135 replies to this topic

[Devonian]

Chris Knight, on 18 December 2009 - 19:32 , said:

Dev, I have just re-read this post from the beginning. You link to two blogs only - where's the science in that? Had I linked to the Air Vent, or Junk Science - would you have taken that as serious evidence?

I take the Met Office seriously, I take NSIDC seriously. The two blogs were written by named scientists, you can (as you have done so far) just dismiss them but they simply report what is going on. They are serious reports of the science, please read them. Dr Masters is widely respected, the other proff is a messenger, he's reporting on the AGU and I though that interesting. Neither is (if you've read them you'll know this) advocating a position but reporting. beside, what have you posted that we might discuss? Not a thing...

Quote

Now argue your point properly,

Are you a school teacher? You have the gall to say that having not posted an iota of evidence yourself???

Quote

or admit that there is no point in speculating about a mythological concept like an "Ice-free Arctic", at least in the near future. I said "move along" previously - you now state that this is not "going anywhere...". We agree!

No need to play games with my word, Chris.

There is plenty in the literature, the IPCC, NSIDC, The Met Office that is science and not speculation. Continually dismissing everything in the way you have doesn't help, it just looks like a refusal to engage in debate.

Edited by Devonian, 18 December 2009 - 20:44 .

[Chris Knight]

Devonian, on 18 December 2009 - 20:43 , said:

I take the Met Office seriously, I take NSIDC seriously. The two blogs were written by named scientists, you can (as you have done so far) just dismiss them but they simply report what is going on. They are serious reports of the science, please read them. Dr Masters is widely respected, the other proff is a messenger, he's reporting on the AGU and I though that interesting. Neither is (if you've read them you'll know this) advocating a position but reporting. beside, what have you posted that we might discuss? Not a thing...



Are you a school teacher? You have the gall to say that having not posted an iota of evidence yourself???



No need to play games with my word, Chris.

There is plenty in the literature, the IPCC, NSIDC, The Met Office that is science and not speculation. Continually dismissing everything in the way you have doesn't help, it just looks like a refusal to engage in debate.

That's all you are doing Dev, word games. Come on, lets have a sensible discussion.

There is nothing in the scientific literature that makes a strong case for future Arctic summer conditions. Not by Mark Serreze or David Barber, or any other Cryosphere experts. Many isolated sound bites, which have been exaggerated from "may" to "will" with regard to open water at the pole, were made in the summer of 2008, before the ice failed to match the record loss of 2007.

All that can be said by such experts is that if the models are right, then it will happen, but the question I asked several posts back was:

"If an Ice-Free Arctic Ocean ever were to happen in the next 30 years, what exactly would that mean?"

and then I suggested:

"A few days around the autumn equinox with next to no ice floating around the north pole."

What would you expect?

Hang on I know the answer, Dev: A knock-down argument, no discussion.
We know your views on the various climate agencies that can do no wrong. That is not the point.

The point is that an "ice-free Arctic" would be a very brief phenomenon, not much different to the September of 2 years ago, and of no real lasting consequence. The Arctic winter radiation balance makes that clear.

Any evidence to the contrary?

Sorry, Dev, I missed this on first reading of your links.


I know how you feel

Edited by Chris Knight, 19 December 2009 - 14:29 .

[Gray-Wolf]

mycroft, on 20 December 2009 - 21:34 , said:

One of the most sensible posts i've read for a long time.
As he said, too many "mays" have become "wills" because its become convenient to put that message across.

What will be the argument/excuse if Artic ice bounces back.... Oh it's part of the natural cycle?

Sadly Mycroft even with the alleged 'recovery' of the past 2 years (from the maybe not so freakish 07'?) the trend for loss continues unabated (in fact hasn't the 10yr average losses increased ?) if you look at the 'amount' of ice in the Arctic ,it's mass, as opposed to just it's spread or 'extent'.

If we are being fed good data then we have a summer pack that is now prone to complete melt out if it either gets warm enough or windy enough to drift ice into melting zones.In the past the central core stayed roughly put (being a massive ice island) and was thick enough not to be melted out even over a warm summer.

We know that this thick ice island has been thinning since the late 50's and now it appears to be in it's death throes.

During that 60 years we have had cold as well as warm summers/winters but this hasn't mattered as it appears that the water the ice sits in has continued to warm and melt it out from below........for at least 60 years.

This is no 30yr PDO phase, no 11 year sunspot phase, infact it's no phase I've ever come across.

This is not 'natural variation' ,this is abnormal, to me this is man made.

[Gray-Wolf]

I'd not like to do 7m+ with a hand auger!!! good job we're down to 2m eh?

[Gray-Wolf]

mycroft, on 21 December 2009 - 22:02 , said:

G.W
Sorry i just do not buy that..
with the greatest respect HOW do we know this has not happened before,saying that this is no
natural variation is quick and easy soundbite that is always used by the doom and gloom merchants
as a species we have no way of knowing whether this is a part of a cycle or a long term trend of the natural kind.
As for good data,i take it you would not use the last debacle of the Hadow lead trip (Catlin Survey)
where they drilled... with hand held ice auger to surmise the thickness of the ice.

The models show us how the 'final phase' of sea ice loss operates. We get a lot of open water on the Russian side (and facing the Bering straights) but we also get a lot of wind/current driven ice piling up behind the Canadian Archipelago and north of Greenland.

What did the expedition encounter? Big fat chunks of perennial or piled up ice? what was the problem (apart from equipment failure) they had? was it not trying to traverse this 'unexpected ' landscape?

I'll make you a prediction as to how the ice will melt out come late spring and summer.The Russian side (including the Northern passage) will go before late July, So will the Bering side of things and North of Alaska. The NWest passage will have a slow melt but will be more open than last year.The North coast of Greenland will also open up in Aug. There will be an ice island to the North of the Archipelago with open water all around. This ice will be fragmented as the 'pole cam' will show us. This summer will challenge or beat the 07' 'record min'.

If we suffer a 'perfect storm' then I will predict that at min. we will have less than 25% of the average min from 1980 to 2000.

[paul tall]

Gray-Wolf, on 22 December 2009 - 16:09 , said:

I'd not like to do 7m+ with a hand auger!!! good job we're down to 2m eh?

I wonder if the mammoths were saying "this is no fluke, this is mammoth made" when the glaciers retreated.

Gray-Wolf, on 26 December 2009 - 18:17 , said:

The models show us how the 'final phase' of sea ice loss operates. We get a lot of open water on the Russian side (and facing the Bering straights) but we also get a lot of wind/current driven ice piling up behind the Canadian Archipelago and north of Greenland.

What did the expedition encounter? Big fat chunks of perennial or piled up ice? what was the problem (apart from equipment failure) they had? was it not trying to traverse this 'unexpected ' landscape?

I'll make you a prediction as to how the ice will melt out come late spring and summer.The Russian side (including the Northern passage) will go before late July, So will the Bering side of things and North of Alaska. The NWest passage will have a slow melt but will be more open than last year.The North coast of Greenland will also open up in Aug. There will be an ice island to the North of the Archipelago with open water all around. This ice will be fragmented as the 'pole cam' will show us. This summer will challenge or beat the 07' 'record min'.

If we suffer a 'perfect storm' then I will predict that at min. we will have less than 25% of the average min from 1980 to 2000.

You get kicks out of this don't you?

[Gray-Wolf]

[quote name='paul tall' date='02 January 2010 - 22:18 ' timestamp='1262470730' post='1691847']
I wonder if the mammoths were saying "this is no fluke, this is mammoth made" when the glaciers retreated.

[quote]

Isn't man squarely in the frame for their extinction? I thought that ,along with Megalania, they were the first of our efforts at Environment change?......we've grown in ambition since and our now looking to be the reason for one of the top extinction events of the planet....unless the botanical/zoological science is fudged?
[quote]
You get kicks out of this don't you?
[/quote]


I have kids one of whom has severe dependency on modern technology for his day to day continuance. What ,in Frell's name,would the' kick' be in seeing the end of our current way of being?

The Demise of the ice would truely signal the beginning of the kind of changes you would see as 'alarmist' or 'Doom saying'. Sadly it will be alarming and 'Doom' would kinda hit the nail on the head.

I am sorry that you cannot see the world through my eyes for a day. Not only would you judge me less harshly but you would also be treated to the 'why' of my seeing things this way.

That said it'll take a lot of scientific evidence to persuade me that the understanding I've gained over the past 30yrs is flawed from it's very core.

[laserguy]

Well I'm with you fully that we'll be the architects of our own demise,GW. Looking around,things are shaping up very nicely in that dept,thank you very much. But you know me well enough that I'll say it's nowt to do with a climate in flux (as always),let alone one that we as a species are directing the course of to any degree. We could all be 'carbon neutral' (whatever that's supposed to mean) but our numbers just keep on going up. Something,somewhere along the line has got to give... and the solution is a little more drastic than turning down the thermostat one degree,not leaving appliances on standby and driving electric cars (that might go a little way to plugging the energy gap before the nuke plants get lively and the wind turbines seize up thru' lack of use). But anyway,that belongs elsewhere. Last time I checked (this am!) ice extent it was stuck on Dec 29 - what gives?

[Gray-Wolf]

http://news.bbc.co.u...ech/8437703.stm

Methane release is one of the worst 'side effects' of loss of ice cover both for the permafrost in the shallow shelf seas off Siberia but also for the land based permafrost. When a coast is 'ice free' the impact can be felt up to 1,500km inland which just about encompasses ALL of the northern permafrost.

As the article points out you have the first whammy of 'super greenhouse warming' but then ,as the methane breaks down, you get the second whammy of CO2 greenhouse warming.

For those who think the loss of ice is inconsequential please read up on methane release.

[Gray-Wolf]

http://www.scienceda...91230183301.htm

http://www.scienceda...00111102536.htm

http://www.scienceda..._the_clouds.htm

Edited by Gray-Wolf, 13 January 2010 - 12:15 .

[RAIN RAIN RAIN]

Ice free UK could be a while off...

[sunny starry skies]

Chris Knight, on 17 December 2009 - 21:37 , said:

If this thread is not to go OT, then fanciful speculation about warming due to atmospheric changes should be avoided. The causes for the reduction in (summertime, Arctic) sea ice are not known, expected, predictable or quantifiable (so far), and any link to atmospheric carbon dioxide changes are not demonstrable. We do know how the atmospheric carbon dioxide trends have been changing in a regular fashion for the last half century, but the response of the global or local temperatures have neither been dependent on those figures, predictable nor regular. Those with beliefs that properties of increased quantities of carbon dioxide have definite real-world effects, should at least wait until those effects can be reliably demonstrated in the real world, before casting their self-ordained superior prescience on the rest of humanity.

The causes, and the relative strengths of the key drivers, are pretty well known now - you can't explain the climate of the past 100 years in detail without the forcing of anthropogenic greenhouse gases, but you can explain the same climate with GHGs. That's also supported by basic physics. Atmospheric CO2 concentration is changing in a regular fashion - upwards. The link is demonstrable as the regions predicted to warm the most are the Arctic regions. They are now demonstrably warming the most, and not surprisingly the sea ice is demonstrably thinning and shrinking in response.

Given that we now understand the relative strengths of each of the drivers of the climatic system (solar, orbital, GHG, volcanic, ENSO-type/PDO etc), we can make good predictions for the future, given the changes in driver strength over time. At present, both solar and PDO are very negative, and this has offset the warming of GHGs - any suggestions as to what will happen when solar activity increases and ENSO/PDO return to a more positive state?

Back on topic:

http://atoc.colorado...tal_EOS2005.pdf

This article states that "there is no palaeoclimatic evidence for a seasonally ice-free Arctic in the past 800 millennia." Without doing a lot more reading I can't refute that. Whoever was saying that the climate has been warmer during the Holocene - in parts of the Arctic it was indeed relatively warm in the early to mid-Holocene - the reason being that the key driver of the time (orbital) was close to a peak. We're now closer to an orbital 'minimum', hence there must be another forcing that is causing warming and reducing the sea ice in the Arctic. That's pretty clearly anthropogenic GHGs - solar, volcanic or ENSO/PDO can't explain the trend. If the various interglacials of the late Quaternary have failed to remove summer sea ice, then we are indeed heading into uncharted territory, where the only reason we would be going into that uncharted territory is because we are here to change the climate.

And I can't say I like the concept of the release of more methane and CO2 from the seabed and permafrosted bogs either...
sss

Edit: Chris, you're dismissing Dev just as much too. If you think there's no good evidence for Arctic ice retreat or it's consequences, you should read the literature, otherwise you sound like your head's in the sand.

Edited by sunny starry skies, 13 January 2010 - 13:02 .

[Gray-Wolf]

And why the most negative AO we've ever measured? and why have our new 'A-Train' of sats witnessed a 50% reduction in cloud cover ? and why are storms tracking ever north and penetrating into the Arctic Basin as never witnessed before? and what of the deep water mixing this summer 'open water' allows across the artic basin? and what of the Arctic Amplification we've measured since 02'? and what of the muddying of Arctic waters by permafrost outflow off Siberia?and what of the shift north of the oceanic 10C isotherm?and what of the drastic coastal erosion in the areas once protected by sea ice?and what of the increase in methane release across the northern permafrost? and what of the northerly shift of the Jet? and what of the tend away from trilobal to bi-lobal atmospheric set up over the pole? and what of the 'rotten ice where we thought we measured 'sound' thick perennial?

Seems like an awful lot of 'co-incidental' natural phases all occuring at once dontcha think? and this set against concerns that we have shifted the kilter of the climate system.

Where would a betting man put his dosh?

[Gray-Wolf]

Chris, I feel we need to be mindful of others rights to substantiated opinion. There is nothing 'fanciful' about the changes in circulation we currently witness across the Arctic and ,the fact they are new/novel would suggest we need use our imaginations to map out their implications.

The 'Barber Discoveries' in Sept. 09' (and subsequent paper) would suggest that we will be furnished with a more accurate ice type map of the Artic basin some point soon. If the remnant 'old perennial' to the north of Svalbard is a mix of rotten ice and old perennial then it's removal from the Arctic will be rapid as the rotten ice ablates once beyond Svalbard (as it enters the end of the N.A.D.) leaving only the remnants to flow south down the east coast of Greenland.

Once this historic Arctic ice type is gone we are left with the 'new' 3m max. pack of saline rich ice which is far less durable than the near glacial ice of the old perennial. To me this would mean that only physical position would enable even the thickest ice to survive a summer season. With the lack of 'massive' ice sections the transport around the arctic Gyre will be flowing the fastest we have measured (weather conditions being favourable) and the same with the flush out down the Arctic current.

We were promised a 'ice clogged' NW passage for a couple of years a couple of years ago.Will we see the deep channel open to traffic come late Aug This year?

The other 'new' thing comes off the back of Dr Barbers findings. If the central Arctic holds no 'old perennial' , just 'rotten ice' then it is assessable by all ship types so will we find (once the new charts are published) shipping crossing the central polar regions?

Dr Barber found the new ice type no problem to shipping in the way 30ft thick ice used to and once precedents have been set would we not expect nations to utilise this shortcut to transit East/west without needing Suez or Panama and benefit from the fuel savings to be found there?

If the central Arctic is navigable then what of exploitation of the high arctic? Russia has already planted it's flag on the sea floor of the pole which other nations will lay claim to the region?

With Europe's 'Cryosat' mission on the pad and ready to fly in Feb. more info on the Arctic ice will be available to us all and better assessments as to how close a seasonal Arctic pack we are will be able to be made.

With this summer promising to be heavily influenced by the strong El-Nino in the Pacific (and NOAA promising global climate impacts from it) could this be the last year of large amounts of surviving ice come Sept? One thing is for sure we will have an interesting 8 months in front of us all.

Edited by Gray-Wolf, 19 January 2010 - 09:49 .

[Gray-Wolf]

http://www.usatoday.... - Top Stories)

So ,to save 52 milliseconds in transit time they're laying a cable through the NW Passage now the ice has gone.......I suppose time means money but surely????

[BUSHY]

I think that the answer lies here GW. "The company also hopes to link rural Alaska communities to the cable. It has applied for $350 million in federal stimulus money, nearly 5% of that total for broadband grant and loan program, for lines to eight hub communities in western and northern Alaska. The Asia-Europe line does not depend on stimulus money, Ebell said."

[Gray-Wolf]

BUSHY, on 22 January 2010 - 14:45 , said:

I think that the answer lies here GW. "The company also hopes to link rural Alaska communities to the cable. It has applied for $350 million in federal stimulus money, nearly 5% of that total for broadband grant and loan program, for lines to eight hub communities in western and northern Alaska. The Asia-Europe line does not depend on stimulus money, Ebell said."

Their coastal communities are spending millions to relocate due to coastal erosion, their buildings/infrastructure is sinking into the mire, their subsistance way of being (to help subsidise the govt. handouts they are forced to exist upon) has all but gone but you think high speed broadband is salve enough????

[Gray-Wolf]

http://www.time.com/...1956932,00.html

More confirmation that we are due a set of 'revised' algorithms to measure sea ice by.