Arctic Updates

[tazmic]

Phil Jones already made this argument:

Q: If you agree that there were similar periods of warming since 1850 to the current period, and that the MWP is under debate, what factors convince you that recent warming has been largely man-made?

A: The fact that we can’t explain the warming from the 1950s by solar and volcanic forcing.

[tazmic]

"..only when human activity is put into their computer models of the climate that an explanation becomes evident. Man-made CO2 emissions over the past century or more can explain the recent increase in global temperature. No one has come up with a better explanation."

"Some sceptics may dispute the data used in formulating global temperature records. Others may argue that the computer models used in this analysis are not to be trusted, and a few may hypothesise about some undiscovered cause. [Get ready...] But there is now so much evidence in favour of man-made global warming, from so many different peer-reviewed studies, that the case is overwhelming."

"The evidence for anthropogenic global warming is there for anyone to study. If sceptics are to merit our attention, they need to come up with an equally powerful counter-argument."

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/leading-articles/leading-article-climate-change-is-not-a-matter-of-faith-1916393.html

Do you think it's science he doesn't understand, or just the English language?

[Ben D]

Hey,..good news!!!

[Cosmic Cowbell]

It will be interesting to track what effect the Arctic Oscillation, which reversed its trend briefly in March, will have on April's extent numbers. Not sure if there's a correlation but it seems so.



"Double-dip Arctic Oscillation

As noted previously, the Arctic Oscillation has been extremely negative this winter, with unusually high surface pressure over the Arctic Ocean. Following a strong negative phase from mid-December through mid-January, the AO briefly went positive, but then dipped again to a strongly negative phase. For more information on the Arctic Oscillation, see the NOAA Climate Prediction Center Web site.

The strong negative AO has contributed to cold temperatures throughout much of the U.S. and northern Europe, and the notable snow events in the eastern U.S. However, the impact on the Arctic has been quite different. First, a negative AO tends to bring warmer than normal temperatures to the Arctic. This factor contributed to the low ice conditions in the Atlantic side of the Arctic, discussed above. Second, the AO has a strong effect on Arctic sea ice motion. The pattern of winds associated with a strongly negative AO tends to reduce export of ice out of the Arctic through the Fram Strait. This helps keep more of the older, thicker ice within the Arctic. While little old ice remains, sequestering what is left may help keep the September extent from dropping as low as it did in the last few years. Much will depend on the weather patterns that set up this spring and summer."

Ice conditions off the Canadian east coast

Tom Agnew, Stephen Howell, and Lionel Hache of Environment Canada note that average ice conditions off the east coast of Canada were at record lows during the first three weeks of February. Sea ice charts prepared by the Canadian Ice Service show that ice coverage in the Labrador Sea and Gulf of St. Lawrence was the lowest for that time period since analysts started charting the region in 1969. Mild temperatures and predominately northeasterly winds have prevented both the advance of ice down the Labrador coast and the formation of ice in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. These ice conditions are also linked to the strong negative Arctic Oscillation pattern.

[No_Baseline]

Higher Watermarks
Ice-age sea-level rise brings up questions about glacier melting

http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... watermarks

I don't know where to start - there are approx. three to five current threads where I could've posted this article, and both sides of this debate are going to find interesting nuggets, but I am going to put my two cents in anyway - for the record, I subscribe to James Lovelock's theory of this planet being a whole, closed system with evolved feedback mechanisms for equilibriium which has a tipping point, of which I think we have passed the point-of-no-return for whatever reason - though I could easily believe it is a combination of natural cycles and human obstinance/ignorance/greed.

Aren't all debates really two sides of the same coin when you can take a step back and look at the whole-system picture? this planet is a closed system - why are we so intent on parsing single paragraphs or single decades of data when so many other factors are at play? anyway, fwiw, a few highlights of this very short article-

the record suggests that sea level can go up or down as quickly as two meters a century—nearly 12 times faster than sea-level rise in the past 100 years—an indication of the potential for a meter of sea-level increase within one human lifetime.

and

Glaciologist Richard Alley of Pennsylvania State University, who was not involved in the project, calls the findings solid and careful and notes that this study confirms that ice-sheet changes can happen quickly. “It points to rather rapid shrinkage and growth of ice,” he says, while cautioning that more research is needed to confirm the results. “The growth rates are surprising, but not impossible,” he observes.

One thing is certain, however: the finding points to how complex the earth’s climate is. “Greenhouse gases are clearly important to climate,” Dorale says, “but just as clearly they are not the only major factor at work.”

Why can't we just accept that these cycles can and will happen, and make it as easy a transition as we can?

[Ben D]

Why can't we just accept that these cycles can and will happen, and make it as easy a transition as we can?

Hi No_Baseline, agree with you but then I've no vested interest in the financial side of things, nor a deep preference for either up or down.

[No_Baseline]

Hi yourself, BenD...

No vested interest meaning you are really okay with whatever happens and apathethic about whatever results?

I really am curious about this and do not have any axe to grind...

[Ben D]

Meaning along the lines of Reinhold Niebuhr's...."God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; courage to change the things I can; and wisdom to know the difference."

[No_Baseline]

Ahh BenD- that is where we are kinda in agreement. I have no idea what the fuckity-fuck (and I type that with relish) to do about it either.

Can I change it? No. Can I accept it? Unfortunately, right now I am having a BIG problem with that...hence all the time spent at work thinking/researching that I can FIGURE IT OUT - it is just too surreal, unfair, and surely by now (how many cycles into it?) we have a more intelligent collective solution...yet I am still looking, mostly on work time and the wisdom? after how many civilizations, can we even say (collectively) what wisdom is??

[Ben D]

Ahh BenD- that is where we are kinda in agreement. I have no idea what the fuckity-fuck (and I type that with relish) to do about it either.

Can I change it? No. Can I accept it? Unfortunately, right now I am having a BIG problem with that...hence all the time spent at work thinking/researching that I can FIGURE IT OUT - it is just too surreal, unfair, and surely by now (how many cycles into it?) we have a more intelligent collective solution...yet I am still looking, mostly on work time and the wisdom? after how many civilizations, can we even say (collectively) what wisdom is??

Apologies folks for going OT a moment here.

Yes No-Baseline, important question, and only the most serious souls will ever realize IT. There is this Taoist saying that concerning wisdom or truth,..."He who knows does not say, he who says does nor know." IOW, wisdom is not of the intellect, not of the conceptual thinking mind, it only reveals itself when the mind is still for it is serenity itself and will be obscured when the neurons are firing noisily trying to realize it.

And here is a little Taoist piece that reflects this truism...

Be aware the impulses of the will,
Unravel the errors of the mind,
Untie the knots of virtue,
Unblock the free flow of Tao.

Glory and riches, prominence and position, fame and profit, these six are the impulses of the will,
Personal appearance and style, beauty and cleverness, excitement and memory,these six are the errors of the mind,
Hatred and desire, pleasure and anger, sadness and joy, these six are the knots of the virtue,
Rejection and acceptance, receiving and giving, knowledge and ability, these six obstruct the free flow of Tau.

When the four conditions and their six causes no longer disturb your heart,
Then you will be correct, being correct, you are calm,
Being calm, you are clear, being clear, you are empty,
Emptiness, the state of doing nothing in which everything get's done.

Oh, and a Zen piece....

True understanding is not only understanding understanding, but also understanding not understanding. He who thinks he understands just doesn't understand. - Bodhidharma -

I could go on but this is not the place to do so.

[wintler2]

.. for the record, I subscribe to James Lovelock's theory of this planet being a whole, closed system with evolved feedback mechanisms for equilibriium which has a tipping point, of which I think we have passed the point-of-no-return for whatever reason - though I could easily believe it is a combination of natural cycles and human obstinance/ignorance/greed.

The earth is certainly not a closed system (as Lovelock knows), without insolation there would be very little going on here. And its not a matter of 'the' point of no return, there are at least several tipping points and we don't know what is on the other side of them. What did you mean?

Aren't all debates really two sides of the same coin when you can take a step back and look at the whole-system picture?

No. Most arguments of significance have at least three sides. On AGW for example there are the informed, the deluded and the bought.

this planet is a closed system - why are we so intent on parsing single paragraphs or single decades of data when so many other factors are at play?

Its so complex no-one should look? puh-lease.

..Why can't we just accept that these cycles can and will happen, and make it as easy a transition as we can?

Because that would be a gutless response to the genocidal crimes of corporations and individuals.

[Jeff]

Inuit weather wisdom says it's getting warmer and weirder in the North

2 hours, 50 minutes ago
By Bob Weber, The Canadian Press

Inuit hunters are helping scientists understand an essential fact of Arctic climate change - the weather's not just getting warmer, it's getting weirder.

A new study published in the journal Global Environmental Change has combined the observations of Inuit on the land with cold, hard data to conclude that Arctic weather is getting less predictable all the time.

"The character of weather is changing," said lead author Betsy Weatherhead, an atmospheric physicist at the University of Colorado. "The kind of style that it has to it."

Weatherhead's research began as an attempt to reconcile differences between what Inuit were saying about their weather and what scientists were recording.

Hunters used to be able to count on stable weather, but were increasingly complaining that conditions were swinging wildly from day to day, making their traditional prediction skills less useful and endangering them on the land.

And the anomalies weren't showing up in the long-range studies developed by researchers.

"I've been hearing these reports from the Inuit probably since the late '90s," Weatherhead said. "My colleagues would give these presentations saying, 'The Inuit are saying this, and I don't see it. The data isn't showing it.' "

At a conference, Weatherhead had an idea: "Ah, I think what they're talking about is persistence," she said.

Persistence is the tendency of weather to remain stable for a few days at a time.

"We know that things pass and there's a natural time spell to it," Weatherhead said. "We know that a cold spell doesn't last half a day, for instance."

She decided to examine the weather in two Nunavut communities - Baker Lake and Clyde River - for short-term, day-to-day variability. Inuit told her that the greatest unpredictability was in June's spring weather, so that's where she focused her analysis.

She and her fellow researchers combined weather information from detailed, lengthy hunter interviews together with hourly temperature logs dating back more than 40 years. The two information sources backed each other up.

Likewise, a statistical analysis showed that in the 1960s, June weather persistence was about 80 per cent of the maximum rating. By the turn of the millennium, persistence had dropped as low as 20 per cent.

The weather itself isn't necessarily outside the normal range, but the speed with which it changes is.

It's a crucial insight into the changing global climate, said Weatherhead. While weather persistence is decreasing across the Arctic, it's actually increasing in more temperate zones.

"At mid-latitudes, we're getting a lot more persistent weather," she said.

"The Inuit, by being really clear about what they were observing, and us, by taking it seriously, have only given us insight into what's going on in the Arctic, but really given us insight into how the climate is changing around the world. We probably wouldn't have come down this path if they hadn't been really clear about it."

She said she never would have thought to examine weather persistence in the Arctic without the reports from those who were living in it.

"We'd always had the data, we just hadn't asked the right question," said Weatherhead.

"Part of what I learned is to listen incredibly carefully to what Inuit are saying in real detail and understand that our numbers are telling only half the story. They've got something unique and different to say and anyone who lives it, who's out there, we've got to respect that."

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/1004 ... her_wisdom

[Ben D]

This is a handy site to monitor Arctic Ice coverage,..example below compares conditions now and that 30 years ago.

http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/tes ... 18&sy=2010

[norton ash]

Ben D, what the fuck do those pictures mean? I mean, writing as someone who remembers 1980 just fine. So, just last week, Norway and Baffin Island were all covered in ice and they were totally clear in 1980?

Lies, damn lies, and photo simulations...

[Ben D]

Hi norton ash, I would like another opinion but when comparing the 2010 and 1980 images, Baffin Island shows up fully covered in ice now, but does appear mainly ice free (just one relatively small white patch) in the 1980 one.

BTW, agreed that the software that produces these images can be manipulated to alter history but in this case I don't think so as this web site would be a resource currently used by genuine scientific researchers who may also have access to the original raw data or alternative data and would therefore be exposed if serious deviations were noted.