A dramatic greening of the Arctic over the past 30 years

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 3:30 PM GMT on March 18, 2013

Share this Blog
54
+

A remarkable transformation in the vegetation of the Arctic has occurred over the past 30 years, according to a study of satellite data published on March 10, 2013, in Nature Climate Change. The authors found that Arctic vegetation growth and temperatures in 2011 resembled what occurred 250 - 430 miles farther to the south back in 1982. That's the approximate distance in latitude between San Francisco and San Diego, or Washington D.C. and Atlanta. More greening occurred in Eurasia than North America, and the Arctic's new greenness is visible on the ground as an increasing abundance of tall shrubs and trees. Large patches of vigorously productive vegetation now span a third of the northern landscape, an area about equal to the contiguous United States. "Higher northern latitudes are getting warmer, Arctic sea ice and the duration of snow cover are diminishing, the growing season is getting longer and plants are growing more," said co-author Dr. Ranga Myneni of Boston University's Department of Earth and Environment, in a NASA press release. "In the north's Arctic and boreal areas, the characteristics of the seasons are changing, leading to great disruptions for plants and related ecosystems." The changes in the Arctic's vegetation are being driven by human-caused global warming, which is occurring in the Arctic at more than double the rate of the rest of the planet. This so-called "Arctic amplification" is due, in part, to the increased melting of ice and snow near the pole. When ice and snow melt, they uncover darker surfaces underneath, which absorb more sunlight and increase Arctic temperatures in a vicious cycle which melts even more ice and snow. Using 17 climate models, the researchers predicted that a continuation of warming in the Arctic in coming decades could lead to over a 1300 mile latitudinal shift in Arctic vegetation zones by the year 2100, compared to the period 1951 - 1980. That's a distance greater than the north-south extent of the contiguous United States. However, more frequent forest fires, increased pest outbreaks, and summertime droughts due to a warming climate might slow down Arctic plant growth.


Figure 1. Of the 10 million square miles (26 million square kilometers) of northern vegetated lands, 34 to 41 percent showed increases in plant growth (green and blue), 3 to 5 percent showed decreases in plant growth (orange and red), and 51 to 62 percent showed no changes (yellow) over the past 30 years. Satellite data in this visualization are from AVHRR and MODIS. Credit: NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center Scientific Visualization Studio.


Figure 2. Trees take hold as permafrost thaws near the Altai Mountains in Russia. Credit: Terry Callaghan, EU-Interact/Sergey Kirpotin, Tomsk State University.

Commentary
One often hears complaints that global warming may be greatly overestimated, due to many temperature sensors being located in increasingly urbanized areas where local "urban heat island" effects are not being properly considered. If this were true (and it isn't), then we would not expect to see "nature's thermometers"--plants and animals--change their behavior and ranges much. But plants and animals are responding in major ways to the warming climate, and the greening of the Arctic is merely one more example of "nature's thermometers" telling us that the planet is warming significantly. Some other examples:

Fall is falling back: During 1982 to 1999, the end of the growing season was delayed by 4.3 days in the Northern Hemisphere. During 2000 to 2008, the end of the growing season was further delayed by an additional 2.3 days. In the U.S., fall now occurs ten days later than it did 30 years ago.

Spring is springing forward: Spring events, like bird and butterfly migrations, flower blooming times, and frog mating, have been advancing by about three days per decade over the past 30 years.

Animals are changing migration patterns: New species have colonized previously ‘cool’ regions, including sea anemones in Monterey Bay, and lichens and butterflies in Europe. Over the past 50 years, maximum range shifts vary from 200 km (butterflies) to 1,000 km (marine copepods).

Related blog post: New USDA Plant Hardiness Zone Map for gardeners shows a warming climate

Dr. Myneni's petition to protect Earth from climate change
Professor Myneni of Boston University's Department of Earth & Environment, co-author of the greening Arctic study, has developed a simple one-sentence petition that he hopes one billion people will sign by Earth Day, 2014:

Dear Secretary-General of the United Nations Ban Ki-moon,

We, the People of the Earth, request You to act judiciously and expeditiously to protect the Earth from anthropogenic climate change.

Respectfully,
People of the Earth


The petition, which I have signed, is at: https://yourclimatechange.org/, and was recently featured by Discovery News.

Jeff Masters

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 591 - 541

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

Quoting AGWcreationists:
We also have no sense of the relative intensity of sunspot cycles back then. We can compare sunspot cycles over the last several hundred years, and note that the depths of the Little Ice Age corresponded to the Maunder Minimum and our current warming corresponds to an increase in sunspot cycle intensity over the last 150 years or so.

So there is a possible natural forcing mechanism for the recent warming. And there is a standing theory as to why that can happen, namely weaker solar magnetism allows more cosmic rays to reach Earth, increasing cloud formation and generating a net cooling effect.

But my original point stands. Polar bears did not go extinct back then with far less sea ice than we have seen as of late. And the threat to polar bears is trotted out as one reason to fight AGW. I would imagine they would adapt as they did during the Holocene Warm Period.


I see no one here trotting out the threat to polar bears...and quite frankly the polar bears are not the point.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Guruchild:
I am sick of seeing people comparing climate data to the 1970s and 1980s and using it as evidence of climate change. We have half en eyeblink of data. If you want to pretend this data means squat, you need more of it. You don't have more of it because humans were scientifically lazy and basically just idiots before about 1979. Obviously, they haven't progressed much since then.


Oh gee whiz, someone better break the news to Einstein, Galileo, Copernicus, Brahe, Pastuer, Fleming, Avogadro..... well, a lot of those lazy scientists :)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
yep...check out the new design of wu tabs

Member Since: April 23, 2011 Posts: 104 Comments: 14873
Quoting Guruchild:
I am sick of seeing people comparing climate data to the 1970s and 1980s and using it as evidence of climate change. We have half en eyeblink of data. If you want to pretend this data means squat, you need more of it. You don't have more of it because humans were scientifically lazy and basically just idiots before about 1979. Obviously, they haven't progressed much since then.


(giggles, grabs popcorn and soda)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Season creep
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


In phenology, season creep is a neologism that refers to observed changes in the timing of the seasons, especially earlier indications of spring widely observed in temperate areas across the Northern Hemisphere. Phenological records analyzed by climate scientists have shown significant temporal trends in the observed time of seasonal events, from the end of the 20th century and continuing into the 21st century. In Europe, season creep has been associated with the arrival of spring moving up by approximately one week in a recent 30 year period. Other studies have put the rate of season creep measured by plant phenology in the range of 2–3 days per decade advancement in spring, and 0.3–1.6 days per decade delay in autumn, over the past 30–80 years.

Observable changes in nature related to season creep include birds laying their eggs earlier and buds appearing on some trees in late winter. In addition to advanced budding, flowering trees have been blooming earlier, for example the culturally important cherry blossoms in Japan, and Washington, D.C. Northern hardwood forests have been trending toward leafing out sooner, and retaining their green canopies longer.[18] The agricultural growing season has also expanded by 10–20 days over the last few decades.[19]

The effects of season creep have been noted by non-scientists as well, including gardeners who have advanced their spring planting times,[20] and experimented with plantings of less hardy warmer climate varieties of non-native plants.[21] While summer growing seasons are expanding, winters are getting warmer and shorter, resulting in reduced winter ice cover on bodies of water, earlier ice-out, earlier melt water flows, and earlier spring lake level peaks. Some spring events, or "phenophases", have become intermittent or unobservable; for example, bodies of water that once froze regularly most winters now freeze less frequently, and formerly migratory birds are now seen year-round in some areas.
Relationship to global warming

The full impact of global warming is forecast to happen in the future, but climate scientists have cited season creep as an easily observable effect of climate change that has already occurred and continues to occur. A large systematic phenological examination of data on 542 plant species in 21 European countries from 1971–2000 showed that 78% of all leafing, flowering, and fruiting records advanced while only 3% were significantly delayed, and these observations were consistent with measurements of observed warming. Similar changes in the phenology of plants and animals are occurring across marine, freshwater, and terrestrial groups studied, and these changes are also consistent with the expected impact of global warming.

While phenology fairly consistently points to an earlier spring across temperate regions of North America, a recent comprehensive study of the subarctic showed greater variability in the timing of green-up, with some areas advancing, and some having no discernible trend over a recent 44-year period. Another 40 year phenological study in China found greater warming over that period in the more northerly sites studied, with sites experiencing cooling mostly in the south, indicating that the temperature variation with latitude is decreasing there. This study also confirmed that season creep was correlated with warming, but the effect is non-linear—phenophases advanced less with greater warming, and retarded more with greater cooling.

Shorter winters and longer growing seasons may appear to be a benefit to society from global warming, but the effects of advanced phenophases may also have serious consequences for human populations. Modeling of snowmelt predicted that warming of 3° to 5°C in the Western United States could cause snowmelt-driven runoff to occur as much as two months earlier, with profound effects on hydroelectricity, land use, agriculture, and water management. Since 1980, earlier snowmelt and associated warming has also been associated with an increase in length and severity of the wildfire season there.

Season creep may also have adverse affects on plant species as well. Earlier flowering could occur before pollinators such as honey bees become active, which would have negative consequences for pollination and reproduction. Shorter and warmer winters may affect other environmental adaptations including cold hardening of trees, which could result in frost damage during more severe winters.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:
Well, of course the North Pole is still iced over; it's the time of the annual maximum. Now, if you want to see the real story of what's going on up north, look at these two graphs (I just drew them up, so haven't posted them to my climate graphs site yet).

ice

ice

Wow that second graph sure is visually appealing!

Won't go into arctanlength disagreement of "vertical" scalings. lol
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
12z JMA--lots of moisture..





Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Naga5000:
>Yes, but the Holocene is much more complicated than that. "...the mid-Holocene, roughly 6,000 years ago, was generally warmer than today, but only in summer and only in the northern hemisphere. More over, we clearly know the cause of this natural warming, and know without doubt that this proven "astronomical" climate forcing mechanism cannot be responsible for the warming over the last 100 years." You cannot compare that warm period to what we are experiencing currently. Link
We also have no sense of the relative intensity of sunspot cycles back then. We can compare sunspot cycles over the last several hundred years, and note that the depths of the Little Ice Age corresponded to the Maunder Minimum and our current warming corresponds to an increase in sunspot cycle intensity over the last 150 years or so.

So there is a possible natural forcing mechanism for the recent warming. And there is a standing theory as to why that can happen, namely weaker solar magnetism allows more cosmic rays to reach Earth, increasing cloud formation and generating a net cooling effect.

But my original point stands. Polar bears did not go extinct back then with far less sea ice than we have seen as of late. And the threat to polar bears is trotted out as one reason to fight AGW. I would imagine they would adapt as they did during the Holocene Warm Period.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Chris Holcomb %u200F@ChrisHolcomb
NWS storm survey in Floyd co concludes damage from Cave Spring to Silver Creek was from straight line winds of 80-100mph. #gawx #news #wx









Member Since: February 11, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 9731
Quoting RTSplayer:


Leave it to the U.S. for not doing the right thing.

An appropriate reprisal in ancient times was 4 times the cost of the original damages (with presumably being adjusted by the costs of apprehension, etc,). This would likely have the U.S. in a net surplus economy since 2003, if this policy had been inacted.

Instead, the U.S. bribes neutrals, and pays our enemies, educating their children for free, and building their infrastructure for free, and arming and training their military for free.

In terms of economics and long term strategies, our government's foreign policy is just about as backwards from nature as is conceivably possible.
I like this post....So much for the Law of Least Effort..:)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting aspectre:
517 aspectre: For those questioning whether the Iraq War was just another federal subsidy for the fossil fuel industry, "Iraq stands to gain almost $5 trillion in revenues from oil exports over the period to 2035, an annual average of $200 billion..." according to the International Energy Agency.
532 txjac: I kind of think it was also a payback to China as they needed the oil and they are getting oil from Iraq now

I'm not sure that payback is the proper descriptive, but the prospect of Iraqi crude re-entering the world market was certainly a major consideration when China decided to not veto the UN resolution used to "justify" the invasion of Iraq.

I think there was even more to it. Right now, Saudi Arabia is the only producer with significant excess capacity. It basically made them untouchable after 9/11, even though most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis. And the Saudis threatened to blow up their production capacity if any military action were taken against them.

If Iraq reaches its full production potential, they will offer similar surplus capacity. And that would put a leash on the ability of the Saudis to gain protection by blackmailing world energy needs.

Not sure if the Bush Admin was that smart, but IMO that was one of the net effects of toppling Saddam. It doesn't necessarily rest upon who controls that oil, just that significant surplus capacity was generated to offset the Saudis.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


No, no, aquak9. The one that makes the sunglasses is Grant Foster's dyslexic brother. :)


Ahhh, ok thanks. I guess he's not the only slydexic one.

Still, they both seem to have a problem with the bright sunshiney heat. Must run in the family.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
12z CMC-thats a lot of moisture!!



Member Since: Posts: Comments:
DAY 4-8 CONVECTIVE OUTLOOK
NWS STORM PREDICTION CENTER NORMAN OK
0355 AM CDT TUE MAR 19 2013

VALID 221200Z - 271200Z

...DISCUSSION...
MEDIUM RANGE MODELS EXHIBIT RUN-TO-RUN INCONSISTENCY --LENDING
APPRECIABLE UNCERTAINTY-- ON THE EVOLUTION OF A DEVELOPING UPPER
TROUGH AND ASSOCIATED DIGGING JET STREAK ACROSS THE ROCKIES DURING
THE FRIDAY-SATURDAY /D4-D5/ PERIOD. OF NOTE...THE ECMWF SHOWS A
FARTHER S SOLUTION IN THE PLACEMENT OF A RESIDUAL FRONTAL ZONE OVER
TX/LA...WHEREAS THE GFS SHOWS THIS BOUNDARY ADVANCING FARTHER N AS A
WARM FRONT. THIS WOULD HAVE A SIZABLE IMPACT REGARDING THE SPATIAL
FOOTPRINT OF A DEVELOPING WARM/MOIST SECTOR. NONETHELESS IT APPEARS
MODELS ARE TRENDING TOWARDS A SEVERAL DAY RETURN FLOW INTO THE NWRN
GULF BASIN...WHICH WOULD SUPPLY A MORE MOISTURE-RICH LOW-LEVEL
AIRMASS INTO PORTIONS OF TX/OK AND LOWER MS VALLEY BY DAY 4 AND DAY
5...RESPECTIVELY. ANY SEVERE POTENTIAL DAY 6 FARTHER E OVER THE
DEEP SOUTH IS INHERENTLY MORE UNCERTAIN GIVEN MODEL TIMING/PLACEMENT
DIFFERENCES. DESPITE MORE FAVORABLE SIGNALS FOR SEVERE IN THE
EXTENDED PERIOD...CONSIDERABLE UNCERTAINTY PRECLUDES POSSIBLE AREAS
FROM BEING HIGHLIGHTED ATTM.

..SMITH.. 03/19/2013
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting aspectre:
For those questioning whether the Iraq War was just another federal subsidy for the fossil fuel industry,
"Iraq stands to gain almost $5 trillion in revenues from oil exports over the period to 2035, an annual average of $200 billion..." according to the International Energy Agency.


Leave it to the U.S. for not doing the right thing.

An appropriate reprisal in ancient times was 4 times the cost of the original damages (with presumably being adjusted by the costs of apprehension, etc,). This would likely have the U.S. in a net surplus economy since 2003, if this policy had been inacted.

Instead, the U.S. bribes neutrals, and pays our enemies, educating their children for free, and building their infrastructure for free, and arming and training their military for free.

In terms of economics and long term strategies, our government's foreign policy is just about as backwards from nature as is conceivably possible.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting WDEmobmet:


NWS discussion states a few days of return flow from gulf which should aid in moisture potential. Hopefully so, missed out on last nights show, hoping for a good storm this weekend



well, sure it'll rain well before the trough arrives, but its when the actual front comes, it's 80F with 2000 j/kg CAPE in central AL but no humidity or storms under a 100kt 500mb jet and 30F temp differential....

only a small line of storms pops up in NW alabama

all that with a 990mb surface low
Member Since: February 11, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 9731
Quoting aquak9:
Indeed. As the always quotable Grant Foster puts it,

- I thought he just made sunglasses. He's really come far in life nowadays.

(runs)


No, no, aquak9. The one that makes the sunglasses is Grant Foster's dyslexic brother. :)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: February 11, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 9731
Quoting AGWcreationists:

And polar bears didn't go extinct, either.

Quoting LargoFl:

The researchers concluded that for about 3,000 years, during a period called the Holocene Climate Optimum, there was more open water and far less ice than today - probably less than 50% of the minimum Arctic sea ice recorded in 2007.

"I think we can say that with the loss of 50% of the current ice, the tipping point wasn't reached," said Dr Funder"

Yes, but the Holocene is much more complicated than that. "...the mid-Holocene, roughly 6,000 years ago, was generally warmer than today, but only in summer and only in the northern hemisphere. More over, we clearly know the cause of this natural warming, and know without doubt that this proven "astronomical" climate forcing mechanism cannot be responsible for the warming over the last 100 years." You cannot compare that warm period to what we are experiencing currently. Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Indeed. As the always quotable Grant Foster puts it,

- I thought he just made sunglasses. He's really come far in life nowadays.

(runs)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting aspectre:
517 aspectre: For those questioning whether the Iraq War was just another federal subsidy for the fossil fuel industry,
"Iraq stands to gain almost $5 trillion in revenues from oil exports over the period to 2035, an annual average of $200 billion..." according to the International Energy Agency.
532 txjac: I kind of think it was also a payback to China as they needed the oil and they are getting oil from Iraq now

I'm not sure that payback is the proper descriptive, but the prospect of Iraqi crude re-entering the world market was certainly a major consideration when China decided to not veto the UN resolution used to "justify" the invasion of Iraq.


Crap, I accidently hit the "report" button on your post.

Sorry.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting LargoFl:

The researchers concluded that for about 3,000 years, during a period called the Holocene Climate Optimum, there was more open water and far less ice than today - probably less than 50% of the minimum Arctic sea ice recorded in 2007.

"I think we can say that with the loss of 50% of the current ice, the tipping point wasn't reached," said Dr Funder

And polar bears didn't go extinct, either.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Naga5000:


This stems from a lack of understanding the differences between arctic and antarctic ice. While it is true that sea ice has been increasing in Antarctica, land ice has been decreasing. The reason for this is the warming of the antarctic has changed the wind patterns down there. The antarctic region is still warming at a rate consistent with global averages, and increases in sea ice coupled with decreases in glacial/land ice in Antarctica is exactly what should be occurring in a warming world. Remember, the North Pole is ocean surrounded by land, while the South Pole is land surrounded by ocean. Source: Link
Indeed. As the always quotable Grant Foster puts it, anyone who claims the Antarctic's ice extent gain "offsets" or "balances" the Arctic's ice extent loss "...is either a fool or an outright liar". And that's a pair of shoes that fits Real Science's thoroughly debunked and refuted Steve Goddard to a tee...
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13555
517 aspectre: For those questioning whether the Iraq War was just another federal subsidy for the fossil fuel industry, "Iraq stands to gain almost $5 trillion in revenues from oil exports over the period to 2035, an annual average of $200 billion..." according to the International Energy Agency.
532 txjac: I kind of think it was also a payback to China as they needed the oil and they are getting oil from Iraq now

I'm not sure that payback is the proper descriptive, but the prospect of Iraqi crude re-entering the world market was certainly a major consideration when China decided to not veto the UN resolution used to "justify" the invasion of Iraq.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
566. beell
Quoting 1900hurricane:
If you look at the 500 mb heights for the Northern Hemisphere, you may be surprised to see that heights at the North Pole are actually higher than they are over most of the US!



Where ya parking your vehicle today?
:)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting GeorgiaStormz:


that's what i figrued, pwats struggling to reach 1inch, only some tstorms in S ms/al early, and north al late....might be a dry system....


NWS discussion states a few days of return flow from gulf which should aid in moisture potential. Hopefully so, missed out on last nights show, hoping for a good storm this weekend
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
564. beell
Quoting GeorgiaStormz:
what does a sounding like this mean



A slight cap or EML @ 700mb.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting LargoFl:
when we discuss or even think..about global temps and ice sheets, we must think in the terms of thousands..no 10's of thousands of years...so the current global warming OR global cooling discussions are probably meaningless..what were the civilizations of 3-4 thousand years ago thinking?..how about the people in the little ice age thinking?...lol..im sorry..we here today..with all our math and info and scientists..it doesnt matter..none of us will be around to see the outcome..so enjoy today..............me im going with the ice age theory,why?..because OIL is a limited resource, when That goes away..so does Our human pollution of the air..and poof goes global warming...yes it may take a hundred or so years for that to happen( remember i have said none of us will be here to see it)....but when oil Does run out...just wait...all the scientists of That era..will be clammering again..about the coming ice age.


No they aren't meaningless because they are 1) statistically significant, and 2) proof of a climate out of equilibrium. Saying we won't be around to see the outcome is up there with some of the most selfish statements regarding fellow human beings and more importantly future human beings. By that rationale, why don't we just dump all our garbage into the streets, rivers, and oceans, we won't have to deal with the the outcome, so screw it, right?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting LargoFl:
from what ive read these last few days, most scientists say, this current global warming trend..is only delaying..the coming of the next ice age........ok now, I am no scientist..BUT..if what they say IS true...why on earth would we Stop global warming???..........you think a warming planet is bad?...you should try to live in an ice age...well just trying to start a discussion, not meant to bother anyone...i just do not see the evidence..maybe a lil in the north but way down south its getting colder...we will have to wait and see which way the earth goes...either way most if not all of us here today..wont be around to see it.


Do you have a source for either of the bolded statements above? Thanks in advance for sharing.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
im with you GS..the pollen is AWFUL alright......
Member Since: August 6, 2011 Posts: 4 Comments: 39248
Quoting LargoFl:
The precise way in which they change the climate of the Earth from warm interglacial to cold Ice Age and back every 100,000 years or so is not known.
On the other hand, the precise way in which the climate of the Earth has changed in just over a century is very well known to scientists: CO2 from our burning of fossil fuels.

The climate responds to whatever is driving it at the moment--and at the moment, that's overwhelmingly the 3.4 million metric tons of fossil fuel greenhouse gases we're knowingly belching into the environment every hour of every day.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13555
when we discuss or even think..about global temps and ice sheets, we must think in the terms of thousands..no 10's of thousands of years...so the current global warming OR global cooling discussions are probably meaningless..what were the civilizations of 3-4 thousand years ago thinking?..how about the people in the little ice age thinking?...lol..im sorry..we here today..with all our math and info and scientists..it doesnt matter..none of us will be around to see the outcome..so enjoy today..............me im going with the ice age theory,why?..because OIL is a limited resource, when That goes away..so does Our human pollution of the air..and poof goes global warming...yes it may take a hundred or so years for that to happen( remember i have said none of us will be here to see it)....but when oil Does run out...just wait...all the scientists of That era..will be clammering again..about the coming ice age.
Member Since: August 6, 2011 Posts: 4 Comments: 39248
Quoting WDEmobmet:


Very dry in the upper atmospher 700mb and above. Nothing special


that's what i figrued, pwats struggling to reach 1inch, only some tstorms in S ms/al early, and north al late....might be a dry system....
Member Since: February 11, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 9731
Our pollen count was 356 on sunday, now it's down to 25 after the rain.... it's killing me.

with the rain, it's sure to come back with a vengeance.
Member Since: February 11, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 9731
375 hail & wind reports yesterday. Hail as large as 3 inches in Alabama
Member Since: April 23, 2011 Posts: 104 Comments: 14873





Surveying North Greenland Beaches to find evidence of fluctuations in the North Pole ice cover over time.
(Credit: Svend Funder/University of Copenhagen


4 Aug 11 - Writing in the journal Science, Danish researchers say that an imminent tipping point in the disappearance of Arctic sea ice is unlikely.
For several thousand years, there was much less sea ice in The Arctic Ocean - probably less than half of current amounts - and no tipping point was reached.

Sea ice comes and goes without leaving a record, so our knowledge of its historic variations and extent has been severely limited.

But researchers at the Danish National Research Foundation for Geogenetics at the Natural History Museum of Denmark (University of Copenhagen) have developed an ingenious method for retracing those ancient variations.

By analyzing and carbon-dating ancient pieces of driftwood in Northern Greenland, the team has found evidence that ice levels were about 50% lower some 5,000 years ago.

The driftwood gives a clear, if indirect, picture of the ice loss dating back 11,000 years.

"Driftwood cannot float across the water," said Dr Svend Funder, who led several expeditions to Peary Land in Northern Greenland. "It has to be ferried across the ocean on ice, and this voyage takes several years, which means that driftwood is actually a signal of multi-year sea ice in the ocean."

Named after American Polar explorer Robert E. Peary, Peary Land is an inhospitable and rarely visited area where summer blizzards are not uncommon.

Figuring out the driftwood's origins also yielded important information.

"It's so lovely that drift wood from Siberia is mainly larch and from North America is mainly spruce. So if we see there was more larch or spruce we can see that the wind system had changed and in some periods there was little spruce and in other periods there was lots," said Dr Funder.

As well as the driftwood, the scientists mapped beach ridges for 310 miles (500km) along the coast of Northern Greenland. Today, perennial ice prevents any sort of beach from forming along the coast. But the beach ridges lie behind the present shore, proving that at one time the waves had reached the shore unhindered by the ice.

The researchers concluded that for about 3,000 years, during a period called the Holocene Climate Optimum, there was more open water and far less ice than today - probably less than 50% of the minimum Arctic sea ice recorded in 2007.

"I think we can say that with the loss of 50% of the current ice, the tipping point wasn't reached," said Dr Funder.

See entire article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-144 08930

See also:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/08/1108 04141706.htm
Thanks to Craig Adkins, Gregory Ludvigsen, Jason Hietanen,
Kim Courter, Jason Evans and Matilde H in Denmark for these links


"My favorite quote," says Kim, "is that even with a reduction to
less than 50% of the current amount of sea ice 'the ice will not
reach a point of no return.' I don't imagine that statement will
make it into any major newspaper.
"I am a regular on your iceagenow website and I think it all
makes a lot of sense! says Jason Evans. "Keep up the good work!"


------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------

Two other team members and co-authors of the Science article, Eske Willerslev and Kurt Kjær, are also associated with the Danish Research Foundation at the University of Copenhagen.



Member Since: August 6, 2011 Posts: 4 Comments: 39248
Quoting GeorgiaStormz:
what does a sounding like this mean



Very dry in the upper atmospher 700mb and above. Nothing special
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting LargoFl:
north pole still ice covered,Sat pic........
Well, of course the North Pole is still iced over; it's the time of the annual maximum. Now, if you want to see the real story of what's going on up north, look at these two graphs (I just drew them up, so haven't posted them to my climate graphs site yet).

ice

ice
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13555
Quoting aspectre:
530 PedleyCA: What is the source of your [comment519] picture?

irascibleprofessor.com/ 94370main_STILL sea_ice_yearly.2003 .jpg

Quoting the Irascible Professor:

Perhaps if these skeptics would take a close look at the following two NASA images, they might gain a new understanding of how rapidly global warming is changing our planet...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Drought Monitor as of the 12th
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
looks like the recent model runs have the warm sector extending further north.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
The ice cap that covers Antarctica is more than 2100 meters thick, more than two kilometers (1.3 miles). This is where most of the world's fresh water is contained. If it melted completely it would raise sea levels by 61 meters (200 feet).

The ice sheet of Antarctica has an average thickness of about 1.6 km.

The ice on Antarctica is miles and miles thick. if you were to take a drill into Antarctica you would need a drill about 4 miles long!

About 98% of Antarctica is covered by ice, which averages at least 1.6 kilometres (1.0 mi) in thickness according to Wikipedia.

Even that information is suspect, it would mean that if all the ice were evenly dispersed, that at the continents edge you would run into a wall of ice at least a mile high.

According to NASA the West Antarctic ice sheet rests on a bed well below sea level and is drained by much larger outlet glaciers and ice streams that accelerate over distances of hundreds of kilometers before reaching the ocean, often through large floating ice shelves. The deepest known ice rests 2,555 meters below sea level, where the ice is over 4 kilometers thick.

The question then is, how large would Antarctica be in land mass if there were no ice to displace the ocean?
,
The interior ice sheet is over 2 miles (10,560 ft.) thick.
Member Since: August 6, 2011 Posts: 4 Comments: 39248
Quoting LargoFl:
from what ive read these last few days, most scientists say, this current global warming trend..is only delaying..the coming of the next ice age........ok now, I am no scientist..BUT..if what they say IS true...why on earth would we Stop global warming???..........you think a warming planet is bad?...you should try to live in an ice age...well just trying to start a discussion, not meant to bother anyone...i just do not see the evidence..maybe a lil in the north but way down south its getting colder...we will have to wait and see which way the earth goes...either way most if not all of us here today..wont be around to see it.


Agreed
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting PedleyCA:


What is the source of your picture. Appears there is more ice than that.



This is yesterdays image. North Pole Ice


Looks like the polar ice is close to average this year.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
just trying to understand...alot of info out there to digest...............The root causes of the transitions from Ice Age to interglacial and back again are the subtle variations in the Earth's orbit known as the Milankovitch cycles, after the Serbian scientist Milutin Milankovic who described the effect nearly 100 years ago.

Glaciation and its reverse are related to cycles discovered by Milutin Milankovic
The variations include the eccentricity of the Earth's orbit around the Sun, the degree to which its axis is inclined, and the slow rotation of its axis.

These all take place on timescales of tens of thousands of years.

The precise way in which they change the climate of the Earth from warm interglacial to cold Ice Age and back every 100,000 years or so is not known.
Member Since: August 6, 2011 Posts: 4 Comments: 39248
534 LargoFl: Real Science, a [pseudo]science website, says it "has been increasing at a rate of half a million square kilometers per year. "If this alarming trend continues, the planet will be completely covered with Antarctic ice in 1,000 years.,"

Just bloody silly. Antarctic sea ice is so thin that trawlers regularly harvest tons upon tons of krill in regions that were impenetrable last century except by some icebreakers. So many tons are now being sold (mostly) to fish farms that penguins/etc are suffering a major population crash due to starvation.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
what does a sounding like this mean

Member Since: February 11, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 9731


Member Since: February 11, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 9731
Quoting LargoFl:
guys surf the scientific sites for antartica ice..and you'll see the TRUE picture..we in the northern hemisphere seem to shut out all knowledge of the southern hemisphere for some reason BUT...here's yet another clipped info fact..............That was last week. And this is this week: Antarctic sea ice is on an upward slope. Real Science, a science website, says it "has been increasing at a rate of half a million square kilometers per year.

"If this alarming trend continues, the planet will be completely covered with Antarctic ice in 1,000 years," said Real Science, using University of Illinois data to map out the trend and reach its conclusion. "The Australian coral reefs will freeze to death in less than 300 years."


Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/022213-64 5488-arctic-ice-antarctic-ice-contradict-global-wa rming.htm#ixzz2O0KkCoow
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook


This stems from a lack of understanding the differences between arctic and antarctic ice. While it is true that sea ice has been increasing in Antarctica, land ice has been decreasing. The reason for this is the warming of the antarctic has changed the wind patterns down there. The antarctic region is still warming at a rate consistent with global averages, and increases in sea ice coupled with decreases in glacial/land ice in Antarctica is exactly what should be occurring in a warming world. Remember, the North Pole is ocean surrounded by land, while the South Pole is land surrounded by ocean. Source: Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting hydrus:


Which model will be right as they have opposite forecasts?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 591 - 541

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

Mostly Cloudy
72 °F
Mostly Cloudy