Arctic warming: Why record-breaking melting is just the beginning

[ding]

Ah yes, no science involved, but every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University in the world has policy statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. But we have a internet pretend scientist telling us that science does not support the fact that our burning of fossil fuels and increasing the GHGs in the atmosphere is increasing the heat retained by atmosphere and oceans. Oh, who to believe.

Given the many valid dissenting scientific opinions that remain on these issues, we argue that recent attempts to force an apparent scientific consensus (including the IPCC reports) on these scientific debates are premature and ultimately unhelpful for scientific progress. We hope that the analysis in this paper will encourage and stimulate further analysis and discussion. In the meantime, the debate is ongoing.

ShieldSquare Captcha​

 

[Old Rocks]

Given the many valid dissenting scientific opinions that remain on these issues, we argue that recent attempts to force an apparent scientific consensus (including the IPCC reports) on these scientific debates are premature and ultimately unhelpful for scientific progress. We hope that the analysis in this paper will encourage and stimulate further analysis and discussion. In the meantime, the debate is ongoing.

ShieldSquare Captcha​

http://www.drroyspencer.com/2021/12/uah-global-temperature-update-for-november-2021-0-08-deg-c/

 

[ding]

View attachment 577615

http://www.drroyspencer.com/2021/12/uah-global-temperature-update-for-november-2021-0-08-deg-c/

Why were temperatures warmer in the past with less CO2?

 

[westwall]

Why were temperatures warmer in the past with less CO2?

View attachment 577618

Don't confuse the faithful with facts.

 

[ding]

Don't confuse the faithful with facts.

I'm just having some fun with them.

 

[Old Rocks]

Don't confuse the faithful with facts.

You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you in the ass. You pretend to be a scientist, but do not quote credible scientists to back your nonsense. You are merely an idiot denier. no credibility, no honesty.

 

[westwall]

You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you in the ass. You pretend to be a scientist, but do not quote credible scientists to back your nonsense. You are merely an idiot denier. no credibility, no honesty.

The hell I don't.

The simple fact that you MUST resort to such a baldfaced lie proves what an utter moron, and feckless propagandist you truly are.

 

[ding]

You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you in the ass. You pretend to be a scientist, but do not quote credible scientists to back your nonsense. You are merely an idiot denier. no credibility, no honesty.

Says the guy who can't explain why were temperatures warmer in the past with less CO2.

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[elektra]

The hell I don't.
The simple fact that you MUST resort to such a baldfaced lie proves what an utter moron, and feckless propagandist you truly are.

Old Crock is full of lies, or is it just complete stupidity. Old Crock repeatedly posts nothing more than articles that are propaganda. When challenged old crock has no reply unless it is an insult.

Is old crock that dumb or simply the biggest liar??

 

[westwall]

Old Crock is full of lies, or is it just complete stupidity. Old Crock repeatedly posts nothing more than articles that are propaganda. When challenged old crock has no reply unless it is an insult.

Is old crock that dumb or simply the biggest liar??

I submit he is both.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Ah yes, no science involved, but every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University in the world has policy statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. But we have a internet pretend scientist telling us that science does not support the fact that our burning of fossil fuels and increasing the GHGs in the atmosphere is increasing the heat retained by atmosphere and oceans. Oh, who to believe.

You are so deep into consensus stupidity that it is made clear you have no demonstrated science understanding as you push a lot of half-baked crap.

Yes, CO2 absorbs IR and does have a very small warm forcing effect, but it doesn't drive climate at all as the effect is simply too small which is easy to explain to rational people, yet YOU can't understand it because you are deep into the stupid CO2 cult.

The warm air isn't originating from the Polar region but from the mid lats and the Tropics region which is obvious when you look at the regional temperature data and the ALWAYS near freezing level of the Arctic Ocean.

Most of the warming is during the night while day temperature barely changed at all.

Daily Mean Temperatures in the Arctic 1958 - 2022

LINK

=====

The previous 15 years of September Arctic Sea Ice shown that the decline has long stopped albeit at a lower level than in the 1990's:

LINK

You have no excuse for being stupid AND ignorant, the data makes clear while it is warmer at night (winter) and most of the year it is still well below freezing and the Arctic Sea ice is no longer in decline.

 

[Sunsettommy]

No Tricks Zone

The ‘Hypothesis’ That Longwave (Greenhouse Gas) Forcing Drives Greenland Ice Melt Is Wrong
By Kenneth Richard on 4. November 2021

Excerpt:

Share this...
Scientists publishing in GRL once again affirm that in recent decades the dominant mechanism driving surface melt for the Greenland ice sheet has been downwelling shortwave radiation modulated by clearer skies (fewer clouds) and natural wind pattern changes.

Greenland’s ice melt has not been driven by “longwave heating” from greenhouse gases in the last decades – even though this has been the “prevailing hypothesis” in climate models (Wang et al., 2021).

“The day-to-day variability of normal-rate melt events is dominated by sensible heat exchange (31%) and shortwave radiation (28%). They are likely caused by katabatic winds, a gravity-driven downslope wind that can be forceful and often associated with clear skies.
“With katabatic winds occurring during clear skies, they coincide with periods of increased shortwave radiation.”

LINK

======

CO2 doesn't get involved with sublimation or ice melt since the region is simply TOO COLD for that.

 

[Old Rocks]

You are so deep into consensus stupidity that it is made clear you have no demonstrated science understanding as you push a lot of half-baked crap.

Yes, CO2 absorbs IR and does have a very small warm forcing effect, but it doesn't drive climate at all as the effect is simply too small which is easy to explain to rational people, yet YOU can't understand it because you are deep into the stupid CO2 cult.

The warm air isn't originating from the Polar region but from the mid lats and the Tropics region which is obvious when you look at the regional temperature data and the ALWAYS near freezing level of the Arctic Ocean.

Most of the warming is during the night while day temperature barely changed at all.

Daily Mean Temperatures in the Arctic 1958 - 2022

View attachment 582319

LINK

=====

The previous 15 years of September Arctic Sea Ice shown that the decline has long stopped albeit at a lower level than in the 1990's:

View attachment 582320

LINK

You have no excuse for being stupid AND ignorant, the data makes clear while it is warmer at night (winter) and most of the year it is still well below freezing and the Arctic Sea ice is no longer in decline.

More dumb ass cherry picking, here is the reality;

http://psc.apl.uw.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/schweiger/ice_volume/BPIOMASIceVolumeAnomalyCurrentV2.1.png

 

[Old Rocks]

Of course the really stupid will say they know more than the scientists at the U of W.

Polar Science Center » PIOMAS Arctic Sea Ice Volume Reanalysis

 

[abu afak]

You are so deep into consensus stupidity that it is made clear you have no demonstrated science understanding as you push a lot of half-baked crap.

Yes, CO2 absorbs IR and does have a very small warm forcing effect, but it doesn't drive climate at all as the effect is simply too small which is easy to explain to rational people, yet YOU can't understand it because you are deep into the stupid CO2 cult.

The warm air isn't originating from the Polar region but from the mid lats and the Tropics region which is obvious when you look at the regional temperature data and the ALWAYS near freezing level of the Arctic Ocean.

Most of the warming is during the night while day temperature barely changed at all.

Daily Mean Temperatures in the Arctic 1958 - 2022

View attachment 582319

LINK

=====

The previous 15 years of September Arctic Sea Ice shown that the decline has long stopped albeit at a lower level than in the 1990's:

View attachment 582320

LINK

You have no excuse for being stupid AND ignorant, the data makes clear while it is warmer at night (winter) and most of the year it is still well below freezing and the Arctic Sea ice is no longer in decline.

LOL.
Only using/abusing Cherry picking since 2007 and Only 'September.'
The old 'Down the up Escaslator.'
WattsUpWithThat routine?

NSIDC

`

 

[HenryBHough]

Thank You Greta for saving us all from the -37 Degree windchill outside my front door. That HAS to be Global-What-The-**** at its most severe!

This year the grandkids didn't make a snowman. They made a "snow Karen".

 

[Old Rocks]

Thank You Greta for saving us all from the -37 Degree windchill outside my front door. That HAS to be Global-What-The-**** at its most severe!

This year the grandkids didn't make a snowman. They made a "snow Karen".

Enjoy

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The rapid warming in the Arctic circle, much faster than the rest of the planet, and the enormous loss of Arctic ice - shrinking of ice extent and volume/loss of older thicker ice - has been reported by climate scientists for decades. Although the denier cultists created by the fossil fuel industry have tried to deny the reality of this ice loss and warming and ignore the trend, reality is *****-slapping them harder every year.....and this year looks likely to be one of the worst for destroying the reality-challenged denier cultists' demented delusions.

Here is the beginning of what is happening to the Arctic this year.....almost certain to be the year of the newest record low ice extent and volume...probably by a large margin over the last new record low that occured in 2012.

Arctic warming: Why record-breaking melting is just the beginning
It has been an ‘absurdly warm’ winter in the Arctic this year, as temperatures within 200 miles of the North Pole peaked above freezing
The Independent
Geoffrey lean
February 27, 2015
Rapidly disappearing Arctic sea ice is about to set a new record after an “absurdly warm” winter at the top of the world. For the second year running, it will have grown to cover less of the Arctic Ocean than ever before.

The revelation comes as scientists are increasingly worried that the heating of the region could escalate out of control, as growing numbers of “feedback mechanisms” – which reinforce and accelerate the process – are being discovered.

Most attention on the melting sea ice so far has been focused on the increasingly low minimum levels it reaches each September. Its nine smallest-ever extents have all occurred in the last nine years, with the record being reached in 2012, when it covered only 3.41 million square kilometres - 44 per cent less than the average of the previous three decades, and a full 16 per cent lower than the previous record, in 2007.

But the amount by which the ice recovers each winter, peaking at the end of February and the beginning of March, though little publicised, is at least as important. Last year it reached only 14.54 million sq km on 25 February, its peak day – the lowest ever. Exactly a year later, at the end of last week, it was just 14.27 million sq km, a fall of 270,000 sq km.

Scientists at the National Snow and Ice Data Centre in Boulder, Colorado (NSIDC) – the world’s foremost authority on the issue – are not quite ready to proclaim a new record, as the ice may yet spread further over the next days. But, with another week of unseasonably warm weather forecast for the region, they privately believe it is almost certain.

January has already set a new record for the month, with ice cover averaging just 13.53 million sq km, over a million sq km below its average extent between 1981 and 2010. And Professor Julienne Stroeve of the NSIDC said last week that February would also hit a record low.

Any new ice that now forms will be very thin and will melt quickly as temperatures begin to rise in the spring. And, indeed, Arctic ice has been growing thinner even as its extent has shrunk: across the region it is now less than half as thick as it was in 1980.

This year’s record low has been driven by what NSIDC calls an “absurdly warm” winter: its director, Mark Serreze, has described it as the strangest ever observed in the region. The US government’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration says the warming is “off our chart”.

In late December, temperatures within 200 miles of the North Pole actually peaked above freezing point. During January they averaged 13F above normal across the Arctic; even the coldest reading, recorded in Svalbard, north of the Arctic Circle, was warmer than the average highest temperature in previous years.

Fairbanks, Alaska, received less snowfall in the whole of December and January than fell on New York in just a single hour last month. Anchorage’s famous 50 km cross-country ski race was forced to transfer on to a 4km loop of artificial snow. And the Barents and Kara seas north of Norway and Russia have remained almost ice-free all winter.

The warmth has partly been driven by natural factors – a strong el Niño in the Pacific and, much more importantly, a shift in the Arctic oscillation weather pattern, which weakened the atmospheric barrier between polar and milder latitudes.

But scientists are in no doubt that global warming is the fundamental factor, and that similar conditions will reoccur. Such ice as there is in the Barents and Kara seas, for example, is starting to form two months later than in the past, and scientists say that this year’s freak temperatures near the North Pole will not be unique.

Last year was the warmest ever recorded worldwide, by a large margin, and some scientists believe that this one will exceed it.

The melting itself causes greater warming, because it replaces a white surface, which reflects heat back into the atmosphere, with dark water, which absorbs it. By one calculation this effect has added a further 25 per cent of warming since 1979 to what has been caused by carbon dioxide emissions.

Two new studies published last week by the Woods Hole Research Center in Massachusetts, reported new evidence of such self-reinforcing “feedback mechanisms”.

They showed that, as the region’s permafrost thaws, rapid changes in the functioning of microbes in the soil increase emissions of carbon dioxide and methane, an even more potent warming gas. Partly as a result, the tundra – which contains twice as much carbon as the atmosphere – has turned from being a system that absorbs greenhouse gases, to one that emits them, accelerating climate change even further.
***

Rapidly warming Arctic is 'possibly catastrophic' for planet, climate scientist warns

READ MORE
* UK's youngest Arctic adventurer urges world to act on climate change
* The cost of climate change has been revealed - and it isn't pretty
* Global warming: National Geographic map shows 'striking' retreat of Arctic ice sheet

So the Arctic is ice free now, right?

 

[Crick]

No Tricks Zone

The ‘Hypothesis’ That Longwave (Greenhouse Gas) Forcing Drives Greenland Ice Melt Is Wrong
By Kenneth Richard on 4. November 2021

Excerpt:

Share this...
Scientists publishing in GRL once again affirm that in recent decades the dominant mechanism driving surface melt for the Greenland ice sheet has been downwelling shortwave radiation modulated by clearer skies (fewer clouds) and natural wind pattern changes.

Greenland’s ice melt has not been driven by “longwave heating” from greenhouse gases in the last decades – even though this has been the “prevailing hypothesis” in climate models (Wang et al., 2021).

“The day-to-day variability of normal-rate melt events is dominated by sensible heat exchange (31%) and shortwave radiation (28%). They are likely caused by katabatic winds, a gravity-driven downslope wind that can be forceful and often associated with clear skies.
“With katabatic winds occurring during clear skies, they coincide with periods of increased shortwave radiation.”

LINK

======

CO2 doesn't get involved with sublimation or ice melt since the region is simply TOO COLD for that.

Given that air is transparent to short wave radiation, where did the energy for that sensible heat exchange come from?