|
Post by fascinating on Aug 28, 2012 19:45:12 GMT 1
Well it is just that, for every year for which we have records, the September minimum has always been lower than the August minimum. Why do you think that refreezing might begin this month?
Anyway we will see what happens in the next few weeks.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Aug 29, 2012 8:43:07 GMT 1
There would be no such concept as an early refreeze if the minimum ice extent happened on the same date every year.
Such expressions of certainty are the mark of SOMETHING but it's not that of a careful of observer who uses all sources of information to try to understand all the ramifications of long term weather and climate variables.
As you say, fascinating, we will see what the various systems of ice measurement come up with and then use our brains, at least I will.
|
|
|
Post by nickrr on Aug 30, 2012 13:25:04 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Aug 30, 2012 14:22:28 GMT 1
bah blah blah.
This tells us nothing about the cause. For that we have only the assertion that it is CO2 released as a result of burning fossil fuel.
Still no proof of that.
|
|
|
Post by fascinating on Aug 30, 2012 15:37:34 GMT 1
Still not using your brain I see.
|
|
|
Post by nickrr on Aug 30, 2012 18:02:32 GMT 1
It's explained (and predicted) by rising CO2. However I don't expect someone who's determined to ignore all evidence of AGW to acknowledge it.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Aug 30, 2012 19:05:18 GMT 1
The satellite record..... Stop sniggering at the back.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Aug 31, 2012 14:49:31 GMT 1
When you alarmists can account for the Roman Warm Period, the Mediaeval Warm Period and the Little Ice age I will begin to take into account your opinions on the current temperature (that is, assuming we know exactly what the current temperature actually is).
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 1, 2012 3:16:35 GMT 1
From Dave Springer on Climate Etc Arctic ice melt is not evidence of the globe warming. In fact according to our satellites which were specifically designed to measure global average temperature in the lower troposphere the earth has been cooling at an accelerating pace beginning 15 years ago.
Arctic ice melt is evidence of ice melting in a tiny fraction of the earth’s surface *. The cause could be many things. Winds play a large role in summer ice extents. Slower mixing of cold deep water with warm surface water could cause it. Albedo-lowering black carbon (soot) deposition could cause it. Most of the energy that reaches the earth falls much closer to the equator. Arctic sea ice is a little bitch subject to the whims of winds and ocean currents. This is why Antarctic ice is not in decline – wind can’t push it around to make it clump up or spread out, ocean currents can’t get underneath it to melt it from below.
You will hear progressively more shrill talk about Arctic sea ice because that’s the last thing the global warmists have left to cling to because they’ve been betrayed by the satellite network which unequivocally shows global average temperature in lower troposphere is falling at an accelerating pace beginning over a decade ago even while atmospheric CO2 increased another 8%. The warmists are increasingly looking like fools with each passing year of declining global average temperature. The core fanatics will become increasingly bitter, angry, shrill, and in denial even while the thoughtful among them quietly distance themselves.
Or maybe not. Maybe the next decade will see global average temperature start rising with a vengeance. Only time will tell. judithcurry.com/2012/08/30/activate-your-science/#comment-233937* The area above the Arctic Circle encompasses about 6 percent of the Earth’s surface area.
|
|
|
Post by nickrr on Sept 1, 2012 10:44:51 GMT 1
Same old pathetic and irrelevant arguments (I use the word argument in it's loosest possible sense).
However I'm quite aware that you will continue to perform any mental gymnastics necessary to avoid having to admit that humans are changing the climate.
|
|
|
Post by nickrr on Sept 1, 2012 10:56:31 GMT 1
Delusional garbage.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 1, 2012 11:27:35 GMT 1
On the contrary I DO admit that humans change the climate, nickrr. They change it by felling forests, irrigating land, daming rivers, building cities, planting crops, overgrazing livestock. They change things locally and regionally, not globally. There is no such thing as global mean temperature, it is just a statistical abstraction.
We are still in an "ice age", nickrr. How do I know that? Because there is STILL ice at the Poles and on mountain tops. And it will remain there until the planet enters in to the next period of glaciation which is much more of a KNOWN and understood threat to humanity that any fractional warming from ANY cause.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 1, 2012 16:08:26 GMT 1
Latest Climatic research showing once again that CO2 rise lags temperature not vice versa. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818112001658The phase relation between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperatureby Ole Humlum, Kjell Stordahl and Jan-Erik Solheimd These are just academics based at Norwegian Geoscience, Geology and Technology Universities, so the usual "delusional" denier slobs you love to hate, nickrr. From the Abstract .... Ice cores show atmospheric CO2 variations to lag behind atmospheric temperature changes on a century to millennium scale, but modern temperature is expected to lag changes in atmospheric CO2, as the atmospheric temperature increase since about 1975 generally is assumed to be caused by the modern increase in CO2.... The maximum positive correlation between CO2 and temperature is found for CO2 lagging 11–12 months in relation to global sea surface temperature, 9.5-10 months to global surface air temperature, and about 9 months to global lower troposphere temperature. The correlation between changes in ocean temperatures and atmospheric CO2 is high, but do not explain all observed changes. The paper finds the “overall global temperature change sequence of events appears to be from 1) the ocean surface to 2) the land surface to 3) the lower troposphere,” in other words, the opposite of claims by global warming alarmists that CO2 in the atmosphere drives land and ocean temperatures. Instead, just as in the ice cores, CO2 levels are found to be a lagging effect of ocean warming, not significantly related to man-made emissions, and not the driver of warming.
|
|
|
Post by fascinating on Sept 11, 2012 19:53:09 GMT 1
Well it is September 11th and the melt has continued apace, and the only person surprised is marchesarosa.
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Sept 11, 2012 20:23:05 GMT 1
Has she ever said she's surprised? I'm not, and I think I'm broadly in agreement with her position on this question. The oceans are an immense heatsink, and we're only at the beginning of a cooling cycle. That's coincided with a solar maxima, however weak, and the circa 40 plus year Uranus cycle, which is what drives the short-term fluctuation that everyone's been getting excited about for the past 40 years (before that, the same people were doom-mongering that we were haeading into the next Ice Age - which had a lot more evidence going for it, and still does.) This particular peak in the Uranus cycle has driven the Jet Stream south for the past couple of years, allowing more heat into the Arctic region. None of the IPCC models take this cycle into account.
What's the global temp doing? What's the Antarctic ice doing?
|
|