Remember me
▼ Content

Arctic waters not freezing



Page 13 of 17<<<1112131415>>>
15-03-2017 07:15
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner gaslighter" gushed:... every time you have a strong low, you get a Canadian cold front? It's not coincidence.

Often, when there is a cold front over the U.S., the Present High Arctic Berserker, PHAB, or FAB
is elevated in temperature, specially at times the North Pole is in 24 hours of darkness. The FAB
is now 180+ straight days long.... ~ 140 straight days longer than the High Arctic over-temperatures of the late 1950's & early 1960's.
Meanwhile:
The solar TSI has been languid for many decades & low for 10 years (including a 3+year low setting a 100 year record). Yet, 385+ straight months of temperatures have past, all over the 20th century average. The last 3 years have been successively the hottest years ever recorded. Presently, Arctic sea ice extent has been below 14 million square kilometers, ~ 1.8 million square kilometers LESS than the 1980's. Presently, Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 9,600 cubic kilometers LESS than that of the 1980's. This is an equivalent cube of ice, 21.2 kilometers by 21.2 kilometers by 68,000 feet high, the energy needed to melt it being 30 times the energy consumption of the U.S. All this, while the sun's HEAT.... is low.
https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=95V9E%2bjf&id=4FC0BEEDAF541FE3EDF1A01694FDEE4CCC8A3E34&q=Arctic+Sea+Ice+Volume+Graph+feb+2017&simid=608038143506452087&selectedIndex=9&ajaxhist=0
Edited on 15-03-2017 07:30
15-03-2017 12:19
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(441)
litesong wrote:
Often, when there is a cold front over the U.S., the Present High Arctic Berserker, PHAB, or FAB
is elevated in temperature,


This is your answer?

As I suspected your actual knowledge on the subject that you so often post about is absolute zero. No need to continue with the copy and paste.


James wrote: All you mentioned were observations....
Litebeer wrote: Stuff your shit, you AGW denier liar whiner!
15-03-2017 16:50
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner gaslighter" gushed: This is your answer?

It is good to see an AGW denier liar whiner change my answer. No, the below is my answer:
Often, when there is a cold front over the U.S., the Present High Arctic Berserker, PHAB, or FA
is elevated in temperature, specially at times the High Arctic is in 24 hours of darkness. The FA
is now 180+ straight days long.... ~ 140 straight days longer than the High Arctic over-temperatures of the late 1950's & early 1960's.
Meanwhile:
The solar TSI has been languid for many decades & low for 10 years (including a 3+year low setting a 100 year record). Yet, 385+ straight months of temperatures have past, all over the 20th century average. The last 3 years have been successively the hottest years ever recorded. Presently, Arctic sea ice extent has been below 14 million square kilometers, ~ 1.8 million square kilometers LESS than the 1980's. Presently, Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 9,600 cubic kilometers LESS than that of the 1980's. This is an equivalent cube of ice, 21.2 kilometers by 21.2 kilometers by 68,000 feet high, the energy needed to melt it being 30 times the energy consumption of the U.S. All this, while the sun's HEAT.... is low.
https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=95V9E%2bjf&id=4FC0BEEDAF541FE3EDF1A01694FDEE4CCC8A3E34&q=Arctic+Sea+Ice+Volume+Graph+feb+2017&simid=608038143506452087&selectedIndex=9&ajaxhist=0
15-03-2017 18:02
Wake
★★★☆☆
(746)
GasGuzzler wrote:
litesong wrote:
Often, when there is a cold front over the U.S., the Present High Arctic Berserker, PHAB, or FAB
is elevated in temperature,


This is your answer?

As I suspected your actual knowledge on the subject that you so often post about is absolute zero. No need to continue with the copy and paste.


But when stuck for an answer he can always cut and paste as others here have been known to do in surface detail.
15-03-2017 18:38
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" woofs: when stuck for an answer...


Good to see "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" woke-up, tho still unable to understand. Same with "gaslighter":
Often, when there is a cold front over the U.S., the Present High Arctic Berserker, PHAB, or FAB
is elevated in temperature, specially at times the High Arctic is in 24 hours of darkness. The FAB
is now 180+ straight days long.... ~ 140 straight days longer than the High Arctic over-temperatures of the late 1950's & early 1960's. Its good that "wake-me-up" & "gaslighter" don't think that means anything.
Meanwhile:
The solar TSI has been languid for many decades & low for 10 years (including a 3+year low setting a 100 year record). Yet, 385+ straight months of temperatures have past, all over the 20th century average. The last 3 years have been successively the hottest years ever recorded. Presently, Arctic sea ice extent has been below 14 million square kilometers, ~ 1.8 million square kilometers LESS than the 1980's. Presently, Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 9,600 cubic kilometers LESS than that of the 1980's. This is an equivalent cube of ice, 21.2 kilometers by 21.2 kilometers by 68,000 feet high, the energy needed to melt it being 30 times the energy consumption of the U.S. All this, while the sun's HEAT.... is low.
https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=95V9E%2bjf&id=4FC0BEEDAF541FE3EDF1A01694FDEE4CCC8A3E34&q=Arctic+Sea+Ice+Volume+Graph+feb+2017&simid=608038143506452087&selectedIndex=9&ajaxhist=0
///////
It appears that disappearing "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner i b da no-sigh-ants mann" is on its third bout of prestidigitation. It started its leavings about the time it got interested in the FAB
& posting all its "Berserker" cartoons & I started predicting the record lifetime of the FAB
, which came true. But "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner i b da no-sigh-ants mann" nev'r wast interested in the longevity of FAB
,....jes' liak "wake-me-up" & "gaslighter".
Edited on 15-03-2017 19:01
15-03-2017 19:55
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(441)
litesong wrote:It is good to see an AGW denier liar whiner change my answer. No, the below is my answer:
Often, when there is a cold front over the U.S., the Present High Arctic Berserker, PHAB, or FA
is elevated in temperature, specially at times the High Arctic is in 24 hours of darkness.


I did not change your answer. I simply cut out the bogus FAB
(Futile Artificial Bullshit) crap you've pasted about 438 times.

You are constantly posting about local weather events, which is fine with me. But you've been fully uncovered now and your understanding is ZERO of what it is you would like you talk about.

Maybe it was my fault and I missed something in your answer, so I'll be extremely clear and number my questions....and maybe you could number your answers if you have any?

1. Date of the Hudson Bay snow storm you spoke of, please.

2. What effect does Arctic Oscillation have on US cold fronts and Siberian warm fronts, please.

3. Why would the Arctic have elevated temp when the US has had a recent strong cold front, please.

Thanks, and have a great day

Edited on 15-03-2017 19:57
15-03-2017 22:49
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner gaslighter" gushed: Why would the Arctic have elevated temp when the US has had a recent strong cold front....

Been told lots, but you choose NOT to understand. Excess AGW generated energy in the atmosphere is breaking down the Arctic circulation, which usually corralled the Arctic cold in the Arctic, except for historical occasional massive Arctic breakouts. The Arctic circulations have developed long meanderings north & south from their past more circular patterns. With the breakdown, southern heat (with excess AGW generated energy) is regularly pumping into the Arctic. That is why the FAB
, during the months that sun is mostly absent from the north, is 180+ straight days long, not the 40 straight day lengths of 55+ years ago. With the breakdown letting warm fronts into the High Arctic, the breakdowns also let the Arctic cold push to the south much easier than in the past.
Therefore, even while the general Earth is warming, High Arctic cold is having greater excursions to more densely human populated regions....but the High Arctic itself is strongly warming.
15-03-2017 22:59
Wake
★★★☆☆
(746)
GasGuzzler wrote:
litesong wrote:It is good to see an AGW denier liar whiner change my answer. No, the below is my answer:
Often, when there is a cold front over the U.S., the Present High Arctic Berserker, PHAB, or FA
is elevated in temperature, specially at times the High Arctic is in 24 hours of darkness.


I did not change your answer. I simply cut out the bogus FAB
(Futile Artificial Bullshit) crap you've pasted about 438 times.

You are constantly posting about local weather events, which is fine with me. But you've been fully uncovered now and your understanding is ZERO of what it is you would like you talk about.

Maybe it was my fault and I missed something in your answer, so I'll be extremely clear and number my questions....and maybe you could number your answers if you have any?

1. Date of the Hudson Bay snow storm you spoke of, please.

2. What effect does Arctic Oscillation have on US cold fronts and Siberian warm fronts, please.

3. Why would the Arctic have elevated temp when the US has had a recent strong cold front, please.

Thanks, and have a great day


Asking Chief Limpwrist for facts is like asking the sand in the Sahara for water. It just runs right through your fingers.
15-03-2017 23:30
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
GasGuzzler wrote: Date of the Hudson Bay snow storm you spoke of, please.


Good to know that "gaslighter" needs babysitting:
http://www.mlive.com/weather/index.ssf/2017/03/see_the_reasons_for_massive_wi.html
From the article:
The center was near Hudson Bay when Michigan was getting slammed with damaging winds.
//////
Also the Newfoundland & Labrador storm systems of 180kph.
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2017/03/11/police-in-newfoundland-urge-drivers-to-stay-off-roads-due-to-extreme-winds_n_15299558.html
Edited on 15-03-2017 23:34
15-03-2017 23:56
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(441)
Excess AGW generated energy in the atmosphere is breaking down the Arctic circulation,

How does CO2 break down a circulation?



which usually corralled the Arctic cold in the Arctic,

Depends on OA phase.


except for historical occasional massive Arctic breakouts.

AO is evenly negative and positive over the last 100+ years


The Arctic circulations have developed long meanderings north & south from their past more circular patterns.

This is called a negative Arctic Oscillation and is normal.

With the breakdown, southern heat (with excess AGW generated energy) is regularly pumping into the Arctic.

Send me a link?


James wrote: All you mentioned were observations....
Litebeer wrote: Stuff your shit, you AGW denier liar whiner!

Attached image:


Edited on 15-03-2017 23:58
16-03-2017 04:53
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
litesong wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote: Date of the Hudson Bay snow storm you spoke of, please.


Good to know that "gaslighter" needs babysitting:
http://www.mlive.com/weather/index.ssf/2017/03/see_the_reasons_for_massive_wi.html
From the article:
The center was near Hudson Bay when Michigan was getting slammed with damaging winds.
//////
Also the Newfoundland & Labrador storm systems of 180kph.
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2017/03/11/police-in-newfoundland-urge-drivers-to-stay-off-roads-due-to-extreme-winds_n_15299558.html


Ah.... its good to know that "gaslighter" really didn't want an answer about the Hudson Bay storm or the Newfoundland & Labrador winds.
That's why I seldom answer "gaslighter" & "wake-me-up".
16-03-2017 05:01
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner gaslighter" gushed: AO is evenly negative and positive over the last 100+ years...

Good to know the cyclical AO isn't causing the increasing number of consecutive days of over-temperature periods. The Present High Arctic Berserker, PHAB, or FAB
is 180+ consecutive days in length, compared to 40+ straight days during the late 1950's & early 1960's.
Edited on 16-03-2017 05:03
16-03-2017 14:27
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
There are a number of graphs representing Arctic sea ice VOLUME loss. This is one:
https://14adebb0-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites.googlegroups.com/site/arctischepinguin/home/piomas/grf/piomas-trnd3.png?attachauth=ANoY7crJEieTVHi8C1v54yytfpNKfGuMVmgZppAb-H6kQSYiwQ7DFSTwhY1LUAVxgCXJ5VEkVyODNAruQoZmavwMLRGVuE1DWls4yHvOpx40-OKZEcFsB2ty4lW-Mn36Ed_9vFFRr1s53WGSQRMSkK7jHEOGGsCcN1TOC22qHi1v2fRuTMVvO_SggAHIvRt5mtvVwxMnKciouSP4P9DVlASWKLfGIujDbnTDLPxksxbAP6IBEJEGqQmxaWiqGwyCW729KhEcrAdp&attredirects=0
It directly shows anomalous Arctic sea ice VOLUME losses, presently at ~ 8300 cubic kilometers compared to 1979-2009 ice losses. However, this comparison includes latter years that readily show AGW ice VOLUME loss effects. Another graph shows VOLUME ice losses of ~ 9600cubic kilometers compared to 1979-2001 losses.... again comparing with latter years (but fewer years) already showing AGW ice VOLUME loss effects. If comparisons are made to the past 1980's, total Arctic sea ice Volume losses are more in the loss region of 11,000 to 12,000 cubic kilometers.
In all comparisons tho, the present beginning of 2017 sea ice VOLUME losses are powerfully SEPARATED from all other years. This fact is NOT AS READILY shown as graphs showing Arctic sea ice extent losses only.
Edited on 16-03-2017 14:29
16-03-2017 14:56
Wake
★★★☆☆
(746)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Excess AGW generated energy in the atmosphere is breaking down the Arctic circulation,

How does CO2 break down a circulation?



which usually corralled the Arctic cold in the Arctic,

Depends on OA phase.


except for historical occasional massive Arctic breakouts.

AO is evenly negative and positive over the last 100+ years


The Arctic circulations have developed long meanderings north & south from their past more circular patterns.

This is called a negative Arctic Oscillation and is normal.

With the breakdown, southern heat (with excess AGW generated energy) is regularly pumping into the Arctic.

Send me a link?


Now look what you've done - Chief Limpwrist is going to blather on for another week talking to himself and convincing himself he's right by quoting himself.
16-03-2017 15:40
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(441)
Wake wrote:
Now look what you've done - Chief Limpwrist is going to blather on for another week talking to himself and convincing himself he's right by quoting himself.


I know, I was actually being nice and gave a few pieces to get him started on the right track but he's back to insisting that unicorns fart rainbows. I tried.


James wrote: All you mentioned were observations....
Litebeer wrote: Stuff your shit, you AGW denier liar whiner!
16-03-2017 15:43
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" woofs: Chief Limpwrist is going to blather on for another week ....

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" woofs at its pukey proud pig racist best.
//////
From a post in the past: The last few years High Arctic Berserkers have broken triple digits..... REALLY BROKEN TRIPLE DIGITS. When the Present High Arctic Berserker (PHAB or FAB?) had been in existence for 65 straight days, it wasn't much of a prediction that the PHAB (or FAB
would break triple digits....even 150 straight days.
////////
Present High Arctic Berserker or FAB
is now ~ 185 straight days long, ~ 145 days longer than High Arctic over-temperatures of the latter 1950's to early 1960's.
/////
It is good there is lots of data disproving the 20 year, AGW denier liar whiner contention that we are returning to an ice age.
The above statements in graphic form:
http://iwantsomeproof.com/extimg/siv_annual_polar_graph.png
16-03-2017 15:51
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner gaslighter" gushed: unicorns fart rainbows. I tried.


"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" never tried to get science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc in an unearned hi skule DEE-plooomaa. Meanwhile:
http://iwantsomeproof.com/extimg/siv_annual_polar_graph.png
16-03-2017 17:51
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(441)
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner gaslighter" gushed: unicorns fart rainbows. I tried.


"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" never tried to get science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc in an unearned hi skule DEE-plooomaa. Meanwhile:
http://iwantsomeproof.com/extimg/siv_annual_polar_graph.png


Please don't quote me and give Wake the credit. If I made you mad then I want credit for pissing in your Cheerios! Sorry Wake.



James wrote: All you mentioned were observations....
Litebeer wrote: Stuff your shit, you AGW denier liar whiner!

Edited on 16-03-2017 18:07
16-03-2017 19:33
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
[b]GasGuzzler wrote: Please don't....give Wake the credit.....i want credit


Ah....."old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner gaslighter" wants the credit fer no science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc in an unearned hi skule DEE-plooomaa.
Ya got it.
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner gaslighter" has no science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc in an unearned hi skule DEE-plooomaa.
16-03-2017 21:36
Wake
★★★☆☆
(746)
GasGuzzler wrote:
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner gaslighter" gushed: unicorns fart rainbows. I tried.


"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" never tried to get science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc in an unearned hi skule DEE-plooomaa. Meanwhile:
http://iwantsomeproof.com/extimg/siv_annual_polar_graph.png


Please don't quote me and give Wake the credit. If I made you mad then I want credit for pissing in your Cheerios! Sorry Wake.


Chief Limpwrist is easy to piss off. Just sign on.
18-03-2017 05:41
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" woofs: litesong is easy....

Meanwhile:
Late in the gathering season, Arctic sea ice extent is 13.61 million square kilometers & hasn't reached a maximum 14 million square kilometers for 3 years in a row. In the satellite record, ALL other years have been ABOVE a maximum 14 million square kilometers & the 1980's average is nearly 1.8 million square kilometers greater. As of March 1, this year's to date Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 18600 cubic kilometers, almost 2000 cubic kilometers more than....any other year & over 11,000+ cubic kilometers more than the to date average year in the 1980's.
Also:
The solar TSI has been languid for many decades & low for 10 years (including a 3+year low setting a 100 year record). Yet, 385+ straight months of temperatures have past, all over the 20th century average. The last 3 years have been successively the hottest years ever recorded.
https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=95V9E%2bjf&id=4FC0BEEDAF541FE3EDF1A01694FDEE4CCC8A3E34&q=Arctic+Sea+Ice+Volume+Graph+feb+2017&simid=608038143506452087&selectedIndex=9&ajaxhist=0
Edited on 18-03-2017 05:45
18-03-2017 20:51
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
litesong wrote: As of March 1, this year's to date Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 18600 cubic kilometers, almost 2000 cubic kilometers more than....any other year & over 11,000+ cubic kilometers more than the to date average year in the 1980's....

Correction:
As of March 1, this year's to date Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 18600 cubic kilometers, almost 2000 cubic kilometers LESS than....any other year & over 11,000+ cubic kilometers LESS than the to date average year in the 1980's....
Edited on 18-03-2017 20:52
18-03-2017 22:44
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(441)
litesong wrote:
litesong wrote: As of March 1, this year's to date Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 18600 cubic kilometers, almost 2000 cubic kilometers more than....any other year & over 11,000+ cubic kilometers more than the to date average year in the 1980's....

Correction:
As of March 1, this year's to date Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 18600 cubic kilometers, almost 2000 cubic kilometers LESS than....any other year & over 11,000+ cubic kilometers LESS than the to date average year in the 1980's....


Thanks so much for the update!

I'll get the ice log books updated immediately.


James wrote: All you mentioned were observations....
Litebeer wrote: Stuff your shit, you AGW denier liar whiner!
19-03-2017 00:55
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner gaslighter" gushed:
litesong wrote:
litesong wrote: As of March 1, this year's to date Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 18600 cubic kilometers, almost 2000 cubic kilometers more than....any other year & over 11,000+ cubic kilometers more than the to date average year in the 1980's....

Correction:
As of March 1, this year's to date Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 18600 cubic kilometers, almost 2000 cubic kilometers LESS than....any other year & over 11,000+ cubic kilometers LESS than the to date average year in the 1980's....

Thanks so much for the update!

Its so good to see "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner gaslighter" acknowledge accuracy..... in science & even in its name.
19-03-2017 01:24
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
[quote] litesong wrote:Late in the gathering season, Arctic sea ice extent is 13.61 million square kilometers & hasn't reached a maximum 14 million square kilometers for 3 years in a row. In the satellite record, ALL other years have been ABOVE a maximum 14 million square kilometers & the 1980's average is nearly 1.8 million square kilometers greater. As of March 1, this year's to date Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 18600 cubic kilometers, almost 2000 cubic kilometers LESS than....any other year & over 11,000+ cubic kilometers LESS than the to date average year in the 1980's.
///////
With fluctuating temperatures of the Present High Arctic Berserker or FAB
, recent cooling was again threatening the life of FAB
, with readings of 3degC over average & possibilities of going lower. But now FAB
has bounced up once again, this time to 6degC over average. FAB
is still on track fer 200 straight days(more?) of over-temperatures. However, solar heat is returning to the far north. So excess AGW generated energy readily could be disguised by... returning solar heat!!!
Again, thanks to "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner gaslighter" fer its continued interest in accuracy.
19-03-2017 15:24
Wake
★★★☆☆
(746)
GasGuzzler wrote:
litesong wrote:
litesong wrote: As of March 1, this year's to date Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 18600 cubic kilometers, almost 2000 cubic kilometers more than....any other year & over 11,000+ cubic kilometers more than the to date average year in the 1980's....

Correction:
As of March 1, this year's to date Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 18600 cubic kilometers, almost 2000 cubic kilometers LESS than....any other year & over 11,000+ cubic kilometers LESS than the to date average year in the 1980's....


Thanks so much for the update!

I'll get the ice log books updated immediately.


It comes as no surprise that Chief Limpwrist doesn't mention that the ice extent was a real low record and has recovered so rapidly that what is plain was that it was a weather event and not climate change. But to liberals lies are as good as the truth. The surface detail of that spot on the cist is proof of that.
19-03-2017 16:41
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
Wake wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
litesong wrote:
litesong wrote: As of March 1, this year's to date Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 18600 cubic kilometers, almost 2000 cubic kilometers more than....any other year & over 11,000+ cubic kilometers more than the to date average year in the 1980's....

Correction:
As of March 1, this year's to date Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 18600 cubic kilometers, almost 2000 cubic kilometers LESS than....any other year & over 11,000+ cubic kilometers LESS than the to date average year in the 1980's....

Thanks so much for the update!
I'll get the ice log books updated immediately.

....the ice extent was a real low record and has recovered so rapidly that what is plain was that it was a weather event and not climate change.

Ya say nuthin' new.
NSIDC had reported "during the event", 2012 Arctic sea ice extent low in September was assisted by wind changes that flushed a lot of sea ice out of the Arctic & I often repeated. Despite this "weather" event Arctic sea ice extent & VOLUME ARE LOWEST FOR THIS TIME OF YEAR & PROGRESS DOWNWARD in to date information.
Also, presently Global sea ice extent is ~ 3 million square kilometers less than to date average 1980's years.
It is good that "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" doesn't answer me & is.... still asleep.
Edited on 19-03-2017 16:46
19-03-2017 17:55
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(441)
litesong wrote:Ya say nuthin' new.


This....From none other than Chief Copynpaste


James wrote: All you mentioned were observations....
Litebeer wrote: Stuff your shit, you AGW denier liar whiner!
19-03-2017 18:05
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
GasGuzzler wrote:
litesong wrote:Ya say nuthin' new.

This....From none other than Chief Copynpaste

Nah. NSIDC said it. They said it in 2012 as it was happening. "wake-me-up" is the one repeating what NSIDC said... only he snuffs his stuff four & a half years too late.
Edited on 19-03-2017 18:41
20-03-2017 03:16
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
It appears that 2017 Arctic sea ice extent maximum could have reached its peak sometime ago, & like 2015 & 2016, will NOT reach 14 million square kilometers extent maximum.... just remarkable!! Arctic sea ice VOLUME growth should continue to or into April, but only as a bit more sea ice thickening, not as extra southward expansion frontage. All three years have been very close to the 14 million square kilometer mark, AND even for extended periods of time. But each of the trio has left a graph profile like a volcano with its top blown off & below the 14 mark.
20-03-2017 03:40
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(441)
Damn Siberian warm front.
20-03-2017 04:30
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner gaslighter" gushed: Damn Siberian warm front.

Yes, the Siberian warm front was (& still is) predominant, pumping lots of excess AGW energy into the High Arctic (FAB
has leaped to 7degC over temperature). However, the Present High Arctic Berserker, or FAB
has existed for 185+ days & gained southern excess AGW energy from most all directions providing a seldom ending supply of heat to the 6 months of High Arctic darkness, FROM ANY DIRECTION FROM WHICH THE WIND WAS BLOWING. The extended & extending life of FAB
, in the darkness of the late fall, winter & early spring High Arctic is one of the extraordinary events of AGW.
Edited on 20-03-2017 05:12
21-03-2017 20:20
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
litesong wrote:
It appears that 2017 Arctic sea ice extent maximum could have reached its peak sometime ago, & like 2015 & 2016, will NOT reach 14 million square kilometers extent maximum.... just remarkable!! Arctic sea ice VOLUME growth should continue to or into April, but only as a bit more sea ice thickening, not as extra southward expansion frontage. All three years have been very close to the 14 million square kilometer mark, AND even for extended periods of time. But each of the trio has left a graph profile like a volcano with its top blown off & below the 14 mark.

Robert Scribbler makes mention of this year's Arctic sea ice maximum extent:
https://robertscribbler.com/2017/03/20/frailest-ever-winter-sea-ice-facing-a-cruel-cruel-summer/
Edited on 21-03-2017 20:32
21-03-2017 22:41
Wake
★★★☆☆
(746)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Damn Siberian warm front.


It turns out that:

1: The IPCC and NOAA have used falsified temperature data. This is because the temperatures are from highly urbanized areas that have grown from almost farmland to very large cities such as Moscow, Seoul, Korea, Tokyo, Japan and the like. Their corrections were purposely undervalued since farm areas close to these points showed NO heating at all above normal variations. It turns out that we are in a cooling period at the moment and not a warming.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/29/when-results-go-bad/

The author of this article is a psychologist and since the real problem is with the twisted psychology of True Believers this would be appropriate. Of course he doesn't give his references and they are more than strong enough even for the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. Well, probably not since it doesn't back AGW up.

2. I have argued that CO2 is NOT a "greenhouse gas" and it turns out that there is only ONE paper that has actually measured admixtures of gas containing O2, H2O and CO2. The paper is rather technical but here is the conclusions:

"Conclusions

This assessment demonstrates that the effect of an increased warming caused by an increase of absorptivity of infrared radiation (IR) by water vapor due to overlapping spectral bands with carbon dioxide does not happen in nature.

On the overlapping absorption spectral bands of carbon dioxide and water vapor, the carbon dioxide propitiates a decrease of the total emissivity/absorptivity of the mixture in the atmosphere, not an increase, as AGW proponents argue.

Applying the physics laws of atmospheric heat transfer, the Carbon Dioxide behaves as a coolant of the Earth's surface and the Earth's atmosphere by its effect of diminishing the total absorptivity and total emissivity of the mixture of atmospheric gases."

3. NOAA purposely and with full knowledge and probably at the urging of Obama counterfeited their papers to add to the IPCC conference by - of course - Obama.

So this is NOT a science or a question of science - it is pure unadulterated politics as those of us with a head on our shoulders detected 15 years ago.
Edited on 21-03-2017 23:30
21-03-2017 23:21
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" woofs: It turns out that:
1: The IPCC and NOAA have used falsified temperature data. 3. NOAA purposely and with full knowledge and probably at the urging of Obama....

old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' AGW denier liar whiners been totin' that oil, energy, business & re-pubic-lick-un PR propaganda poop fer far longer than Obama's Presidency. Ya really gots ta ketch up on the latest AGW denier liar whiner poop fer shore. There's plenty slimy steenkin' AGW denier liar whiner poop fer ya to wash yer mouth with.
23-03-2017 00:54
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
litesong wrote: Yes, the Siberian warm front was (& still is) predominant, pumping lots of excess AGW energy into the High Arctic (FAB
has leaped to 7degC over temperature). However, the Present High Arctic Berserker, or FAB
has existed for 185+ days & gained southern excess AGW energy from most all directions providing a seldom ending supply of heat to the 6 months of High Arctic darkness, FROM ANY DIRECTION FROM WHICH THE WIND WAS BLOWING. The extended & extending life of FAB
, in the darkness of the late fall, winter & early spring High Arctic is one of the extraordinary events of AGW.

The FAB
lifetime has now extended close to or at 190 straight days of existence. If not for 1 questionable day, FAB
would be ~ 204 straight days long.... ~ 5 times longer than High Arctic over-temperature periods of the late 1950's to early 1960's.... one of the extraordinary excesses of AGW.
23-03-2017 12:26
litesong
★★★★☆
(1006)
litesong wrote:
litesong wrote:
It appears that 2017 Arctic sea ice extent maximum could have reached its peak sometime ago, & like 2015 & 2016, will NOT reach 14 million square kilometers extent maximum.... just remarkable!! Arctic sea ice VOLUME growth should continue to or into April, but only as a bit more sea ice thickening, not as extra southward expansion frontage. All three years have been very close to the 14 million square kilometer mark, AND even for extended periods of time. But each of the trio has left a graph profile like a volcano with its top blown off & below the 14 mark.

Robert Scribbler makes mention of this year's Arctic sea ice maximum extent:
https://robertscribbler.com/2017/03/20/frailest-ever-winter-sea-ice-facing-a-cruel-cruel-summer/

Not only was 2017 Arctic sea ice extent maximum below 14 million square kiometers, it actually DIDN'T reach 13.9 million square kilometers. AND THAT SEA ICE was thin. Of course, March 2017 Arctic sea ice VOLUME was 9600 cubic kilometers less than the average of the 1980's, & 11,000(+?) cubic kilometers less than 1980, itself, but even a thousand (+?) cubic kilometers less than record breaking years, 2015 & 2016.
It is good that AGW denier liar whiners double-down & triple-down(?) on their bets that Earth is returning to an ice age.
23-03-2017 15:34
Frescomexico
★★☆☆☆
(168)
Wake wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Damn Siberian warm front.


It turns out that:

1: The IPCC and NOAA have used falsified temperature data. This is because the temperatures are from highly urbanized areas that have grown from almost farmland to very large cities such as Moscow, Seoul, Korea, Tokyo, Japan and the like. Their corrections were purposely undervalued since farm areas close to these points showed NO heating at all above normal variations. It turns out that we are in a cooling period at the moment and not a warming.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/29/when-results-go-bad/

The author of this article is a psychologist and since the real problem is with the twisted psychology of True Believers this would be appropriate. Of course he doesn't give his references and they are more than strong enough even for the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. Well, probably not since it doesn't back AGW up.

2. I have argued that CO2 is NOT a "greenhouse gas" and it turns out that there is only ONE paper that has actually measured admixtures of gas containing O2, H2O and CO2. The paper is rather technical but here is the conclusions:

"Conclusions

This assessment demonstrates that the effect of an increased warming caused by an increase of absorptivity of infrared radiation (IR) by water vapor due to overlapping spectral bands with carbon dioxide does not happen in nature.

On the overlapping absorption spectral bands of carbon dioxide and water vapor, the carbon dioxide propitiates a decrease of the total emissivity/absorptivity of the mixture in the atmosphere, not an increase, as AGW proponents argue.

Applying the physics laws of atmospheric heat transfer, the Carbon Dioxide behaves as a coolant of the Earth's surface and the Earth's atmosphere by its effect of diminishing the total absorptivity and total emissivity of the mixture of atmospheric gases."

3. NOAA purposely and with full knowledge and probably at the urging of Obama counterfeited their papers to add to the IPCC conference by - of course - Obama.

So this is NOT a science or a question of science - it is pure unadulterated politics as those of us with a head on our shoulders detected 15 years ago.


The part of this scenario that I have trouble following is the question of motive. What did NASA, NOAA, and the Obama administration have to gain?
23-03-2017 15:49
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1391)
Frescomexico wrote:
Wake wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Damn Siberian warm front.


It turns out that:

1: The IPCC and NOAA have used falsified temperature data. This is because the temperatures are from highly urbanized areas that have grown from almost farmland to very large cities such as Moscow, Seoul, Korea, Tokyo, Japan and the like. Their corrections were purposely undervalued since farm areas close to these points showed NO heating at all above normal variations. It turns out that we are in a cooling period at the moment and not a warming.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/29/when-results-go-bad/

The author of this article is a psychologist and since the real problem is with the twisted psychology of True Believers this would be appropriate. Of course he doesn't give his references and they are more than strong enough even for the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. Well, probably not since it doesn't back AGW up.

2. I have argued that CO2 is NOT a "greenhouse gas" and it turns out that there is only ONE paper that has actually measured admixtures of gas containing O2, H2O and CO2. The paper is rather technical but here is the conclusions:

"Conclusions

This assessment demonstrates that the effect of an increased warming caused by an increase of absorptivity of infrared radiation (IR) by water vapor due to overlapping spectral bands with carbon dioxide does not happen in nature.

On the overlapping absorption spectral bands of carbon dioxide and water vapor, the carbon dioxide propitiates a decrease of the total emissivity/absorptivity of the mixture in the atmosphere, not an increase, as AGW proponents argue.

Applying the physics laws of atmospheric heat transfer, the Carbon Dioxide behaves as a coolant of the Earth's surface and the Earth's atmosphere by its effect of diminishing the total absorptivity and total emissivity of the mixture of atmospheric gases."

3. NOAA purposely and with full knowledge and probably at the urging of Obama counterfeited their papers to add to the IPCC conference by - of course - Obama.

So this is NOT a science or a question of science - it is pure unadulterated politics as those of us with a head on our shoulders detected 15 years ago.


The part of this scenario that I have trouble following is the question of motive. What did NASA, NOAA, and the Obama administration have to gain?

That and the fact that it is utter nonsense.

CO2, like H2O, is a greenhouse gas because it contains atoms of different kinds. This means that the molecule has modes of vibration corresponding to the energy of photons in the IR spectrum and hence is able to absorb IR photons of certain wavelengths.

This is all very well understood fundamental science. Anyone claiming that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas is, basically, claiming that the entirety of radiative physics is wrong.
23-03-2017 16:37
Wake
★★★☆☆
(746)
Frescomexico wrote:
Wake wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Damn Siberian warm front.


It turns out that:

1: The IPCC and NOAA have used falsified temperature data. This is because the temperatures are from highly urbanized areas that have grown from almost farmland to very large cities such as Moscow, Seoul, Korea, Tokyo, Japan and the like. Their corrections were purposely undervalued since farm areas close to these points showed NO heating at all above normal variations. It turns out that we are in a cooling period at the moment and not a warming.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/29/when-results-go-bad/

The author of this article is a psychologist and since the real problem is with the twisted psychology of True Believers this would be appropriate. Of course he doesn't give his references and they are more than strong enough even for the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. Well, probably not since it doesn't back AGW up.

2. I have argued that CO2 is NOT a "greenhouse gas" and it turns out that there is only ONE paper that has actually measured admixtures of gas containing O2, H2O and CO2. The paper is rather technical but here is the conclusions:

"Conclusions

This assessment demonstrates that the effect of an increased warming caused by an increase of absorptivity of infrared radiation (IR) by water vapor due to overlapping spectral bands with carbon dioxide does not happen in nature.

On the overlapping absorption spectral bands of carbon dioxide and water vapor, the carbon dioxide propitiates a decrease of the total emissivity/absorptivity of the mixture in the atmosphere, not an increase, as AGW proponents argue.

Applying the physics laws of atmospheric heat transfer, the Carbon Dioxide behaves as a coolant of the Earth's surface and the Earth's atmosphere by its effect of diminishing the total absorptivity and total emissivity of the mixture of atmospheric gases."

3. NOAA purposely and with full knowledge and probably at the urging of Obama counterfeited their papers to add to the IPCC conference by - of course - Obama.

So this is NOT a science or a question of science - it is pure unadulterated politics as those of us with a head on our shoulders detected 15 years ago.


The part of this scenario that I have trouble following is the question of motive. What did NASA, NOAA, and the Obama administration have to gain?


Effectively NASA and NOAA had nothing more to gain except to maintain their position that there WAS AGW.

Obama had yet more political standing in the world by agreeing with the IPCC and providing them strong proof.

But here's the clincher - NOAA conveniently "lost" the data set they used to calculate this warming. When others tried to get the data and couldn't they were reduced to having to generate the set themselves. That's when it became clear that large urban areas were not corrected for in the growth over the period of time in question.

But as you can see, perhaps a large part of the problem was that NOAA didn't want to disappoint the True Believers like Surface Defect who proclaims the Mexican scientist's paper garbage because it was only published on-line. His high school arithmetic wasn't up to understanding the rather simple calculus in the paper so he proclaims it junk science.

I've simply quit trying to say anything to him because he isn't sane and arguing with an insane person does no good.
Page 13 of 17<<<1112131415>>>





Join the debate Arctic waters not freezing:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Stockholm University is looking for a Arctic Climate Doctorate724-04-2017 18:09
Fast recovery of thick Arctic ice3617-04-2017 20:39
Arctic ice still rapidly decreasing9209-04-2017 16:54
Arctic ice falls to record winter low after polar 'heatwaves'1004-04-2017 12:39
I am an Arctic researcher. Donald Trump is deleting my citations1330-03-2017 18:38
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Will Arctic summers be ice-free in this century?

Yes

No

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2017 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact