Earth's attic is on fire: Arctic sea ice bottoms out at a new record low

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 3:46 PM GMT on September 20, 2012

Share this Blog
67
+

The extraordinary decline in Arctic sea ice during 2012 is finally over. Sea ice extent bottomed out on September 16, announced scientists at the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) on Wednesday. The sea ice extent fell to 3.41 million square kilometers, breaking the previous all-time low set in 2007 by 18%--despite the fact that this year's weather was cloudier and cooler than in 2007. Nearly half (49%) of the icecap was gone during this year's minimum, compared to the average minimum for the years 1979 - 2000. This is an area approximately 43% of the size of the Contiguous United States. And, for the fifth consecutive year--and fifth time in recorded history--ice-free navigation was possible in the Arctic along the coast of Canada (the Northwest Passage), and along the coast of Russia (the Northeast Passage or Northern Sea Route.) "We are now in uncharted territory," said NSIDC Director Mark Serreze. "While we've long known that as the planet warms up, changes would be seen first and be most pronounced in the Arctic, few of us were prepared for how rapidly the changes would actually occur. While lots of people talk about opening of the Northwest Passage through the Canadian Arctic islands and the Northern Sea Route along the Russian coast, twenty years from now from now in August you might be able to take a ship right across the Arctic Ocean."


Figure 1. Arctic sea ice reached its minimum on September 16, 2012, and was at its lowest extent since satellite records began in 1979. Image credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC).

When was the last time the Arctic was this ice-free?
We can be confident that the Arctic did not see the kind of melting observed in 2012 going back over a century, as we have detailed ice edge records from ships (Walsh and Chapman, 2001). It is very unlikely the Northwest Passage was open between 1497 and 1900, since this spanned a cold period in the northern latitudes known as "The Little Ice Age". Ships periodically attempted the Passage and were foiled during this period. Research by Kinnard et al. (2011) shows that the Arctic ice melt in the past few decades is unprecedented for at least the past 1,450 years. We may have to go back to at least 4,000 B.C. to find the last time so little summer ice was present in the Arctic. Funder and Kjaer (2007) found extensive systems of wave generated beach ridges along the North Greenland coast, which suggested the Arctic Ocean was ice-free in the summer for over 1,000 years between 6,000 - 8,500 years ago, when Earth's orbital variations brought more sunlight to the Arctic in summer than at present. Prior to that, the next likely time was during the last inter-glacial period, 120,000 years ago. Arctic temperatures then were 2 - 3°C higher than present-day temperatures, and sea levels were 4 - 6 meters higher.


Figure 2. Year-averaged and 3-month averaged Northern Hemisphere sea ice extent from Chapman and Walsh (2001), as updated by the University of Illinois Cryosphere Today. I've updated their graph to include 2011 plus the first 9 months of 2012.


Figure 3. Late summer Arctic sea ice extent over the past 1,450 years reconstructed from proxy data by Kinnard et al.'s 2011 paper, Reconstructed changes in Arctic sea ice over the past 1,450 years. The solid pink line is a smoothed 40-year average, and the light pink areas shows a 95% confidence interval.  Note that the modern observational data in this figure extend through 2008, though the extent is not as low as the current annual data due to the 40-year smoothing. More commentary on this graph is available at skepticalscience.com.

When will the Arctic be ice-free in summer?
So, when will Santa's Workshop need to be retrofitted with pontoons to avoid sinking to the bottom of the Arctic Ocean in summer? It's hard to say, since there is a large amount of natural variability in Arctic weather patterns. Day et al. (2012) found that 5 to 31% of the changes in Arctic sea ice could be due to natural causes. However, the sea ice at the summer minimum has been declining at a rate of 12% per decade, far in excess of the worst-case scenario predicted in the 2007 IPCC report. Forecasts of an ice-free Arctic range from 20 - 30 years from now to much sooner. Just this week, Dr. Peter Wadhams of Cambridge University predicted that the Arctic will be ice-free in summer within four years. A study by Stroeve et al. (2012), using the updated models being run for the 2014 IPCC report, found that "a seasonally ice-free Arctic Ocean within the next few decades is a distinct possibility." Of the 21 models considered, 2022 was the earliest date that complete Arctic sea ice occurred in September.


Video 1. A powerful storm wreaked havoc on the Arctic sea ice cover in August 2012. This visualization shows the strength and direction of the winds and their impact on the ice: the red vectors represent the fastest winds, while blue vectors stand for slower winds. According to NSIDC, the storm sped up the loss of the thin ice that appears to have been already on the verge of melting completely.Video credit: NASA.

But Antarctic sea ice is growing!
It's a sure thing that when Arctic sea ice hits new record lows, global warming contrarians will attempt to draw attention away from the Arctic by talking about sea ice around Antarctica. A case in point is an article that appeared in Forbes on Wednesday by James Taylor. Mr. Taylor wrote, "Antarctic sea ice set another record this past week, with the most amount of ice ever recorded on day 256 of the calendar year (September 12 of this leap year)...Amusingly, page after page of Google News results for Antarctic sea ice record show links to news articles breathlessly spreading fear and warning of calamity because Arctic sea ice recently set a 33-year low. Sea ice around one pole is shrinking while sea ice around another pole is growing. This sure sounds like a global warming crisis to me."

This analysis is highly misleading, as it ignores the fact that Antarctica has actually been warming in recent years. In fact, the oceans surrounding Antarctica have warmed faster than the global trend, and there has been accelerated melting of ocean-terminating Antarctic glaciers in recent years as a result of warmer waters eating away the glaciers. There is great concern among scientists about the stability of two glaciers in West Antarctica (the Pine Island and Thwaites Glaciers) due the increase in ocean temperatures. These glaciers may suffer rapid retreats that will contribute significantly to global sea level rise.

Despite the warming going on in Antarctica, there has been a modest long-term increase in Antarctic sea ice in recent decades. So, how can more sea ice form on warmer ocean waters? As explained in an excellent article at skepticalscience.com, the reasons are complex. One reason is that the Southern Ocean consists of a layer of cold water near the surface and a layer of warmer water below. Water from the warmer layer rises up to the surface, melting sea ice. However, as air temperatures warm, the amount of rain and snowfall also increases. This freshens the surface waters, leading to a surface layer less dense than the saltier, warmer water below. The layers become more stratified and mix less. Less heat is transported upwards from the deeper, warmer layer. Hence less sea ice is melted (Zhang 2007). As the planet continues to warm, climate models predict that the growth in Antarctic sea ice will reverse, as the waters become too warm to support so much sea ice.


Figure 4. Surface air temperature over the ice-covered areas of the Southern Ocean surrounding Antarctica (top), and sea ice extent, observed by satellite (bottom). Image credit: (Zhang 2007).

Commentary: Earth's attic is on fire
To me, seeing the record Arctic sea ice loss of 2012 is like discovering a growing fire burning in Earth's attic. It is an emergency that requires immediate urgent attention. If you remove an area of sea ice 43% the size of the Contiguous U.S. from the ocean, it is guaranteed to have a significant impact on weather and climate. The extra heat and moisture added to the atmosphere as a result of all that open water over the pole may already be altering jet stream patterns in fall and winter, bringing an increase in extreme weather events. This year's record sea ice loss also contributed to an unprecedented melting event in Greenland. Continued sea ice loss will further increase melting from Greenland, contributing to sea level rise and storm surge damages. Global warming doubters tell us to pay attention to Earth's basement--the Antarctic--pointing out (incorrectly) that there is no fire burning there. But shouldn't we be paying attention to the steadily growing fire in our attic? The house all of humanity lives on is on fire. The fire is certain to spread, since we've ignored it for too long. It is capable of becoming a raging fire that will burn down our house, crippling civilization, unless we take swift and urgent action to combat it.

References
Funder, S. and K.H. Kjaer, 2007, "A sea-ice free Arctic Ocean?", Geophys. Res. Abstr. 9 (2007), p. 07815.

Kinnard et al., 2011, "Reconstructed changes in Arctic sea ice over the past 1,450 years".

Walsh, J.E and W.L.Chapman, 2001, "Twentieth-century sea ice variations from observational data", Annals of Glaciology, 33, Number 1, January 2001, pp. 444-448.

Related info
Half of the polar ice cap is missing: Arctic sea ice hits a new record low. September 6, 2012 blog post
Wunderground's Sea Ice page

Jeff Masters and Angela Fritz

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: 909 - 859

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 | 30 | 31Blog Index

I thought 93E might get a renumber in time for the 5PM advisory but it looks like that's not gonna happen. It's very close though if it isn't there already.



21/1745 UTC 13.1N 106.3W T1.5/1.5 93E -- East Pacific
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting luvtogolf:
And just like that, it continues. Don't bother to post anything because you will be told that it is a myth, unsubstantiated fact, lie, etc.........
luvtogolf..........I'm beginning to believe you are right....Damn, My opinions seem to be going to hell...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Everyone is entitled to an opinion on AGW. My personal belief is that it is real and having a definite impact on Earth and that it will only continue to get worse from here unless we do something about it. There is very little solid evidence to support anything otherwise. Having said that, it doesn't make it right for people to attack other bloggers who are presenting their anti AGW opinion in a respectful way. Perhaps it will be easier to show people how real AGW and its effects are through polite discussions and presentations of facts rather than a continuous game of "You're wrong!", "No you're wrong!" like we see way too much of here.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Peer_reviewed scientific papers sound real good, but reality paints a different picture.

Jim,
I just thought it was amusing that you chided me for attacking the scientist when the entire rest of your comment was attacking the scientist. Not the same scientist I was supposedly attacking, but the one I apparently attacked WITH... :>)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting SSideBrac:
An aside from the weather!

As a non-American, here as a Caribbean dweller concerned about possible tropical weather systems, I read some of the politically inclined threads, the tirades that occur when there is, what is frankly, a difference of opinion, some of the intolerance displayed and, sometimes, dare I say it - bigotry. Even recently, some throw away comments that may have got the author into trouble at the Nuremberg Trials of yesteryear

Coincidentally, I read an article this morning (link below)- and I am saddened - BTW, it appears to be going this way in UK also.

Link

Back to watching Blobs and Blobettes
Yes, the misinformation age as I like to call it. I think our poor educational system has a lot to do with it as well. And you hit the nail on the head when you said bigotry. There are a lot of Americans who are still bigots, because they were raised that way and taught that way and prayed that way. I am sure there are still parts of America that do not have a person of color living in their neighborhood. The Ugly American. When I travel in Europe, I try not to dress like an American. In fact I was mistaken for Dutch in Amsterdam, so I got it right that time. Not that I don't love my country, but you really cannot defend the radical American. And I don't want to be lumped with them. Politics and religion have always been a devisive subject in America. Those are the two taboo subjects of conversation at any social gathering. We have big hearts when it comes to helping people. Just don't disagree with us. After all, we went to war over "States Rights". That was political. But isn't it true of most countries. Or maybe the fact that we have freedom of speech as a guarantee means that we can all express our opinion as vehemently as possible without retribution. So it gets in the news and the world sees it. Maybe that is the real difference in our country and the rest of the world.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting SWDarby:
Hello,
I wanted to respond to Mr Master's comment that we have been ignoring the changes or warming in the Arctic for too long. I would not interpret the constant news stories about the warming of the artic as ignoring it, not to mention the making of films and debates in various political bodies. Nobody is ignoring it. There is disagreement and debate as to the cause of the changes, and that is what I think a forum like this would be useful for. So if we "stop ignoring" the warming, then how would that look. What would "swift and urgent action to combat it" look like? Do we adopt Kyoto protocol? Does anyone here seriously think that if we had adopted the Kyoto protocol that this year we would not be seeing the great shrinkage of the ice pack? If Arctic warming is due to man- made causes, then what caused the ice free Arctic 8,000 years ago and 120,000 years ago, that Mr Master's mentioned? Did man drive Automobiles and fly airplanes then? Somewhere I saw a rough breakdown of the sources of Carbon dioxide in the air. Man- made CO2 accounted for 4% of it. So let's say that we cut our output in half, (which by the way would slay the economies of the world.) So we would end up reducing the output by 2%. Does anyone here think that that would actually stop the warming of the Arctic? I think it is clear that forces are at work here, much bigger that our little exhaust pipes. One theory that stirs my interest is that the activity of the sun plays a large part in this. We have had lots of solar flaring this year, have we not? What could we do to stop that? Just some thoughts and questions that I hope will spark a friendly and civilized and intelligent conversation.

SWDarby
Hey. The thing is, every single item you brought up has been hashed and rehashed countless times. For instance:

--There is no real "debate" as to the cause of the changes among climate scientists.

--The global climate responds to whatever forces are causing it to change. When the Arctic was ice-free thousands--or tens of thousands--of years ago, those drivers were natural. And what's happening now is caused by man.

--For millions of years, CO2 emissions were roughly balanced by CO2 absorption. But since the dawn of the industrial age, those CO2 emissions have increased exponentially, overwhelming the planet's ability to absorb it, so all that excess CO2 is building up, leading to the warming we're experiencing.

--The sun's output has been at a relatively low level for decades, yet the planet has continued to warm up. Increased solar activity has been ruled out as a primary driver of that warming.

Friendly, civilized, and intelligent conversation is a good thing, to be sure. But repeatedly bringing up the same thoroughly debunked and rightly discarded arguments time and time again is really just a waste of everyone's time. Here are the well-established base rules:

1) The oceans and atmosphere are warming.
2) That warming is due primarily to increasing CO2 concentrations.
3) Those increasing CO2 concentrations are from our profligate burning of fossil fuels.

Any debate--such as it is--needs to continue from there.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13555
902. MTWX
Quoting luvtogolf:
It is amazing to me how condescending folks are on this blog (including the writers) to people when they post thoughts, opinions, theories, facts, or causes of Climate Change if it does not agree with the pro GW agenda.


I start seeing some of those, I may change my mind...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting luvtogolf:
It is amazing to me how condescending folks are on this blog (including the writers) to people when they post thoughts, opinions, theories, facts, or causes of Climate Change if it does not agree with the pro GW agenda.
It seems to be happening more and more everyday... There are a few I won't even respond to because of their attempt to ridicule my post.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
nice to see new members panama is the gateway to the orient. flew through six months ago. unbelievable to see the skyscrapers and such. great surf too on both coast
Member Since: September 11, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 4728
Quoting luvtogolf:
It is amazing to me how condescending folks are on this blog (including the writers) to people when they post thoughts, opinions, theories, facts, or causes of Climate Change if it does not agree with the pro GW agenda.


What, exactly, is the "pro GW agenda"? Are people here actively promoting climate change? Trying to hasten the ice melt? Is global warming a goal to which we all should contribute? Changecasting? Meltcasting?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Big blob passing north of Panama in the coastal waters, expanding and heading towards Nicaragua.

This is my first rainy season living here in the highlands at 4,500' above the mountain town of Boquete, and about 50 miles SE of the Costa Rica border. Most of our 80" of rain so far this year is from pop-up thunderstorms. We don't get frontal systems or cyclonic storms here at 8.5° north of the equator. I get my weather data from Lloyd Cripes' WU certified station (LINK) about 2 miles south of my location. 24hr temps at my location range from 60%uFFFD-80%uFFFDF year-around and humidity is usually ~45-60% when it's not raining - a perfect climate for me.


Today's action is mid-level clouds streaming from the blob filling most of the coastal waters north of western Panama. On satellite, I see popups over the the land along the isthmus toward Panama City and the canal heading my way, so we could get hit with heavy rain and thunderstorms later today. There is a lot of deep, rumbly thunder in the distance

This is also my first hurricane season here, and it is an area of cyclogenesis for both Atlantic and Pacific tropical storms. I will be watching to see if local Caribbean blobs become tropical cyclones as the hurricane season heads into it's final stretch when Caribbean-generated storms are more common. This far south there is no history of direct hurricane hits, although 1969's Martha came ashore as a tropical storm, and Mitch caused heavy rainfall and three deaths in 1998.

Hurricane Martha, one of the most southerly tropical storms recorded in the Caribbean, made landfall farther south than any tropical cyclone recorded in the Atlantic basin. The hurricane was the eighteenth tropical storm and eleventh hurricane of the 1969 Atlantic hurricane season. Martha, the last tropical cyclone of the season, developed 99 miles (159 km) northwest of Colon, Panama, during the morning of November 21. It remained stationary and deepened to a hurricane. Martha attained maximum sustained winds of 90 mph (150 km/h) on the morning of November 22. Subsequently, Martha weakened and drifted southward. On November 24, the tropical cyclone made landfall in Veraguas Province, Panama, as a strong tropical storm. The system weakened to a tropical depression and dissipated over land on November 25.

Due to Mitch's large circulation, it dropped heavy precipitation as far south as Panama, especially in the Darien and Chiriqui provinces. The flooding washed away a few roads and bridges, and damaged numerous houses and schools, leaving thousands homeless. The hurricane left three casualties in Panama.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting SWDarby:
Hello,
I wanted to respond to Mr Master's comment that we have been ignoring the changes or warming in the Arctic for too long. I would not interpret the constant news stories about the warming of the artic as ignoring it, not to mention the making of films and debates in various political bodies. Nobody is ignoring it. There is disagreement and debate as to the cause of the changes, and that is what I think a forum like this would be useful for. So if we "stop ignoring" the warming, then how would that look. What would "swift and urgent action to combat it" look like? Do we adopt Kyoto protocol? Does anyone here seriously think that if we had adopted the Kyoto protocol that this year we would not be seeing the great shrinkage of the ice pack? If Arctic warming is due to man- made causes, then what caused the ice free Arctic 8,000 years ago and 120,000 years ago, that Mr Master's mentioned? Did man drive Automobiles and fly airplanes then? Somewhere I saw a rough breakdown of the sources of Carbon dioxide in the air. Man- made CO2 accounted for 4% of it. So let's say that we cut our output in half, (which by the way would slay the economies of the world.) So we would end up reducing the output by 2%. Does anyone here think that that would actually stop the warming of the Arctic? I think it is clear that forces are at work here, much bigger that our little exhaust pipes. One theory that stirs my interest is that the activity of the sun plays a large part in this. We have had lots of solar flaring this year, have we not? What could we do to stop that? Just some thoughts and questions that I hope will spark a friendly and civilized and intelligent conversation.

SWDarby


Milankovitch cycles.
Member Since: July 20, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 2928
ATCF:

AL, 14, 2012092118, , BEST, 0, 335N, 272W, 50, 982, SS, 50, NEQ, 0, 0, 50, 70, 1005, 200, 70, 0, 0, L, 0, , 0, 0, NADINE, M,

Has Nadine officially become subtropical?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
New JTWC advisory keeps Jelawat at 45kts. I have a hard time believing that since JMA already has 10 minute sustained at 50kts and T numbers suggest 55kts. Nonetheless they have raised their overall intensity forecast and are now calling for a 115kt peak.



Quite a bit of uncertainty on its future track.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
168 hrs.... Eternal Nadine....









Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting seminolesfan:
I love how you lambaste others for the same sins that you yourself commit, Jim.
How's that? Specifics, please. Surely you're not suggesting that noting McIntyre's well-known lack of credibility on matters of climate science is equivalent to the repeated, baseless, and very costly (to taxpayers) attacks on actual climate scientists, such as Michael Mann has been subjected to by fossil fuel interests. Are you? McIntyre is not a climate scientist, of course; he is a "retired minerals consultant" who has spent years fruitlessly trying to disprove Mann's increasingly solid "hockey stick" graphs. Making note of such activities is in no way, shape and form the same as the fossil fuel-funded vendetta against Dr. Mann.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13555
Quoting Patrap:


Yup..most likely right thru the Northwest passage with the melting Sherbet.



being led by that horse of a different color you've all heard about.

Good to see ya back on the blog Devil Dog.
Member Since: September 23, 2006 Posts: 1 Comments: 2563
"We may have to go back to at least 4,000 B.C. to find the last time so little summer ice was present in the Arctic. Funder and Kjaer (2007) found extensive systems of wave generated beach ridges along the North Greenland coast, which suggested the Arctic Ocean was ice-free in the summer for over 1,000 years between 6,000 - 8,500 years ago, when Earth's orbital variations brought more sunlight to the Arctic in summer than at present. Prior to that, the next likely time was during the last inter-glacial period, 120,000 years ago. Arctic temperatures then were 2 - 3°C higher than present-day temperatures, and sea levels were 4 - 6 meters higher."

120,000 years ago it was the glacier's fault
6000-8500 years ago it was the orbital variations fault
now, it's MAN'S fault.

you betcha.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting JTDailyUpdate:
Morning Everyone, Found an Interesting article I would like to share with the blog

Exclusive: A Peek Inside NASA’s Global Hawk Hangar

Link


That was very interesting, thanks.

688. captainktainer 11:32 AM EDT on September 21, 2012

Capn., I tried to plus this comment multiple times...
Member Since: September 23, 2006 Posts: 1 Comments: 2563
Quoting lordhuracan01:
MAJOR HURRICANE GEORGE


MAJOR HURRICANE GEORGE



Where's your "S". The name is pronounced zhorzh.
Member Since: July 17, 2009 Posts: 71 Comments: 26483
Hello,
I wanted to respond to Mr Master's comment that we have been ignoring the changes or warming in the Arctic for too long. I would not interpret the constant news stories about the warming of the artic as ignoring it, not to mention the making of films and debates in various political bodies. Nobody is ignoring it. There is disagreement and debate as to the cause of the changes, and that is what I think a forum like this would be useful for. So if we "stop ignoring" the warming, then how would that look. What would "swift and urgent action to combat it" look like? Do we adopt Kyoto protocol? Does anyone here seriously think that if we had adopted the Kyoto protocol that this year we would not be seeing the great shrinkage of the ice pack? If Arctic warming is due to man- made causes, then what caused the ice free Arctic 8,000 years ago and 120,000 years ago, that Mr Master's mentioned? Did man drive Automobiles and fly airplanes then? Somewhere I saw a rough breakdown of the sources of Carbon dioxide in the air. Man- made CO2 accounted for 4% of it. So let's say that we cut our output in half, (which by the way would slay the economies of the world.) So we would end up reducing the output by 2%. Does anyone here think that that would actually stop the warming of the Arctic? I think it is clear that forces are at work here, much bigger that our little exhaust pipes. One theory that stirs my interest is that the activity of the sun plays a large part in this. We have had lots of solar flaring this year, have we not? What could we do to stop that? Just some thoughts and questions that I hope will spark a friendly and civilized and intelligent conversation.

SWDarby
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting PalmBeachWeather:
I aboslutely love quiet


Hear, hear!!!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting tatoprweather:
I was asking myself the same thing...We are in September and there's nothing out there. So boring.
I absolutely love quiet
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
An incredible image of the Eastern End of DR appearing in the Eye of George
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
MAJOR HURRICANE GEORGE


MAJOR HURRICANE GEORGE

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
An aside from the weather!

As a non-American, here as a Caribbean dweller concerned about possible tropical weather systems, I read some of the politically inclined threads, the tirades that occur when there is, what is frankly, a difference of opinion, some of the intolerance displayed and, sometimes, dare I say it - bigotry. Even recently, some throw away comments that may have got the author into trouble at the Nuremberg Trials of yesteryear

Coincidentally, I read an article this morning (link below)- and I am saddened - BTW, it appears to be going this way in UK also.

Link

Back to watching Blobs and Blobettes
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Grothar:


Not bad. I'll have to give you credit for that, each time I use it though.


Nah, it's my gift to you. Use it well.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting SSideBrac:

Just back from "e-mail answering" and "Yes" - just hope it stays down there close to CA mainland and does not cause any adverse affects to anywhere in neighbourhood.
This tends to be the time of year that worries me the most.
Same here. Still a lot of lightning and thunder and sporadic heavy showers.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting seminolesfan:


Compares a simple average of the long O18 series to the Kinnard reconstruction (inverted), one gets the graphic above; both shown in SD units for simplicity. There is nothing in the long O18 series that yields the pronounced Kinnard hockey-stick.

The problem with proxy data isn't the data, its the manipulation of it. And dodging FOIA requests r.e. your 'algorithms' isn't how science is conducted.
Shorter: when you can't attack the science, attack the scientists.

Also: I'll gladly look at a graph that doesn't come from a denialist site like the laughably lame Steve McIntyre's. Can you please provide something peer-reviewed? Thanks!
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13555
It's ok Georgia, good joke. nice pic too. my skin is pretty thick. thanks for the levity
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting sheople:


it's not spelled sheep in case you didn't notice it's spelled sheople just sayin


i was just making a joke, no hard feelings, even if i dont agree with you, lol.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting GeorgiaStormz:


Kinda hard for sheep to sit in chairs, I know


it's not spelled sheep in case you didn't notice it's spelled sheople just sayin
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting E46Pilot:
I have a really hard time believing what man has done in the last 200 years is messing up Earth which has been around 4.5 Billion years. I think what we are seeing is just part of the Earth's natural cycle.



What cycle would that be? The only cycles I'm aware of that affect climate are the Milankovitch cycles, which take place over tens of thousands of years, and have a profound effect on Earth's climate, being responsible for ice ages and interglacial warm periods.

The other cycle I'm aware of is the 11 year solar cycle, which has a very small effect on global climate.

There might be other cycles that we don't know about, but that's just speculation. So, what natural cycle are you referring to?
Member Since: July 20, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 2928
It has been 14 years since powerful hurricane Georges made landfall in Puerto Rico on September 21rst 1998. For me,it was not an experience I would repeat as I lived in a 5th floor of a condo and when the winds were at hurricane strength,the building was shaking a lot. Most of PR was without power for almost two weeks and there were very long lines of people to buy ice. PR has seen some landfalls of strong Tropical Storms after Georges such as Jeanne in 2004 and last season's Tropical Storm Irene on late August. But we haven't seen another hurricane landfall since 1998. The question is when will the next big one will strike this island? As we live on hurricane alley,every year we have to be watching to our east to see what is out there and sometime in the future,the lack of powerful hurricanes making landfall here after Georges will go by the window.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting sheople:


almost fell of my chair
That was the earth shifting.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

It usually quiets down around mid-Septemer and the focus of activity turns towards the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico.


Thank You
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Eugeniopr:
Can anyone tell me what happens with the African Hurricane Season? The Atlantic is to quite.
I was asking myself the same thing...We are in September and there's nothing out there. So boring.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Eugeniopr:
Can anyone tell me what happens with the African Hurricane Season? The Atlantic is to quite.

It usually quiets down around mid-Septemer and the focus of activity turns towards the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico.
Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 32275
Quoting sheople:


almost fell of my chair, thank you, there is another one who thinks it has an effect


Kinda hard for sheep to sit in chairs, I know


This wasnt meant to be an attack on you, just a joke on your name...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting stormwatcherCI:
I don't know if you noticed but vorticity has increased in the GOH.

Just back from "e-mail answering" and "Yes" - just hope it stays down there close to CA mainland and does not cause any adverse affects to anywhere in neighbourhood.
This tends to be the time of year that worries me the most.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Can anyone tell me what happens with the African Hurricane Season? The Atlantic is to quite.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting NOWCAST:
Why is everyone so quick to pull the earth has a fever card? Why are people not talking about the earth shifting on its axis? It has In fact happened. I would love to see data about this imputed in one of these climate models.


almost fell of my chair, thank you, there is another one who thinks it has an effect
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Can anyone tell me what happens with the African hurricane season?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
861. MTWX
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:
You can't convince everybody it seems. Somebody on this planet is probably debating whether or not we breath oxygen everyday.


Well there are ones that still believe the earth is flat.... So I guess anything is possible...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I have to leave for a few hours, but I just wanted to make this last comment. As I have written many times, I do not usually engage in political or controversial subjects. This may sound like a very conceited statement, but I'm a pretty smart guy.

It has been obvious from the first day I started seeing comments from certain bloggers that it is a concerted effort to attack certain people and ideas. It is a small group who attempt to mask their diatribes with interspersed weather blogs. You know who you are.

The sad part is, that if you sincerely have an opposing view, there is nothing wrong with presenting it. I believe you are more concerned with playing with people than defending your position. It is the manner in which you do it that is not only childish, but a very sad comment on your behavior. You think it is cute to make fools out of these bloggers who genuinely respond to you. I would have more respect for not only your position, but the honesty with which you present it. You may have fooled most of the bloggers on here, but it has not escaped me. I happen to care for a lot of the people on here and respect them, regardless of whether I agree with them or not. I do not enjoy seeing them being played.

Hatred is a terrible thing to waste.
Member Since: July 17, 2009 Posts: 71 Comments: 26483
93E is on the virge of TD status.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 909 - 859

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 | 30 | 31Blog 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.