New Iceage? Much Evidence? - Global Cooling

[jethro]

Cheers GW,

So, using global temperatures is pretty meaningless then. Surely what is more important are local temperatures. I know the principle of heat from the Tropics being transferred to the Poles applies but if the heat from the Tropics is counter-balanced by cold in Northern latitudes, there will be less heat transferred North.

Does that make sense or is my caffeine depleted brain still waking up?

Wonder what, if any, longer term impact will be felt further North by the deep La Nina and accompanying cooling of mid-latitude oceans?

[songster]

Sustained expansion of glaciers and ice caps over a period of a couple of centuries?

[Iceberg]

Wonder what, if any, longer term impact will be felt further North by the deep La Nina and accompanying cooling of mid-latitude oceans?

Enso is a pretty self contained perpetuating cycle.

During La Nina the cold air is pushed up and along the surface westwards, this has the effect of pushing the warmer water down and along eastwards, at some point the warm water spreads far enough eastwards that its forced back upto the surface and then an El Nino occurs will the warm water, the warmer water further east leads to less of a temp gradient and the normal west to east winds kick in. As the warm water rises up though the surface it's replaced at depth by colder water. At some point the amount of warm water is exausted, the cold rises and the temp differential at the surface is made greater and the wind switches to a east to west direction pushing the cold water westwards starting the cycle anew.

The re-inforcement mechanism of the prevailing wind(SOI) is partly effected by the PDO switch, a negative PDO gives more of an advantage to a SOI and prevailing winds that support La Nina and less to an El Nino.

However this is ofset to a degree as the SOI will also effect the PDO as well as the vice versa described above. This means that the effect of the PDO lessens the further into an ENSO event you get.

To put maybe more simply a negative PDO looks like it will lead to a quicker change to a La Nina but won't prolong it and a slower change to an El Nino but again won't effect it's general effects. I think this has been shown nicely over the last few years and the next few years i.e the 2009/2010 El Nino really took an age to kick in properly, the 2010/11 La Nina swtich occured quite rapidly and the next switch to a El Nino will probably be quite slow.

A neutral ENSO event will likely be more negative (maybe -2 to -4) in a negative PDO and more postive in a postive PDO +2 to +4.

All in All the effects of the PDO probably has only a minor effect on the global temperature changes caused by ENSO and the ENSO effect/changes on Global temperatures must be largely neutral over several cycles as it's purely a cyclical current movement and no changes deeper than the current ENSO cycle have been observed by Argos floats etc therefore its nothing more than a temporary sink and release of energy, with a global impact.

Therefore in a very long winded answer your question, I don't think Enso has any long term impact further north, unless you think that ENSO can be effected by some underlying factor such as AGW, but I'll leave AGW out for now.

The Above is only IMO, and is just the way I see it all fitting together.

[Essan]

From what I've read you need cool summers allowing snow patches to survive and then grow the season after? You get to the point that the 'albedo effect' then starts to have a small impact which then (no pun intended) snowballs as the years progress.

Exactly

Which in theory we should be seeing in higher latitudes in the N Hemisphere as axial tilt declines - and which in turn makes the fact that the ice caps on Baffin Island are smaller than they were even in the MWP all the more baffling ....... They were increasing nicely until around 150 years ago.

[VillagePlank]

From what I've read you need cool summers allowing snow patches to survive and then grow the season after?

Oh no! The last time Ben Nevis was snow free was the summer of 2006. I think I'd best buy some woolies!

Sodding around aside ... Ben Nevis would only need to be about 100m higher to have a permanent snow cap - I wonder if records of snow cover for Ben Nevis could act as a proxy to 850hPa heights?

Edited February 5, 2011 by VillagePlank

[barrel1234]

Oh no! The last time Ben Nevis was snow free was the summer of 2006. I think I'd best buy some woolies!

Sodding around aside ... Ben Nevis would only need to be about 100m higher to have a permanent snow cap - I wonder if records of snow cover for Ben Nevis could act as a proxy to 850hPa heights?

http://visit-fortwil...illiam-scotland

webcam if anyone is interested.

Edited February 6, 2011 by barrel1234

[Village]

There is no such thing As global warming simple

I agree with you 100% and so does the IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change agree.

The IPCC simply pretends that Global warming is real but were forced to change the theory name 'Global Warming' to that of 'Climate Change' because the term global warming is totally misleading.

Climate Change is the term now because the climate does change, always has done and always will do. So its a nothing statement.

The question should be; Why on Earth is the IPCC waisting billions of Dollars of tax payer's money in a futile attempt to make global climate stand still just because it suits the Human world to do so?

I say to all these people; Climate changes, get over it!

[chris78]

I agree with you 100% and so does the IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change agree.

The IPCC simply pretends that Global warming is real but were forced to change the theory name 'Global Warming' to that of 'Climate Change' because the term global warming is totally misleading.

Climate Change is the term now because the climate does change, always has done and always will do. So its a nothing statement.

The question should be; Why on Earth is the IPCC waisting billions of Dollars of tax payer's money in a futile attempt to make global climate stand still just because it suits the Human world to do so?

I say to all these people; Climate changes, get over it!

I have no idea as to how the climate is changing....or more importantly how human activity may be impacting on that....Village I dont believe you or anyone else does either..so im not sure why you are so convinced...and to all those who are convinced human activity has NO effect, if you are right..what does that mean....we are free to use whatever the earth has to offer with no regard to anything.....I find it hard to understand why people are so pasionatly against the green/climate change movement....even if we arent impacting climate...surely using les resources....being more sustainable and reducing a dependancy on finite fossil fuels are good things anyway?????????

we all consume too much and need to cut down....get over it!

[keithlucky]

I agree with you 100% and so does the IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change agree.

The IPCC simply pretends that Global warming is real but were forced to change the theory name 'Global Warming' to that of 'Climate Change' because the term global warming is totally misleading.

Climate Change is the term now because the climate does change, always has done and always will do. So its a nothing statement.

The question should be; Why on Earth is the IPCC waisting billions of Dollars of tax payer's money in a futile attempt to make global climate stand still just because it suits the Human world to do so?

I say to all these people; Climate changes, get over it!

The IPPC is so good USA has withdrawn funding at last a government are waking up to scaremongering moneymaking organisation.

[cheeky_monkey]

Sodding around aside ... Ben Nevis would only need to be about 100m higher to have a permanent snow cap - I wonder if records of snow cover for Ben Nevis could act as a proxy to 850hPa heights?

My understanding is that the snow line for Scotland is 5300 feet so Ben Nevis would need to be 900ft higher..or nearly 300m at least

[jethro]

After a member questioner/suggestion thread, involving anyone who wanted to get involved, followed by analysis of the feedback, it was universally agreed by both members and the MOD team that a general ranting thread was not only not required, but not welcome either.

Now I'm all for a good rant, it's good for the soul but let's face it, there's always a time and a place - this is neither.

I recommend Speakers Corner if you really cannot resist getting things off your chest.

New Ice Age? Much Evidence? Anyone????

[Grimsby Snow Lover]

Im not sure if anyone has read this but I found it quite interesting.

http://globalcoolingnewiceageuk.blogspot.com/2011/01/uk-summer-and-winter-weather-forecast_31.html

[Essan]

Im not sure if anyone has read this but I found it quite interesting.

http://globalcoolingnewiceageuk.blogspot.com/2011/01/uk-summer-and-winter-weather-forecast_31.html

I found this quite interesting:

Large icebergs was also a frequent sight in the Irish Sea and Morecambe Bay area towards the latter part of the month

I assume he was taking about 14,361BC ? Obviously he was not refering to this year or any other in human memory?

[Methuselah]

The IPPC is so good USA has withdrawn funding at last a government are waking up to scaremongering moneymaking organisation.

Oh, the ever-present stench of the Oil Lobby!

[VillagePlank]

My understanding is that the snow line for Scotland is 5300 feet so Ben Nevis would need to be 900ft higher..or nearly 300m at least

Depends much on location, rather than only altitude I suppose, here

[Argyllcraig]

Scottish snowline depends on the time of year too.

In general from nov to april its probably around the 600m level or roughly 1800-2000feet. As a consequence this where most of the ski resorts can be found.

As for Ben Nevis, well its snow free pretty much every year barring a couple of snow patches that sometimes hang on around the northface in the shade from the huge cliffs.

[Mr_Pessimistic]

anyone think the huge amount of underwater active volcanoes in the arctic ocean has something to do with the natural temp fluctuations? Having a global effect on sea temps, ice and co2 being released by the oceams

[knocker]

anyone think the huge amount of underwater active volcanoes in the arctic ocean has something to do with the natural temp fluctuations? Having a global effect on sea temps, ice and co2 being released by the oceams

Was your question by any chance promted by this site?

http://www.iceagenow.com/index.htm

Edited April 28, 2011 by weather ship

[jethro]

anyone think the huge amount of underwater active volcanoes in the arctic ocean has something to do with the natural temp fluctuations? Having a global effect on sea temps, ice and co2 being released by the oceams

If it is having an impact then I would think it would be visible on the SST data - how uniform are the ocean temperatures, are there any correlating hotspots?

[Mr_Pessimistic]

also people may want to take a look at the correlation between the earths magnetic field and global temps over a large timescale. At the end of the day though, its no good just looking at recemt temps, like the last few hundred or thousand years, one needs to look at the last million years, and when you do, there are clear cycles. The earth has been cooler and warmer than it is now, many times. We are at, or very near the end of a warm period, heading into both a small, and large ice age. Humans will have no, or very little effect on this. The natural state of the planet is much colder than it is now. Is there much evidence of a upcoming ice age? Plenty, if u are willing to look at the earths hirtory past the last 150 years.

[Mr_Pessimistic]

weather ship, i have to admit, i have visited the site on a few occasions over the years. And i would say that much of mr felixs theorys are utter tosh, such as oil being a result of carbon falling out the sky! Etc. But, that doesnt mean its all rubbish..

weather ship, i have to admit, i have visited the site on a few occasions over the years. And i would say that much of mr felixs theorys are utter tosh, such as oil being a result of carbon falling out the sky! Etc. But, that doesnt mean its all rubbish..

[Gray-Wolf]

Since the acceptance of plate tectonics (in the 60's) a lot of attention has been given to both constructive and destructive plate margins (where all the activity is) and I have never seen surface (top 200m) anoms due to deep sea volcanism?

I've oft used the analogy of an electric kettle element trying to warm Ullswater....

Recent studies of deep ocean 'smokers' goes to show just how far out the super heated water has an impact.....we would not have samples/excellent photographs/video if this water impacted metres away from the stack now would we?

As for being at the end of a warm period I would refer you back to my conversation with Richard Alley last year where he made it quite plain that orbital forcing would lead us to the understanding that we have at least 2 23,000yr cycles (man's impacts could lengthen this ....and he touches on it at the end of the Email) to endure before we are once again at a point that we can expect 'cooling' of a scale to prompt another glaciation.

We must try and read all and not just that which suits (or so I am often told!!!) to get a full understanding of our 'current' understanding of such things.

I would agree that mankind would suffer faster and more intensely from cold (Esp. the N.Hemisphere) than they will through our warming but that most other creatures would fare better in a cool down than in a 'warm up' period. Sadly I'd rather keep the diversity (if we had a choice) as some sections of humanity would survive either occurance.....not so our fellow occupants of this planet.

[jethro]

Here is the latest from Leif Svalgaard on the theory by Livingston & Penn of Sunspots disappearing from view by 2015. Thus far, their theory is showing remarkable accuracy. Svalgaard makes a note in this latest study "One might speculate that this last happened during the Maunder Minimum, 350 years ago."

http://www.leif.org/research/HMI-Livingston-Comparison.pdf

The Maunder Minimum was a time of many harsh winters in the Northern Hemisphere, research a few years ago (based on the changes in Total Sun Irradiance) concluded this was too small to have been responsible, the connection was coincidental. Later, more recent research has concluded that a deep Solar Minimum does impact upon climate but locally, especially in Europe and North America.

http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100414/full/news.2010.184.html

It's looking increasingly more likely that in this part of the world, we'll be facing a few years of colder, snowier winters. How long it could last is unknown but sources such as NASA suggest the Sun isn't going to make a spectacular recovery any time soon.

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2006/10may_longrange/

[feb1991blizzard]

Definately increasing, i dont see how there can be any argument against that unless there is some sort of conspiracy going on involving all the worlds meteorological organisations which it would be farcical to suggest, however there are two things to note, firstly this planet has cooled and warmed on many occasions in its existance so i dont belive that all of a sudden it is because of man and secondly Ice ages in the past have been preceded by a period of warming.

[Gray-Wolf]

Here is the latest from Leif Svalgaard on the theory by Livingston & Penn of Sunspots disappearing from view by 2015. Thus far, their theory is showing remarkable accuracy. Svalgaard makes a note in this latest study "One might speculate that this last happened during the Maunder Minimum, 350 years ago."

http://www.leif.org/...-Comparison.pdf

The Maunder Minimum was a time of many harsh winters in the Northern Hemisphere, research a few years ago (based on the changes in Total Sun Irradiance) concluded this was too small to have been responsible, the connection was coincidental. Later, more recent research has concluded that a deep Solar Minimum does impact upon climate but locally, especially in Europe and North America.

http://www.nature.co...s.2010.184.html

It's looking increasingly more likely that in this part of the world, we'll be facing a few years of colder, snowier winters. How long it could last is unknown but sources such as NASA suggest the Sun isn't going to make a spectacular recovery any time soon.

http://science.nasa....0may_longrange/

It's a shame that we will (in the Northern Hemisphere) be facing an increasing period of impact from the Arctic Amplification's forcing of atmospheric circulation patterns?

We have ,as I see it, had 3 winters in N.USA and N. Europe blighted by displaced Arctic air as the past summers open water sheds it's summers heat, Many recent studies have pointed to the puny impact of solar output variance (dwarfed by the impacts that 'climate change' is driving). Luckily we are studying the physical impacts that the rapid changes in the Arctic's driving ( as the preliminary paper from Overland (et al) showed us last year) so we will be left with no doubt as to why we face colder starts to our winter (as the Arctic sectors face WAA as we saw around E. Canada last year) over the years to come (no guarantees as the 'plunges' may shift east as more of the Arctic suffers the A.A. as sea ice recedes in early summer~).

Personally I have studied the 'Arctic Plunges' that have collapsed roofs/caused travel disruption , since he early naughties, over many areas of the N.Hemisphere (even through Solar max). The recent ice cover loss of areas other than Barents/Kara leads me to consider a switch away from the 'direct hits' that we ( Europe/N. USA) have suffered over the past 4 winters.

We need watch this years Arctic melt and see which areas (this year) have open stretches of 'dark water' ,from July through Sept, and how 'delayed' re-freeze is across those areas (and how the 'shed heat' impacts the air masses over those areas from Oct through Dec) and how this 'drives away' any deep cold that is able to form once the sun sets for the year in those areas.

I'm sure that the 0.whatever% impact of solar variance plays it's part but the likes of the 30c anom over Barent/Kara in Oct/Nov must surely be a bigger driver of the atmosphere there?

Edited May 8, 2011 by Gray-Wolf