Climate Change Banter

[WinterWxLuvr]

he's fine....just needs a break.

chill..

Probably needs to get out of the basement.

[LakeEffectKing]

He pines for a science forum, yet pukes alarmist tripe....He is amusing!!  Keep him around!!

[SVT450R]

The forum is on the front-page too, you'd think climate change would rank high as an important issue. People have this conception that this is a problem for the 2050's and beyond.

 

The -PDO/La Nina was just a shot in the dark based on ocean temperature trends. HadSST is still coming well over 2014 outside of el nino regions. Sorry but I don't have good reasoning other than that at this point, it's a vague prediction with a wide timescale.

 

Whatever tipping points that may or may not happen will also affect how natural cycles play out.

Well lets get serious climate change is not on the top of the list for problems for Americans and won't be any time soon as it's not affecting our daily lives in a serious threatening way that is just a fact.  This is why people jump on you if you are going to make statements around here you need to support it with some real factual evidence.  This is what the forum is about.

 

You guys complain about the same stuff over and over again..  Why not just sit back and appreciate the opinions of others?   That's what forums are for...to discuss / have different opinions on things.

 

It's people like him that think outside the box, with factual material  (not always, but most of the time) that make things worthwhile reading here.  Who cares if he goes into left field at times...even if it does seem far-fetched , he at-least brings up points that could be looked into.

 

Typical Republican-like behaviour here...the ones against him.   Where people extremely over-exaggerate the smallest of matters.  I feel like i'm watching Megyn Kelly on FoxNews... where she'll have some news piece to start her show off with.   With that look in her eye like it's the end of the world....all while talking about Hillary Clinton's funding issues.  (or some other comical news piece...that would of been laughed at if it were mentioned as 'Breaking News' 10 years ago) 

There is a difference of having a factual opinion and that of just baseless nonsense that isn't supported by scientific literature or factual information.  Perfect example you just stated ORH is in ''another world'' in the sea ice thread after he posted ''there's been solid gains on last year over the past month'' while posting a graphic image that supports his statement.  Now where is your evidence that he is wrong and in another world i won't hold my breath.

[Sophisticated Skeptic]

^ there are too many variables in climate change to jump from 1 image to the next.   

 

you guys can 'slander' your reasonings with an image or 2 that favor the 'factual' data to be on your side....and so can we.   

 

But as time goes by, the evidence is becoming overwhelming.  Yet, you continue holding on to the smallest bit of hope that everythings normal..  (when it's not even close)     I'm just wondering at what point will u guys give in. 

[AvantHiatus]

^ there are too many variables in climate change to jump from 1 image to the next.   

 

you guys can 'slander' your reasonings with an image or 2 that favor the 'factual' data to be on your side....and so can we.   

 

But as time goes by, the evidence is becoming overwhelming.  Yet, you continue holding on to the smallest bit of hope that everythings normal..  (when it's not even close)     I'm just wondering at what point will u guys give in. 

This^

 

Some are in for a rude awakening across the board from SIE, heat records, and drought.

[ORH_wxman]

^ there are too many variables in climate change to jump from 1 image to the next.   

 

you guys can 'slander' your reasonings with an image or 2 that favor the 'factual' data to be on your side....and so can we.   

 

But as time goes by, the evidence is becoming overwhelming.  Yet, you continue holding on to the smallest bit of hope that everythings normal..  (when it's not even close)     I'm just wondering at what point will u guys give in. 

 

It's really not worth discussing this with you two any longer since it is clear you view any post that isn't extremely alarmist as some sort of ulterior motive not supported by science...but I'll give it one last shot and I'll try to use short points:

 

- Almost everyone in here save for a select few that don't post very often believes in AGW. That is, we believe that the earth is warming and a majority of that warming is anthropogenic (human caused).

 

- The state of the science in the literature (and much of this is included within the IPCC reports as well) is still quite uncertain on many of the variables and attributions of climate change. Much of this is centered on climate sensitivity (both ECS and TCR) and the attribution of extreme weather events. Some are robust like heat waves. Others such as drought, tropical storms, tornadoes, snowstorms, etc are much less certain.

 

 

Specific Example that you called me "in another world on" and I'll try and apply the above to it:

 

 

- Arctic sea ice melting is one of the characteristics of climate change. However, within that context there is also natural variability. When some of us pointed out a few years ago that the 2007-2012 period may have been enhanced by a natural variability, it was met with some resistance. Now, since then, volume has increased year over year two consecutive seaons (and possibly 3 by this summer)....this is because natural variability has swung the other direction now. It doesn't mean global warming doesn't exist.

 

 

 

Hopefully this helps.

[AvantHiatus]

2013/2014 were just blips. You will see in-time unless something catastrophic happens with Greenland and AMOC. 2 years is not long enough to constitute a trend.

 

The majority of CO2 forcing is lagged by 10 years, this is why natural factors were able to cause a hiatus, additionally another 1/3 of CO2 forcing is not felt for 30 years.

 

The science behind ECS is very solid and the uncertainties reside more on the upper range. People miss the forest for the trees or don't understand paleo when discussing this area of climate science.

[ORH_wxman]

2013/2014 were just blips. You will see in-time unless something catastrophic happens with Greenland and AMOC. 2 years is not long enough to constitute a trend.

 

The majority of CO2 forcing is lagged by 10 years, this is why natural factors were able to cause a hiatus, additionally another 1/3 of CO2 forcing is not felt for 30 years.

 

The science behind ECS is very solid and the uncertainties reside more on the upper range. People miss the forest for the trees or don't understand paleo when discussing this area of climate science.

 

2013 and 2014 were natural variability...of course the sea ice will eventually melt out in the summer in the future once we warm enough...but much of the debate centered around 2015 as the melt-out year back in 2011 and 2012 or in years very close to 2015 (say before 2020). Go read this thread:

 

http://www.americanwx.com/bb/index.php/topic/29928-arctic-sea-ice-could-completely-melt-away-by-the-summer-of-2015/

 

 

It is not hard to accept that 2007-2012 was probably enhanced by natural variability too...there could have been some sort of feedback from AGW to make the pattern worse (we don't really know this for sure), but clearly it was not a permanent pattern which leads us to the very likely possibility that natural variability played a part in it. Otherwise 2013 and 2014 would not have happened.

 

Debating alarmist claims like 2015 will melt out all the sea ice is not denying AGW or "not seeing the forest through the trees"...it is simply debunking a claim that was not supported by much science to begin with. It is OK to acknowledge AGW while also keeping your points scientifically accurate.

 

 

There are areas of the field where scientifically accurate covers a very broad range...these more uncertain areas of climate change are where most of the debate is. Arctic sea is melting out by 2015 wasn't one of them.

[AvantHiatus]

GG

 

[A-L-E-K]

that fantasy range warmth hasn't materialized in the arctic in 2+ years

[AvantHiatus]

that fantasy range warmth hasn't materialized in the arctic in 2+ years

It's legit. There is no reason to believe the cold could hold out for 3 more months in this new regime.

[AvantHiatus]

 

Sick stuff. Do we really want early season conditioning over the MYI headquarters? Even if the Russian side is near-average?

[A-L-E-K]

this melt season won't even make the top 3

[forkyfork]

agreed. probably another version of 2009, 2013, and last year

[AvantHiatus]

agreed. probably another version of 2009, 2013, and last year

 You are a irrational'ish poster, however troll post is obvious.

[StudentOfClimatology]

You are a irrational'ish poster, however troll post is obvious.

You're *literally* describing yourself to a tee here. Couldn't have scripted this one any better.

[AvantHiatus]

You're *literally* describing yourself to a tee here. Couldn't have scripted this one any better.

It's impossible to be a rational alarmist. You are not very intelligent just like Mr.Blizzard. 

 

The big bag of crow is coming, don't dig deeper into a growing wound.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Sick stuff. Do we really want early season conditioning over the MYI headquarters? Even if the Russian side is near-average?

No. We are already past precondtioning.

Albedo has already plummeted. Hundreds of miles out into the Beaufort and Chuchki.

2008, 09, 10 has fresh dry snow not only over the ice at this point But over the area in the image below.

2011-13 images are not available.

2014 had early melt and more snow loss than this year but not the albedo crusher over the ice.

This can still be reversed. Like if it would get cold and snow.

However models not only show none of that.

They show straight record to crushing record temps.

The GFS has highs reaching 70F all the way to the shores of the arctic basin next week.

If the current GFS pans out in 10 days there will be a very large pocket of warm SSTs like never observed in modern history.

With a large part of the Beaufort/Chuchki already melt ponding

[AvantHiatus]

 

 

No. We are already past precondtioning. 

Albedo has already plummeted. Hundreds of miles out into the Beaufort and Chuchki.

2008, 09, 10 has fresh dry snow not only over the ice at this point But over the area in the image below.

2011-13 images are not available.

2014 had early melt and more snow loss than this year but not the albedo crusher over the ice.

This can still be reversed. Like if it would get cold and snow.

However models not only show none of that.

They show straight record to crushing record temps.

The GFS has highs reaching 70F all the way to the shores of the arctic basin next week.

If the current GFS pans out in 10 days there will be a very large pocket of warm SSTs like never observed in modern history.

With a large part of the Beaufort/Chuchki already melt ponding 

 

And then there is one of the more impressive Bering melt out's in years. We may actually fall out of the pack this time early on for a while. Imagine combining 2006's early melt with a 2007 or 2008 summer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Isotherm]

2013/2014 were just blips. You will see in-time unless something catastrophic happens with Greenland and AMOC. 2 years is not long enough to constitute a trend.

 

The majority of CO2 forcing is lagged by 10 years, this is why natural factors were able to cause a hiatus, additionally another 1/3 of CO2 forcing is not felt for 30 years.

 

The science behind ECS is very solid and the uncertainties reside more on the upper range. People miss the forest for the trees or don't understand paleo when discussing this area of climate science.

 

Not true. This is very debatable. There's plenty of uncertainty throughout the ECS range, and I think many here would be surprised at the number of peer reviewed studies asserting fairly low equilibrium climate sensitivities and TCR's.

[forkyfork]

You are a irrational'ish poster, however troll post is obvious.

not trolling. we need greenland blocking for a big melt year and it has been absent

[Jonger]

I have to give TheGlobalWarmer one thing, his devotion to melting ice is amazingly unwavered. 

[The_Global_Warmer]

I have to give TheGlobalWarmer one thing, his devotion to melting ice is amazingly unwavered.

I find extremes very fascinating.

This is a possible extreme event.

The average end of snow cover in far NW Canada is the first week of June.

Percentage wise 50% historical snow cover doesnt happen until around June 10th.

With snow cover lasting until June 20th a few years.

The average breakup dates for the Northern half of the MacKenzie river are May 25th to June 5th.

For the Delta plain the first week of June.

Ice free dates June 5th to 15th.

The part that really grabs attention is the modeled lows on day 6 on being in the low 50s over the DTA region.

Highs in the upper 60s to low 70s abd lows in the low 50s at the mouth of the arctic basin in the middle of May is huge.

This side of the Summer sun is normally going into snow and ice melt through May.

Not only within 3-4 days will the delta plain be near ice free there won't be any snow left.

Albedo goes from .55-.80 over snow covered land to .20 or so over green forests and grasslands.

Over the lakes, rivers, Delta and arctic ocean it drops to 0.08 roughly.

Solar insolation is about 410w/m2.

A week from now about 450w/m2.

We are talking about a potential regional extra uptake of insolation by the ground/water the next three to four weeks of 8000-10000 w/m2.

Of course it won't be that much.

But with ice and snow that drops to 1500-4000 w/m2.

And whatIs is absorbed goes to melting not warming the ground water and air.

Gonna be fun to track

[AvantHiatus]

not trolling. we need greenland blocking for a big melt year and it has been absent

Still so much time for that to show up. We don't need a 2012-repeat to be in bad shape going forward.

[AvantHiatus]

Like I said, lower than 2014 is a lock. Every model abruptly collapses the 2m temps to above 0 in two weeks. The breakdown is now deep into the day 5-10 range. Things are cold now but the situation will continue to evolve.

 

Have we ever seen basin-wide 0-1C 2m temps before June?

[AvantHiatus]

Having 2015 200,000km2 (possibly) out of the pack for SIE will make a difference. No way to beat around the bush here.

 

 

 

[SVT450R]

Like I said, lower than 2014 is a lock. Every model abruptly collapses the 2m temps to above 0 in two weeks. The breakdown is now deep into the day 5-10 range. Things are cold now but the situation will continue to evolve.

 

Have we ever seen basin-wide 0-1C 2m temps before June?

I'm glad we have someone that's capable of predicting the weather pattern for the entire melt season so far in advance.  Yes we see it all the time.  I mentioned it once before but i guess you choose to ignore it that the graphics will always show above normal 2m temps even for average weather because of the long term warming that has gone on in the arctic.  They usually use 1981-2010 climo so because the arctic is the warmest decade in observations it will show above average 2m temps on top of the actual weather pattern because of the colder 80's-90's data.

 

 

Having 2015 200,000km2 (possibly) out of the pack for SIE will make a difference. No way to beat around the bush here.

 

may12.jpg

[The_Global_Warmer]

Like I said, lower than 2014 is a lock. Every model abruptly collapses the 2m temps to above 0 in two weeks. The breakdown is now deep into the day 5-10 range. Things are cold now but the situation will continue to evolve.

Have we ever seen basin-wide 0-1C 2m temps before June?

No.

We have never seen basin wide temps above 0C there is always a cool pocket somewhere.

Maybe in 2011.

You are ignoring way to many ice dynamics.

The event about to unfold over the Beaufort region is extreme but its a small area.

Its importance is being a staging area for major land based heat intrusions.

Late July 2012 had a similar setup.

Temps reaching near 30C penetrated into the Beaufort.

Since the ssts were like 8C min to the ice.

Air that warm could reach thick MYI 300 miles of shore.

A large batch of myi saw 20CM a day+ melt rates before the big cyclone

[AvantHiatus]

Ice is your area of expertise. My main focus is records and feedback systems. Thanks for the information and I agree 100%. Hard to hold a straight face, like some are doing.

[chubbs]

MINNEAPOLIS (The Borowitz Report) – Scientists have discovered a powerful new strain of fact-resistant humans who are threatening the ability of Earth to sustain life, a sobering new study reports. The research, conducted by the University of Minnesota, identifies a virulent strain of humans who are virtually immune to any form of verifiable knowledge, leaving scientists at a loss as to how to combat them.---------More worryingly, Logsdon said, “As facts have multiplied, their defenses against those facts have only grown more powerful.”

 

 

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/scientists-earth-endangered-by-new-strain-of-fact-resistant-humans