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: 59 - 9

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 sar2401:
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.
Speaking of breathless....
Exactly what actions should be done swiftly and urgrently to reverse this process? This is now the intersection of science, policy, and public opinion. What are the recommendations that will not reduce the entire globe to the status of a third world country? I understand the concerns, but this is like shouting "Fire" in a crowded theater. It does no good to point out the problem without reasonable solutions.


What is being suggested is: GEOENGINEERING. The same people who invented the nuclear meltdown will now show us how to make another enduring disaster.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
The convection approaching the N Leewards this morning has dissipated and is now cirrus debris only. If it was for the windwards, sure it would not dissipate.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Grothar:
Thanks, Doc. I had an interesting question posed to me the other night. Someone asked why it gets warmer in the Arctic in the summer, but colder in the Antarctic in the summer. I was speechless.
This may have been refering to the Arctic's record warmth while near record cold is happening in the Antartic.Poorly stated question.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting GTcooliebai:
94L making a run at Sub-Tropical Depression status:



Would he end up being Oscar Wilde or Oscar the Grouch?! Someone before said it reminded them of hot dogs....so it could be an Oscar Meyer weinercane?! LOL
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting GeorgiaStormz:
Are humans creating more water vapor by our rapid blowup in population?


C6H12O6 6 O2 %u2192 6 CO2 6 H2O Energy (34-36 ATP heat)

Through this the air we breathe out is 100% saturated with water vapor and is up to 5% water vapor, compared to the much drier air we take in, which typically is less than 1% water vapor.
Maybe having 7billion humans exceeds the rate at which all this water vapor is converted into rainfall, and then causes a feedback loop, since water vapor is an even better greenhouse gas than is CO2.

So maybe not only co2, but water vapor is to blame, not only from evaporation, but from the feedback loop of creating more and more by animal( in this case humans especially) respiration.



(I'm not saying i believe this, as i am not nearly knowledgable enough to make a fair analysis of this, and im sure respiration is not that major of an effect, but im just wondering if it could have some effect, besides the increase in water vapor by warming, some of which could be excess water vapor induced)


Lets compare water vapor to carbon dioxide:
if you chop down a tree and burn it you release carbon dioxide, but, since the tree took in the carbon from the air to be burned to form carbon dioxide there is no net increase in carbon dioxide. Similarly when animals respire they take energy from what they eat (eg. plants which take in carbon dioxide and water vapor) and that gets turned into carbon dioxide and water vapor, so there is no net increase in either gas.

The danger of burning fossil fuels is that not only does it release carbon dioxide that was once stored in the earth for millions of years, it releases water vapor that was stored in the earth for millions of years; both in the form of a hydrocarbon.

However, despite water vapor being a more potent greenhouse gas, its atmospheric concentration depends on the earth's temperature, because water can exist in solid liquid and gaseous forms on Earth - its the gaseous form we are worried about. Carbon dioxide is different; it doesn't naturally exist in these forms and remains a gas - which is why its the big player that gets all the attention.
However, increasing the earth's average temperature through increasing carbon dioxide concentrations can increase the water vapor concentration - a feedback mechanism.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AussieStorm:


That does not explain why the CO2 is not having an effect on the Antarctic.

The Lowest Southern hemisphere sea ice recorded was on February 28 1993 with 1.30987million square km, that year the sea ice grew to 15.37472million square km during winter.

This year
February 25 2012: Minimum 1.96297million square km


Keep in mind, Antarctica is effectively a frozen desert; there's very little annual precipitation in the interior of the continent because the temperatures are so low that there's little water vapor.

Increasing temperatures, as shown to exist in the charts in the blog post, would actually in the short-term INCREASE the amount of Antarctic ice because there would be an increase in the amount of water the atmosphere could hold.

While that is happening, also in the short-term, warming of the ocean has been observed to lead to an increase in the forward rate of speed of Antarctic glaciers-- there's evidence that seawater is getting into the base of some of the glaciers, effectively "lubricating" them.

Both of these factors would lead to an increase in sea ice volume--for a while--that would be entirely consistent with a warming environment. No conspiracy theories need apply.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting goosegirl1:


I mean this respectfully- read the first sentance. CO2 is having an effect on sea ice in Antarctica, just not the same effect as in the Arctic. One explanation for the difference is that the Arctic is a frozen ocean, while the Antarctic is a frozen land mass surrounded by ocean.

The numbers I quoted is for the Southern hemisphere Sea Ice Area. That does not include Ice on land. If it included land ice, those numbers would be much much higher.
Member Since: September 30, 2007 Posts: 9 Comments: 15932
Oh it's going to be long days until the next blog with this topic.

Anyway, problem is, unless you are of very decent means to install your own personal renewable energy, we are at the mercy of those in power-either government or corporation- and those with money to sway things. Being those things, the likelyhood anything is going to swing towards a greater amount of renewable energy is pretty slim. Unless the masses really rise up and demand...but that's even unliklier to happen.

So, it'll be how it is, until the planet actually is running out. Because those with the power, are generally the most self serving people you can find. So unless it equals profit for them, they aren't going to change their direction. Though, I don't see how oil platforms and drilling, or building 1000's of miles of pipeline is actually any cheaper.

If I ever own my own home again, will def hope I have the means to install renewable energy sources, just so I don't have to pay the outlandish rates to the energy companies for them to make bumper profits every year.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
94L making a run at Sub-Tropical Depression status:

Member Since: August 31, 2009 Posts: 0 Comments: 5628
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.
Speaking of breathless....
Exactly what actions should be done swiftly and urgrently to reverse this process? This is now the intersection of science, policy, and public opinion. What are the recommendations that will not reduce the entire globe to the status of a third world country? I understand the concerns, but this is like shouting "Fire" in a crowded theater. It does no good to point out the problem without reasonable solutions.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
That's what the GFS develops into a TD or weak TS west of the Cape Verde Islands.

Member Since: August 31, 2009 Posts: 0 Comments: 5628
Quoting sar2401:

Any idea if that lens might be heated? I didn't think so.


Actually, there is a thermometer near the camera. It said: .2 degrees C.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AussieStorm:


That does not explain why the CO2 is not having an effect on the Antarctic.

The Lowest Southern hemisphere sea ice recorded was on February 28 1993 with 1.30987million square km, that year the sea ice grew to 15.37472million square km during winter.

This year
February 25 2012: Minimum 1.96297million square km


I mean this respectfully- read the first sentance. CO2 is having an effect on sea ice in Antarctica, just not the same effect as in the Arctic. One explanation for the difference is that the Arctic is a frozen ocean, while the Antarctic is a frozen land mass surrounded by ocean.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Mid atlantic. MODIS today

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting GeorgiaStormz:
Are humans creating more water vapor by our rapid blowup in population?
Because
C6H12O6 + 6 O2 → 6 CO2 + 6 H2O + Energy (34-36 ATP + heat)

Through this the air we breathe out is 100% saturated with water vapor and is up to 5% water vapor, compared to the much drier air we take in, that typically is less than 1% water vapor.
Maybe having 7billion humans exceeds the rate at which all this water vapor is converted into rainfall, and then causes a feedback loop as water vapor is an even better greenhouse gas than is CO2.

So maybe not only co2, but water vapor is to blame, not only from evaporation, but from the feedback loop of creating more and more by respiration.


(I'm not saying i believe this, as i am not nearly knowledgable enough to make a fair analysis of this, and im sure respiration is not that major of an effect, but im just wondering if it could have some effect, besides the increase in water vapor by warming, some of which could be excess water vapor induced)


At least you and sometimes most will admit we aren't experts on this subject (goodness knows I'm not). But we also aren't close-minded to other ideas, theories, etc and will discuss them in an open minded manner. I don't portray the ostrich head in the sand theory that man made co2 from fossil fuels is the only acceptable answer. All of this while I burn fossil fuels to make my computer, power the battery and enjoy the climate control of a central air and heat system while I'm pontificating how evil these things are...ahh the irony
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting CaicosRetiredSailor:



As stated above by Dr. Masters

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.


That does not explain why the CO2 is not having an effect on the Antarctic.

The Lowest Southern hemisphere sea ice recorded was on February 28 1993 with 1.30987million square km, that year the sea ice grew to 15.37472million square km during winter.

This year
February 25 2012: Minimum 1.96297million square km
Member Since: September 30, 2007 Posts: 9 Comments: 15932
**Are humans creating more water vapor by our rapid blowup in population?**

Whip out your Occam's Razor and you can see that the amswer is much more likely more heat= more evaporation= more water vapor. Although most other human activities most certainly do create more water vapor, by increasing CO2 and trapping heat.


Member Since: Posts: Comments:
twenty years from now from now in August you might be able to take a ship right across the Arctic Ocean."


Using the 5 year running average of net melt rate, August 1 will be ice free in about


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


The 5 year running average net sea ice minimum volume loss is now 602cu km/yr, the same as this years net loss.

If this rate is linear and there is no further acceleration, then the volume minimum will be zero for at least one day in September in 6 years or less, assuming no more "giant drops" like 2007 or 2010. If the rate is exponentional with a growth factor of the 5th root of 2 per year, as it appears to be, then there will be at least one ice-free day in September in 4 or 5 years.

There will be at least one ice free day in both August and October in 10 years or less, and more likely 7 or 8 years, with September being totally ice free by then.

August will be totally ice free, for the ENTIRE MONTH, some time between 10 and 15 years, at the present 5 year average LINEAR rate of net loss.


As I said on another board, Volume is what melts, not extent or area. Extent and Area simply describe how the Volume is distributed.

Since most of the volume loss is coming from the thinning of ice in the past 5 years, it will eventually start coming more and more from loss of area and extent as average thickness reaches 1 meter or less, because all three values: volume, area, and extent, are squeezed to zero simultaneously for the real world value, not our estimates.

See below:




and



Notice the VERY rapid decline in annual minimum Area and Extent in the past year or two? This happened because THICKNESS has become so little that it is very easy for area to be lost.


This trend in loss of area will now grow exponentially at a rate of ~15% per year, roughly matching the exponential rate of volume loss, rather than 10 to 15% per decade as in the past, because the thickness is approaching 1 meter.

In the past, the area was partially maintained as thickness decreased, now that is no longer possible, and the graphs are beginning to show the evidence, though it will take another year or two for the data to convince any legitimate skeptics.


Further, winter maximum volume will be below the 1979 September minimum volume in about another 6 to 9 years, representing a complete seasonal bifurcation.


Now remember, warming does not stop when the ice melts. In fact, it greatly accelerates as I've pointed out many times. Remember, the Heat of Fusion of water is around 80 times the Specific Heat Capacity of water, so the "heating" of water will be far greater in terms of temperature than anything we have yet seen once this ice melts completely.


Now that I've come to have a better understanding of these trends, I am convinced that not only is AGW real, it is significantly worse than the IPCC has ever predicted.

It should be noted that the "linear" rate would remain approximately the same even if we magically quit producing net gains in CO2 and Methane tomorrow and never looked back.
Member Since: January 25, 2012 Posts: 33 Comments: 1520
Quoting AussieStorm:


I can see this happening in the Arctic

That's funny, except penguins don't live in the Arctic. Seeing the sea ice figures for the Antarctic, the poor guy would get an awful bop on the head from the bully. :)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting StormPro:


What precentage is "Almost wholly"?

I would say Neo is suggesting close to 100%.
100% = whole, Right??
Member Since: September 30, 2007 Posts: 9 Comments: 15932
Quoting AussieStorm:


Why is it not having an effect on the Antarctic?
3 of the last 5 years have been the highest ever.

2007, 2010, and 2012 top 3 records for highest amount of Southern Hemisphere sea ice level.

2007: 16.23238million square km(Day 263)
2012: 16.14588million square km(Day 259)
2010: 16.05034million square km(Day 227)



As stated above by Dr. Masters

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.
Member Since: July 12, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 5997
Are humans creating more water vapor by our rapid blowup in population?


C6H12O6 6 O2 %u2192 6 CO2 6 H2O Energy (34-36 ATP heat)

Through this the air we breathe out is 100% saturated with water vapor and is up to 5% water vapor, compared to the much drier air we take in, which typically is less than 1% water vapor.
Maybe having 7billion humans exceeds the rate at which all this water vapor is converted into rainfall, and then causes a feedback loop, since water vapor is an even better greenhouse gas than is CO2.

So maybe not only co2, but water vapor is to blame, not only from evaporation, but from the feedback loop of creating more and more by animal( in this case humans especially) respiration.



(I'm not saying i believe this, as i am not nearly knowledgable enough to make a fair analysis of this, and im sure respiration is not that major of an effect, but im just wondering if it could have some effect, besides the increase in water vapor by warming, some of which could be excess water vapor induced)

Gasoline also produces water vapor, as well as natural gas.
Coal does not.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting wxmod:
This is a webcam image taken near the north pole. The droplets on the lens are melted water, not ice. The arctic is still melting and will continue to melt for a little longer.


Any idea if that lens might be heated? I didn't think so.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:
Yes, you most certainly could be. And are, in this case. The rapidly vanishing Arctic ice isn't due to an increase in polar insolation from either heightened solar activity or axial tilt of the planet; it is due primarily and almost wholly to a warming atmosphere and warming oceans brought about by increaing concentrations of C02 from the burning of fossil fuels.


What precentage is "Almost wholly"?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Thanks Jeff & Angela...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:
Taylor is certainly free to spout whatever non-scientific gibberish he wishes. But curious types should be made aware that truthful climate science is far more likely to come from an actual climate scientist than from a fossil fuel-funded non-scientist opining in a pro-Big Energy newspaper.

Forbes is a newspaper funded by the fossil-fuel industry that is pro-Big Energy? Since you've apparently never read the magazine named Forbes, maybe you should stick to your scientific journals.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting FatPenguin:


CO2 is a HEAT-TRAPPING gas and there's more of it now than there was 200 years ago. Why is this fact still ignored by so many?


Why is it not having an effect on the Antarctic?
Is it cause there is less population in the Southern Hemisphere.


3 of the last 5 years have been the highest ever.

2007, 2010, and 2012 top 3 records for highest amount of Southern Hemisphere sea ice level.

2007: 16.23238million square km(Day 263)
2012: 16.14588million square km(Day 259)
2010: 16.05034million square km(Day 227)
Member Since: September 30, 2007 Posts: 9 Comments: 15932
Quoting FatPenguin:
Nothing personal to Mr. James Taylor, but people like him need to shut their traps over global warming.
Taylor is certainly free to spout whatever non-scientific gibberish he wishes. But curious types should be made aware that truthful climate science is far more likely to come from an actual climate scientist than from a fossil fuel-funded non-scientist opining in a pro-Big Energy magazine.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting sheople:
I still think it has something to do with the earths axis shifting and exposing the arctic to more sunlight. but I could be wrong
Yes, you most certainly could be. And are, in this case. The rapidly vanishing Arctic ice isn't due to an increase in polar insolation from either heightened solar activity or axial tilt of the planet; it is due primarily and almost wholly to a warming atmosphere and warming oceans brought about by increaing concentrations of C02 from the burning of fossil fuels.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AussieStorm:


I can see this happening in the Arctic


That's a riot!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting sheople:
Link

I still think it has something to do with the earths axis shifting and exposing the arctic to more sunlight. but I could be wrong


CO2 is a HEAT-TRAPPING gas and there's more of it now than there was 200 years ago. Why is this fact still ignored by so many?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting wxmod:
This is a webcam image taken near the north pole. The droplets on the lens are melted water, not ice. The arctic is still melting and will continue to melt for a little longer.



I can see this happening in the Arctic
Member Since: September 30, 2007 Posts: 9 Comments: 15932
Nothing personal to Mr. James Taylor, but people like him need to shut their traps over global warming.

Their should be a Wall of Shame that records these misleading articles, blogs & interviews so that future generations can have reference points to the selfish behavior and callous disregard for science.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting sheople:
Link

I still think it has something to do with the earths axis shifting and exposing the arctic to more sunlight. but I could be wrong


Nah, it's melting because the lizard people have an invisible mothership in geostationary orbit over the North Pole. They're melting the ice with phaser energy beamed down from the ship, because Earth's a bit too cold for them to colonize, just now.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting GTcooliebai:
12z GFS 90 hrs.



Hmmm,east of Barbados.
Member Since: April 29, 2009 Posts: 75 Comments: 14061
12z GFS 90 hrs.

Member Since: August 31, 2009 Posts: 0 Comments: 5628
This is a webcam image taken near the north pole. The droplets on the lens are melted water, not ice. The arctic is still melting and will continue to melt for a little longer.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Link

I still think it has something to do with the earths axis shifting and exposing the arctic to more sunlight. but I could be wrong
Member Since: September 12, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 35
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


That could have easily become a "tilted" conversation.


Very bipolar conversation.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting dartboardmodel:
Is that growing blob in the Eastern Caribbean are old invest friend that propagated from the Western Caribbean a few days ago?? I lost track of it (thought it was toast) but something looks alive down there today. Where could this new blob be going... up the East Coast??? Any comments??

Woops I meant growing blob in the Western Caribbean coming from the Eastern Caribbean. Man I need some stronger coffee lol!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Doc:

Could enough calving occur to cool down the Gulf stream.

Regardz
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
"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." from Jeff's blog.

Well, I showed you all satellite photos of an area as large as 43% of Europe covered with jet induced clouds today. And I do repeat: "it is guaranteed to have a significant impact on weather and climate."
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Is that growing blob in the Eastern Caribbean are old invest friend that propagated from the Western Caribbean a few days ago?? I lost track of it (thought it was toast) but something looks alive down there today. Where could this new blob be going... up the East Coast??? Any comments??
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Grothar:
Thanks, Doc. I had an interesting question posed to me the other night. Someone asked why it gets warmer in the Arctic in the summer, but colder in the Antarctic in the summer. I was speechless.


That could have easily become a "tilted" conversation.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Grothar:
Thanks, Doc. I had an interesting question posed to me the other night. Someone asked why it gets warmer in the Arctic in the summer, but colder in the Antarctic in the summer. I was speechless.



what was your answer?? OH Good morning everybody


never mind. you said you were speechless
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Dear Dr Jeff Masters and Angela Fritz.

James Taylor is wrong when he said "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).

He and you didn't check out The Cryosphere Today's Southern Hemisphere Sea Ice Area tracking chart.

Day 256-2012 had 16.05708million sq km of sea ice area. Day 259-2012 had 16.14588million sq. km of sea ice area.

The record is 16.23238million sq km of sea ice area set on day 263 of 2007.

This can be seen in the image below and at The Cryosphere Today's Southern Hemisphere Sea Ice Area tracking chart.


2012 compared to 2007.

Click image to see full size.
Member Since: September 30, 2007 Posts: 9 Comments: 15932
Thanks, Doc. I had an interesting question posed to me the other night. Someone asked why it gets warmer in the Arctic in the summer, but colder in the Antarctic in the summer. I was speechless.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Thanks for the information, Dr. Masters.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Thank you Jeff and Angela.
Member Since: July 12, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 5997
Quoting Hurricane1956:
I believe there is a hint of a circulation at the end tail of the front in the western Gulf of Mexico,as shown on the Rainbow loop,the CMC model pick-up on one of their runs yesterday,developing a Tropical storm then moving East to South Florida,let's see what happens,this is very typical to happens this time of year from a stalled front.


yep todays run too u decide

Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 59 - 9

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.