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: 459 - 409

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

Quoting spathy:


Interesting.
Thank you.
Closing loopholes.
There is a proposal to close loopholes and reduce taxes.
Net gain of simplified taxes and same revenue/minus some tax preparers. (sorry)



Sane country deterrent.???
Would you call Iran a sane country?
Can you name any other countrys that arent sane?
I would think so.
Security is one of the things that is Constitutionally required.
Yet Military can be cut as well.
50% is insanely dangerous though.

Patents and tax laws should all be up for debate.


But you see what I'm talking about right?

The U.S. gave R&D grants to the companies, in some cases funded or helped fund the founder's, CEOs, and stock holders educations, issued the patents protecting their "rights" to their inventions and improvements, and made possible the infrastructure, which allowed those companies to exist, but now they want to hijack the system and not pay taxes.


And by the way, Facebook and Google are two of the biggest culprits in recent memory, with the core ideas and software of Facebook literally being developed on U.S. university property, and now 2 of the 3 founders have ex-patriated to avoid taxes.

What happens when the oil, coal, and electricity companies all expatriate and pay taxes to Switzerland?



Doesn't everyone feel insulted that companies with 90% of their business in the U.S. and was "born" in the U.S. pays zero federal taxes to the U.S. and now pays their taxes to Switzerland?

How offended would you be if they paid taxes to Iran or North Korea instead? You'd surely consider that treason, I bet.

Why isn't it treason for them to pay taxes to Switzerland?


Switzerland's got a great deal right now, don't they? They can do next to nothing, and still have a constant stream of money coming in from traitorous U.S. companies paying taxes to them. Of course they can keep their tax rates lower, if they are going to get "free" tax revenues from every U.S. company expatriating their "corporate headquarters" to them.


I swear, some things in the constitution, including the "Ex post facto" rule, patents, taxes, and at least 2 of the amendments in the Bill of Rights (2nd and part of the 4th,) need some serious consideration ASAP to fix many issues.

Well, you say, "Why the fourth amendment," because the tax code isn't actually enforceable under the present day interpretation of the amendment.

Why the second amendment? Look at any recent mass shooting.

Why patents? Several reasons, not the least of which is another way to enforce tax laws to close loopholes, but also because the U.S. patents were supposed to "promote useful arts and sciences," for the good of all people; not make a few individuals or corporations the lords over all of civilization, which is what the present day interpretation of patents does.

Why taxes? Because I'm sick of corporations with 50% profit margin paying zero taxes, or paying their taxes to another country.


I know, I know, this isn't weather related, directly, but in an indirect way it is, because all of this indirectly ties back into climate change, which effects weather.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
458. Skyepony (Mod)
The record Antarctic sea ice isn't looking all that impressive when put in context.


Looking at it closer as has been said..it's a record for that day, not an overall record even.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
457. HadesGodWyvern (Mod)
** WTPQ20 BABJ 210000 ***
SUBJECTIVE FORECAST
TS JELAWAT 1217 (1217) INITIAL TIME 210000 UTC
00HR 13.3N 131.0E 998HPA 20M/S (40 knots)

30KTS 100KM
P12HR WSW 5KM/H
P+24HR 12.6N 130.0E 988HPA 25M/S
P+48HR 13.3N 129.0E 975HPA 33M/S
P+72HR 14.7N 128.0E 955HPA 42M/S
P+96HR 16.4N 126.9E 950HPA 45M/S
P+120HR 18.3N 125.5E 940HPA 50M/S= (100 knots)

China Meteorological Administration
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting HurricaneDean07:

About 4% of it is Weather cycled, and about 96% of it is Man-made. Good enough to realize it? out of almost 8 Billion people.

This is no weather cycle, no situation on Earth is a carbon-copied match, as people we can only compare and analog certain situations and years to another, and we've only been keeping track of these "Weather Records" and "Global Climate Trends" for roughly 200 years, This may seem like a long time, but put it into perspective that the Earth has been hear for about roughly 20 Billion years... 200 years would literally equal 2 Seconds if you simplified 20 billion years down to 200 years.


That is the debate. Since the overall data set is so small, we tend to make assumptions to fill in any perceived gaps.

I am not in anyway discounting man's negative impact on our environment, especially as we sit here using computers and servers likely powered by coal fired electricity. While the U.S. has made great strides in this area, I haven't heard the term acid rain in 30 years, much of the rest of the world is rather primitive. I don't see anyone having the ability to tell China, India or Brazil to reduce their emissions.

I guess we're doomed.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
WTPN31 PGTW 210300
MSGID/GENADMIN/JOINT TYPHOON WRNCEN PEARL HARBOR HI//
SUBJ/TROPICAL CYCLONE WARNING//
RMKS/
1. TROPICAL STORM 18W (JELAWAT) WARNING NR 003
01 ACTIVE TROPICAL CYCLONE IN NORTHWESTPAC
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS BASED ON ONE-MINUTE AVERAGE
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
---
WARNING POSITION:
210000Z --- NEAR 13.2N 130.7E
MOVEMENT PAST SIX HOURS - 255 DEGREES AT 07 KTS
POSITION ACCURATE TO WITHIN 060 NM
POSITION BASED ON CENTER LOCATED BY SATELLITE
PRESENT WIND DISTRIBUTION:
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS - 035 KT, GUSTS 045 KT
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
REPEAT POSIT: 13.2N 130.7E
---
FORECASTS:
12 HRS, VALID AT:
211200Z --- 12.7N 129.7E
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS - 045 KT, GUSTS 055 KT
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
RADIUS OF 034 KT WINDS - 030 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
030 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
030 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
030 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
VECTOR TO 24 HR POSIT: 250 DEG/ 03 KTS
---
24 HRS, VALID AT:
220000Z --- 12.5N 129.1E
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS - 055 KT, GUSTS 070 KT
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
RADIUS OF 050 KT WINDS - 020 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
020 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
020 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
020 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
RADIUS OF 034 KT WINDS - 045 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
045 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
045 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
045 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
VECTOR TO 36 HR POSIT: 280 DEG/ 02 KTS
---
36 HRS, VALID AT:
221200Z --- 12.6N 128.6E
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS - 060 KT, GUSTS 075 KT
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
RADIUS OF 050 KT WINDS - 025 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
025 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
025 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
025 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
RADIUS OF 034 KT WINDS - 055 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
055 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
055 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
055 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
VECTOR TO 48 HR POSIT: 310 DEG/ 02 KTS
---
EXTENDED OUTLOOK:
48 HRS, VALID AT:
230000Z --- 12.9N 128.2E
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS - 070 KT, GUSTS 085 KT
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
RADIUS OF 064 KT WINDS - 020 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
020 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
020 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
020 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
RADIUS OF 050 KT WINDS - 035 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
035 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
035 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
035 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
RADIUS OF 034 KT WINDS - 080 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
075 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
080 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
080 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
VECTOR TO 72 HR POSIT: 325 DEG/ 03 KTS
---
72 HRS, VALID AT:
240000Z --- 13.9N 127.5E
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS - 080 KT, GUSTS 100 KT
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
RADIUS OF 064 KT WINDS - 030 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
025 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
025 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
030 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
RADIUS OF 050 KT WINDS - 045 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
045 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
045 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
045 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT

RADIUS OF 034 KT WINDS - 090 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
085 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
085 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
090 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
VECTOR TO 96 HR POSIT: 330 DEG/ 04 KTS
---
LONG RANGE OUTLOOK:
---
96 HRS, VALID AT:
250000Z --- 15.3N 126.7E
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS - 090 KT, GUSTS 110 KT
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
VECTOR TO 120 HR POSIT: 325 DEG/ 06 KTS
---
120 HRS, VALID AT:
260000Z --- 17.3N 125.3E
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS - 095 KT, GUSTS 115 KT
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
---
REMARKS:
210300Z POSITION NEAR 13.1N 130.4E.
TROPICAL STORM (TS) 18W (JELAWAT), LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 575 NM EAST
OF MANILA, PHILIPPINES, HAS TRACKED WEST-SOUTHWESTWARD AT 07 KNOTS
OVER THE PAST 06 HOURS. MAXIMUM SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT AT 210000Z
IS 12 FEET. NEXT WARNINGS AT 210900Z, 211500Z, 212100Z AND 220300Z.
//
NNNN

Member Since: April 29, 2009 Posts: 75 Comments: 14887
453. LBAR
Quoting KoritheMan:

Did you even read his explanation, which was given directly below that paragraph?


Of course I read it. The bottom line is that we don't understand climate at all. Heck, we can't even predict the intensity of a hurricane 48 hours out. All of the AGW people can scream that the sky is falling, or that that the attic is on fire or whatever, but there is no real proof one way or the other. These are the same people who most likely believe in survival of the fittest/evolution. I have every confidence mankind can adjust to whatever climate changes happen. If we can't...oh, well. It was a nice ride.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I'm going to bed so bye everyone, I want to see what 94L will be and what Nadine will be strength wise in the morning.
Member Since: March 16, 2012 Posts: 127 Comments: 7972
Quoting spathy:


He explained that with the Orbital variances.
But he did not show any graph that tells us where we are in that variance.
Nor did he expound on the little understood Oceanic and atmospheric trends that we are seeing that could be a repeat of the past. Or just a perfect storm of atmospheric and oceanic flows.


I think we are somewhere in the coolest 1/4th of the precession cycle, I believe, as the warmest 1/4th ended 6000 to 8000 years ago, and the cycle is 20-something thousand years, I think it's around 22,000 to get back to the same place, but I'd have to do a bit of refreshing my memory.

Also, believe it or not, Mediterranean sea levels by 2000 years ago, the time of Herod in Israel, were significantly lower than present day levels, whch is known because some of his construction projects are now below sea level. However some of this is due to tilting of the basin caused by Earthquakes and other issues, though some is also from "global sea level rise".

The reason North Africa got more rain during the warm phase, maintaining those ancient freshwater lakes, is because the ITCZ was pushed to the north more, which brought more monsoonal rains.


Anyway, the variances do not explain GW, because as stated, we are in the cool phase, definitely the coolest half of the cycle, and I think we are in the coolest 1/4th of the cycle as stated, but I'd need to look it up exactly.


There are cycles within cycles, and remember, orbital variance and precession are not the same thing.

Orbital variance is how the shape of the Earth's orbit around the Sun changes due to frame dragging, tidal forces, and other issues. Precession is the wobble of the Earth's axis' tilt, which changes over time.

If we were at the opposite end of the cycle of precession, the northern hemisphere winter would begin on June 21, and Summer would begin on December 21, for example.

Our calendars actually should have the equinox and solstice shifted by one day about every 60 years or so.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting airmet3:


I think the question is how much is due to natural weather cycles and how much of it is man made.

About 4% of it is Weather cycled, and about 96% of it is Man-made. Good enough to realize it? out of almost 8 Billion people.

This is no weather cycle, no situation on Earth is a carbon-copied match, as people we can only compare and analog certain situations and years to another, and we've only been keeping track of these "Weather Records" and "Global Climate Trends" for roughly 200 years, This may seem like a long time, but put it into perspective that the Earth has been hear for about roughly 20 Billion years... 200 years would literally equal 2 Seconds if you simplified 20 billion years down to 200 years.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting airmet3:


I think the question is how much is due to natural weather cycles and how much of it is man made.

The CO2 coming out of smokestacks and autos is certainly not 'natural'.
Millions of cubic yards of it every year.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Quoting LBAR:
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.

================

LOL
Did you even read his explanation, which was given directly below that paragraph?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting allancalderini:
Poor thing it looks like its dying.

I don't think it is dying but my confidence in it forming have dropped some.
Member Since: March 16, 2012 Posts: 127 Comments: 7972
Quoting HurricaneDean07:
7 comments in 26 comments that I've been online... That would mean That since I've been on ive accounted for nearly 1/3 of the blog's post... Sad. The blog is so DEAD.
Good night everyone, The blog's silence is depressing.

Good night HD07, it wasn't as dead earlier today.

Quoting HurricaneDean07:

Comment 426.

I see, that cone is way too big.
Member Since: March 16, 2012 Posts: 127 Comments: 7972
Per JTWC:

THERE IS A LARGE SPREAD IN THE NUMERICAL MODEL GUIDANCE
AS THE SYSTEM ENTERS A WEAK STEERING ENVIRONMENT. SOME OF THE SPREAD
IS ATTRIBUTED TO DIFFERENCES IN SPEED, WHILE SOME MODELS APPEAR TO
OVER-ANALYZE THE IMPACT OF THE MID-LATITUDE TROUGH AND TURN THE
SYSTEM TO THE NORTH AS A RESULT. DUE TO THIS LARGE MODEL SPREAD AND
UNCERTAINTIES ASSOCIATED WITH QUASI-STATIONARY MOTION, THERE IS LOW
CONFIDENCE IN THIS PORTION OF THE FORECAST.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
438. LBAR
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.

================

LOL
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
7 comments in 26 comments that I've been online... That would mean That since I've been on ive accounted for nearly 1/3 of the blog's post... Sad. The blog is so DEAD.
Good night everyone, The blog's silence is depressing.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Quoting airmet3:


I think the question is how much is due to natural weather cycles and how much of it is man made.
It's definitely a combination of both. I'm not sure where we draw the line, to be honest.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting KoritheMan:
I don't understand why anyone still denies global warming. It's a fact that CO2 traps heat. I really don't see the dispute here. You can't just keep adding and adding such a compound to the atmosphere without inevitably causing warming.


I think the question is how much is due to natural weather cycles and how much of it is man made.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Quoting spathy:


Where are you going to find the tax revenue to pay for more green energy that is going bankrupt. Going bankrupt with billions of tax payer funds?

@0 some coal plants are shutting down as I type.
Lost Jobs. Lost tax revenue.
More borrowed and printed money.

Where in your superior intellect does that lead?
More clean energy? NOT!
More taxable revenue? NOT!
A future reliable source of energy to warm Grandma this winter? NOT!

Get a grip. This is not sustainable.
And its even more unsustainable because of mandated green and over burdensome regulation.
Before I answer, I would like to hear your thoughts on the matter. What is your proposal?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Civicane49:
94L:

Poor thing it looks like its dying.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting wxchaser97:

Is it possible to make the cone any bigger? This storm could be another big typhoon.

Comment 426.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Tropicsweatherpr:


JMA 00z track. Taiwan may be the target this time instead of Okinawa.


Is it possible to make the cone any bigger? This storm could be another big typhoon.
Member Since: March 16, 2012 Posts: 127 Comments: 7972
Quoting spathy:


Where are you going to find the tax revenue to pay for more green energy that is going bankrupt. Going bankrupt with billions of tax payer funds?

@0 some coal plants are shutting down as I type.
Lost Jobs. Lost tax revenue.
More borrowed and printed money.

Where in your superior intellect does that lead?
More clean energy? NOT!
More taxable revenue? NOT!
A future reliable source of energy to warm Grandma this winter? NOT!

Get a grip. This is not sustainable.
And its even more unsustainable because of mandated green and over burdensome regulation.

RESIST !

... on principle, if needs be.
and may the devil take the hindmost.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Tropicsweatherpr:


JMA 00z track. Taiwan may be the target this time instead of Okinawa.


The Joint center is not very good if you ask me, VERY conservative and there cones are almost double the size of the NHC, basically all they're good for is to give a statement that a Typhoon is coming... It could hit anywhere within 1000 miles of the current position...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting HurricaneDean07:

No. The large increase in population would mean that CO2 Emmisions would be on the increase due to the invention of Automobiles and the creations of Thousands of largescale factories worldwide. All this does is cause CO2, a major Greenhouse gass that traps all the sun's rays in the atmosphere, instead of harmlessly reflecting out into space. This only means there will be bigger build ups in the the Earth's heat, and will cause unordinary weather patterns such as 2010-2011 $ Billion dollar Era. And those build ups could also result in increased ammount of Hurricane activity (Ehm *clears throat* 2010-2012 with above average seasons of a grand total, so far, of 52 Named storms), this can also increase the chances of a season with many MAJOR hurricanes, but an average season overall, which is forecasted to occur in abundance if the Climate the shifts the way it is. Also, the Build up of CO2 is causing the Oceans to soak it up, and poison the Ocean water and kill marine life destroy many habitats and ecosystems. Basically if the Ocean water comes to a point of Absorbing to much CO2, the Water will be equivalent to h2co2 which is not even close to what life needs to live. Personally, I would consider finding a way to transplant some hardy plants to Mars, and see how the plants do(due to the discovery of carbon snowfall on the south pole 06-07) if it works out properly, The plants would absorb CO2 and put out O2 which is what is needed to create life, the only problem seen here is that mars doesn't have an atmosphere(much of one), and that temperatures are much different there(Antartica cold during winter, globally).


Anyone? Plus 1 for my longest comment ever posted on this blog? :)
lol
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:
No one said Arctic sea ice was in decline 1500 years ago. Read what Dr. Masters wrote:

"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."

Bottom line: it's been thousands of years since there was so little ice in the Arctic--and the last time there was so little, the oceans were 12-18 feet higher.

I've said this more than once lately: while we may not be doomed (yet), we're definitely in serious, serious trouble.

We are. Mother Earth isn't, she could live on happily for billions of years without us... Personally, Maybe that Wall-E (pixar/disney) movie was right, we should all ship ourselves off into Space and travel around for about 30 generations or so, and wait for Earth to recover :) LOL
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Grothar:


You should. It is the amount of energy produced by Jello.

Brilliant !
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:
Jelawat is organizing quite rapidly. JTWC already has the storm up to 50 mph as of 18z and JMA has it at 60 mph (50 mph 10-minute) as of 0Z.



JMA 00z track. Taiwan may be the target this time instead of Okinawa.

Member Since: April 29, 2009 Posts: 75 Comments: 14887
Quoting victoria780:
If arctic sea ice was in a decline 1500 years ago which Dr.Masters has said,then the question is Did they have man made global warming back then too?Someone explain..

No. The large increase in population would mean that CO2 Emmisions would be on the increase due to the invention of Automobiles and the creations of Thousands of largescale factories worldwide. All this does is cause CO2, a major Greenhouse gass that traps all the sun's rays in the atmosphere, instead of harmlessly reflecting out into space. This only means there will be bigger build ups in the the Earth's heat, and will cause unordinary weather patterns such as 2010-2011 $ Billion dollar Era. And those build ups could also result in increased ammount of Hurricane activity (Ehm *clears throat* 2010-2012 with above average seasons of a grand total, so far, of 52 Named storms), this can also increase the chances of a season with many MAJOR hurricanes, but an average season overall, which is forecasted to occur in abundance if the Climate the shifts the way it is. Also, the Build up of CO2 is causing the Oceans to soak it up, and poison the Ocean water and kill marine life destroy many habitats and ecosystems. Basically if the Ocean water comes to a point of Absorbing to much CO2, the Water will be equivalent to h2co2 which is not even close to what life needs to live. Personally, I would consider finding a way to transplant some hardy plants to Mars, and see how the plants do(due to the discovery of carbon snowfall on the south pole 06-07) if it works out properly, The plants would absorb CO2 and put out O2 which is what is needed to create life, the only problem seen here is that mars doesn't have an atmosphere(much of one), and that temperatures are much different there(Antartica cold during winter, globally).
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I don't understand why anyone still denies global warming. It's a fact that CO2 traps heat. I really don't see the dispute here. You can't just keep adding and adding such a compound to the atmosphere without inevitably causing warming.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting victoria780:
If arctic sea ice was in a decline 1500 years ago which Dr.Masters has said,then the question is Did they have man made global warming back then too?Someone explain..
No one said Arctic sea ice was in decline 1500 years ago. Read what Dr. Masters wrote:

"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."

Bottom line: it's been thousands of years since there was so little ice in the Arctic--and the last time there was so little, the oceans were 12-18 feet higher.

I've said this more than once lately: while we may not be doomed (yet), we're definitely in serious, serious trouble.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13796
Quoting AussieStorm:
What the!!!!



is this a glitch??


Must be...Unless they've tapped into the secrets of The Bermuda Triangle!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Quoting victoria780:
Who says?or is it solar cycles?or maybe some of each?
Last I heard we were actually in a solar minimum.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting KoritheMan:

The warming back then was largely due to solar cycles. The ongoing warming is not.
Who says?or is it solar cycles?or maybe some of each?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Quoting victoria780:
If arctic sea ice was in a decline 1500 years ago which Dr.Masters has said,then the question is Did they have man made global warming back then too?Someone explain..
The warming back then was largely due to solar cycles. The ongoing warming is not.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
If arctic sea ice was in a decline 1500 years ago which Dr.Masters has said,then the question is Did they have man made global warming back then too?Someone explain..
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
410. HadesGodWyvern (Mod)
Quoting AussieStorm:
What the!!!!



is this a glitch??


it's predicting the future too..

Doesn't it say October 17 2012? (kind of hard to read with the small print)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 459 - 409

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.

Local Weather

Overcast
32 °F
Overcast

JeffMasters's Recent Photos

Lake Effort Snow Shower Over Windsor, Ontario
Sunset on Dunham Lake
Pictured Rocks Sunset
Sunset on Lake Huron