today than the average of the last 30 years the ice there has been growing the past several years and as of mid September 2009 there was 24% more ice than just two years earlier, which is over 1 million square kilometers of new ice since 2007. There is also substantially more multi year ice in the Arctic in 2009 than just one year earlier link Antarctic sea ice extent in September 2009 is also growing and is 1 million square kilometers more than the previous year. In 2009 the Antarctic had the most Summer ice ever recorded link. View today's Arctic sea ice extent, NSIDC link DMI link


View todays Antarctic sea ice extent Univ. Illinois Cyrosphere link


2010 Antarctic ice extent was the third largest ever recorded. Average snowfall in Antarctica was the most ever recorded link


See current ice conditions in the Northern Hemisphere link and the Southern Hemisphere link


Ocean temperatures are cooling
*NSIDC/NASA AMSR-E also shows that the overall trend of ocean temperatures since 2002 is one of cooling in spite of a recent short lived El Nino warming event link

The oceans have been cooling which is contrary to climate model predictions link See how Argo is measuring ocean temperatures throughout the globe link Argo research (with its 3,300 ocean buoys) has found ocean temperatures are cooler. link link

The PDO (Pacific) is moving towards a cool period (La Nina). See current ocean surface temperatures from the NOAA link link

Track mid Atlantic storm formation here, NOAA link

Global storms and their intensity are in decline

*The trend for violent tornadoes is in decline in the US link. U.S. landfall hurricanes are less numerous and powerful than decades ago. Global hurricane, typhoon, and cyclone activity are nearing 50 year lows according to Florida State University link Deaths from severe weather events are in decline link


Global cyclone activity is at 33 year lows at the end of the 2010 hurricane season. Pacific storms lowest since recording began in 1945. link


There have been few hurricanes to reach US shores in the past three years which is highly unusual link The U.S. went over 1,000 days in a row without a single hurricane strike.

Global hurricane (tornado) activity in 2010 was at the lowest level in three decades even though 2010 was a warm year overall link


Polar Bear populations are of record size

Some say Polar Bears are threatened but there are more polar bears today than ever recorded, an increase of 300%+ since the 1950s. link link The scientific name for Polar bears is Ursus Maritimus, which means sea bear. Polar Bears are excellent swimmers and can swim 200 miles or more link. A Polar Bear with a radio tracking collar swam over 400 miles in 9 days and without rest link Polar bears have survived periods when the Arctic melted completely in the past (they moved to land). Polar bear face bright future link


Solar activity is in decline. This has led to cooler temperatures in the past

So what has changed? CO2 concentrations continue to increase yet temperatures have been falling since 2002? Polar ice is growing. Storm intensity is in decline. One reason may be that solar activity is at the lowest level in almost a Century. link link link See what the sun looks like with and without sunspots link In the past periods with fewer sunspots and lower solar activity were ones with cooler temperatures. It is believed by some scientists that lower solar activity increases cloud formation and this has a cooling effect. If the past is a predictor of the future, these changes in solar activity will cause a 30 year period of cooling temperatures on earth and in fact it appears that this has already begun. See solar activity charts here link


See the combined impact of ocean and solar cycles on global temperatures link


NASA recently announced that due to the expected multi decade continuation of low solar activity that global temperatures should continue to cool. How much will rising CO2 levels offset this? If the past is a predictor of the future, not much.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting yoboi:


you can't prove the amount of harm they are doing...


Actually, I can, pretty easily.

Global CO2 is measured at Mauna Kea, Hawaii. Which is an island chain in the middle of the Pacific. It is removed from major industrial, residential, and commercial regions by several thousand miles of open water.

Yet it shows a CO2 increase, even as Hawaii as a whole is a very "green" state.

Also, in a more logic-based perspective - Get a tank of water, lets say a 100-gallon fish tank. Make the water circulate throughout the tank (as air does in the atmosphere). Even plant some obstructions, like plastic plants and the treasure chest thingy that opens and closes.

Does it matter where you put 10 drops of food coloring? No. The food coloring will evenly distribute itself via circulation. You can put it in at one spot on the very edge, one spot in the middle, or 10 spots all over the surface of the water. After a few minutes, the food coloring will be evenly dispersed.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Minnemike:
getting past the who-did-what-when is going to be one of our species greatest accomplishments.. and i don't limit that to this debate.. it is mostly aimed at reality television ;)
but seriously, action among the masses only comes at the heels of this debate. it is comforting to know that many many people, corporations, and agencies are actively working on reducing their footprint. that is a heck of a lot better than an alternative of no one acting.
it would be a fallacy, a mistake, to stop efforts at reducing ones footprint simply because other people, corporations, or agencies(countries) refuse to do so, even those that are major emitters such as China. i mean, here I am using a computer, but why should that prohibit me from making better choices regarding my own footprint when i'm Not at a desk job requiring i be online!
Yep.. We have to start somewhere, and once it is set in motion, the rest will most likely join in. There are a lot of people in high places that do not want the green path, because the huge monetary losses it will cost them..The reality is, that we will always need oil and petroleum for manufacturing many different types of products until technology can replace it with other substances. Some people would be amazed at the large percentage of oil that does not go to the gas stations and goes to use in factories. It is high time for the U.S. and other countries to ween off the oil, and go with alternative energy.
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 21488
As a shark, I trend away from Bait and hooks always.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Morning all...

Quoting StormTracker2K:
Any deniers on GW still? No matter if we change our ways to better the enviroment the damage has already been done and there is no stopping our warming Globe now!
You know, I really hate the confrontational, contentious, downright bullying tone you are using here. It seems to me posts like this do more to alienate people, to put their backs up, than anything else. I wonder if that isn't your goal in the first place.

Unlike a number of other bloggers here who actively and conscientiously attempt to provide information about global changes, you are simply baiting people who you disagree with. I'm sure there are lots of people out there who, like me, don't appreciate being jeered at or told what to think. If anything, this will just make us even more unlikely to "see things your way". We DO appreciate a reasoned argument, but that is not what you are presenting.

I also don't think it is right - or fair - for you or anybody else to try to force non-AGW supporters off the blog, which is what you seem to be doing here. I personally believe there is a very important role to be played in this debate by those on the dissenting side of this argument, and your baseless arrogance as presented in this post negates the value of their contribution. Unlike you, I realize that we don't know everything, and serious debate based on factual scientific information is one very effective way of getting at the aspects of climate change we don't as yet understand.

I certainly hope - in fact I encourage you to do so - that you will cease this pompous ranting and make more reasoned, mature contributions to this discussion.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
597. yoboi
Quoting jeffs713:

Um... where did I say that?

Oh, wait... I DIDN'T.

I said they are not doing a disproportionate amount of harm.


you can't prove the amount of harm they are doing...
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 7 Comments: 2369
Quoting yoboi:


sorry let me do it the fair way, i challenge you to provide data that says humans located there are not really doing any harm....

Um... where did I say that?

Oh, wait... I DIDN'T.

I said they are not doing a disproportionate amount of harm.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
594. yoboi
Quoting Barefootontherocks:
I wonder about over the pole airline flights. Then again, I guess it could be argued flights taking the long way around would put more pollutants in the atmosphere. Always more than one way to see.

"Make solutions, not Data."

(T-60)


then explain all the tractors, ships running in there people burning fossil fuels there on a daily basis nahh that don't hurt anything....and they are flying planes to observe ice melting they are just making it melt faster...kinda funny when ya think about it..
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 7 Comments: 2369
Quoting Barefootontherocks:
Hi jeffs, I gotta great used Matrix I'll sell ya for a good price. Only 58K miles on it. Got all the service records and even the original window sticker. I'm gonna go get the biggest, honkingest RV I can afford and cruise around the U.S. before it all goes up in smoke.

There are some here who come down critically on bloggers who mention this is a global problem and extends far beyond U.S politics, that there are more factors involved in eliminating fossil fuels, or let's talk solutions, and that, perhaps, mankind is in a helpless situation. Sometimes I wonder if these bloggers aren't paid by "Big Oil" with the goal to irritate the silent majority so much that they tune out any mention of "global warming."

My wife and I are looking for a new car, actually. hehe

As for the second part, I agree. I find it amusing to see people whining about being blasted for disagreeing with GW... but they are frequently the same ones calling others names, stating others that disagree with them are ignorant, etc... Basically, the pot calling the kettle black.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:




Potent wave! We'll see how it fares when it hits water though.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
There are weather cycles mostly ignored in the pro GW discussions

Please, show us this "cycle".

We have time.

There are now 154 days until the 2012 Winter Solstice.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
It is what it is ... :(

CO2 Data Set:


Original data file posted by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) on Thursday July 5, 2012

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting yoboi:


sorry let me do it the fair way, i challenge you to provide data that says humans located there are not really doing any harm....
I wonder about over the pole airline flights. Then again, I guess it could be argued flights taking the long way around would put more pollutants in the atmosphere. Always more than one way to see.

"Make Solutions, not Data."

(T-60)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
"Even IF global warming doesn't turn out nearly as bad as we would seem to think today, we can still make this world a cleaner, more sustainable place than it is today."

(quoted because I'm sure many people have said this many times before)

To all deniers: please provide a (valid) counter-argument to that statement.

I bet you. :)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Considering what is happending in Syria right now, makes me all that much thankful to be a US Citizen. At least we have the right to free speech (including on GW issues) and have an orderly election process regardless of where you stand on politcal issues. God Bless the USA Folks.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting nativhoustonian:


My original premise for making that comment is that a typical (not saying yours specifically) GW arguement does not give fair consideration for other issues involved.

It depends on what you consider to be 'fair consideration'. All the current objections have been examined and disproven by the data. Several earlier posters in this thread have covered the major objections already. The problem is that skeptics have not presented anything new for several years. It's the same arguments brought up over and over. At some point those arguments have to be discarded from consideration.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting sunlinepr:
This wave should hold healthy for a while....





That wave is moving fast mainly south of PR.But we have been having a few showers from it today.
Member Since: April 29, 2009 Posts: 75 Comments: 14406
Quoting jeffs713:

Ok. What about the increase in variability? Or the rise in average temperatures globally? Or the increase in the past 100+ years of significant weather events?


There is always truth in the middle as I mentioned in my post#543. My original premise for making that comment is that a typical (not saying yours specifically) GW arguement does not give fair consideration for other issues involved. Thats all, nothing more. With those other considerations the alarmist insinuations would drop a couple of notches - in my opinion, and be more realistic.

We could go back and forth all day showing each other studies if we were not open minded, as you say you are. The continued Masters posts on GW do not mention factors other than human cause (at least not very often)that I recall, but I may be incorrect. But I have a choice to not visit the blog (my medicine as you refer to it).
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Hot and bright here today. Yesterday too.
Looks like sometime on the weekend things will get wet again.
Some waves setting up in the EATL and CenATL.
Member Since: October 24, 2005 Posts: 0 Comments: 24452
581. yoboi
Quoting jeffs713:

Right. And when you drive your car to work every day, you're polluting too. I never said they weren't polluting. I just said that their pollution is a statistically insignificant amount when compared to the rest of the world.

The pollution the people in Greenland do is similar to a person putting a single drop of food coloring into a 20,000 gallon tank of water. Chances are, you won't notice the extra drop of food coloring.

I think you're using a bit of a straw man argument, by the way. That kind of argument tends to not fare well in an open debate.


sorry let me do it the fair way, i challenge you to provide data that says humans located there are not really doing any harm....
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 7 Comments: 2369
Quoting jeffs713:

I think what most of us are reacting so strongly to is people refusing to consider other sources. Think about it. If you are looking at cars, and one of your friends says "you HAVE to buy a Toyota", and then talks about how their Toyota is so nice... but refuses to acknowledge that you can't afford a Toyota... you'd get a little irritated with them. Same thing here.
Hi jeffs, I gotta great used Matrix I'll sell ya for a good price. Only 58K miles on it. Got all the service records and even the original window sticker. I'm gonna go get the biggest, honkingest RV I can afford and cruise around the U.S. before it all goes up in smoke.

There are some here who come down critically on bloggers who mention this is a global problem and extends far beyond U.S politics, that there are more factors involved in eliminating fossil fuels, or let's talk solutions, and that, perhaps, mankind is in a helpless situation. Sometimes I wonder if these bloggers aren't paid by "Big Oil" with the goal to irritate the silent majority so much they tune out any mention of "global warming."

(T-61)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 630 - 580

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30Blog 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.

Local Weather

Overcast
52 °F
Overcast