2015, the beginning of ice free arctic?

[polarbear]

The vast majority of the land based stations are still in densely populated urban heat islands within 45 deg. latitude of the equator and for the rest of the globe the distribution is still as poor as it`s been since the data collection started. The number of sampling points out in the oceans, the land mass north of 50N and south of 50S are still as sparse as they have been before this "correction" .

He doesn't seem to be able to think deeply enough to grasp the fact that the temperature record in those sparcely covered areas (most of the globe) are simple fabrications and have about as much actual meaning as the output of flawed computer models. It would be far to much to ask of him to actually notice that some of the areas of the globe that are claimed to have the most remarkable warming are oddly enough areas of the globe with the least instrumental coverage.

Forget it SSDD...trying to discuss science with this pretend journalist who turns out to be a hippie, pretending to live in Finland is as futile as trying to discuss science with a fence post.
It`s way over his dope head capacity, that almost all these Met stations are in urban environments and that the "average temperature" that these "climatologists" are publishing for the mass media are just simple arithmetic mean averages.
Which is in no way a valid representation of an "average global temperature" as in these milk maid math graphs they continue to publish.
Here is the problem:
Instrumental temperature record - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Calculating the global temperature


The calculation needs to filter out the changes that have occurred over time that are not climate related (e.g. urban heat islands), then interpolate across regions where instrument data has historically been sparse (e.g. in the southern hemisphere and at sea), before an average can be taken.
There are three main datasets showing analyses of global temperatures, all developed since the late 1970s: the HadCRUT analysis is compiled in a collaboration between the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit and the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research

And as we all know the U of east Anglia could no longer show that there was an "average temperature" increase for the last 10 years after skeptics pointed out the flaws in their stats math and forced these corrections.
But even after all these CRUTEM3 and HADCRUT3 "corrections" their math still remains severely flawed.
It`s simply not valid to apply a simple arithmetic average to a data set which has a spacial distribution as ridiculous as shown on the station maps.
Their geometric mean corrections are also entirely incorrect because that applies only to positive numbers.
That`s what happens when "climatologists" are trying to do the math which is a prerequisite for real science. Anyone schooled in real science had no problem to spot the flaws in their stats calculations but it`s way over the heads of the IPCC "peer review". Most of them are, as the latest audits revealed just a bunch of loud mouths consensus enviro- activists who got caught falsifying documents .

 

[Saigon]

Comparison of global temperatures from raw and adjusted Global Historical Climatology Network (GHCN) v3 data, 1880–2010 (analysis by Zeke Hausfather)

 

[Saigon]

So actually, when we compare 5 entirely different sets of data analysis - the results are very similar.

There are some minor differences of 'opinion', but all-in-all the basic trend is EXTREMELY clear.

Polar Bear -

I now have you on ignore mode for the same reason some of your posts were deleted by mods. This means I do not see any of your posts.

 

[polarbear]

Comparison of global temperatures from raw and adjusted Global Historical Climatology Network (GHCN) v3 data, 1880–2010 (analysis by Zeke Hausfather)

You are beyond help and I pity any teacher who is or was supposed to educate You.
I`ve been posting official CRUTEM3 and HADCRUT3 data and You come back here to "refute" these with a picture from oh my God the world is doomed "skeptical science" nut case favorite web site
a right click on your picture shows the source link:
{Home Page.skepticalscience.com/pics/GHCN_RawvAdj.jpg}...your favorite source of "information"...and it is an "analysis" by none other than the grand daddy of global warmist bloggers Zeke Hausfather.

He knows better than what the official CRUTEM & HADCRUT3 analysis concluded after some of their error "corrections"..:

Mind You it`s still a hockey stick despite all the evidence that was exposed how they fabricated it..but in contrast to your Zeke nut-house-daddy "analysis" it shows a sharp decline after 2005. Let`s wait and see how the official CRUTEM & HADCRUT will show once they finally get around to publish what it looks like from 2005 to date. It`s no wonder they are delaying it, probably hoping for a few volcanic eruptions that can be used to "explain" the decline.
If we were talking stock market instead of a temp-trend the above graph would have triggered a massive sell off .
It`s a valid analogy, because "climatology" is as much as a junk-science as the junk-bonds that caused the crash we are still paying for
The sad irony is that Zeke Hausfather who did this "analysis" is also in the midst of selling junk bonds for Tom Siebel`s "C3".
A company that has raised over $ 100 million from the same public that already forgot how they have been shafted by Enron.

B.t.w. You said that there is evidence of "global warming" right outside your window..The thermometer outside my kitchen window had it at -33 C this morning.
What is it outside your window in "Finland" today ? Upload a picture for us, will`ya..? I would love to see that "evidence" You are talking about...Oh, so sorry I forgot,..for you that would be almost as much trouble as running a finger across a PC keyboard that`s been sold for use in Finland.
I know it`s hard to fake it because You have no idea in what sequence the Å, ä, and so on are generated if you would or could do it.
Helsinki is a balmy -5 C...how come it`s not snowing like crazy?
I`ve been reading an article in the "Åbo Underrättelser"
http://www.abounderrattelser.fi/news/

I`m curious.
"kvällen" the phonetics are almost the same as "Quellen" is pronounced in German...does it mean "sources"...?
brandhärdar som flammar upp och som måste släckas.[/quote]
German...:"Brandherde Flammen flammen so hoch wie Mäste"....or is that all in Swedish ?
Sounds like Swedish to me...!!! It`s not very hard for Germans to understand Swedish

"E-postadressen publiceras inte. Obligatoriska fält är märkta * . OBS! ÅU publicerar inte kommentarer under signatur!"
postadressen...German : Post Addressen
Obligatoriska...English bligatory
"fält är märkta "....Now that sounds 100% Swedish to me! They pronounce that word "fält" exactly the same as "Feld" is pronounced in German, meaning "field" in English.
How come most of the text in Fin newspapers is printed in Swedish ?

Aaha...finally found an article that`s published in Your native tongue..
Would You be so kind and translate that for me?

Etelän koulujen hiihtolomaviikolla auringonpaistetta tulee vuoroin etelään, vuoroin pohjoiseen.
Torstaina etelässä on aamulla vielä kova yli kymmenen asteen pakkanen. Ilma lämpenee päivän mittaan muutamaan pakkasasteeseen. Auringonvalostakin pääsee nauttimaan, mutta aurinko paistaa pilvien välistä.
Pohjoisessa on suhteellisen lauhaa ilmaa, mutta pilvistä. Lumisade tulee pohjoiseen pohjoisesta alkaen.
Perjantaina pilvistä säätä tulee myös etelään, mutta Pohjois-Suomessa puolestaan on upea hiihtosää. Pakkasta on siellä hieman tavallista enemmän.
Auringonpaiste lisääntyy viikonloppuna Etelä- ja Keski-Suomessa.
Sunnuntaina aurinkoista voi olla jo koko maassa lännestä alkaen.
Ilmatieteen laitoksen ja Nelosen meteorologi Anniina Törmä kutsuu säätä nyt kevättalviseksi – keväästä ei voi vielä puhua.

Gee...it`s only -7 C in Helsinki and they act as if it was 40 below or something:

Helsinki sai torstaina lumipeitteen.

@ -7 C... Canadians head to the closest golf course

Because more than 6 months of hockey is a drag:

and @ -20 C the downtown hookers already wear mini-skirts..but I guess they don`t have any female hookers in gay Finland, so these women in Helsinki must be housewives, not wanting to make any "Carbon footprints" so they walk to get their groceries..?
Another thing I could not help but notice...here we are in Helsinki..@ an intersection, traffic lights and the whole 9 yards of a typical downtown area...yet not a single car in sight..amazing!!!

In Canada we drive, doesn`t fucking matter how much snow there is:

Polar Bear -

I now have you on ignore mode for the same reason some of your posts were deleted by mods. This means I do not see any of your posts.

You love to exaggerate...my posts were deleted ?...posts as in plural
The only post that was deleted was that 3 liner with the Java script where Your IP showed up...
I got the e-mail..it was deleted "for security reasons"...after You shit Your pants and complained to the moderator

How can you put me in "ignore mode" ?
That`s the mode You have been in since birth...not me !

You meant "ignore list"...
I`m sure I`m in good company there, with almost every scientist there has been since the printing press has been invented

So now you are off the hook to answer the Greenland snow question and running Your thumb across a keyboard anyone who lives in Finland has.
I know where you are , but posting that for everyone else here to read, that would be a legitimate reason to get me banned from this forum...which is what you demanded after I found you out
Man You are a prime example of a phoney baloney internet personality faker...
If You are an educated journalist in Finland then I`m Swedish, blond, 20 years old, and a single millionaire.. and not an old married & retired engineer, raising my grand children

 

[SSDD]

Comparison of global temperatures from raw and adjusted Global Historical Climatology Network (GHCN) v3 data, 1880–2010 (analysis by Zeke Hausfather)

You are thinking that perhaps GHCN is not a database that has been "adjusted" (tampered with)? Think again.

ANd that is just one example...GHCN has been tampered with to the point that it is meaningless.

 

[PredFan]

A blog, but many links to reputable sources. Such as the US Navy.

Arctic News

In conclusion, it looks like there will be no sea ice from August 2015 through to October 2015, while a further three months look set to reach zero in 2017, 2018 and 2019 (respectively July, November and June). Before the start of the year 2020, in other words, there will be zero sea ice for the six months from June through to November.

And, events may unfold even more rapidly, as discussed earlier at Getting the picture.


The image below, from the Naval Research Laboratory, shows the dramatic decline of sea ice thickness over the last 30 days.

Oh, it's 2015 now is it? They keep pushing that date back i see.

 

[RollingThunder]

A blog, but many links to reputable sources. Such as the US Navy.

Arctic News

In conclusion, it looks like there will be no sea ice from August 2015 through to October 2015, while a further three months look set to reach zero in 2017, 2018 and 2019 (respectively July, November and June). Before the start of the year 2020, in other words, there will be zero sea ice for the six months from June through to November.

And, events may unfold even more rapidly, as discussed earlier at Getting the picture.


The image below, from the Naval Research Laboratory, shows the dramatic decline of sea ice thickness over the last 30 days.

Oh, it's 2015 now is it? They keep pushing that date back i see.

LOLOLOLOL...."pushing it back"???? LOLOL.....actually the predictions for an ice free Arctic have been drastically 'pulled forward' over the last decade.

In 2007 the IPCC reported that "the projected reduction [in global sea ice cover] is accelerated in the Arctic, where some models project summer sea ice cover to disappear entirely in the high-emission A2 scenario in the latter part of the 21st century.″[11] There is currently no scientific evidence that a seasonally ice-free Arctic Ocean existed anytime in the last 700,000 years.

The rate of the decline in entire arctic ice coverage is accelerating. From 1979–1996, the average per decade decline in entire ice coverage was a 2.2% decline in ice extent (i.e., area with at least 15% sea ice coverage) and a 3% decline in ice area. For the decade ending 2008, these values have risen to 10.1% and 10.7%, respectively. These are comparable to the September to September loss rates in year-round ice (i.e., perennial ice, which survives throughout the year), which averaged a retreat of 10.2% and 11.4% per decade, respectively, for the period 1979–2007.[36] This is consistent with ICESat measurements indicating decreased thickness in arctic ice and a decline in multi-year ice. For the period 2005–2008, multi-year ice decreased 42% in coverage and 40% in volume, a loss of ~6300 km3.[37] While the Arctic Ice Coverage showed an accelerating downward trend, recent reports on the Arctic Ice Volume showed an even sharper decline then the Ice coverage. Since 1979, the ice volume has shrunk by 80% and in just the past decade the volume declined by 36% in the Autumn and 9% in the winter.[38]
(source: Climate change in the Arctic - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

 

[SSDD]

LOLOLOLOL...."pushing it back"???? LOLOL.....actually the predictions for an ice free Arctic have been drastically 'pulled forward' over the last decade.

Right...you cut and paste drones believe whatever you are spoon fed....don't you. That's the big problem with being stupid. Since you don't know, you are forced to pick sides and just believe your side is right.

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Arctic summers ice-free 'by 2013'

The Arctic could be ice-free by 2016 | Grist

Arctic Sea Ice Gone in Summer Within Five Years?

Arctic summer ice could vanish by 2013: expert | Reuters

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Arctic summers ice-free 'by 2013'

North Pole Could Be Ice Free in 2008 - ABC News

The big problem with the internet for you guys is that your idiot predictions don't go away. They are lying around everywhere so your attempts at rewriting history are always doomed to failure.

 

[RollingThunder]

LOLOLOLOL...."pushing it back"???? LOLOL.....actually the predictions for an ice free Arctic have been drastically 'pulled forward' over the last decade.

Right...you cut and paste drones believe whatever you are spoon fed....don't you.

Ahhh, SSooooDDuuumb, you are talking to yourself again.....your fossil fuel industry puppet masters "spoon feed" you their lies, misinformation and propaganda and you parrot it here, like a good little braindead dupe.

That's the big problem with being stupid.

Yup. A problem that you must be very well acquainted with, after having had such a fierce and unsuccessful lifelong struggle with it....too bad there's no cure for stupid....

Since you don't know

Ah, but I do know. I know, for example that you are a clueless retard acting as a 'useful idiot' foot soldier for the fossil fuel industry.

I also know that climate scientists were predicting an ice free summer Arctic to happen decades in the future until just recently when the pace of the observed melting started to far exceed the climate model predictions. This is a fact that is easily verifiable. The topic of this thread involves a prediction that the Arctic may be ice free in summer by 2015. One to the other denier cult nutjobs claimed that a 2015 prediction was "pushing it back" and I told him that it was actually the reverse. You post some articles from 2008, after the big record ice melt in 2007, that talk about a possible summer melt-off by 2013 but, as usual for you, you either don't actually read the articles you cite or you're just too stupid to understand what is being said. Let's look at whether the articles you posted support my position that climate scientists have previously been predicting later dates than 2015 or your position that they all thought the meltdown would happen this year. The second article you cited - The Arctic could be ice-free by 2016 | Grist - is actually talking about a meltoff date of 2016, which is after 2015, the date cited in the OP, you poor confused cretin. All the rest of your articles except one are about the same bit of research predicting a summer ice free Arctic by 2013. LOLOLOLOL. When I provide a list of sources to support my position, they are all, each one, about different studies by different researchers. You're apparently far too stupid to understand that listing multiple reports about the same study does not actually reinforce the information presented in that study. The one article with a headline that seems to be predicting a meltoff in 2008 does not actually predict that. Instead it is talking about an ice free North Pole only. Here's some excerpts from that article:
North Pole Could Be Ice Free in 2008 - ABC News
April 27, 2008
You know when climate change is biting hard when instead of a vast expanse of snow the North Pole is a vast expanse of water. This year, for the first time, Arctic scientists are preparing for that possibility. "There is this thin first-year ice even at the North Pole at the moment", says Mark Serreze, of the US National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC). "This raises the spectre – the possibility that you could become ice free at the North Pole this year". Despite its news value in the media, the North Pole being ice free is not in itself significant. To scientists, Serreze points out, "this is just another point on the globe". What is worrying, though, is the fact that multi-year ice – the stuff that doesn't melt in the summer – is not piling up as fast as Arctic ice generally is melting.


Now let's look at one of these articles you cited and see whether it agrees with your position.

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Arctic summers ice-free 'by 2013'
12 December 2007
(excerpts)
Professor Wieslaw Maslowski told an American Geophysical Union meeting that previous projections had underestimated the processes now driving ice loss. Summer melting this year reduced the ice cover to 4.13 million sq km, the smallest ever extent in modern times. Professor Maslowski's group, which includes co-workers at Nasa and the Institute of Oceanology, Polish Academy of Sciences (PAS), is well known for producing modelled dates that are in advance of other teams. These other teams have variously produced dates for an open summer ocean that, broadly speaking, go out from about 2040 to 2100. "My claim is that the global climate models underestimate the amount of heat delivered to the sea ice by oceanic advection," Professor Maslowski said.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the UN-led body which assesses the state of the Earth's climate system, uses an averaged group of models to forecast ice loss in the Arctic. But it is has become apparent in recent years that the real, observed rate of summer ice melting is now starting to run well ahead of the models. The US National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) research scientist Dr Mark Serreze was asked to give one of the main lectures here at this year's AGU Fall Meeting. Discussing the possibility for an open Arctic ocean in summer months, he told the meeting: "A few years ago, even I was thinking 2050, 2070, out beyond the year 2100, because that's what our models were telling us. But as we've seen, the models aren't fast enough right now; we are losing ice at a much more rapid rate. My thinking on this is that 2030 is not an unreasonable date to be thinking of." And later, to the BBC, Dr Serreze added: "I think Wieslaw is probably a little aggressive in his projections, simply because the luck of the draw means natural variability can kick in to give you a few years in which the ice loss is a little less than you've had in previous years".

 

[Saigon]

SSDD -

If you had actyally looked at what I posted, you miht have noticed that the graphs contain data from a half dozen entirely different sources.

They all draw similar conclusions.

No doubt this will now have to be deemed 'a lie' or 'a fraud' or some other nonsense. Right?

 

[ima]

Global warming is good, ice free arctic is also good. Warm is basically good. Freezing cold isn't so good. Move away from the coast.

Did I miss anything?

 

[SSDD]

SSDD -

If you had actyally looked at what I posted, you miht have noticed that the graphs contain data from a half dozen entirely different sources.

They all draw similar conclusions.

No doubt this will now have to be deemed 'a lie' or 'a fraud' or some other nonsense. Right?

That should tell you something siagon...when your supposedly pristine sources jibe with known altered sources you should be clued into the fact that your pristine sources..aren't.

 

[Saigon]

SSDD -

Perhaps just look at the graphs and given them a bit of thought.

Again - we have a half dozen entirely independent sources, with some variation between the graphs. And all showing the same trends, and the same conclusions.

I'd have thought that for most scpetics with any interest in science, this was fairly much the end of the road.

 

[RollingThunder]

Global warming is good, ice free arctic is also good. Warm is basically good. Freezing cold isn't so good. Move away from the coast.

Did I miss anything?

Yeah, you missed the fact that you're a clueless retard who has no idea what people are talking about.

 

[ima]

Global warming is good, ice free arctic is also good. Warm is basically good. Freezing cold isn't so good. Move away from the coast.

Did I miss anything?

Yeah, you missed the fact that you're a clueless retard who has no idea what people are talking about.

They're arguing over whose scientists are the most full of crap. Global warming is our friend. Embrace it. Might as well, because we can't stop it.

 

[SSDD]

Global warming is good, ice free arctic is also good. Warm is basically good. Freezing cold isn't so good. Move away from the coast.

Did I miss anything?

Yeah, you missed the fact that you're a clueless retard who has no idea what people are talking about.

What sort of evidence do you have that the earth is presently at the optimum temperature for life?

 

[SSDD]

SSDD -

Perhaps just look at the graphs and given them a bit of thought.

Again - we have a half dozen entirely independent sources, with some variation between the graphs. And all showing the same trends, and the same conclusions.

I'd have thought that for most scpetics with any interest in science, this was fairly much the end of the road.

GHCN=NOAA...known to tamper with temperature records...known to have cooled 754 months since 2008 with 98% of those months being prior to 1960 and 223 of those months having been cooled more than -0.05 degrees and known to have warmed 793 months since 2008 with 72% of those months being after 1959 and the warming of 70 of those months was greater than 0.05 degrees.

You actually believe anything that NOAA puts out or anything that jibes with NOAA's temperatures?

How much more gullible could you possibly be? All you are telling me is that the rest of those people's temperature records closely match the known tampering that has been going on at NOAA. GISTEMP and HADCRU are also known tamperers. So the known tamperers temperature records agree? So what?....they are known and proven tamperers.

As to zeke hausfather and nick stokes....which one of them actually has a world wide temperature gathering network? If they don't own one, where do they get their data? We both know that they get it from at least one of the known tamperers since known tamperers are the only ones with worldwide gathering networks. Is it surprising then, that the data they get from known tamperers matches the data produced by known tamperers?

 

[RollingThunder]

Global warming is good, ice free arctic is also good. Warm is basically good. Freezing cold isn't so good. Move away from the coast.

Did I miss anything?

Yeah, you missed the fact that you're a clueless retard who has no idea what people are talking about.

What sort of evidence do you have that the earth is presently at the optimum temperature for life?

SSoooDDuuumb, your questions are always very stupid. I guess that's because you're so retarded.

There is no "optimum temperature for life", dumbass. There are however the temperature ranges, rainfall patterns and general climate conditions that the human race's agricultural systems are designed for and depend on. Higher temperatures and changing rainfall timing and patterns will adversely affect agricultural production all around the world and will very probably result in mass starvation at some point. Higher temperatures are also seriously shrinking the world's mountain glaciers, which normally play a vitally important role in the summer water supplies for drinking and agriculture for hundreds of million of people. As these glaciers disappear, water supplies will vanish and great suffering and starvation will result.

 

[RollingThunder]

SSDD -

Perhaps just look at the graphs and given them a bit of thought.

Again - we have a half dozen entirely independent sources, with some variation between the graphs. And all showing the same trends, and the same conclusions.

I'd have thought that for most scpetics with any interest in science, this was fairly much the end of the road.

GHCN=NOAA...known to tamper with temperature records...known to have cooled 754 months since 2008 with 98% of those months being prior to 1960 and 223 of those months having been cooled more than -0.05 degrees and known to have warmed 793 months since 2008 with 72% of those months being after 1959 and the warming of 70 of those months was greater than 0.05 degrees.

You actually believe anything that NOAA puts out or anything that jibes with NOAA's temperatures?

How much more gullible could you possibly be? All you are telling me is that the rest of those people's temperature records closely match the known tampering that has been going on at NOAA. GISTEMP and HADCRU are also known tamperers. So the known tamperers temperature records agree? So what?....they are known and proven tamperers.

As to zeke hausfather and nick stokes....which one of them actually has a world wide temperature gathering network? If they don't own one, where do they get their data? We both know that they get it from at least one of the known tamperers since known tamperers are the only ones with worldwide gathering networks. Is it surprising then, that the data they get from known tamperers matches the data produced by known tamperers?

Your denier cult myths and fantasies about temperature record "tampering" are as crackpot insane as the rest of your moronic myths. You silly wankers are just more conspiracy theory nutjobs and your particular conspiracy theory involving tens of thousands of scientists all around the world is an especially idiotic and insane one at that.

 

[skookerasbil]

Yeah, you missed the fact that you're a clueless retard who has no idea what people are talking about.

What sort of evidence do you have that the earth is presently at the optimum temperature for life?

SSoooDDuuumb, your questions are always very stupid. I guess that's because you're so retarded.

There is no "optimum temperature for life", dumbass. There are however the temperature ranges, rainfall patterns and general climate conditions that the human race's agricultural systems are designed for and depend on. Higher temperatures and changing rainfall timing and patterns will adversely affect agricultural production all around the world and will very probably result in mass starvation at some point. Higher temperatures are also seriously shrinking the world's mountain glaciers, which normally play a vitally important role in the summer water supplies for drinking and agriculture for hundreds of million of people. As these glaciers disappear, water supplies will vanish and great suffering and starvation will result.

Well s0n.....then I'd suggest you start stocking up on supplies starting now. Too, if you want to play it safe, look into making your own personal ark. Some are already doing it..........

Sittting around worryng all your life about a tragic world is gay. A waste of time......the days are ticking by. Assholes like you have been preaching doomsday for decades. Nobody cares.


Now...........get to work...........sitting around here posting up stuff about glaciers isnt going to accomplish dick.