Remember me
▼ Content

Arctic waters not freezing



Page 19 of 20<<<17181920>
09-09-2017 03:13
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
Average Arctic sea ice VOLUME for September 1, for the period 1980-89, was ~15,000 cubic kilometers. Present September 1, 2017 sea ice VOLUME is ~ 4700 cubic kilometers, ~10,300 cubic kilometers less than the 1980-89 period for September 1.
AGW denier liar whiners made hoopla about 2013-15 returning us to the ice ages. However, ALL YEARLY SEA ICE VOLUME LOW MONTHS in that period, showed Arctic sea ice NOT returned to 50% levels & most below 40%.
Present September 1, Arctic sea ice Volume is 31% of the 1980-89 average.
Edited on 09-09-2017 03:18
09-01-2018 05:38
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
Average Arctic sea ice VOLUME for January 1, for the period 1980-89, was ~23,300 cubic kilometers. Present January 1, 2018 sea ice VOLUME is ~14,300 cubic kilometers, ~9000 cubic kilometers LESS than the 1980-89 average for January 1.
13-01-2018 06:20
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
I love this Blast from the Past:
////////
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner gasguzlr & gazmuflr" gushed:...why doesn't it snow every time cold moves south?
/////////////
From my comments above, "Both Poles are generally dry, at times, even designated deserts, due to lack of precipitation. But Jennifer Francis determines extra GHG water vapor is being transported to the Arctic, along with southern excess AGW energy."
Altho Ms. Francis talks about more water vapor in the Arctic, that is a relative term. As stated, the Poles are desert areas. Bumping up precipitation by say, 5% or 10%, still would mean incoming Arctic weather would only have the capability of precipitation of ~ 11 inches of rain per year, still dry air for southern climes used to 30 to 40+ inches of rain a year. Only by encountering wet fronts from the Pacific Ocean or the Gulf of Mexico, would a south proceeding Arctic cold front be able to produce snow in any great temperate zone quantities.
Of course, "old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner gasguzlr & gazmuflr" knew all this. It circles around with questions to see if it can make someone stumble. & if it or other AGW denier liar whiners get no answer because AGW denier liar whiners are slimeballs, they declare AGW denier liar whiners the winner. AGW denier liar whiners earn their full names, old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' AGW denier liar whiners.
15-01-2018 23:02
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(979)
I love this Blast from the Past:
////////
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner gasguzlr & gazmuflr" gushed:...why doesn't it snow every time cold moves south?

Nicely taken out of context...well done.


You have no idea what you said here, do you?
Bumping up precipitation by say, 5% or 10%, still would mean incoming Arctic weather would only have the capability of precipitation of ~ 11 inches of rain per year, still dry air for southern climes used to 30 to 40+ inches of rain a year.

Who? What? When? Where? Why? How? WTF?
Only by encountering wet fronts from the Pacific Ocean or the Gulf of Mexico, would a south proceeding Arctic cold front be able to produce snow in any great temperate zone quantities.

What is a wet front? Prefrontal or post frontal? Just a front doesn't usually produce appreciable snow. Are these "wet" fronts warm or cold fronts? WTF is a "great temperate zone quantity"?
Edited on 15-01-2018 23:03
15-01-2018 23:28
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(979)
If you can't explain it, or even define it, you are the one who doesn't understand.

So in your next 2000 posts, try posting about something that actually makes sense so we can talk about it....otherwise, have a great 2018 being ignored. Bye now.......zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
15-01-2018 23:32
Wake
★★★★★
(3353)
GasGuzzler wrote:
If you can't explain it, or even define it, you are the one who doesn't understand.

So in your next 2000 posts, try posting about something that actually makes sense so we can talk about it....otherwise, have a great 2018 being ignored. Bye now.......zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


Now you're catching on. He can debate "science" with nightmare.
17-01-2018 06:35
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
Here's an excellent BLAST FROM THE PAST DATED--17-11-2016
litesong wrote:
With the High Arctic in darkness for almost 2 months to date:
1990's decade of Arctic sea ice extent to date was 4% less than that of the 1980's.
2000's decade of Arctic sea ice extent to date was 10% less than that of the 1980's.
The year 2012 of Arctic sea ice extent to date was 20% less than that of the 1980's.
The year 2016 of Arctic sea ice extent to date is 23% less than that of the 1980's.
The 1980's average November 1 Arctic sea ice VOLUME was 18,100 cubic kilometers. November 1, 2016 Arctic sea ice VOLUME was 6400 cubic kilometers, a loss of 11,700 cubic kilometers or a loss of 64.6%. The energy needed to melt this ice is 36 times the U.S. annual energy consumption. Since 1958, High Arctic temperature has been rising (more before satellite temperatures?). Two plus years ago, High Arctic temperature over nearly 4 million square kilometers, for 140 straight days was over average. For a few days at the end of 2015, the North Pole was THAWING! From the end of 2015 into 2016, there were 150 straight days over average temperature. For 100 straight days during that period, temperatures were 3degC to 11degC over average. For 65 straight days presently, High Arctic temperatures are & have been over average AND MOSTLY WAY OVER AVERAGE. High Arctic temperatures over nearly 4 million square kilometers presently are 18degC over average...I believe the highest anomaly since 1958. For 10 years the sun has been at a low TSI (including a 3+ year period, setting a 100 year record low). But, Earth temperatures have not returned to early 20th century levels. For 385+(?) straight months, Earth temperatures have been over the 20th century average.
20-01-2018 01:26
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
litesong wrote:
Here's an excellent BLAST FROM THE PAST DATED--17-11-2016
litesong wrote:
With the High Arctic in darkness for almost 2 months to date:
1990's decade of Arctic sea ice extent to date was 4% less than that of the 1980's.
2000's decade of Arctic sea ice extent to date was 10% less than that of the 1980's.
The year 2012 of Arctic sea ice extent to date was 20% less than that of the 1980's.
The year 2016 of Arctic sea ice extent to date is 23% less than that of the 1980's.
The 1980's average November 1 Arctic sea ice VOLUME was 18,100 cubic kilometers. November 1, 2016 Arctic sea ice VOLUME was 6400 cubic kilometers, a loss of 11,700 cubic kilometers or a loss of 64.6%. The energy needed to melt this ice is 36 times the U.S. annual energy consumption. Since 1958, High Arctic temperature has been rising (more before satellite temperatures?). Two plus years ago, High Arctic temperature over nearly 4 million square kilometers, for 140 straight days was over average. For a few days at the end of 2015, the North Pole was THAWING! From the end of 2015 into 2016, there were 150 straight days over average temperature. For 100 straight days during that period, temperatures were 3degC to 11degC over average. For 65 straight days presently, High Arctic temperatures are & have been over average AND MOSTLY WAY OVER AVERAGE. High Arctic temperatures over nearly 4 million square kilometers presently are 18degC over average...I believe the highest anomaly since 1958. For 10 years the sun has been at a low TSI (including a 3+ year period, setting a 100 year record low). But, Earth temperatures have not returned to early 20th century levels. For 385+(?) straight months, Earth temperatures have been over the 20th century average.


Not to disagree with you litesong but shipping companies are hoping for an ice free Arctic Ocean. It would decrease the cost of shipping. You're not a very good American when you put the environment ahead of profit. (am being sarcastic)
20-01-2018 02:14
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
[b]James_ wrote:...shipping companies are hoping for an ice free Arctic Ocean. It would decrease the cost of shipping.
American companies already have the best sea trips to foreign nations. As far as american companies using the Panama Canal on long term operations, a cheaper, quicker alternative might be operations set up on both U.S. coasts. It is communist china(always small letters), putin's russia(always small letters) & northern european countries that benefit most from northwest & northeast arctic passage ice free seas.
The northeast passage is already working for putin's russia(always small letters) with their nuclear icebreakers escorting both military & commercial ships in almost continuous summer operations.
So american companies desiring northwest & northeast ice free conditions, will play second fiddle to communist china(always small letters) & putin's russia(always small letters) trade growths.
Edited on 20-01-2018 02:23
20-01-2018 02:54
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
litesong wrote:
[b]James_ wrote:...shipping companies are hoping for an ice free Arctic Ocean. It would decrease the cost of shipping.
American companies already have the best sea trips to foreign nations. As far as american companies using the Panama Canal on long term operations, a cheaper, quicker alternative might be operations set up on both U.S. coasts. It is communist china(always small letters), putin's russia(always small letters) & northern european countries that benefit most from northwest & northeast arctic passage ice free seas.
The northeast passage is already working for putin's russia(always small letters) with their nuclear icebreakers escorting both military & commercial ships in almost continuous summer operations.
So american companies desiring northwest & northeast ice free conditions, will play second fiddle to communist china(always small letters) & putin's russia(always small letters) trade growths.


It might be cheaper to ship from China to New York going through the Arctic. About 25% of the U.S. population lives between Washington DC and Boston.
20-01-2018 06:08
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
James_ wrote:
litesong wrote: It is communist china(always small letters), putin's russia(always small letters) & northern european countries that benefit most from northwest & northeast arctic passage ice free seas.
It might be cheaper to ship from China to New York going through the Arctic.
Yeah..... what I said. However, after numerous ship break-ups, losing entire crews, the devastated families of such, will guarantee rich men sending people to their deaths, may not get as rich as they thought. Of course, rich men don't care how quickly the Arctic is savaged either, since none of the rich men will go to the Arctic on a continuing basis.
Edited on 20-01-2018 06:12
30-01-2018 00:24
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
litesong wrote:Average Arctic sea ice VOLUME for January 1, for the period 1980-89, was ~23,300 cubic kilometers. Present January 1, 2018 sea ice VOLUME is ~14,300 cubic kilometers, ~9000 cubic kilometers LESS than the 1980-89 average for January 1.
To date, Arctic sea ice extent is the LEAST of any year measured by ~ 340,000square kilometers:
http://iwantsomeproof.com/extimg/sie_nsidc_six_week_detail.png
07-02-2018 21:27
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
After the small warm front (re-inforced by the hot siberian front) moved over the North Pole & onward, High Arctic FAB
(2) has cooled, down to 9degC over average. Warm fronts are in the High Arctic, but at the southern borders. FAB
(2) now extends to 175 straight days. Yes, even AGW is becoming increasingly.... not gay, neither ac/dc. AGW denier liar whiners oughta liak dat!
Edited on 07-02-2018 21:28
11-02-2018 23:38
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
litesong wrote: Posted the following in the wrong thread. FAB
(2), which is NOT gay, or ac/dc, belongs here:
Tho FAB
(2) has recently retreated from its highest temperature anomaly during its near 185 straight days of life, FAB
(2) might up its temperature in the days ahead.
Yes, FAB
(2) has bounced up to ~12degC over average temperature.
Edited on 11-02-2018 23:43
12-02-2018 01:19
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
litesong wrote:
litesong wrote: Posted the following in the wrong thread. FAB
(2), which is NOT gay, or ac/dc, belongs here:
Tho FAB
(2) has recently retreated from its highest temperature anomaly during its near 185 straight days of life, FAB
(2) might up its temperature in the days ahead.
Much cold is on most of Canada & Archipelago, eastern U.S. & much of Greenland. However, FAB
(2) has bounced up to ~12degC over average temperature.
17-02-2018 17:41
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
litesong wrote: After 3 weeks this vast system of similar temperature still exists.....the system no longer extends to the U.S. border, & withdraws to the higher latitudes of Canada. Tho still heavy on Greenland, the system is sporadically thinned in the High Arctic, affected by FAB
(2) which is still at 12degC above its normal average. The system also, has become spotty in its southern latitudes over Asia.
The vast system continues to thin at the North Pole & High Arctic. A warm front of similar temperature now exists from Spain all the way north of the UK & even over ocean waters west of Norway. Altho cooling a bit northwest of Norway, it pumps heat to the North Pole & should cleave in half the vast system of similar temperature that has existed for a month & extended from all of Canada to the North Pole & on to China & countries south of Russia.
Of course, it is strong excess AGW heat like this one that keeps High Arctic temperatures so dramatically AND CONTINUALLY elevated. FAB
(2), which is defined CONTINUOUS excess AGW temperatures above the 80th parallel, now has extended to almost 195 straight days. Soon FAB
(2) will have extended its life to 5 TIMES the straight days of over-temperature days occurring in late 1950's & early 1960's. Yes, FAB
(2) is certainly NOT GAY OR EVEN BISEXUAL. It is HOT THO & is STRAIGHT DAYS of High Arctic HEAT. It does appear that FAB
(2) will reach 200 days of STRAIGHT existence, the second time since 2015, that High Arctic temperatures have extended for 200 STRAIGHT DAYS OF EXISTENCE. Previous to 2015, back to the late 1950's, NO 200 DAY PERIODS of over-temperature STRAIGHT DAYS have occurred over the entire High Arctic. Even, 100 STRAIGHT DAY PERIODS of over-temperatures were very rare & ONLY IN THE LATTER PORTION OF THE PERIOD MENTIONED.
20-02-2018 18:08
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
litesong wrote: The vast system continues to thin at the North Pole & High Arctic. A warm front of similar temperature now exists from Spain all the way north of the UK & even over ocean waters west of Norway. Altho cooling a bit northwest of Norway, it pumps heat to the North Pole & should cleave in half the vast system of similar temperature that has existed for a month & extended from all of Canada to the North Pole & on to China & countries south of Russia. It does appear that FAB
(2) will reach 200 days of STRAIGHT existence, the second time since 2015, that High Arctic temperatures have extended for 200 STRAIGHT DAYS OF EXISTENCE.
The warm system from Spain, pumping heat all the way to the North Pole stengthens its predicted split of the long vast system of similar temperature between Canada to the North Pole & on to China. Yes, the split should totally take place at its most UNPREDICTABLE spot, the North Pole. FAB
(2), which has been fluctuating up & down, between 9degC to 12degC over temperature, should escalate in temperature in the near future, due to the Spanish heat, pumped to the North Pole. Matter of fact, there is a possibility that at least a small region near the North Pole should climb to 30+degF over temperature.
21-02-2018 23:15
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
litesong wrote:
litesong wrote: The vast system continues to thin at the North Pole & High Arctic. A warm front of similar temperature now exists from Spain all the way north of the UK & even over ocean waters west of Norway. Altho cooling a bit northwest of Norway, it pumps heat to the North Pole & should cleave in half the vast system of similar temperature that has existed for a month & extended from all of Canada to the North Pole & on to China & countries south of Russia. It does appear that FAB
(2) will reach 200 days of STRAIGHT existence, the second time since 2015, that High Arctic temperatures have extended for 200 STRAIGHT DAYS OF EXISTENCE.
The warm system from Spain, pumping heat all the way to the North Pole stengthens its predicted split of the long vast system of similar temperature between Canada to the North Pole & on to China. Yes, the split should totally take place at its most UNPREDICTABLE spot, the North Pole. FAB
(2), which has been fluctuating up & down, between 9degC to 12degC over temperature, should escalate in temperature in the near future, due to the Spanish heat, pumped to the North Pole. Matter of fact, there is a possibility that at least a small region near the North Pole should climb to 30+degF over temperature.
The vast system of similar temperature has now split....split by the smaller system of similar temperature(both systems of similar temperature have.... different temperatures) that has pumped warm air from Spain (& parts south), all the way to the North Pole. As such, FAB
(2) which has fluctuated, has now sizzled to 15degC over its average temperature. Even more sizzling is the North Pole, which is now 45+degF over average temperature & may hit 50degF over average.
Edited on 21-02-2018 23:26
22-02-2018 05:03
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
litesong wrote:
litesong wrote:
litesong wrote: The vast system continues to thin at the North Pole & High Arctic. A warm front of similar temperature now exists from Spain all the way north of the UK & even over ocean waters west of Norway. Altho cooling a bit northwest of Norway, it pumps heat to the North Pole & should cleave in half the vast system of similar temperature that has existed for a month & extended from all of Canada to the North Pole & on to China & countries south of Russia. It does appear that FAB
(2) will reach 200 days of STRAIGHT existence, the second time since 2015, that High Arctic temperatures have extended for 200 STRAIGHT DAYS OF EXISTENCE.
The warm system from Spain, pumping heat all the way to the North Pole stengthens its predicted split of the long vast system of similar temperature between Canada to the North Pole & on to China. Yes, the split should totally take place at its most UNPREDICTABLE spot, the North Pole. FAB
(2), which has been fluctuating up & down, between 9degC to 12degC over temperature, should escalate in temperature in the near future, due to the Spanish heat, pumped to the North Pole. Matter of fact, there is a possibility that at least a small region near the North Pole should climb to 30+degF over temperature.
The vast system of similar temperature has now split....split by the smaller system of similar temperature(both systems of similar temperature have.... different temperatures) that has pumped warm air from Spain (& parts south), all the way to the North Pole. As such, FAB
(2) which has fluctuated, has now sizzled to 15degC over its average temperature. Even more sizzling is the North Pole, which is now 45+degF over average temperature & may hit 50degF over average.
Heat pours into the High Arctic with reports of 60degF over-temperatures. North Pole may thaw, while the warm system pushes cold Arctic weather to the south:
https://mashable.com/2018/02/20/temperature-above-freezing-top-greenland-europe-cold-snap-snow/#vS9dYE9N3qqg
Edited on 22-02-2018 05:04
23-02-2018 14:54
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
litesong wrote:
litesong wrote: The warm system from Spain, pumping heat all the way to the North Pole stengthens its predicted split of the long vast system of similar temperature between Canada to the North Pole & on to China. Yes, the split should totally take place at its most UNPREDICTABLE spot, the North Pole. FAB
(2), which has been fluctuating up & down, between 9degC to 12degC over temperature, should escalate in temperature in the near future, due to the Spanish heat, pumped to the North Pole. Matter of fact, there is a possibility that at least a small region near the North Pole should climb to 30+degF over temperature.
The vast system of similar temperature has now split....split by the smaller system of similar temperature(both systems of similar temperature have.... different temperatures) that has pumped warm air from Spain (& parts south), all the way to the North Pole. As such, FAB
(2) which has fluctuated, has now sizzled to 15degC over its average temperature. Even more sizzling is the North Pole, which is now 45+degF over average temperature & may hit 50degF over average.
Heat pours into the High Arctic with reports of 60degF over-temperatures. North Pole may thaw, while the warm system pushes cold Arctic weather to the south:
https://mashable.com/2018/02/20/temperature-above-freezing-top-greenland-europe-cold-snap-snow/#vS9dYE9N3qqg
Eastern Atlantic Ocean heat from west of Spain (& even northwest Africa), keep pumping into the North Pole. FAB
(2) has powered up to 17+ degC over-temperature, averaged on almost 4million square kilometers of the High Arctic. Temps in Europe are lower than at the North Pole. AGW keeps heating the Earth.
https://mashable.com/2018/02/22/north-pole-temperatures-above-freezing-europe-deep-freeze/#Jmd9zqdyqOq4

At no point in latter February have High Arctic average temperatures over almost 4 million square kilometers ever been this high, over the last half century & longer.
Edited on 23-02-2018 15:30
24-02-2018 04:03
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
Several compiled posts belong in this thread:
The vast system continues to thin at the North Pole & High Arctic. A warm front of similar temperature now exists from Spain all the way north of the UK & even over ocean waters west of Norway. Altho cooling a bit northwest of Norway, it pumps heat to the North Pole & should cleave in half the vast system of similar temperature that has existed for a month & extended from all of Canada to the North Pole & on to China & countries south of Russia. It does appear that FAB
(2) will reach 200 days of STRAIGHT existence, the second time since 2015, that High Arctic temperatures have extended for 200 STRAIGHT DAYS OF EXISTENCE. The warm system from Spain, pumping heat all the way to the North Pole stengthens its predicted split of the long vast system of similar temperature between Canada to the North Pole & on to China. Yes, the split should totally take place at its most UNPREDICTABLE spot, the North Pole. FAB
(2), which has been fluctuating up & down, between 9degC to 12degC over temperature, should escalate in temperature in the near future, due to the Spanish heat, pumped to the North Pole. Matter of fact, there is a possibility that at least a small region near the North Pole should climb to 30degF over temperature. The vast system of similar temperature has now split....split by the smaller system of similar temperature(both systems of similar temperature have.... different temperatures) that has pumped warm air from Spain (& parts south), all the way to the North Pole. As such, FAB
(2) which has fluctuated, has now sizzled to 15degC over its average temperature. Even more sizzling is the North Pole, which is now 45+degF over average temperature & may hit 50degF over average. Heat pours into the High Arctic with reports of 60degF over-temperatures. North Pole may thaw, while the warm system pushes cold Arctic weather to the south:
https://mashable.com/2018/02/20/temperature-above-freezing-top-greenland-europe-cold-snap-snow/#vS9dYE9N3qqg
No time over the last half century(plus) has High Arctic temperatures averaged over 4 million square kilometers, been this high in latter February.
All the above has occurred, during a solar TSI that has been languid for half a century & low for 11+ years(including a 3+ year period setting a 100 year record low TSI). For 41 straight years, Earth temperatures have been over the 20th century average & for 395+ straight months, Earth temperatures have been over the 20th century average.

High Arctic average temperature on nearly 4million square kilometers, FAB
(2), has leaped to 20degC over-temperature, now tied with latter 2016 for the highest average temperature over the past 58 years on that icy region. A "hot spot" within the FAB
(2), is about a fifth the size of FAB
(2).... ~ 800,000 square kilometers. That huge area is 50+degF over-temperature. It is NOT a spot but an area 500+ miles by 500+ miles...... absolutely stunning. FAB
(2) is now approaching 200 straight days of over-temperature. FAB
(2) is very broad & now FAB
(2) is hanging, very very high over-average.
25-02-2018 06:35
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
Present High Arctic Berserker(2), or PHAB(2), or FAB
(2) has risen to its highest temperature(20degC over average) since mid-October of last year, 2017, when the High Arctic still had heat from the summer. Yet, the Highest latitudes of the High Arctic have been in fall & winter darkness for 5+ months. No year in the satellite record has had such a leap in High Arctic(4 million square kilometers) temperature, as has just occurred, during this, the coldest period of the long High Arctic darkness. Only excess AGW heat, pumped from southern climates can account for such heat, that is powering High Arctic temperatures to such a massive 20degC departure from the norm.
Edited on 25-02-2018 06:45
25-02-2018 18:25
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
From another website (not like this webcyst):
Alexander555 February 24, 2018, 10:35:58 PM
There is even a little spot(on the Arctic) that's 30 degree C warmer than average.
/////
litesong wrote:
Your catch came right after(?) a much larger area of 30degC over-temperature which covered about 500+miles by 500+miles area, or ~ 1/6th the size of the High Arctic.
//////
litesong continues:
Right now, another huge "hot spot" is on the North Pole region:
http://cci-reanalyzer.org/wx/DailySummary/#t2anom
It might be nearly as large in area as the previous "hot spot", which was ~ 500+miles by 500+ miles, in size. Again, it appears, tho heat pours into the High Arctic from various southern regions, that the main driver of present High Arctic heat is coming from eastern Atlantic & western european heat, originating as far south as Northwestern Africa & Spain. This "north to the North Pole diversion of heat", hasn't proceeded into europe (as normal?), & has allowed siberian cold to engulf almost all of europe.
Edited on 25-02-2018 18:32
27-02-2018 14:15
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
litesong wrote:
litesong wrote: Present High Arctic Berserker(2), or PHAB(2), or FAB
(2) has risen to its highest temperature(20degC over average) since mid-October of last year, 2017, when the High Arctic still had heat from the summer.

The departure from normal High Arctic temperatures(Present High Arctic Berserker(2) or FAB
(2) ), soars to 21+degC over temperature, breaking the record set in 2016, which busted High Arctic over-temperatures wide open. The largest factor in this excursion from normality, is the huge "hot spot" plastered on the North Pole, which isn't a spot, but a large state-sized heater, 30degC over-temperature. Within this "hot spot" could easily be heat that is 30+degC over-temperature, possibly 60degF over-temperature heat.
The FAB
(2) heat, tossed into the High Arctic from southern climes, is now being radiated to space from its record 6-7degC (?) over-temperature, compared to other over-temperature records at the High Arctic's coldest February time. The vast cold region, which has been on almost all of Canada & presently extended to western continental U.S. & Alaska during these winter months, is extending into the High Arctic. Already sharp temperature drops in FAB
(2) are occurring. Further FAB
(2) temperature drops can be expected, possibly even with the potential to extinguish FAB
(2)! The contention between cold fronts generally caused by 5+ months of complete darkness, & warm north-driven fronts invading the High Arctic is on-going.
Edited on 27-02-2018 14:18
01-03-2018 00:39
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
litesong wrote: FAB
(2) has plunged 10degC, which I stated on other threads could happen. However, it is still 11 degC over average. We'll see if further drops occur, that could endanger FAB
(2) life, as it nears its 200th day of existence.
Yes, continued temperature drops now occur, with FAB
(2) dropping more, this time to "only" 8degC above average. Again, possible further temp decreases may continue.
Edited on 01-03-2018 00:40
09-03-2018 11:30
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
litesong wrote: Yes, continued temperature drops now occur, with FAB
(2) dropping more, this time to "only" 8degC above average. Again, possible further temp decreases may continue.
Much Northern Hemisphere heat has withdrawn to lower latitudes. Powerful continuous heat extends from Northern Africa & southern europe to countries south of russia, all the way to Asia, & China. Strong heat is on Canada to eastern U.S. As such, only smaller heat is on the High Arctic. Vast cold is on siberia, & russia. The high Greenland Ice Sheet, is now -50degC to -60degC. Thus, FAB
(2) slips to only 4degC over the average. Much heat inflow to the High Arctic, from the south is cut off, altho FAB
(2) has passed 200 straight days of existence. At this time FAB
(2) temperature is vulnerable to dropping even further, such that FAB
(2) could end.
Edited on 09-03-2018 11:32
10-03-2018 01:54
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
[b]litesong wrote: FAB
(2) slips to only 4degC over the average. FAB
(2) temperature is vulnerable to dropping even further, such that FAB
(2) could end.
As such, FAB
(2) now slips to 3degC. FAB
(2) temperature is vulnerable to dropping even further....
11-03-2018 18:15
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
litesong wrote:
[b]litesong wrote: FAB
(2) slips to only 4degC over the average. FAB
(2) temperature is vulnerable to dropping even further, such that FAB
(2) could end.
As such, FAB
(2) now slips to 3degC. FAB
(2) temperature is vulnerable to dropping even further....
FAB
(2) is at the lowest temperature that the High Arctic has been in over 1 year. FAB
(2) now sinks to 2.5degC over average High Arctic temperature for this time period. FAB
(2) temperature is vulnerable to dropping even further....
04-04-2018 22:13
LucianoA
☆☆☆☆☆
(4)
climate scientist wrote:
See here for an interesting article about what is happening in the Arctic this year:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/nov/14/why-sea-reluctant-freeze-arctic-climate-weatherwatch

To summarise, the average temperature at Barrow in October 2016 is only -1 deg C, whereas the long-term average in October is around -8 deg C. Data show that in September 2016, the sea-ice matched the 2007 record for being the lowest sea-ice extent on record.

Very low summer sea-ice in the Arctic seems to have implications for northern hemisphere winter weather patterns, owing to a shift in the polar vortex. See this article in Nature Climate Change here: http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate3136.html

The late winter (February) polar vortex has been shifting away from the North American continent and closer to the Eurasian continent over the past three decades. The authors found that there is a larger polar vortex over Eurasia and a smaller polar vortex over North America during very low Arctic sea-ice years. This has likely led to increased snowfall over the Eurasian continent over the last three decades, and has implications for future Eurasian winter weather, given that the September sea-ice minimum in the Arctic is predicted to decrease further.


DIRE WARNING FROM EARTH!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6NrjShiXqI&feature=youtu.be
04-04-2018 22:14
LucianoA
☆☆☆☆☆
(4)
DIRE WARNING FROM EARTH!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6NrjShiXqI&feature=youtu.be
04-04-2018 22:45
Jeffvw
☆☆☆☆☆
(27)
DIRE WARNING FROM EARTH!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6NrjShiXqI&feature=youtu.be

There have always been droughts, floods, storms and cyclical climate throughout history. Showing that there are currently problems is meaningless. It just means that bad things happen. They always have and always will. Controlling CO2 emissions will have no impact on that.

If you can show me that the earth was paradisaical prior to the 1950's (before CO2 emissions got really high), then I will get concerned. In reality the climate is cyclical. Here's an example where the Northwest passage was reported to be open in 1903:



It was over 100 years before it recently opened up again.
05-04-2018 00:53
LucianoA
☆☆☆☆☆
(4)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6NrjShiXqI
05-04-2018 00:54
LucianoA
☆☆☆☆☆
(4)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6NrjShiXqI
05-04-2018 15:27
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(979)
LucianoA wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6NrjShiXqI


It doesn't matter how many times you post the same video. You could post it 37 times and it would still be the same crock it is now.

1. All humans will be dead from global warming in ten years. We are quickly heading towards the hottest time in the last BILLION years. HAHAHAHAHAHA!

2. Insurance companies paying more for claims payouts is proof of more natural disasters? Wake up dumbass! It's the insurance companies cashing in on the global warming hoax in the form of higher premiums.

3. Citing a drought in a relatively tiny section of the southern tip of South Africa is not proof of global warming, nor is any drought anywhere! 85% of Southern Africa is NOT in ANY drought.

Din't have time to watch the entire horror show, but couldn't let it go without a couple quick comments.
Attached image:

08-04-2018 22:49
Wake
★★★★★
(3353)
LucianoA wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6NrjShiXqI


That is almost entirely bunk. If global warming and sea level changes were actually occurring there would be LESS drought and not more.

The glaciers that are melting are almost entirely on Greenland and as they melt away they have farmed land underneath them that was farmed before the little ice age occurred.

Contrary to the nutty True Believers talking points it wasn't called Greenland because of some sort of advertising gimmick to attract more colonists, it was called Greenland because it had a LOT of arable land.

At this point there is STILL not as much land as there had been before the little ice age.

Can you tell us why you are looking for pro-global warming sites when now that Obama is out of office and the threat of losing research grants for not toeing the man-made global warming line is gone that tens of thousands of scientists are telling us what absolute crap the idea is?

Since you could NOT have opened youTube on that one site without having a dozen others stating the exactly opposite why did you select that one specific site?

The Oregon Petition has over 31,000 degreed scientists who deny that there is ANY man-made global warming. Over 9,000 of them are PhD's and at least three are Nobel Prize winners. You can find a youTube video with at least 25 NASA scientists explaining how the NASA command had purposely misrepresented the threats and size of "climate change" and that it is well within the boundaries of NORMAL climate variations.

I will ask you again - WHY did you present this video as if it contained any valid information?
13-04-2018 01:56
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(648)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6NrjShiXqI
Reposted as a link so it's easier for everyone to watch. It's worth watching, if you just woke up and realized that Global Warming will kill us all.

The idjits of course don't agree. And there is nothing that will change their opinion, since facts don't matter. If you say it's getting hotter, they say you're crazy, because we can't really tell how hot it is. And don't dare show them any scientific evidence as fact, because they don't believe scientists who earn a living investigating climate change. [they think they are on Obama's payroll, still, and are too stupid to realize that their boss has changed]

The idjits will go to their grave cursing God. Those who know God will be ok, as soon as the idjits are dealt with, naturally.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~
13-04-2018 02:12
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(648)
Wake wrote:
LucianoA wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6NrjShiXqI


That is almost entirely bunk. If global warming and sea level changes were actually occurring there would be LESS drought and not more.


Yo dude, heat causes drought. It also cause excessive precipitation. Depends on what the landscape looks like. Take for example, the Mohave Desert, which borders a huge mountain range, which blocks moisture from the ocean. It's so dry there, that you can see the rain falling from the clouds, but it doesn't reach the ground. That's heat, and a lack of humidity.
Wake wrote:

The glaciers that are melting are almost entirely on Greenland and as they melt away they have farmed land underneath them that was farmed before the little ice age occurred.

Contrary to the nutty True Believers talking points it wasn't called Greenland because of some sort of advertising gimmick to attract more colonists, it was called Greenland because it had a LOT of arable land.

At this point there is STILL not as much land as there had been before the little ice age.


Truth is, you have no idea why they called it Greenland. Your made up reasoning is the same as theirs.
Wake wrote:

Can you tell us why you are looking for pro-global warming sites when now that Obama is out of office and the threat of losing research grants for not toeing the man-made global warming line is gone that tens of thousands of scientists are telling us what absolute crap the idea is?

Since you could NOT have opened youTube on that one site without having a dozen others stating the exactly opposite why did you select that one specific site?

The Oregon Petition has over 31,000 degreed scientists who deny that there is ANY man-made global warming. Over 9,000 of them are PhD's and at least three are Nobel Prize winners. You can find a youTube video with at least 25 NASA scientists explaining how the NASA command had purposely misrepresented the threats and size of "climate change" and that it is well within the boundaries of NORMAL climate variations.


The Oregon Petition was discredited as soon as it came out. Nothing but a bunch of non-climate scientists and other wannabes.
Wake wrote:

I will ask you again - WHY did you present this video as if it contained any valid information?


I don't know. Maybe because she/he thought people should know what's going on. The real question is, why do you continue to spout your nonsense in here? Don't you have better things to do, than harass people who are concerned about the future of humanity? No, we're not trying to mess up capitalism. We just want to give our grandchildren a chance. Is that too much to ask for?


~*~ GreenMan ~*~
13-04-2018 02:36
Wake
★★★★★
(3353)
GreenMan wrote:
Wake wrote:
LucianoA wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6NrjShiXqI


That is almost entirely bunk. If global warming and sea level changes were actually occurring there would be LESS drought and not more.


Yo dude, heat causes drought. It also cause excessive precipitation. Depends on what the landscape looks like. Take for example, the Mohave Desert, which borders a huge mountain range, which blocks moisture from the ocean. It's so dry there, that you can see the rain falling from the clouds, but it doesn't reach the ground. That's heat, and a lack of humidity.


Apparently you like to talk to hear the sound of one hand clapping. Heat doesn't cause "drought" - lack of rain does. With the change in the climate more and more precipitation is occurring around the Sahara region and more farming is occurring. Not to be too poignant but I ain't your Dude.

GreenMan wrote:
Wake wrote:
The glaciers that are melting are almost entirely on Greenland and as they melt away they have farmed land underneath them that was farmed before the little ice age occurred.

Contrary to the nutty True Believers talking points it wasn't called Greenland because of some sort of advertising gimmick to attract more colonists, it was called Greenland because it had a LOT of arable land.

At this point there is STILL not as much land as there had been before the little ice age.


Truth is, you have no idea why they called it Greenland. Your made up reasoning is the same as theirs.


The "truth is" that AS THE GLACIERS MELT THEY FIND THAT THE LAND BENEATH HAS BEEN FARMED. Is that like too difficult for a "yo dude" to understand?

GreenMan wrote:
Wake wrote:
The Oregon Petition has over 31,000 degreed scientists who deny that there is ANY man-made global warming. Over 9,000 of them are PhD's and at least three are Nobel Prize winners. You can find a youTube video with at least 25 NASA scientists explaining how the NASA command had purposely misrepresented the threats and size of "climate change" and that it is well within the boundaries of NORMAL climate variations.


The Oregon Petition was discredited as soon as it came out. Nothing but a bunch of non-climate scientists and other wannabes.


So Dr. Roy Spencer, the head of the NASA satellite weather program is a climate wannabe huh? What credentials do you have for judging ANYONE. What degree? Where do you work? What experience do you have? And while you're at it - what University awards a degree in Climate Science?

Exactly where do jackasses like you come from? You read "Skeptical Science" and think that you actually have knowledge about something. Too bad that they have no qualifications just like you.

GreenMan wrote:
Wake wrote:

I will ask you again - WHY did you present this video as if it contained any valid information?


I don't know. Maybe because she/he thought people should know what's going on. The real question is, why do you continue to spout your nonsense in here? Don't you have better things to do, than harass people who are concerned about the future of humanity? No, we're not trying to mess up capitalism. We just want to give our grandchildren a chance. Is that too much to ask for?


Exactly WHO are you kidding? If you had the slightest interest in the future of this planet you'd actually go to college and get a PhD in atmospheric physics. But you're not bright enough to do so and so you just shoot your mouth off as Mark Twain put it: "people's beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second-hand, and without examination, from authorities who have not themselves examined the questions at issue but have taken them at second-hand from other non-examiners, whose opinions about them were not worth a brass farthing."

This is a world for people who do and not for people to like to talk. So stop with the "Greenman" as if you had the slightest clue about environmentalism or the climate which ISN'T changing.
13-04-2018 12:31
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(648)
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Wake wrote:
LucianoA wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6NrjShiXqI


That is almost entirely bunk. If global warming and sea level changes were actually occurring there would be LESS drought and not more.


Yo dude, heat causes drought. It also cause excessive precipitation. Depends on what the landscape looks like. Take for example, the Mohave Desert, which borders a huge mountain range, which blocks moisture from the ocean. It's so dry there, that you can see the rain falling from the clouds, but it doesn't reach the ground. That's heat, and a lack of humidity.


Apparently you like to talk to hear the sound of one hand clapping. Heat doesn't cause "drought" - lack of rain does. With the change in the climate more and more precipitation is occurring around the Sahara region and more farming is occurring. Not to be too poignant but I ain't your Dude.

GreenMan wrote:
Wake wrote:
The glaciers that are melting are almost entirely on Greenland and as they melt away they have farmed land underneath them that was farmed before the little ice age occurred.

Contrary to the nutty True Believers talking points it wasn't called Greenland because of some sort of advertising gimmick to attract more colonists, it was called Greenland because it had a LOT of arable land.

At this point there is STILL not as much land as there had been before the little ice age.


Truth is, you have no idea why they called it Greenland. Your made up reasoning is the same as theirs.


The "truth is" that AS THE GLACIERS MELT THEY FIND THAT THE LAND BENEATH HAS BEEN FARMED. Is that like too difficult for a "yo dude" to understand?

GreenMan wrote:
Wake wrote:
The Oregon Petition has over 31,000 degreed scientists who deny that there is ANY man-made global warming. Over 9,000 of them are PhD's and at least three are Nobel Prize winners. You can find a youTube video with at least 25 NASA scientists explaining how the NASA command had purposely misrepresented the threats and size of "climate change" and that it is well within the boundaries of NORMAL climate variations.


The Oregon Petition was discredited as soon as it came out. Nothing but a bunch of non-climate scientists and other wannabes.


So Dr. Roy Spencer, the head of the NASA satellite weather program is a climate wannabe huh? What credentials do you have for judging ANYONE. What degree? Where do you work? What experience do you have? And while you're at it - what University awards a degree in Climate Science?

Exactly where do jackasses like you come from? You read "Skeptical Science" and think that you actually have knowledge about something. Too bad that they have no qualifications just like you.

GreenMan wrote:
Wake wrote:

I will ask you again - WHY did you present this video as if it contained any valid information?


I don't know. Maybe because she/he thought people should know what's going on. The real question is, why do you continue to spout your nonsense in here? Don't you have better things to do, than harass people who are concerned about the future of humanity? No, we're not trying to mess up capitalism. We just want to give our grandchildren a chance. Is that too much to ask for?


Exactly WHO are you kidding? If you had the slightest interest in the future of this planet you'd actually go to college and get a PhD in atmospheric physics. But you're not bright enough to do so and so you just shoot your mouth off as Mark Twain put it: "people's beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second-hand, and without examination, from authorities who have not themselves examined the questions at issue but have taken them at second-hand from other non-examiners, whose opinions about them were not worth a brass farthing."

This is a world for people who do and not for people to like to talk. So stop with the "Greenman" as if you had the slightest clue about environmentalism or the climate which ISN'T changing.


That was a good Mark Twain quote, and he was right, about you, whose only research is reading someone else's opinion. What he said doesn't apply to me, because I did the research. I examined the evidence myself. I built a Climate Model that proves beyond a doubt that Global Warming is Real.

My opinion is that there is nothing we can do to stop the heating that is definitely coming. So our best path is thinking survival when the world turns upside down. Just a figure of speech, but a shifting of the axis is actually predicted to occur, along with the heating. I think the eruption is going to be so powerful that we actually shift a little, or even a lot. If Antarctica moves just a little from the South Pole, then it's mass would have a tendency to pull the earth into an eccentric spin until it ends up around the equator. Of course, when that happens, all the ice will melt very quickfully.

Let's hope that in a few lifetimes, because I'm not ready for that.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~
13-04-2018 14:49
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1115)
GreenMan wrote:

That was a good Mark Twain quote, and he was right, about you, whose only research is reading someone else's opinion. What he said doesn't apply to me, because I did the research. I examined the evidence myself. I built a Climate Model that proves beyond a doubt that Global Warming is Real.

My opinion is that there is nothing we can do to stop the heating that is definitely coming. So our best path is thinking survival when the world turns upside down. Just a figure of speech, but a shifting of the axis is actually predicted to occur, along with the heating. I think the eruption is going to be so powerful that we actually shift a little, or even a lot. If Antarctica moves just a little from the South Pole, then it's mass would have a tendency to pull the earth into an eccentric spin until it ends up around the equator. Of course, when that happens, all the ice will melt very quickfully.

Let's hope that in a few lifetimes, because I'm not ready for that.


Publish your climate model here. We can have a look at it.
Page 19 of 20<<<17181920>





Join the debate Arctic waters not freezing:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
"Freakishly Warm" Arctic Weather Has Scientists Reconsidering Worst-Case Scenarios on Climate1104-06-2018 18:50
Jennifer Francis: Crazy Weather and the Arctic Meltdown1726-05-2018 23:39
Radio Ecoshock: Arctic Meltdown – 50 shades of panic121-05-2018 06:29
Arctic Amplification219-05-2018 21:31
Arctic ice still rapidly decreasing10330-03-2018 23:34
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


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