Global Warming Actually Still Accelerating - no "lull"

[orogenicman]

More than you.....Here are four possible causes for the Permian Extinction....Amazingly enough global warming isn't mentioned... Only in the fevered imaginings and tortured computer models can warmth be trotted out as a possible cause, the paleo record though says otherwise....

Wikipedia on the 'Clathrate Gun'
However, there is stronger evidence that runaway methane clathrate breakdown may have caused drastic alteration of the ocean environment and the atmosphere of earth on a number of occasions in the past, over timescales of tens of thousands of years; most notably in connection with the Permian extinction event, when 96% of all marine species became extinct 251 million years ago.[5]

5. ^ "The Day The Earth Nearly Died". Horizon. 2002. BBC.

Wikipedia on the Permian-Triassic Extinction
Researchers have variously suggested that there were from one to three distinct pulses, or phases, of extinction.[5][9][10][11] There are several proposed mechanisms for the extinctions; the earlier phase was probably due to gradual environmental change, while the latter phase has been argued to be due to a catastrophic event. Suggested mechanisms for the latter include large or multiple bolide impact events, increased volcanism, coal/gas fires and explosions from the Siberian Traps,[12] and sudden release of methane clathrate from the sea floor; gradual changes include sea-level change, anoxia, increasing aridity, and a shift in ocean circulation driven by climate change.

5. ^ a b c d e f Sahney S and Benton M.J (2008). "Recovery from the most profound mass extinction of all time" (PDF). Proceedings of the Royal Society: Biological 275 (1636): 759–765. doi:10.1098/rspb.2007.1370. PMC 2596898. PMID 18198148.
9. ^ a b c d e f Jin YG, Wang Y, Wang W, Shang QH, Cao CQ, Erwin DH (2000). "Pattern of Marine Mass Extinction Near the Permian–Triassic Boundary in South China". Science 289 (5478): 432–436. Bibcode:2000Sci...289..432J. doi:10.1126/science.289.5478.432. PMID 10903200.
10. ^ Yin H, Zhang K, Tong J, Yang Z, Wu S. "The Global Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP) of the Permian-Triassic Boundary". Episodes 24 (2). pp. 102–114.
11. ^ Yin HF, Sweets WC, Yang ZY, Dickins JM (1992). "Permo-Triassic events in the eastern Tethys–an overview". In Sweet WC. Permo-Triassic events in the eastern Tethys: stratigraphy, classification, and relations with the western Tethys. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. pp. 1–7. ISBN 0-521-54573-0.
12. ^ Darcy E. Ogdena and Norman H. Sleep (2011). "Explosive eruption of coal and basalt and the end-Permian mass extinction.". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. Bibcode:2012PNAS..109...59O. doi:10.1073/pnas.1118675109.

Wrong again. Like I said only in the twisted mind of a climate fraudster does warming enter into the equation. There is ZERO empirical data to support that amusing "theory" and plenty to support the idea of an ice age being the cause.

If you are referring to the end Permian extinction, that is utter nonsense. There was clearly a 10 degree Celsius rise in temperature at the end Permian that coincided with a massive rise in CO2 and CH4 levels. Study after study have repeatedly shown this to be the case. And NONE indicating that the extinction was due to an ice age.

 

[orogenicman]

Ain't that cool? THIS is why I am a skeptic... Change the entire MEANING of a finding. Leave out a KEY assertion.. You are supporting dishonest science.. You just demonstrated it in action...

Once you give us the cite for that particular abstract -- us skeptics will thank you for contributing to our cause..


Nothing personal -- you are just too trusting...

What are you talking about?!? Shakova says precisely what the Wikipedia article says: 50 GTons is at risk of immediate release through taliks and would cause a 12-fold increase to atmospheric methane levels.

Now WHY is it you think you should be a skeptic?

Holocene thermal max was much warmer than the present day and yet no disaster like you claim will occur. Why is that?

Mid-Holocene Thermal Maximum

Conclusions about the mid Holocene warmth are based on several lines of evidence - latitudinal displacements of vegetation zones (Ritchie et al., 1983) and vertical displacements of mountain glaciers (Porter & Orombelli, 1985).

Quantitative estimates of mid-Holocene warmth (COHMAP, 1988) suggest that the Earth was perhaps 1 or 2°C warmer than today. Most of this warmth may primarily represent seasonal (summer) warmth rather than year-round warmth. Accompanying the higher global temperatures were significant changes in precipitation patterns, most noticeably in the monsoon belt of Africa and Asia. Reconstructions from palaeo-lake levels and latitudinal vegetation shifts (Ritchie & Haynes, 1987) suggest that these regions were considerably wetter than they were during the arid conditions of the last glacial maximum (18Ka), when moisture availability from cooler Northern Hemisphere sub-tropical oceans was reduced (Street-Perrott & Perrott, 1990).

****************

Latitudinal vegetation shifts and loss of glaciers are not insignificant events from an ecological point of view. It could actually explain the disappearance of the native American archaic lifestyle, a major shift in native American populations.

 

[orogenicman]

No.. Of course not silly.. It's the rabid warmers who back up their assertions by quoting a text that gives TEN reasons something happened, when THEIR theory is just one of the ten possibilities.. That's the odds of guessing in that case... Also a good guess we can take away the high probability that science just doesn't know the answer.

Wikipedia on Permian Extinction
There are several proposed mechanisms for the extinctions; the earlier phase was probably due to gradual environmental change, while the latter phase has been argued to be due to a catastrophic event. Suggested mechanisms for the latter include
1) large or multiple bolide impact events,
2) increased volcanism,
3) coal/gas fires and explosions from the Siberian Traps
4) sudden release of methane clathrate from the sea floor

Not one in ten, one in four.

1=No evidence to support the theory.
2=Lots of evidence that leads to global COOLING.
3=No evidence to support the theory.
4=No evidence to support the theory.

You clearly are not familiar with the scientific literature on the Permian extinction event. Your response is akin to na na nana na. Not a very professional response. The Permian extinction event coincided with a 2 million year eruption episode of flood basalts in Siberia (the Siberian Trapps). These flood basalts release billions of tons of gases into the atmosphere, leading to a long term rise in global temperatures, which, at its maximum, was up to 10 degrees Celsius higher than before the eruptions. There was no ice age at all during this time, and in fact, there were no polar ice caps.

 

[orogenicman]

I was hoping a geologist would recognize that putting a methane sensor on a mountain with 15 or more ACTIVE fissure volcanoes would require more than a simple "fixed" baseline deduction. Especially when the staff has to LEAVE the facility when the big eruptions happen.

Oh well -- just do the freshman Chem thing.. It's all climate science anyway aint' it?

Mauna Loa is dormant, and has been since a tiny aa eruption occurred down on a flack vent in 1984. The miniscule amount of methane it is emitting at the very high, very windy summit, is quite manageable, and monitored daily. To be honest, the only ones I've ever heard complaining about using a location with the some of the most pristine air on the planet are the rare deniers like you. But lets talk about the measurements for a moment. Even if they weren't accounting for the small amount of native methane at that location, it would only add 0.8333333333333333 % error to the measurements, and that could simply be reads as +_ this tiny amount. We are talking about 1800ppm, versus 15ppm. It is two orders of magnitude of difference, and so quite insignificant. And yet they do account for it in their measurements. It isn't an issue. AT ALL.

Dormant? Not hardly. Tiny eruption? What the hell are you smoking? Mr. Mountain building event seems to not understand geologic timescales.


"A cyclic model was recently proposed for the volcano's summit-flank alternation of eruptive activity. Detailed geologic mapping suggests that the cycles may last about 2,000 years each. Since the most recent period of intense summit activity began about 2,000 years ago, perhaps Mauna Loa is "on the verge of shifting to a period of long-lived lava-lake activity, shield-building, increased summit overflow, and diminished rift zone eruptions." See a technical skip past cyclic model, history table, 1984 eruption, and 1950 eruption summary of this proposed cyclic model."




Eruption History of Mauna Loa Volcano, Hawai`i

The last eruption at Mauna Loa was in 1984, and consisted of a small aa lava flank eruption (at an elevation of 9,350 ft) well away (in fact, on the opposite side of the very large mountain from where the sensors are located) from where the atmospheric sensors are located upwind AT THE SUMMIT (at an altitude of 13,678 ft). Dormant does not mean extinct. It means not currently active.

But hey, if you are concerned about all the sensors that have been in use up there for decades, you can contact Stuart Weinstein, Ph.D, who works for the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center on the big island, and knows the guys who operate the weather station on Mauna Loa, and ask him to pass on your concern to them. Tell him 'George' sent you. He'll know who you are talking about. I'm sure he will be more than happy to pass on your fears. It'll make their day, I'm sure.

 

[orogenicman]

1=No evidence to support the theory.
2=Lots of evidence that leads to global COOLING.
3=No evidence to support the theory.
4=No evidence to support the theory.

No evidence? OK then, what are you talking about? Just go away. You're a ******* idiot anyway.

I'm talking geological and paleontological evidence you halfwit. Go smoke some more pot you ******* imbecile.

Topics about which you are obviously oblivious.

 

[orogenicman]

I was hoping a geologist would recognize that putting a methane sensor on a mountain with 15 or more ACTIVE fissure volcanoes would require more than a simple "fixed" baseline deduction. Especially when the staff has to LEAVE the facility when the big eruptions happen.

Oh well -- just do the freshman Chem thing.. It's all climate science anyway aint' it?

Mauna Loa is dormant, and has been since a tiny aa eruption occurred down on a flack vent in 1984. The miniscule amount of methane it is emitting at the very high, very windy summit, is quite manageable, and monitored daily. To be honest, the only ones I've ever heard complaining about using a location with the some of the most pristine air on the planet are the rare deniers like you. But lets talk about the measurements for a moment. Even if they weren't accounting for the small amount of native methane at that location, it would only add 0.8333333333333333 % error to the measurements, and that could simply be reads as +_ this tiny amount. We are talking about 1800ppm, versus 15ppm. It is two orders of magnitude of difference, and so quite insignificant. And yet they do account for it in their measurements. It isn't an issue. AT ALL.

"Pristine air on the planet" include investigators driving the mere 18 miles to Kileahua and donning gas masks as he drives thru the plumes?? Just saw a series on weather channel of this.. Active lava flows on the SE coast within VIEW of Mona Loa?

Wow, you really are desperate. Of course it is within view of Mauna Loa. EVERYTHING is within view of Mauna Loa. It is the second highest mountain on the island, only slightly lower in elevation than Mauna Kea. Kilauea (note spelling) is on the eastern flank of the island at an elevation of 4,091 feet above sea level, well away from the sensors at the summit of Mauna Loa, at over 13,000 feet, well away from any active vents (in fact, the weather station is located at Mauna Loa Observatory (a permanent facility), 29 miles upwind from Kilauea, and 9,000 feet higher in altitude. Next.

 

[westwall]

What are you talking about?!? Shakova says precisely what the Wikipedia article says: 50 GTons is at risk of immediate release through taliks and would cause a 12-fold increase to atmospheric methane levels.

Now WHY is it you think you should be a skeptic?

Holocene thermal max was much warmer than the present day and yet no disaster like you claim will occur. Why is that?

Mid-Holocene Thermal Maximum

Conclusions about the mid Holocene warmth are based on several lines of evidence - latitudinal displacements of vegetation zones (Ritchie et al., 1983) and vertical displacements of mountain glaciers (Porter & Orombelli, 1985).

Quantitative estimates of mid-Holocene warmth (COHMAP, 1988) suggest that the Earth was perhaps 1 or 2°C warmer than today. Most of this warmth may primarily represent seasonal (summer) warmth rather than year-round warmth. Accompanying the higher global temperatures were significant changes in precipitation patterns, most noticeably in the monsoon belt of Africa and Asia. Reconstructions from palaeo-lake levels and latitudinal vegetation shifts (Ritchie & Haynes, 1987) suggest that these regions were considerably wetter than they were during the arid conditions of the last glacial maximum (18Ka), when moisture availability from cooler Northern Hemisphere sub-tropical oceans was reduced (Street-Perrott & Perrott, 1990).

****************

Latitudinal vegetation shifts and loss of glaciers are not insignificant events from an ecological point of view. It could actually explain the disappearance of the native American archaic lifestyle, a major shift in native American populations.

You guys crack me up. You claim disaster is imminent with a ONE degree rise possibly occurring in the next 100 years and yet here you admit to a one degree rise that had no impact and the papers I present below have substantive support for a temperature of MORE than 5 degrees C and you ignore that because it exposes your claims for the lie they are.

The HTO WAS much warmer than today. Disaster did not occur. Case closed.


Midge-Inferred Temperatures from Three Interglacial Periods in the Eastern Canadian Arctic

* Axford, Y (axford@colorado.edu) , INSTAAR and Department of Geological Sciences, University of Colorado, UCB 450, Boulder, CO 80309 United States
Briner, J P (jbriner@buffalo.edu) , Department of Geology, University at Buffalo, 876 Natural Sciences Complex, Buffalo, NY 14260 United States
Francis, D R (dfrancis@geo.umass.edu) , Department of Geosciences, University of Massachusetts, 233 Morrill Science Center, Amherst, MA 01003 United States
Baker, G , Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of Tennessee, 1412 Circle Drive, Knoxville, TN 37996 United States
Miller, G H (gmiller@colorado.edu) , INSTAAR and Department of Geological Sciences, University of Colorado, UCB 450, Boulder, CO 80309 United States


Lake sediments recovered from a Canadian Arctic lake are providing a rare opportunity to reconstruct Holocene, last interglacial, and earlier temperature changes at centennial to decadal resolution. Lake CF8 (informal name) is a small (0.5 km2) lake situated on an inter-fjord lowland in northeastern Baffin Island at 70$^{o}$ N latitude. Sediment cores from Lake CF8 contain three organic lake sediment units, separated by non-lacustrine sands. Radiocarbon ages from the uppermost organic unit span the entire Holocene. The middle organic unit is beyond the limit of radiocarbon dating. Comparison with a similar lacustrine record from Fog Lake, Baffin Island, indicates that this middle unit most likely records the last interglacial (Eemian) period. The lowest organic unit was only partially recovered, but may record the late stages of the penultimate interglacial. Subfossil midges (Chironomidae) are abundant and well-preserved throughout the organic sediments, providing a quantitative means for temperature reconstruction. Midge-based temperature reconstructions indicate that summer temperatures at Lake CF8 surpassed modern values by 10 cal kyr BP. Summer temperatures during the first half of the Holocene were as much as 5C warmer than present. Similarly, the early part of the last interglacial was several degrees warmer than the latter part of the period. The bottommost lake sediments we recovered, which were presumably deposited during the late stages of a prior interglacial period, record summer temperatures similar to those of the latter parts of the Holocene and last interglacial. The magnitude of early Holocene and last interglacial warmth at this high-latitude site lends support to concerns about Arctic amplification of future warming.""


"PP42B-04

The Holocene Thermal Maximum in the Arctic

* MacDonald, G M (macdonal@geog.ucla.edu) , Department of Geography, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1524 United States
Kaufman, D S (darrell.kaufman@nau.edu) , Department of Geology, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011-4099 United States
Duval, M (mduvall@bates.edu) , PARCS Data Office, Geology Department Bates College, Lewsiton, ME 04240-6028 United States
Kremenetski, K (costya@geog.ucla.edu) , Department of Geography, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1524 United States


Through the support of the Paleoenvironmental Arctic Sciences (PARCS) program sponsored by the National Science Foundation two working groups of over 50 scientists have been synthesizing data from more than 160 terrestrial, ice-core and marine records from the Arctic. The aim of the synthesis is to provide a unified picture of the magnitude of the Holocene Thermal Maximum (HTM) and the spatiotemporal characteristics of the HTM across the broader Arctic region. Work on the western Arctic sector (0 - 180 W) has been completed and is published (Kauffman et al. 2004. Quaternary Science Reviews 23: 529 - 560). That synthesis suggests that the HTM temperatures were on average 1.6 C warmer than average 20th century temperatures. The warming was highly time-transgressive. The thermal response to the early Holocene precession-driven summer insolation maximum was concentrated in northwest North America where the HTM is apparent 12 - 9 ka (thousands of calendar years ago), while cool conditions persisted in the northeast with the HTM not apparent in Quebec and Labrador until the mid to late Holocene. The delayed warming in central and eastern Canada may be linked to the residual Laurentide Ice Sheet and thermal asymmetry caused by atmospheric circulation patterns. Our preliminary synthesis suggests that the magnitude of HTM warming was often 2.0 C or greater. In addition, there is far less dramatic regional asynchrony than in the western sector. In general, HTM conditions are apparent between approximately 10 and 4 ka in the eastern Arctic with a slighter later initiation in some areas such as northern Fennoscandia."


Early Holocene Climate Variability and the Timing and Extent of the Holocene Thermal Maximum (HTM): Comparisons From the Northern and Southern Hemispheres II - Paleoceanography and Paleoclimatology [PP]

 

[westwall]

Wikipedia on Permian Extinction
There are several proposed mechanisms for the extinctions; the earlier phase was probably due to gradual environmental change, while the latter phase has been argued to be due to a catastrophic event. Suggested mechanisms for the latter include
1) large or multiple bolide impact events,
2) increased volcanism,
3) coal/gas fires and explosions from the Siberian Traps
4) sudden release of methane clathrate from the sea floor

Not one in ten, one in four.

1=No evidence to support the theory.
2=Lots of evidence that leads to global COOLING.
3=No evidence to support the theory.
4=No evidence to support the theory.

You clearly are not familiar with the scientific literature on the Permian extinction event. Your response is akin to na na nana na. Not a very professional response. The Permian extinction event coincided with a 2 million year eruption episode of flood basalts in Siberia (the Siberian Trapps). These flood basalts release billions of tons of gases into the atmosphere, leading to a long term rise in global temperatures, which, at its maximum, was up to 10 degrees Celsius higher than before the eruptions. There was no ice age at all during this time, and in fact, there were no polar ice caps.

Wrong as usual. I just find laughable the recent crapola to come out of the warmists camp and how they are trying to make warming the cause of every mass extinction ever to try and scare the natives when we KNOW this one simple fact warmth has never been shown to be a killer. Cold most certainly has, but not warmth. Even one of your former favorite "mass extinction events" the PETM was anything but a mass extinction event.

I will quote wiki as that seems to be the limit of your capabilities.... It shows that your "mass extinction event" was in fasct limited to localized deep sea environments and while they claim that only temperature could possibly be the cause it is far more likely that O2 depletion was the cause. Regardless, the terrestrial life exploded across the world. Mammals did exceptionally well. That is a simple fact...and what does the Principle of Uniformitarianism tell us when we are exposed to that fact?





Life[edit]

The PETM is accompanied by a mass extinction of 35-50% of benthic foraminifera (especially in deeper waters) over the course of ~1,000 years – the group suffering more than during the dinosaur-slaying K-T extinction. Contrarily, planktonic foraminifera diversified, and dinoflagellates bloomed. Success was also enjoyed by the mammals, who radiated profusely around this time.

The deep-sea extinctions are difficult to explain, as many were regional in extent. General hypotheses such as a temperature-related reduction in oxygen availability, or increased corrosion due to carbonate undersaturated deep waters, are insufficient as explanations. The only factor global in extent was an increase in temperature. Regional extinctions in the North Atlantic can be attributed to increased deep-sea anoxia, which could be due to the slowdown of overturning ocean currents,[9] or the release and rapid oxidation of large amounts of methane.

In shallower waters, it's undeniable that increased CO2 levels result in a decreased oceanic pH, which has a profound negative effect on corals.[18] Experiments suggest it is also very harmful to calcifying plankton.[19] However, the strong acids used to simulate the natural increase in acidity which would result from elevated CO2 concentrations may have given misleading results, and the most recent evidence is that coccolithophores (E. huxleyi at least) become more, not less, calcified and abundant in acidic waters.[20] Interestingly, no change in the distribution of calcareous nanoplankton such as the coccolithophores can be attributed to acidification during the PETM.[20] Acidification did lead to an abundance of heavily calcified algae[21] and weakly calcified forams.[22]

The increase in mammalian abundance is intriguing. There is no evidence of any increased extinction rate among the terrestrial biota. Increased CO2 levels may have promoted dwarfing[23] – which may have encouraged speciation. Many major mammalian orders – including the Artiodactyla, horses, and primates – appeared and spread across the globe 13,000 to 22,000 years after the initiation of the PETM.[23]



Paleocene?Eocene Thermal Maximum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[westwall]

Mauna Loa is dormant, and has been since a tiny aa eruption occurred down on a flack vent in 1984. The miniscule amount of methane it is emitting at the very high, very windy summit, is quite manageable, and monitored daily. To be honest, the only ones I've ever heard complaining about using a location with the some of the most pristine air on the planet are the rare deniers like you. But lets talk about the measurements for a moment. Even if they weren't accounting for the small amount of native methane at that location, it would only add 0.8333333333333333 % error to the measurements, and that could simply be reads as +_ this tiny amount. We are talking about 1800ppm, versus 15ppm. It is two orders of magnitude of difference, and so quite insignificant. And yet they do account for it in their measurements. It isn't an issue. AT ALL.

Dormant? Not hardly. Tiny eruption? What the hell are you smoking? Mr. Mountain building event seems to not understand geologic timescales.


"A cyclic model was recently proposed for the volcano's summit-flank alternation of eruptive activity. Detailed geologic mapping suggests that the cycles may last about 2,000 years each. Since the most recent period of intense summit activity began about 2,000 years ago, perhaps Mauna Loa is "on the verge of shifting to a period of long-lived lava-lake activity, shield-building, increased summit overflow, and diminished rift zone eruptions." See a technical skip past cyclic model, history table, 1984 eruption, and 1950 eruption summary of this proposed cyclic model."




Eruption History of Mauna Loa Volcano, Hawai`i

The last eruption at Mauna Loa was in 1984, and consisted of a small aa lava flank eruption (at an elevation of 9,350 ft) well away (in fact, on the opposite side of the very large mountain from where the sensors are located) from where the atmospheric sensors are located upwind AT THE SUMMIT (at an altitude of 13,678 ft). Dormant does not mean extinct. It means not currently active.

But hey, if you are concerned about all the sensors that have been in use up there for decades, you can contact Stuart Weinstein, Ph.D, who works for the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center on the big island, and knows the guys who operate the weather station on Mauna Loa, and ask him to pass on your concern to them. Tell him 'George' sent you. He'll know who you are talking about. I'm sure he will be more than happy to pass on your fears. It'll make their day, I'm sure.

And Mauna Loa is still not considered dormant. Mauna Kea IS however, though I personally disagree with that appellation. They are all vents of the shield volcano that makes up Hawaii so how can one be considered dormant when they are all part of the same system? And, for the record, it is you and your nervous nellies who are worried. The planet is doing just fine.

 

[westwall]

No evidence? OK then, what are you talking about? Just go away. You're a ******* idiot anyway.

I'm talking geological and paleontological evidence you halfwit. Go smoke some more pot you ******* imbecile.

Topics about which you are obviously oblivious.

Sure thing bub, I didn't claim that Mauna Loa was dormant. You claim to be a geologist and make a dumbass claim like that and you want to be taken seriously? I think not....

 

[Abraham3]

The magnitude of early Holocene and last interglacial warmth at this high-latitude site lends support to concerns about Arctic amplification of future warming.""

The North Pole today has the greatest warming signal on the planet. Your work here does nothing to refute the numbers Orogenicman posted. 2C average global warming is entirely consistent with what your paper states and, in fact, it is what the authors seem to be assuming.

 

[orogenicman]

I'm talking geological and paleontological evidence you halfwit. Go smoke some more pot you ******* imbecile.

Topics about which you are obviously oblivious.

Sure thing bub, I didn't claim that Mauna Loa was dormant. You claim to be a geologist and make a dumbass claim like that and you want to be taken seriously? I think not....

A volcano that is not current active and emitting gas and/or magma is consider, for all intents and purposes, dormant. All of the recent activity on Mauna Loa (29 years ago) is located on the eastern flank. The Mauna Loa observatory is located on the western side of the summit, miles away from any recent activity. In fact, the most recent activity at that location was hundreds of years ago. They wouldn't have built the observatory where it is located in the first place if there was a concern for future eruptions/emissions there.

 

[skookerasbil]

The magnitude of early Holocene and last interglacial warmth at this high-latitude site lends support to concerns about Arctic amplification of future warming.""

The North Pole today has the greatest warming signal on the planet. Your work here does nothing to refute the numbers Orogenicman posted. 2C average global warming is entirely consistent with what your paper states and, in fact, it is what the authors seem to be assuming.

meh

and the ice in Antarctica is expanding.

nobody cares.

 

[westwall]

The magnitude of early Holocene and last interglacial warmth at this high-latitude site lends support to concerns about Arctic amplification of future warming.""

The North Pole today has the greatest warming signal on the planet. Your work here does nothing to refute the numbers Orogenicman posted. 2C average global warming is entirely consistent with what your paper states and, in fact, it is what the authors seem to be assuming.

I see facts are still eluding you. The reality is the three coldest Arctic summers on record have occurred during the last FIVE years.


"Calculation of the Arctic Mean Temperature
The daily mean temperature of the Arctic area north of the 80th northern parallel is estimated from the average of the 00z and 12z analysis for all model grid points inside that area. The ERA40 reanalysis data set from ECMWF, has been applied to calculate daily mean temperatures for the period from 1958 to 2002, from 2002 to 2006 data from the global NWP model T511 is used and from 2006 to 2010 T799 data are used and from 2010 to present the T1279 model data are used.

The ERA40 reanalysis data, has been applied to calculation of daily climate values that are plotted along with the daily analysis values in all plots. The data used to determine climate values is the full ERA40 data set, from 1958 to 2002.
More information can be found here."

COI | Centre for Ocean and Ice | Danmarks Meteorologiske Institut

 

[westwall]

Topics about which you are obviously oblivious.

Sure thing bub, I didn't claim that Mauna Loa was dormant. You claim to be a geologist and make a dumbass claim like that and you want to be taken seriously? I think not....

A volcano that is not current active and emitting gas and/or magma is consider, for all intents and purposes, dormant. All of the recent activity on Mauna Loa (29 years ago) is located on the eastern flank. The Mauna Loa observatory is located on the western side of the summit, miles away from any recent activity. In fact, the most recent activity at that location was hundreds of years ago. They wouldn't have built the observatory where it is located in the first place if there was a concern for future eruptions/emissions there.

And yet, when one looks at the list of dormant volcano's, Mauna Loa isn't on it while Mauna Kea is. You can shuck and jive all you want but an ethical scientist would say "whoops, I made a mistake and misspoke" as I have done on this very forum on a couple of occasions, while the ethically challenged will not.

Instead they will tie themselves into contortions of ridiculous proportions all so they don't have to admit they were wrong.

Pathetic....

 

[orogenicman]

The magnitude of early Holocene and last interglacial warmth at this high-latitude site lends support to concerns about Arctic amplification of future warming.""

The North Pole today has the greatest warming signal on the planet. Your work here does nothing to refute the numbers Orogenicman posted. 2C average global warming is entirely consistent with what your paper states and, in fact, it is what the authors seem to be assuming.

meh

and the ice in Antarctica is expanding.

nobody cares.

Gee, if only it were that simple, or true.

 

[orogenicman]

the three coldest Arctic summers on record have occurred during the last FIVE years

Fig. 1.3. Annual average near-surface air temperature anomalies for the first decade of the 21st century (2001-11) relative to the baseline period of 1971-2000. Data are from NOAA/ESRL, Boulder, CO: ESRL : PSD : Physical Sciences Division.

Fig. 1.2. Arctic-wide annual average surface air temperature (SAT) anomalies for the period 1900-2011 relative to the 1981-2010 mean value, based on land stations north of 60°N. Data are from the CRUTEM3v dataset at Temperature data (HadCRUT4). Note: this curve includes neither marine observations nor 2012 data, as the year was incomplete at the time of writing.

Seasonal Air Temperatures

Consistent with the annual average temperatures (Fig. 1.1), each seasonal anomaly distribution for near-surface temperatures shows departures primarily in the sub-Arctic (Fig. 1.4). Fall 2011 and winter 2012 were characterized by a positive North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO). This promotes the warm temperature anomaly over the Barents and Kara Seas, which are downstream of the stronger winds and lower pressures of the Icelandic low pressure center. This is unlike the Warm Arctic/Cold Continents pattern associated with a negative Arctic Oscillation (AO) climate pattern over the central Arctic (see previous Report Cards), which dominated the previous two falls and winters (2009-10 and 2010-11).

In contrast to the positive NAO in fall 2011 and winter 2012, spring and summer 2012 had a very negative NAO, with significant consequences for snow cover duration and extent (see the Snow essay) and melting on the Greenland Ice Sheet (see the Greenland Ice Sheet essay). Spring 2012 also saw the early formation of the Arctic Dipole (AD) pattern (Fig. 1.5) with high pressure on the North American side of the Arctic and low pressure on the Siberian side. In the previous five years this has not occurred until June (Overland et al., 2012). The dipole pattern supported increased winds across the Arctic and warmer temperature anomalies over the East Siberian Sea and western Greenland (Fig. 1.4c). In summer 2012 an unusual low pressure, centered on the Pacific Arctic sector, was a new feature of central Arctic weather relative to the last decade (Fig. 1.6).

Also noteworthy in Fig. 1.6 is the high sea level pressure over Greenland, which has been a feature of early summer for the last six years. Higher pressures over Greenland and their influence on Arctic and subarctic wind patterns, a so called blocking pattern, suggests physical connections between it and reduced Arctic sea ice in the summer, loss of Greenland and Canadian Arctic glacier ice, reduced North American snow cover in May and June, and potentially extremes in mid-latitude weather (Overland et al., 2012). See the essays on Sea Ice, Glaciers and Ice Caps, Greenland Ice Sheet and Snow for further information on those topics.


You were saying?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The magnitude of early Holocene and last interglacial warmth at this high-latitude site lends support to concerns about Arctic amplification of future warming.""

The North Pole today has the greatest warming signal on the planet. Your work here does nothing to refute the numbers Orogenicman posted. 2C average global warming is entirely consistent with what your paper states and, in fact, it is what the authors seem to be assuming.

meh

and the ice in Antarctica is expanding.

nobody cares.

Uhh, HELLO! The LAND ice isn't expanding. Its melting.

Satellites measure Antarctica is gaining sea ice but losing land ice at an accelerating rate which has implications for sea level rise.

Is Antarctica losing or gaining ice?

You're a ******* expert. How could you have missed this?

 

[orogenicman]

Sure thing bub, I didn't claim that Mauna Loa was dormant. You claim to be a geologist and make a dumbass claim like that and you want to be taken seriously? I think not....

A volcano that is not current active and emitting gas and/or magma is consider, for all intents and purposes, dormant. All of the recent activity on Mauna Loa (29 years ago) is located on the eastern flank. The Mauna Loa observatory is located on the western side of the summit, miles away from any recent activity. In fact, the most recent activity at that location was hundreds of years ago. They wouldn't have built the observatory where it is located in the first place if there was a concern for future eruptions/emissions there.

And yet, when one looks at the list of dormant volcano's, Mauna Loa isn't on it while Mauna Kea is. You can shuck and jive all you want but an ethical scientist would say "whoops, I made a mistake and misspoke" as I have done on this very forum on a couple of occasions, while the ethically challenged will not.

Instead they will tie themselves into contortions of ridiculous proportions all so they don't have to admit they were wrong.

Pathetic....

Yes, it is currently listed as active despite the fact that it is also currently dormant. The fact remains that the observatory, a multi-million dollar, permanent installation is located well away from any vents, is located over 29 miles laterally upwind and thousands of feet in altitude above ANY potential magmatic activity or gas release. There has been no volcanic activity in that location for hundreds of years. Using your reasoning, one might as well not install the instruments anywhere on the island because it is volcanic in nature. And that would be a big mistake, and rather foolish. You obviously don't understand how large these volcanos are. You can be on the west side of Mauna Loa while it is erupting in a major episode and never even know it. The active Hawaiian volcanos are the most heavily instrumented volcanic systems on the planet. I think they have it covered, dude.

 

[westwall]

The North Pole today has the greatest warming signal on the planet. Your work here does nothing to refute the numbers Orogenicman posted. 2C average global warming is entirely consistent with what your paper states and, in fact, it is what the authors seem to be assuming.

meh

and the ice in Antarctica is expanding.

nobody cares.

Uhh, HELLO! The LAND ice isn't expanding. Its melting.

Satellites measure Antarctica is gaining sea ice but losing land ice at an accelerating rate which has implications for sea level rise.

Is Antarctica losing or gaining ice?

You're a ******* expert. How could you have missed this?

You're a scientist, how could you miss this?

Thomas, E. R., G. J. Marshall, and J. R. McConnell, 2008. A doubling in snow accumulation in the western Antarctic Peninsula since 1850. Geophysical Research Leters, 35, L01706, doi:10.1029/2007GL032529.

Wonder how that construction crane got buried under ice that according to you doesn't exist?