“Where’s the sea ice?” Right where it’s been for most of the Holocene.

[Sunsettommy]

Warmist/alarmists are once again wailing over a low Arctic sea ice level, while completely ignoring Antarctica high sea ice levels. Meanwhile life up there in the North goes on...., Polar Bears population is stable or increasing in most areas.

Watts Up With That?

“Where’s the sea ice?” Right where it’s been for most of the Holocene.

David Middleton / 16 hours ago October 30, 2020

Guest “geological perspective” by David Middleton

Excerpt:

This is sort of a sequel yesterday’s post: Where’s the sea ice? 3 reasons the Arctic freeze is unseasonably late and why it matters.

With the setting of the sun and the onset of polar darkness, the Arctic Ocean would normally be crusted with sea ice along the Siberian coast by now. But this year, the water is still open.
Mark Serreze, University of Colorado Boulder

What a difference a day can make! Looks like it’s starting to crust over:

Figure 0. Daily sea ice extent map, October 29, 2020. (NSIDC)“Where’s the sea ice?”

Right here:

LINK

 

[toobfreak]

Warmist/alarmists are once again wailing over a low Arctic sea ice level, while completely ignoring Antarctica high sea ice levels. Meanwhile life up there in the North goes on...., Polar Bears population is stable or increasing in most areas.

Watts Up With That?

“Where’s the sea ice?” Right where it’s been for most of the Holocene.

David Middleton / 16 hours ago October 30, 2020

Guest “geological perspective” by David Middleton

Excerpt:

This is sort of a sequel yesterday’s post: Where’s the sea ice? 3 reasons the Arctic freeze is unseasonably late and why it matters.

With the setting of the sun and the onset of polar darkness, the Arctic Ocean would normally be crusted with sea ice along the Siberian coast by now. But this year, the water is still open.
Mark Serreze, University of Colorado Boulder

What a difference a day can make! Looks like it’s starting to crust over:

Figure 0. Daily sea ice extent map, October 29, 2020. (NSIDC)“Where’s the sea ice?”

Right here:

LINK

Most people don't understand that the Holocene (or the greater Quaternary Period of which it is a part) has been an oscillating period of repeated mini ice ages and warming periods! At least 5-6 cooling periods we know of not including the warming which ended the Younger-Dryas, the 8200 year cooling, and the Medieval Warm Period followed by the Little Ice Age!

 

[Sunsettommy]

Warmist/alarmists are once again wailing over a low Arctic sea ice level, while completely ignoring Antarctica high sea ice levels. Meanwhile life up there in the North goes on...., Polar Bears population is stable or increasing in most areas.

Watts Up With That?

“Where’s the sea ice?” Right where it’s been for most of the Holocene.

David Middleton / 16 hours ago October 30, 2020

Guest “geological perspective” by David Middleton

Excerpt:

This is sort of a sequel yesterday’s post: Where’s the sea ice? 3 reasons the Arctic freeze is unseasonably late and why it matters.

With the setting of the sun and the onset of polar darkness, the Arctic Ocean would normally be crusted with sea ice along the Siberian coast by now. But this year, the water is still open.
Mark Serreze, University of Colorado Boulder

What a difference a day can make! Looks like it’s starting to crust over:

Figure 0. Daily sea ice extent map, October 29, 2020. (NSIDC)“Where’s the sea ice?”

Right here:

LINK

Most people don't understand that the Holocene (or the greater Quaternary Period of which it is a part) has been an oscillating period of repeated mini ice ages and warming periods! At least 5-6 cooling periods we know of not including the warming which ended the Younger-Dryas, the 8200 year cooling, and the Medieval Warm Period followed by the Little Ice Age!

Here is a chart based on the official data

 

[ChemEngineer]

Ninety percent of earth's ice is on the Antarctic shelf, so Greenland and Alaska are pretty immaterial. And the research stations in Antarctica continue to raise their buildings on long posts as the ice thickness increases. Facts trigger Leftists.

 

[toobfreak]

Here is a chart based on the official data

It looks like if it is warming now, not only isn't it a man-made unnatural event but that we probably should be glad for it.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Here is the typically bad warmist/alarmist comment from the link:


"griff

October 31, 2020 at 2:25 am

UTTER NONSENSE!

Because what matters is what is happening now, not what happened under very different conditions several thousand years ago.

Was this the second lowest extent in the satellite record? Yes. If we look at Russian/soviet records and other records from last century, was this the second lowest in 100 years? Yes.

does this show a continued decline over the last 40 years? yes.

Is the level through October the lowest for date on record for 100 years? Yes!

So explain that -don’t try and explain it away.

If this is a low point in a cycle, why is it so much lower than the last low point?

The arctic was ice free in summer last time because the Earth’s orbital inclination produced extra insolation during summer. It was down to a Milankovitch cycle effect. We don’t have the same effect now – yet we have the lowest levels since then.

This is NOT the same as it has been for the Holocene. It is a new and continuing low.

Just look at the little red lines on the NSIDC charts with this article – those are where the ice should be if this was just like the rest of the Holocene"

===

He is so dumb, that he doesn't realize he is actually supporting the authors point about the Scale versus time discussion.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Just recently warmist/alarmist science illiterates wailed over Greenland, who never learn how to count.

Watts Up With That?

Greenland Ice Sheet Doomed… Again


David Middleton / October 2, 2020
Guest “geological perspective” by David Middleton


Excerpt:

CRYOSPHERE RESEARCH UPDATE

Unprecedented ice loss is predicted for Greenland Ice Sheet
30 Sep 2020

Over the next eighty years global warming is set to melt enough ice from the Greenland Ice Sheet to reverse 4000 years of cumulative ice growth – with rates of ice-loss more than quadruple even the fastest melt rates during the past 12,000 years. These stark conclusions come from new simulations which, for the first time, put current and projected future rates of ice-loss into context; comparing them directly with historical rates of ice-loss. These latest results are consistent with previous research that shows that if we continue our current high trajectory of greenhouse gas emissions we can expect Greenland to become ice-free in as little as 1000 years.
[…]

But as their simulation ventured into the future they discovered that the rate of ice-loss is likely to dwarf anything seen in the past. Under a high-emissions “business as usual” scenario Briner and his colleagues show that ice loss could reach an eye-watering 35,900 billion tonnes per century by 2100, whilst under a low-emissions scenario it is likely to rise to around 8800 billion tonnes per century. “It was a shocking to me to see that even with low emissions the pace of ice loss is going to be faster than it was during the warmest period in the past,” says Briner, whose findings are published in Nature.
[…]

Physics World

A read-only copy of the paper is available for viewing… Nature.


Basically, RCP8.5 melts all of Greenland’s ice within 1,000 years.

Is anyone else picking up a “been there, done that” vibe?


Perspective

This section adapted from The Insignificance of Greenland’s Ice Mass Loss in Five Easy Charts…

I downloaded the Kobashi et al., 2017 climate reconstruction from NOAA and plotted it to evaluate the context of recent climate change in central Greenland.

LINK

=====

Too many Marxist/leftists wet their pants over wild modeling scenarios to year 2100, this is the latest warmist/alarmist fantasy they are rolling in the mud with.

Pseudoscience pabulums must be a lot of fun for science illiterates to run with........, is there a Pseudoscience club or website that exist?

 

[ChemEngineer]

I have been compiling these facts, videos, papers and graphs for perhaps ten years now. It's extremely broad and revealing and yet it's not 1% of the available science refuting the Global Warming Fraud.

theglobalwarmingfraud

TheGlobalWarmingFraud.wordpress.com

 

[mamooth]

The holocene warmth peaked 6000 - 8000 years ago. It's been slowly cooling every since. Comparing current sea ice to peak warmth sea ice is really stupid.

And all the deniers embrace the stupid. They have to deflect from the fact that sea ice levels have very recently nosedived, that humans caused it, that the scientists were once more correct with predictions, and deniers again pooched it completely.

And Tommy, rather than address that, will pretend he didn't see it. It's how he handles all of his garbage getting refuted, by pretending the refutation doesn't exist.

 

[Sunsettommy]

The holocene warmth peaked 6000 - 8000 years ago. It's been slowly cooling every since. Comparing current sea ice to peak warmth sea ice is really stupid.

And all the deniers embrace the stupid. They have to deflect from the fact that sea ice levels have very recently nosedived, that humans caused it, that the scientists were once more correct with predictions, and deniers again pooched it completely.

And Tommy, rather than address that, will pretend he didn't see it. It's how he handles all of his garbage getting refuted, by pretending the refutation doesn't exist.

You post ZERO refutation, no evidence, facts or counterpoint posted. You have yet to read the posted article written by a 35 year Geologist veteran, using published science papers for his article. He actually posted the LOW values, he stated this, but you being a wild eyed BIGOT, ignored reading the article.

35 year Geologist writes:


"September is the most recent monthly ice extent map available. September is also when the annual minimum generally occurs. The magenta outline represents the median September ice edge from 1981-2010. The minimum Arctic sea ice extent generally occurs in September. At 3.9 million km2, this is the second lowest September “on record.” A record that goes all the way back to 1979.

bolding mine

======

You are a tiresome pile of shit!

 

[mamooth]

You post ZERO refutation,

Comparing peak holocene warmth conditions to current condiations is kind of stupid. That's the refutation. Nothing more is needed.

What point are you trying to make? In a single sentence, state your point, clearly and directly, without your usual deflection avalanche of insults, evasions, red herrings and appeals to authority. You know, like I do. Watch me. Learn from my example how to look honest and intelligent.

Your implied point here is a claim that since natural cycles have caused warming, humans can't cause warming, and that's hilarously stupid.

See? One sentence. If someone understands the topic, that's all it takes. I can do it. You can't.

 

[Sunsettommy]

You post ZERO refutation,

Comparing peak holocene warmth conditions to current condiations is kind of stupid. That's the refutation. Nothing more is needed.

What point are you trying to make? In a single sentence, state your point, clearly and directly, without your usual deflection avalanche of insults, evasions, red herrings and appeals to authority. You know, like I do. Watch me. Learn from my example how to look honest and intelligent.

Your implied point here is a claim that since natural cycles have caused warming, humans can't cause warming, and that's hilarously stupid.

See? One sentence. If someone understands the topic, that's all it takes. I can do it. You can't.

It is clear you didn't read the article since that wasn't the authors argument.

Since you still batting zero, you are here to convince everyone how stupid you are, I am convinced that you KNOW you have nothing in the way of a counterpoint to the article. That is why you stalk me instead, with your debate free bullshit.

That is why you are pile of shit. At the other forum, you hardly bother me, because you KNOW the Mods will thread ban you, for not debating in good faith. All I have to do is start a thread using the TPF marker.... which is why you hardly reply in them.

Do you suffer from ocular hallucinations, on a regular basis?

 

[ReinyDays]

I didn't read the article because it started with the word "Unprecedented" ... that's a RED FLAG for fake news ... the poles have been ice free for most of the Earth's history ... so just the first word is a lie ...

I feel sorry for Panama ... they just completed a massive upgrade on the Canal down there ... just in time for shipping channels to open up through the Arctic Ocean ... the Big Ditch will be losing money now ... there's a long history of transcontinental travel through there ... Vasco Balboa followed trading paths and discovered the Pacific Ocean for Europeans ... Peru, Columbia and then independence ... we should be sad Panama is just going to become another Banana Republic ...

Does anybody care? ...

 

[Sunsettommy]

I didn't read the article because it started with the word "Unprecedented" ... that's a RED FLAG for fake news ... the poles have been ice free for most of the Earth's history ... so just the first word is a lie ...

I feel sorry for Panama ... they just completed a massive upgrade on the Canal down there ... just in time for shipping channels to open up through the Arctic Ocean ... the Big Ditch will be losing money now ... there's a long history of transcontinental travel through there ... Vasco Balboa followed trading paths and discovered the Pacific Ocean for Europeans ... Peru, Columbia and then independence ... we should be sad Panama is just going to become another Banana Republic ...

Does anybody care? ...

The article is worth reading since the 25 year Geologist veteran makes a fool out of the "unprecedented" statement made by Physics world website, which is a lie anyway, the actual Nature paper doesn't use that hyperbole at all, but the abstract makes clear they are using the never verifiable 8.5 modeling scenario (the highest modeling scenario warming level rate) to make the absurd claims:

Rate of mass loss from the Greenland Ice Sheet will exceed Holocene values this century


Abstract
The Greenland Ice Sheet (GIS) is losing mass at a high rate1. Given the short-term nature of the observational record, it is difficult to assess the historical importance of this mass-loss trend. Unlike records of greenhouse gas concentrations and global temperature, in which observations have been merged with palaeoclimate datasets, there are no comparably long records for rates of GIS mass change. Here we reveal unprecedented mass loss from the GIS this century, by placing contemporary and future rates of GIS mass loss within the context of the natural variability over the past 12,000 years. We force a high-resolution ice-sheet model with an ensemble of climate histories constrained by ice-core data2. Our simulation domain covers southwestern Greenland, the mass change of which is dominated by surface mass balance. The results agree favourably with an independent chronology of the history of the GIS margin3,4. The largest pre-industrial rates of mass loss (up to 6,000 billion tonnes per century) occurred in the early Holocene, and were similar to the contemporary (AD 2000– 2018) rate of around 6,100 billion tonnes per century5. Simulations of future mass loss from southwestern GIS, based on Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) scenarios corresponding to low (RCP2.6) and high (RCP8.5) greenhouse gas concentration trajectories6, predict mass loss of between 8,800 and 35,900 billion tonnes over the twenty-first century. These rates of GIS mass loss exceed the maximum rates over the past 12,000 years. Because rates of mass loss from the southwestern GIS scale linearly5 with the GIS as a whole, our results indicate, with high confidence, that the rate of mass loss from the GIS will exceed Holocene rates this century.

=====

It is another stupid science paper, since we are not even near the 4.5 rate now, with no indication of increased rate of warming into the future. The modeling scenarios to year 2100 are being treated as evidence.

I care that smart people like you read the article.

 

[mamooth]

It is clear you didn't read the article since that wasn't the authors argument.

I said no appeals to authority. Away with your endless diversions.

In a single sentence, state your point, clearly and directly, without your usual deflection avalanche of insults, evasions, red herrings and appeals to authority.

If you need help, watch me do it.

My primary point: Your implied point here is a claim that since natural cycles have caused warming, humans can't cause warming, and that's a hilarously stupid claim on your part.

That is why you are pile of shit.

Go on. Have a good cry. When you're all done, I'll still be asking you what your point is.

At the other forum,

Junior <snap><snap>, we're at _this_ forum. So clearly make a point, or, by failure to do so, admit that you can't.

My secondary point: You're incapable of making a coherent point because you're just dumping pointless avalanches of bullshit, and you know it.