Present conditions in the Arctic

[Old Rocks]

Arctic News

The chart below shows the decline of snow cover on land on the Northern Hemisphere in Spring over the years.


Credit: Rutgers University Global Snow Lab
The image below shows sea surface temperature anomalies in the Arctic on May 30, 2015.




Temperature in Alaska on the afternoon of May 23, 2015, when a temperature of 91°F (32.78°C) was recorded in Eagle.
High temperatures extended over the Beaufort Sea and Chukchi Sea. The image below shows the difference in sea surface temperatures between May 13, 2015, and May 23, 2015.

Perhaps the people in the Northeast need to move to interior Alaska.

 

[eagle1462010]

http://www.weather.com/news/news/alaska-snow-june1-record-warm-may

Snow Falls In Alaska’s Interior One Week After Temps Hit 90

Sun Unleashes Most Powerful Solar Flare of 2015 Video

he sun unleashed its most intense flare of the year Tuesday (May 5), a monstrous blast that caused temporary radio blackouts throughout the Pacific region.

The X-class solar flare — the most powerful category of sun storm — erupted Tuesday from a sunspot called Active Region 2339 (AR2339), peaking at 6:11 p.m. EDT (2211 GMT). NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory spacecraft captured a gorgeous video of the solar flare, recording it in multiple wavelengths of light.

 

[eagle1462010]

Alaska s Record Warmth Captured In Colorful NASA Photo Weather Underground

Why Did This Happen?
Interestingly, Alaska's recent warmth can be traced to a pair of earlier super typhoons.

"A series of two western Pacific super typhoons -- Noul and Dolphin -- have done a number on the (jet stream) pattern across the north Pacific following their extratropical transition," says Dr. Michael Ventrice, Operational Scientist at The Weather Channel Professional Division.

Ventrice says the ex-typhoons created "high-latitude wave breaking," creating a pronounced northward diversion of the jet stream over the eastern two-thirds of Alaska and northwest Canada.

This warm spell does have its drawbacks. Fire danger has been high and snowmelt led to flooding in other areas of the state, like the oil-rich North Slope, which was cut off by floodwaters.

So far, the heat hasn't had much of a negative impact on drought conditions for Alaska. According to the U.S. Drought Monitor, none of the state is currently in any level of drought, but nearly one-fourth of the state is abnormally dry – the level just below drought status.

 

[eagle1462010]

Okay.............2 Pacific super typhoons moved the jet stream north of the areas setting records...............typhoons leave..................jet stream falls..........temperatures back down.................

 

[IanC]

Arctic News


Credit: Rutgers University Global Snow Lab

here we go again. more scary graphs.

what does it look like in context?

starting in 67 rather than 72 includes years with missing data but i'll show that too.

spring is from late march to late june-

it looks like spring is down 12M km^2, and the rest of the year is up 10M. even smaller change if you only use years with full coverage. I finding it hard to get scared over that.

 

[TheOldSchool]

The important thing is to not give a fuck. Which is the natural stance for most humans to have about the world.

Fuck it. God will handle things right?

 

[eagle1462010]

The important thing is to not give a fuck. Which is the natural stance for most humans to have about the world.

Fuck it. God will handle things right?

Seems like God created Mother Nature and she's bad to the bone................and has been throwing people like you for a loop for a long time.....................

Riddle me this....................does plant life grow quicker and larger with higher levels of CO2..........................

 

[TheOldSchool]

The important thing is to not give a fuck. Which is the natural stance for most humans to have about the world.

Fuck it. God will handle things right?

Seems like God created Mother Nature and she's bad to the bone................and has been throwing people like you for a loop for a long time.....................

Riddle me this....................does plant life grow quicker and larger with higher levels of CO2..........................

Whoa there homie. Sounds to me like you're citing something discovered by scientists. You are a CO2 cultist!

Next you'll be crazy enough to admit the climate has changed before!

 

[Old Rocks]

Arctic News


Credit: Rutgers University Global Snow Lab

here we go again. more scary graphs.

what does it look like in context?

starting in 67 rather than 72 includes years with missing data but i'll show that too.

spring is from late march to late june-

it looks like spring is down 12M km^2, and the rest of the year is up 10M. even smaller change if you only use years with full coverage. I finding it hard to get scared over that.

And how much differance does that make in insolation in January? Compared to June? How much differance between the reflective snow over 13 km^2 compared to 6 km^2. That is 7 km^2 more dark earth absorbing sunlight, rather than having the sunlights energy reflected near the time of maximum sunlight. Energy balance is what it is all about. And that dark earth is permafrost loaded with CO2 and CH4.

 

[IanC]

Arctic News


Credit: Rutgers University Global Snow Lab

here we go again. more scary graphs.

what does it look like in context?

starting in 67 rather than 72 includes years with missing data but i'll show that too.

spring is from late march to late june-

it looks like spring is down 12M km^2, and the rest of the year is up 10M. even smaller change if you only use years with full coverage. I finding it hard to get scared over that.

And how much differance does that make in insolation in January? Compared to June? How much differance between the reflective snow over 13 km^2 compared to 6 km^2. That is 7 km^2 more dark earth absorbing sunlight, rather than having the sunlights energy reflected near the time of maximum sunlight. Energy balance is what it is all about. And that dark earth is permafrost loaded with CO2 and CH4.

That is a fair enough question. It does make a difference. Albedo is reduced, more things grow etc.

But that begs the question of when the clathrates and peat were set down. And why everything didn't 'let go' during the MWP, RWP, or any of the other warm periods. You keep making predictions of doom but you fail to realize that they should already have happened! Perhaps if this present warm period continues for hundreds or thousands of years we will move into unprecedented conditions but we are certainly not there yet. Not much farming going on in Greenland this year, eh?

You are too gullible when it comes to all these worst case scenarios. I cannot say for certain that disaster is impossible, just that it is very unlikely. And this is the crux of the matter. It is easy for climate science to admit to the farfetched predictions of doom because there is no penalty to be paid, instead there are rewards by more funding. On the other hand if they pointed out the low probability of disaster they would also be putting themselves out of a job. Rewards for alarmism, penalty for pragmatism. It is easily understandable how we got to this position, it is hard to see how we can get back to to a more realistic view.

 

[jc456]

The important thing is to not give a fuck. Which is the natural stance for most humans to have about the world.

Fuck it. God will handle things right?

well again, what is it you'd do? Since you're scared, what would you need to stop being scared. Let's see some solutions to your problem.

 

[jc456]

Arctic News


Credit: Rutgers University Global Snow Lab

here we go again. more scary graphs.

what does it look like in context?

starting in 67 rather than 72 includes years with missing data but i'll show that too.

spring is from late march to late june-

it looks like spring is down 12M km^2, and the rest of the year is up 10M. even smaller change if you only use years with full coverage. I finding it hard to get scared over that.

And how much differance does that make in insolation in January? Compared to June? How much differance between the reflective snow over 13 km^2 compared to 6 km^2. That is 7 km^2 more dark earth absorbing sunlight, rather than having the sunlights energy reflected near the time of maximum sunlight. Energy balance is what it is all about. And that dark earth is permafrost loaded with CO2 and CH4.

That is a fair enough question. It does make a difference. Albedo is reduced, more things grow etc.

But that begs the question of when the clathrates and peat were set down. And why everything didn't 'let go' during the MWP, RWP, or any of the other warm periods. You keep making predictions of doom but you fail to realize that they should already have happened! Perhaps if this present warm period continues for hundreds or thousands of years we will move into unprecedented conditions but we are certainly not there yet. Not much farming going on in Greenland this year, eh?

You are too gullible when it comes to all these worst case scenarios. I cannot say for certain that disaster is impossible, just that it is very unlikely. And this is the crux of the matter. It is easy for climate science to admit to the farfetched predictions of doom because there is no penalty to be paid, instead there are rewards by more funding. On the other hand if they pointed out the low probability of disaster they would also be putting themselves out of a job. Rewards for alarmism, penalty for pragmatism. It is easily understandable how we got to this position, it is hard to see how we can get back to to a more realistic view.

Ian, let's say they're right, what is their next step? more money? For what? I'm ok with lstening, but damn present something other than oh we're doomed.

 

[jc456]

The important thing is to not give a fuck. Which is the natural stance for most humans to have about the world.

Fuck it. God will handle things right?

Seems like God created Mother Nature and she's bad to the bone................and has been throwing people like you for a loop for a long time.....................

Riddle me this....................does plant life grow quicker and larger with higher levels of CO2..........................

Whoa there homie. Sounds to me like you're citing something discovered by scientists. You are a CO2 cultist!

Next you'll be crazy enough to admit the climate has changed before!

dude, the climate changes everyday. And again, who is it in here that thinks climate doesn't change. name a poster.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The important thing is to not give a fuck. Which is the natural stance for most humans to have about the world.

Fuck it. God will handle things right?

Seems like God created Mother Nature and she's bad to the bone................and has been throwing people like you for a loop for a long time.....................

Riddle me this....................does plant life grow quicker and larger with higher levels of CO2..........................

It depends on the availability of nutrients water and light. Anyone who grows hydroponic s indoors knows this. A plant will only grow as fast as its least available resource... If you drop all your money on a supplemental co2 system for your grow but use weak lighting, you won't get a higher yield.

Its also important to realize extra co2 doesn't help the forest one bit when you are clear cutting it.

 

[jc456]

The important thing is to not give a fuck. Which is the natural stance for most humans to have about the world.

Fuck it. God will handle things right?

Seems like God created Mother Nature and she's bad to the bone................and has been throwing people like you for a loop for a long time.....................

Riddle me this....................does plant life grow quicker and larger with higher levels of CO2..........................

It depends on the availability of nutrients water and light. Anyone who grows hydroponic s indoors knows this. A plant will only grow as fast as its least available resource... If you drop all your money on a supplemental co2 system for your grow but use weak lighting, you won't get a higher yield.

Its also important to realize extra co2 doesn't help the forest one bit when you are clear cutting it.

thanks for the continued bullshit. still no solutions. Let us know your solution after stopping cutting down trees, cause that has nothing to do with the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, but you already knew that didn'tcha?

 

[IanC]

Arctic News


Credit: Rutgers University Global Snow Lab

here we go again. more scary graphs.

what does it look like in context?

starting in 67 rather than 72 includes years with missing data but i'll show that too.

spring is from late march to late june-

it looks like spring is down 12M km^2, and the rest of the year is up 10M. even smaller change if you only use years with full coverage. I finding it hard to get scared over that.

And how much differance does that make in insolation in January? Compared to June? How much differance between the reflective snow over 13 km^2 compared to 6 km^2. That is 7 km^2 more dark earth absorbing sunlight, rather than having the sunlights energy reflected near the time of maximum sunlight. Energy balance is what it is all about. And that dark earth is permafrost loaded with CO2 and CH4.

That is a fair enough question. It does make a difference. Albedo is reduced, more things grow etc.

But that begs the question of when the clathrates and peat were set down. And why everything didn't 'let go' during the MWP, RWP, or any of the other warm periods. You keep making predictions of doom but you fail to realize that they should already have happened! Perhaps if this present warm period continues for hundreds or thousands of years we will move into unprecedented conditions but we are certainly not there yet. Not much farming going on in Greenland this year, eh?

You are too gullible when it comes to all these worst case scenarios. I cannot say for certain that disaster is impossible, just that it is very unlikely. And this is the crux of the matter. It is easy for climate science to admit to the farfetched predictions of doom because there is no penalty to be paid, instead there are rewards by more funding. On the other hand if they pointed out the low probability of disaster they would also be putting themselves out of a job. Rewards for alarmism, penalty for pragmatism. It is easily understandable how we got to this position, it is hard to see how we can get back to to a more realistic view.

Ian, let's say they're right, what is their next step? more money? For what? I'm ok with lstening, but damn present something other than oh we're doomed.

I don't know. It is like asking if we should spend a couple of hundred trillion dollars on the capability to deflect an asteroid from hitting the Earth. If we knew it was coming then it's worth it. And we would either succeed or fail.

Global warming is an unknown risk that is heavily biased towards pointing out the negatives and ignoring the positives. Mitigation of possible problems is easier and cheaper than prevention. And we don't even have the realistic technology for prevention.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

http://www.weather.com/news/news/alaska-snow-june1-record-warm-may

Snow Falls In Alaska’s Interior One Week After Temps Hit 90

Sun Unleashes Most Powerful Solar Flare of 2015 Video

he sun unleashed its most intense flare of the year Tuesday (May 5), a monstrous blast that caused temporary radio blackouts throughout the Pacific region.

The X-class solar flare — the most powerful category of sun storm — erupted Tuesday from a sunspot called Active Region 2339 (AR2339), peaking at 6:11 p.m. EDT (2211 GMT). NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory spacecraft captured a gorgeous video of the solar flare, recording it in multiple wavelengths of light.

The Sun has no effect on Earth's climate -- AGWCult

 

[jc456]

well I'd say it's a crap shoot, will this happen, will that happen, what if, what if not, each and every day. to stand on a mountain and just yell is so constructive.instead of first understanding what you want to stand and yell about. Maybe attempt to get along and weight out the scenarios and possibilities, I thought that was part of science. To stand and argue at bay about what you know are lies, is sanctimonious. And it is why we are where we are.

As Paul McCartney sang, someone's knocking on the door, so do me a favor, open the door, let them in. oh yeah,

 

[Crick]

Here is the problem right here

To stand and argue at bay about what you know are lies, is sanctimonious.

You know so such thing. What does that make YOUR statement?

 

[Old Rocks]

First, neither in the MWP, which was not warmer than today, or in the RWP, the same, or even 8000 years ago, which was, was the GHG load in the atmosphere what it is today. Now the response to the load is not instant. It takes time for the heat to build. And we are seeing it building. And we are not talking about just what is going to happen in the next five years. We are talking about what we are doing to our great-grandchildren's world.