Watching the sea ice melt in the arctic 2012!

As of July 1st SIA was:

2012.5013 -1.9314744 6.3138075 8.2452822
2011.5013 -1.5253255 6.7199564 8.2452822
2010.5013 -1.6466062 6.5986757 8.2452822
2009.5013 -0.6222447 7.6230373 8.2452822
2008.5013 -0.9778000 7.1540303 8.1318302
2007.5013 -1.6577666 6.5875154 8.2452822
 
Ice melting in the summer?

For fuck sake!

When was the last time that ever happened?
 
June 2012 compared to recent years
Arctic sea ice extent for June 2012 was well below average for the month compared to the satellite record from 1979 to 2000. It was the second lowest in the satellite record, behind 2010. Through 2012, the linear rate of decline for June Arctic ice extent over the satellite record is 3.7% per decade.
 

Attachments

  • $Figure3.jpg
    $Figure3.jpg
    57.3 KB · Views: 65
All that melting sea ice will freeze in the next Ice Age. I feel bad for the mastodon.

Aww. Tell you what. Here comes Mass Extinction Event 6, which will challenge the Permian/Triassic Extinction, for top spot, as all-time leading killer, in geologic time.

The P/T happened 251 m.y.a., and it leads the others, by a large margin, since most ocean species died out, and 7 of 10 land species died out, and every creature suffered die-offs.

The old ocean got acidic, then warmer, then more areas became anoxic.

The old jellyfish took over. Then the old algae and bacteria bloomed. H2S respirators evolved. Sailing sucked!

Storms, floods, droughts, and fires all became worse, during volcanism, which we won't have as bad, unless we screw up, raise the sea level, and this forces seismic and volcanic events. But since we are out-gassing CO2, at 10x the rate, prior to the PETM extinction, which isn't one of the big five, and since we are out-gassing CH4, faster, than before the P/T Extinction, we will have all the pre-conditions, necessary, to kill darned near every sea creature, with a lot of the land creatures.

IF we see volcanism AND CH4, will we die out, like animals did, during the P/T? If you send in the old Marines, the old Navy will still have to sink or swim.
 
June 2012 compared to recent years
Arctic sea ice extent for June 2012 was well below average for the month compared to the satellite record from 1979 to 2000. It was the second lowest in the satellite record, behind 2010. Through 2012, the linear rate of decline for June Arctic ice extent over the satellite record is 3.7% per decade.

You do understand that it's not long enough to establish a planetary trend right?
 
All that melting sea ice will freeze in the next Ice Age. I feel bad for the mastodon.

Aww. Tell you what. Here comes Mass Extinction Event 6, which will challenge the Permian/Triassic Extinction, for top spot, as all-time leading killer, in geologic time.

The P/T happened 251 m.y.a., and it leads the others, by a large margin, since most ocean species died out, and 7 of 10 land species died out, and every creature suffered die-offs.

The old ocean got acidic, then warmer, then more areas became anoxic.

The old jellyfish took over. Then the old algae and bacteria bloomed. H2S respirators evolved. Sailing sucked!

Storms, floods, droughts, and fires all became worse, during volcanism, which we won't have as bad, unless we screw up, raise the sea level, and this forces seismic and volcanic events. But since we are out-gassing CO2, at 10x the rate, prior to the PETM extinction, which isn't one of the big five, and since we are out-gassing CH4, faster, than before the P/T Extinction, we will have all the pre-conditions, necessary, to kill darned near every sea creature, with a lot of the land creatures.

IF we see volcanism AND CH4, will we die out, like animals did, during the P/T? If you send in the old Marines, the old Navy will still have to sink or swim.

No species have ever survived. Neither will we.
 
June 2012 compared to recent years
Arctic sea ice extent for June 2012 was well below average for the month compared to the satellite record from 1979 to 2000. It was the second lowest in the satellite record, behind 2010. Through 2012, the linear rate of decline for June Arctic ice extent over the satellite record is 3.7% per decade.

You do understand that it's not long enough to establish a planetary trend right?

Who's to say what we're seeing is an anomaly? We have warm, cold, warm, cold and we just came out of a huge cold period within the innerglacial (little ice age). We're now within a warm period! We as humans for the first time in the history of this planet have the tools to study our planet, should be curious to watch it and see what warm regime is like. :eusa_whistle:

Nothing is wrong with doing so.

Is it long enough within the sine wave pattern of the interglacial to see a new trend? No! In there's no data that suggest otherwise.
 
I'm wondering how valid it is to plot "areas with at least 15% sea ice." That's a pretty rigid definition if you think about it.. That's not where the large volume of ice exists..

Would like to compare the plots to "areas with at least 25% sea ice" -- or even 40%. I bet there'd be a lot less hysteria.. I'd expect ALL areas with 15% or less to be too volatile to make a judgement call.
 
I'm wondering how valid it is to plot "areas with at least 15% sea ice." That's a pretty rigid definition if you think about it.. That's not where the large volume of ice exists..

Would like to compare the plots to "areas with at least 25% sea ice" -- or even 40%. I bet there'd be a lot less hysteria.. I'd expect ALL areas with 15% or less to be too volatile to make a judgement call.

They pick the number that generates maximum hysteria...and then they manipulate the data
 
I'm wondering how valid it is to plot "areas with at least 15% sea ice." That's a pretty rigid definition if you think about it.. That's not where the large volume of ice exists..

Would like to compare the plots to "areas with at least 25% sea ice" -- or even 40%. I bet there'd be a lot less hysteria.. I'd expect ALL areas with 15% or less to be too volatile to make a judgement call.

They pick the number that generates maximum hysteria...and then they manipulate the data

On one hand, you'd expect similiar but much smaller percentages for areas with 25% ice, (at least I would). On the other hand -- if the 40% ice graphs took a dive, I'd buy a kayak toute suite..
 
The time 1979 to 2000 really isn't long enough to measure climate data on a planetary basis.
 
The time 1979 to 2000 really isn't long enough to measure climate data on a planetary basis.

Crapzndogz, have you got any data, to study? See how Matthew loads graphs and links, to studies? See how you keep spamming dogshit-posts? Go take a walk, with sucksassandballs, who is also part dog.

You missed the part, about increased GHGs. You missed the parts, about cars and chainsaws, accelerated out-gassing, oceanic acidification, sea level rise, more powerful storms, more floods, more droughts, desertification, and tracking dogshit, where it doesn't belong. Do you have some comment, about a dataset?

Either make a point, or get your leash and go walkies, before you crap up the house.

GHGs are off the hook, the sun is relatively cool, and the planet is on fire. Do you have a clue, or do you just have to let fucking everybody know, you have shit, for brains?
 
I'm wondering how valid it is to plot "areas with at least 15% sea ice." That's a pretty rigid definition if you think about it.. That's not where the large volume of ice exists..

Would like to compare the plots to "areas with at least 25% sea ice" -- or even 40%. I bet there'd be a lot less hysteria.. I'd expect ALL areas with 15% or less to be too volatile to make a judgement call.

They pick the number that generates maximum hysteria...and then they manipulate the data

On one hand, you'd expect similiar but much smaller percentages for areas with 25% ice, (at least I would). On the other hand -- if the 40% ice graphs took a dive, I'd buy a kayak toute suite..

Here you can see the ice concentration by percentage.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/NEWIMAGES/arctic.seaice.color.000.png
 
They pick the number that generates maximum hysteria...and then they manipulate the data

On one hand, you'd expect similiar but much smaller percentages for areas with 25% ice, (at least I would). On the other hand -- if the 40% ice graphs took a dive, I'd buy a kayak toute suite..

Here you can see the ice concentration by percentage.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/NEWIMAGES/arctic.seaice.color.000.png

That just seems to prove the point that plotting the melt based on 15% sea ice is bullshit..

Because according to that pix -- It's EXTREMELY limited to the very edges of the ice pack and only has appreciable volume because of the large circumference.

Do you know of places where they use melt volumes based on anything OTHER than 15%?

Now I REALLY want to know what that looks like over the recent years..
 
The Arctic perennial ice is MELTING, Fatass! The annual ice is melting FASTER, than ever! It's melting faster, than ever, even though the sun is less intense, in the last several decades, and the recent short-term solar cycle is mild.

Meanwhile, you are a retard, with a big, fat ASS.
 
The Arctic perennial ice is MELTING, Fatass! The annual ice is melting FASTER, than ever! It's melting faster, than ever, even though the sun is less intense, in the last several decades, and the recent short-term solar cycle is mild.

Meanwhile, you are a retard, with a big, fat ASS.

Not a single fucking thing you can do about melting ice on planet Earth.

You're powerless.

Clueless too
 
The Arctic perennial ice is MELTING, Fatass! The annual ice is melting FASTER, than ever! It's melting faster, than ever, even though the sun is less intense, in the last several decades, and the recent short-term solar cycle is mild.

Meanwhile, you are a retard, with a big, fat ASS.

No. It's not.

Earth's Polar Ice Melting Less Than Thought - US News and World Report

Man caused global warming had nothing to do with this either.

'Britain's Atlantis' found at bottom of North sea - a huge undersea kingdom swamped by a tsunami 5,500 years ago | Mail Online

The wave was part of a larger process that submerged the low-lying area over the course of thousands of years.


Read more: 'Britain's Atlantis' found at bottom of North sea - a huge undersea kingdom swamped by a tsunami 5,500 years ago | Mail Online

Over thousands of years. Get that. No man cause global warming, get that too.

Data from 1979 to 2000 is NOTHING in terms of planetary evolution. It's less than a millisecond.

If there is global warming, which is debatable since we have had period of warming and cooling before as we did in the Medieval Warm Period it is not likely caused by any activity of human beings. Not any more than the much hyped global ice age hysteria of the 70s.

NOAA Paleoclimatology Global Warming - The Data

Is there global cooling? The answer might not be what you expected. - Home

Did you know that in the past the Roman Period and Medieval Period were both several degrees warmer than today's temperature. The world then cooled at least four degrees from 1450 to 1850. This period was called the Little Ice Age (a period of glacial advance, the same glaciers that have been in retreat until recently). These temperature variations were not caused by man. They were caused entirely by natural forces.

It is hot now, but last year there was almost no summer at all. If there are record heat temperatures this summer, last winter there were record cold temperatures.

February 2011, Moscow has coldest winter in 100 years link. Record low temperatures in San Francisco and Spokane link Link Minneapolis has most snow emergency days in city's history link New York City and Philadelphia shatter snowfall records link

Winter 2010-2011 in the US, 39th coldest in 113 years of records. link link Temperatures are dropping an average of 4.1 deg F per decade link


Coldest March ('11) in Australia history link Global temperatures in first 3 months of '11 are the coolest in the past decade link May '11 Australian ski slopes to open early with early cold link Seattle has coldest April in history in 2011 link Darwin Austalia has coldest May and June 2011 temps in history link


Northern Australia has coolest May in history link Record 2011 US snowpacks threaten western states link Record Sierra Mtn snowfall link Record 2011 snowpack in Rockies link


July 2011, South America gripped by brutal winter link July 2011 New Zealand sets record for coldest day ever link Unusual snows hit South Africa in late July 2011 link

August 2011, Auckland New Zealand has coldest temperature in history, and first snow since 1939 link New Zealand worst blizzards in 50 years link


Sept '11 Minnesota has record low temperatures and tie earliest snow record linkParts of the UK have the coolest summer in 20 years, butterfly population suffers link Switzerland has record September snows link


October '11, extremely rare early snow in Germany link Earliest snows in Ireland since 1964 link New York City has largest October snow since the Civil War link Many records set for earliest snow and most snow in the northeast USA for October, millions without power link Many snow records broken in New England. link Colorado ski resorts have ealiest season opening in history link 80% of Australia cooler than normal in first ten months of 2011 link Record 2011 snow in U.S. link


November '11 British Columbia ski resort has earliest opening in its history link record Alaska snow link Russia south hit with record low temps link Northern Hemisphere has record snow cover extent for this date link Fairbanks Alaska has record low temps of -41F, 39 degrees below avg temp. link


December '11, Australia has coolest start to summer in 50 years, Brisbane coldest temps in 126 years link Alps have largest December snows in history link


January '12 Heavy frost damages Kenyan tea crops link Record snow and cold in northern India, 140 dead link Alaskan town digs out from 18 feet of now link Nome Alaska frozen in and running out of oil link Austria hit with heavy snow, rail lines cut link Record cold in Canada link Seattle gets a years worth of snow in a single day link Record snow in northern Japan link India coldest day in 132 years link Artic seal shows up in Seattle link Anchorage smashes snowfall record link


February '12 Europe caught in deadly deep freeze link Coldest temps in Germany in 26 years as Europe's cold temperatures kill over 300 link temps in China drop to - 50 Deg C link record cold in Europe for 3 weeks, many areas 25 degrees below normal, death toll numbers 600 link Sydney Australia experiences record coldest summer link Europe has coldest February in 26 years, and one of the ten coldest in 150 years link Coldest winter in memory in Mongolia, up to 40% of livestock froze to death in temps of -40 to -50 F. link


March '12 Oregon and Washington break all time March snowfall record link Bering Sea has second largest March ice extent on record link Record breaking March cold in Tasmania Australia link Huge snowfall in China kills 90,000 livestock and impacts 25,000 people link First quarter 2012 was very warm in the USA link


April '12 Sydney, coldest day in 80 years. link May '12 UK on track for coldest May in 200 years. link


June '12 Sweden has one of the coldest Junes since records began in 1789. link Rare cold in New Zealand. link Argentina agrigulture frosts lead to crisis link Seattle has third coldest June in history link


The best and most accurate way to measure global temperatures are from satellites that measure atmospheric temperatures. See how atmospheric temperatures have changed since the start of measurement in 1979 link 

Though the 2011/12 Winter temperatures were warm in the U.S. global temps were the 11th coolest in 32 years of satelite measurement link

If in fact, there is such a thing as global warming that human being can affect (which is doubtful) you might be grateful for it, as the sun enters a cool phase.

With sun's activity set to diminish, is global cooling coming? | Fox News

The debate over global warming may be heating up again amid new scientific evidence that the sun's activity is cooling down -- which will cause temperatures to fall on planet Earth, scientists say.

A recent surge in scorching solar flares millions of miles long comes from a peak in the sun's activity cycle. Yet "Cycle 25," the next 11-year activity phase, will be one of the weakest in centuries, NASA predicts -- a decrease that will mean fewer flares and more fleece sweaters.

“If solar output reduced below that seen [in the late 1600s] the global temperature reduction would be 0.13 C,” the U.K. Met Office said.

That's not a big change, of course. But since global air temperatures have remained more or less flat over the past 12 years, according to the newest climate data, the coming lull in the sun’s activity may mean a decrease in world temperatures.


The effect of human activity on global temperature has exactly the same effect as throwing bones in a circle to cause rain.
 
My greatest fear is that some vastly superior alien civilization will capture and interrogate Rdean and Bobgnote to see if Earth is really inhabited by sentient beings
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top