Remember me
▼ Content

Arctic waters not freezing



Page 14 of 20<<<1213141516>>>
23-03-2017 19:32
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1673)
Wake wrote:
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.

How amusing. You don't actually know what calculus is, do you? The paper contains no calculus, just a bit a of straightforward arithmetic.

Here it is again:

www.biocab.org/Overlapping_Absorption_Bands.pdf

No integrals, no differentiation, so no calculus.
24-03-2017 01:14
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
litesong wrote:
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.

Not mentioned earlier.... during this time of year, when yearly sea ice maximum variations are reduced..... 2017 Arctic sea ice maximum extent was well LESS THAN 2 million square kilometers than for the year 1979.
24-03-2017 05:43
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
litesong wrote:
litesong wrote:
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.

Not mentioned earlier.... during this time of year, when yearly sea ice maximum variations are reduced..... 2017 Arctic sea ice maximum extent was well LESS THAN 2 million square kilometers than for the year 1979.

2017 Arctic sea ice extent is so low as of Mar. 22, that 1980 DECADE average sea ice extent was NOT as low until MAY 9. Beyond that tidbit was this largebit:
At these divergent times WHEN ARCTIC SEA ICE EXTENT WAS THE SAME, 1980 decade average VOLUME WAS 30,000+ cubic kilometers, while 2017 VOLUME is 18,600 cubic kilometers.
Edited on 24-03-2017 06:21
24-03-2017 16:44
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
litesong ,

http://www.livescience.com/4992-volcanoes-erupt-beneath-arctic-ice.html

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130925102833.htm

It is possible that the waste heat that is being dumped into the atmosphere and any waters flowing north have started glacial melting that increases tectonic activity that allows for more volcanic eruptions and hydrothermal vents.


Jim
24-03-2017 17:25
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
james_ wrote:
litesong ......It is possible that....more volcanic eruptions and hydrothermal vents.

AGW denier liar whiners have been totin' da increased volcano theory fer a decade. They have NOT & can NOT make inroads to mainline Volcanology.
http://volcano.oregonstate.edu/has-there-been-increase-volcanic-activity-past-few-decades
AGW denier liar whiners have tried to do the same about extra-terrestrial mechanisms increasing Earth warming. Mainline astronomy doesn't fall for the con, either.
Edited on 24-03-2017 17:57
24-03-2017 22:41
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
litesong wrote:
litesong wrote:
litesong wrote:
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.

Not mentioned earlier.... during this time of year, when yearly sea ice maximum variations are reduced..... 2017 Arctic sea ice maximum extent was well LESS THAN 2 million square kilometers than for the year 1979.

2017 Arctic sea ice extent is so low as of Mar. 22, that 1980 DECADE average sea ice extent was NOT as low until MAY 9. Beyond that tidbit was this largebit:
At these divergent times WHEN ARCTIC SEA ICE EXTENT WAS THE SAME, 1980 decade average VOLUME WAS 30,000+ cubic kilometers, while 2017 VOLUME is 18,600 cubic kilometers.

The sun is an arcdegree off the horizon at the North Pole.However, at the Arctic Circle & places further south where there is sea ice, the sun is 15 to 20+ arcdegrees above the horizon & daily rising in the sky at nearly its fastest rate of the year, one of the reasons the Arctic is presently losing sea ice. As mentioned above, 2+million KM2 is water that was sea ice in 1979 & readily absorbing solar energy, instead of reflecting solar heat to space.
Yeah, already excess AGW energy has a strong feedback, causing more solar energy to be absorbed. Wherever there are downwellings in that 2 million extra KM2 of water, solar energy is transported to bottom of continental shelves or into the deep Arctic Ocean for storage.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-ocean-heat-content
From the article:
More than 90 percent of the warming that has happened on Earth over the past 50 years has occurred in the ocean. Recent studies estimate that warming of the upper oceans accounts for about 63 percent of the total increase in the amount of stored heat in the climate system from 1971 to 2010, and warming from 700 meters down to the ocean floor adds about another 30 percent. Though the atmosphere has been spared from the full extent of global warming for now, heat already stored in the ocean will eventually be released, committing Earth to additional warming in the future.
Edited on 24-03-2017 22:49
25-03-2017 17:04
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
[img][/img]
litesong wrote:
james_ wrote:
litesong ......It is possible that....more volcanic eruptions and hydrothermal vents.

AGW denier liar whiners have been totin' da increased volcano theory fer a decade. They have NOT & can NOT make inroads to mainline Volcanology.
http://volcano.oregonstate.edu/has-there-been-increase-volcanic-activity-past-few-decades
AGW denier liar whiners have tried to do the same about extra-terrestrial mechanisms increasing Earth warming. Mainline astronomy doesn't fall for the con, either.


litesong,
I think when you call people liars and whiners is nothing more than using abusive behavior to make your point. There was climate change before 1950. That is something that people who focus on CO2 dismiss because it does not support CO2 as driving Global Warming.

https://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/grnlndice.htm

And litesong, this graph is for you. It shows Global Warming did not start in 1950.
https://goo.gl/photos/7ZcEoSwyj4wbQMZe9
Edited on 25-03-2017 17:05
25-03-2017 17:11
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
james_ wrote: litesong,
That is something that people who focus on CO2 dismiss...

james is an AGW denier liar whiner.
25-03-2017 17:14
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
james is an AGW denier liar whiner.
Meanwhile:

litesong wrote:
litesong wrote:
litesong wrote:
litesong wrote:
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.

Not mentioned earlier.... during this time of year, when yearly sea ice maximum variations are reduced..... 2017 Arctic sea ice maximum extent was well LESS THAN 2 million square kilometers than for the year 1979.

2017 Arctic sea ice extent is so low as of Mar. 22, that 1980 DECADE average sea ice extent was NOT as low until MAY 9. Beyond that tidbit was this largebit:
At these divergent times WHEN ARCTIC SEA ICE EXTENT WAS THE SAME, 1980 decade average VOLUME WAS 30,000+ cubic kilometers, while 2017 VOLUME is 18,600 cubic kilometers.

The sun is an arcdegree off the horizon at the North Pole.However, at the Arctic Circle & places further south where there is sea ice, the sun is 15 to 20+ arcdegrees above the horizon & daily rising in the sky at nearly its fastest rate of the year, one of the reasons the Arctic is presently losing sea ice. As mentioned above, 2+million KM2 is water that was sea ice in 1979 & readily absorbing solar energy, instead of reflecting solar heat to space.
Yeah, already excess AGW energy has a strong feedback, causing more solar energy to be absorbed. Wherever there are downwellings in that 2 million extra KM2 of water, solar energy is transported to bottom of continental shelves or into the deep Arctic Ocean for storage.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-ocean-heat-content
From the article:
More than 90 percent of the warming that has happened on Earth over the past 50 years has occurred in the ocean. Recent studies estimate that warming of the upper oceans accounts for about 63 percent of the total increase in the amount of stored heat in the climate system from 1971 to 2010, and warming from 700 meters down to the ocean floor adds about another 30 percent. Though the atmosphere has been spared from the full extent of global warming for now, heat already stored in the ocean will eventually be released, committing Earth to additional warming in the future.
25-03-2017 17:37
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1431)
James,
Clearly you don't know the rules. You must not look at any point in history other than any portion after the industrial revolution that shows temps increasing. You must only look at current weather events that killed people within the last 50 years. When speaking of ice melt, whether it be in the arctic or your freezer, it is only due to the 1 degree of warming that has taken place globally in the past 100 years, and nothing else. When addressing the reliability of gov. reports, you cannot say that they may be skewed or corrupted, because we all know that government only wants what is best for the people. Please don't be stupid. Governments have no agenda. And last but not least, do not ever under any circumstances, suggest that a scientist might have slanted his findings in a certain direction in order to get funding for the next set of "findings".
Are we clear, Mr. James?

Edited on 25-03-2017 17:40
25-03-2017 19:16
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner gaslighter" gushed:
James,
Clearly you don't know the rules.

"gaslighter" correction:
james,
Clearly you don't know the rules. Thanks for joining me.
Edited on 25-03-2017 19:17
26-03-2017 21:45
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
@GasGuzzler & litesong
I'll give you two something to think about. And this has to do with warming around Greenland and it's adjacent waters. And if I remember correctly, between about 1910 and 1940 only in 1929 did Arctic sea ice reach Iceland. And between 1910 and 1945 the warming pretty much matches for between 1978 and 2010. This is one reason why I consider waste heat. That could help to accelerate natural Arctic warming.

Jim

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/03/120306-titanic-supermoon-moon-science-iceberg-sky-sink/
Edited on 26-03-2017 21:46
26-03-2017 21:49
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1431)
Jim!! You know I was kidding right??

I was giving you the rules from the other side of the argument. Yes, definitely look at all possible natural reasons for any natural change.
26-03-2017 21:57
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Jim!! You know I was kidding right??

I was giving you the rules from the other side of the argument. Yes, definitely look at all possible natural reasons for any natural change.


Hi,
I knew you were being sarcastic. With the early 1900's earthquakes might have allowed for hydrothermal vents http://www.divediscover.whoi.edu/ventcd/vent_discovery/

If anyone cares to, they can search earthquakes around Greenland. They keep increasing in quantity when there didn't used to be that many of them. With drawing a rectangular map, left click on it then move the cursor. That map can also be pulled down. Or just copy and paste the lins I provided which might be easier.
from 1920 - 1950 https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/map/#%7B%22autoUpdate%22%3A%5B%5D%2C%22basemap%22%3A%22grayscale%22%2C%22feed%22%3A%221490554511188%22%2C%22listFormat%22%3A%22default%22%2C%22mapposition%22%3A%5B%5B-70.84467263425277%2C-147.3046875%5D%2C%5B74.21198251594369%2C220.4296875%5D%5D%2C%22overlays%22%3A%5B%22plates%22%5D%2C%22restrictListToMap%22%3A%5B%22restrictListToMap%22%5D%2C%22search%22%3A%7B%22id%22%3A%221490554511188%22%2C%22name%22%3A%22Search%20Results%22%2C%22isSearch%22%3Atrue%2C%22params%22%3A%7B%22starttime%22%3A%221920-01-01%2000%3A00%3A00%22%2C%22endtime%22%3A%221950-01-01%2023%3A59%3A59%22%2C%22maxlatitude%22%3A84.541%2C%22minlatitude%22%3A59.922%2C%22maxlongitude%22%3A9.844%2C%22minlongitude%22%3A-74.531%2C%22minmagnitude%22%3A2.5%2C%22orderby%22%3A%22time%22%7D%7D%2C%22sort%22%3A%22newest%22%2C%22timezone%22%3A%22utc%22%2C%22viewModes%22%3A%5B%22list%22%2C%22map%22%5D%2C%22event%22%3Anull%7D

from 2000 - present
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/map/#%7B%22feed%22%3A%221490554605661%22%2C%22sort%22%3A%22newest%22%2C%22mapposition%22%3A%5B%5B57.362%2C-73.125%5D%2C%5B84.738%2C5.625%5D%5D%2C%22viewModes%22%3A%7B%22help%22%3Afalse%2C%22list%22%3Atrue%2C%22map%22%3Atrue%2C%22settings%22%3Afalse%7D%2C%22autoUpdate%22%3Afalse%2C%22search%22%3A%7B%22id%22%3A%221490554605661%22%2C%22name%22%3A%22Search%20Results%22%2C%22isSearch%22%3Atrue%2C%22params%22%3A%7B%22starttime%22%3A%222000-01-01%2000%3A00%3A00%22%2C%22endtime%22%3A%222017-03-26%2023%3A59%3A59%22%2C%22maxlatitude%22%3A84.738%2C%22minlatitude%22%3A57.362%2C%22maxlongitude%22%3A5.625%2C%22minlongitude%22%3A-73.125%2C%22minmagnitude%22%3A2.5%2C%22orderby%22%3A%22time%22%7D%7D%7D
Edited on 26-03-2017 21:58
02-04-2017 19:48
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
posted: 25-3-2017:
litesong wrote: 2+million KM2 is water that was sea ice in 1979 & readily absorbing solar energy, instead of reflecting solar heat to space.
Yeah, already excess AGW energy has a strong feedback, causing more solar energy to be absorbed. Wherever there are downwellings in that 2 million extra KM2 of water, solar energy is transported to bottom of continental shelves or into the deep Arctic Ocean for storage.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-ocean-heat-content.

Solar energy is now flooding into the Arctic & directly so. Presently, (old) average High Arctic temperatures should be ~ 3degC higher than their normal (old) wintertime lows, even with the sun low on the Arctic horizon & still remaining long nights. However, excess AGW energy in the High Arctic is causing High Arctic temperatures to be 7degC. above the (old) average temperature mark & 10degC over the (old) wintertime low.
Edited on 02-04-2017 19:51
03-04-2017 17:37
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
litesong wrote:
posted: 25-3-2017:
litesong wrote: 2+million KM2 is water that was sea ice in 1979 & readily absorbing solar energy, instead of reflecting solar heat to space.
Yeah, already excess AGW energy has a strong feedback, causing more solar energy to be absorbed. Wherever there are downwellings in that 2 million extra KM2 of water, solar energy is transported to bottom of continental shelves or into the deep Arctic Ocean for storage.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-ocean-heat-content.

Solar energy is now flooding into the Arctic & directly so. Presently, (old) average High Arctic temperatures should be ~ 3degC higher than their normal (old) wintertime lows, even with the sun low on the Arctic horizon & still remaining long nights. However, excess AGW energy in the High Arctic is causing High Arctic temperatures to be 7degC. above the (old) average temperature mark & 10degC over the (old) wintertime low.


litesong,
There is a reason why the warming in the first half of the 20th Century has been ignored, they say it was limited to a regional area. This is to suggest that if a fault line increases the heat it emits than the previous warming it allowed for was for a different reason ? That is what this link suggests. At the same time about all AGW warming graphs show that the earlier warming had the same effect on global warming as the latter warming has.
https://judithcurry.com/2013/04/10/historic-variations-in-arctic-sea-ice-part-ii-1920-1950/

And if you look at this graph where both rectangular boxes are the same size, the warming in the first half of the 20th Century happened faster.
https://goo.gl/photos/G81aEKgrnfWSfYQA8

edited to add; litesong, there is one thing that has been over looked so far.
When was the last time there were no glaciers on Greenland and is enough heat being dumped into the atmosphere to allow that to happen ?
Edited on 03-04-2017 17:54
03-04-2017 19:59
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
@litesong just wanted to let you know I was just providing more information. I am not sure if you know that before about 1910 that Arctic pack ice always extended to Iceland.
04-04-2017 00:10
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
James_ wrote:
@litesong just wanted to let you know I was just providing more information. I am not sure if you know that before about 1910 that Arctic pack ice always extended to Iceland.


Makes no difference whether he understands or not. He doesn't believe that the Maunder Minimum occurred.
04-04-2017 05:16
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
James_ wrote: There is a reason...

For 387(?) months, Earth temperatures have been over the 20th century average, altho solar TSI has been languid for decades, & solar TSI has been sub-average for 10 years (including 3+ years setting a 100 year record low).
2017 Arctic sea ice extent maximum did NOT reach 13.9 million square kilometers.... just remarkable.... the last three years have been below 14 million square kilometer mark. All other recorded years have been OVER 14 million KM2 & even to 15.5 million. 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...
It is good that AGW denier liar whiners double-down & triple-down(?) on their bets that Earth is returning to an ice age.
2017 Arctic sea ice maximum extent was well LESS THAN 2 million square kilometers than for the year 1979. 2017 Arctic sea ice extent is so low as of Mar. 22, that 1980 DECADE average sea ice extent was NOT as low until MAY 9. Beyond that tidbit was this largebit:
At these divergent times WHEN ARCTIC SEA ICE EXTENT WAS THE SAME, 1980 decade average VOLUME WAS 30,000+ cubic kilometers, while 2017 VOLUME was 18,600 cubic kilometers. As mentioned above, 2+million KM2 is water that was sea ice in 1979 & readily absorbing solar energy, instead of reflecting solar heat to space.
Yeah, already excess AGW energy has a strong feedback, causing more solar energy to be absorbed. Wherever there are downwellings in that 2 million extra KM2 of water, solar energy is transported to bottom of continental shelves or into the deep Arctic Ocean for storage.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-ocean-heat-content
From the article:
More than 90 percent of the warming that has happened on Earth over the past 50 years has occurred in the ocean. Recent studies estimate that warming of the upper oceans accounts for about 63 percent of the total increase in the amount of stored heat in the climate system from 1971 to 2010, and warming from 700 meters down to the ocean floor adds about another 30 percent. Though the atmosphere has been spared from the full extent of global warming for now, heat already stored in the ocean will eventually be released, committing Earth to additional warming in the future.
04-04-2017 17:34
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
litesong wrote:
James_ wrote: There is a reason...

For 387(?) months, Earth temperatures have been over the 20th century average, altho solar TSI has been languid for decades, & solar TSI has been sub-average for 10 years (including 3+ years setting a 100 year record low).
2017 Arctic sea ice extent maximum did NOT reach 13.9 million square kilometers.... just remarkable.... the last three years have been below 14 million square kilometer mark. All other recorded years have been OVER 14 million KM2 & even to 15.5 million. 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...
It is good that AGW denier liar whiners double-down & triple-down(?) on their bets that Earth is returning to an ice age.
2017 Arctic sea ice maximum extent was well LESS THAN 2 million square kilometers than for the year 1979. 2017 Arctic sea ice extent is so low as of Mar. 22, that 1980 DECADE average sea ice extent was NOT as low until MAY 9. Beyond that tidbit was this largebit:
At these divergent times WHEN ARCTIC SEA ICE EXTENT WAS THE SAME, 1980 decade average VOLUME WAS 30,000+ cubic kilometers, while 2017 VOLUME was 18,600 cubic kilometers. As mentioned above, 2+million KM2 is water that was sea ice in 1979 & readily absorbing solar energy, instead of reflecting solar heat to space.
Yeah, already excess AGW energy has a strong feedback, causing more solar energy to be absorbed. Wherever there are downwellings in that 2 million extra KM2 of water, solar energy is transported to bottom of continental shelves or into the deep Arctic Ocean for storage.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-ocean-heat-content
From the article:
More than 90 percent of the warming that has happened on Earth over the past 50 years has occurred in the ocean. Recent studies estimate that warming of the upper oceans accounts for about 63 percent of the total increase in the amount of stored heat in the climate system from 1971 to 2010, and warming from 700 meters down to the ocean floor adds about another 30 percent. Though the atmosphere has been spared from the full extent of global warming for now, heat already stored in the ocean will eventually be released, committing Earth to additional warming in the future.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130925102833.htm

Litesong,
All you mentioned were observations. Science is not based on estimates. Before co2 became the reason for Global Warming scientists had observed that deep ocean warming accurately predicted climatic warming 10 years in advance.

I find it interesting that your post suggests that I am denying Arctic warming when I posted that it's been happening for much longer than what a co2 supporter claims.

Jim
04-04-2017 17:59
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
GasGuzzler wrote:
James,
Clearly you don't know the rules. You must not look at any point in history other than any portion after the industrial revolution that shows temps increasing. You must only look at current weather events that killed people within the last 50 years. When speaking of ice melt, whether it be in the arctic or your freezer, it is only due to the 1 degree of warming that has taken place globally in the past 100 years, and nothing else. When addressing the reliability of gov. reports, you cannot say that they may be skewed or corrupted, because we all know that government only wants what is best for the people. Please don't be stupid. Governments have no agenda. And last but not least, do not ever under any circumstances, suggest that a scientist might have slanted his findings in a certain direction in order to get funding for the next set of "findings".
Are we clear, Mr. James?


Sir,
I do owe you an apology. Your article was well written and also quite accurate. I would have faired better if I hqd listened to you.
I hope you accept my sincere apologies.

And just for fun
http://dailycaller.com/2016/11/22/report-satellites-show-the-global-warming-pause-is-back/
04-04-2017 18:32
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
James_ wrote:
And just for fun
http://dailycaller.com/2016/11/22/report-satellites-show-the-global-warming-pause-is-back/


Now that article is dated 2016 and the "scientists" are screaming "extreme emergency" and "totally unprecedented".

Here we are in 2017 with totally the opposite and completely predictable reverse.

The insanity of the leftist so-called "scientists" is the only thing that is unprecedented.

So far Trump has cut their funding by a third and I'm thinking that it should have been two thirds. If scientists are willing to allow pure unadulterated balderdash to be presented as "science" then they need to see the results of their non-reactions.
04-04-2017 18:59
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1431)
James_ wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
James,
Clearly you don't know the rules. You must not look at any point in history other than any portion after the industrial revolution that shows temps increasing. You must only look at current weather events that killed people within the last 50 years. When speaking of ice melt, whether it be in the arctic or your freezer, it is only due to the 1 degree of warming that has taken place globally in the past 100 years, and nothing else. When addressing the reliability of gov. reports, you cannot say that they may be skewed or corrupted, because we all know that government only wants what is best for the people. Please don't be stupid. Governments have no agenda. And last but not least, do not ever under any circumstances, suggest that a scientist might have slanted his findings in a certain direction in order to get funding for the next set of "findings".
Are we clear, Mr. James?


Sir,
I do owe you an apology. Your article was well written and also quite accurate. I would have faired better if I hqd listened to you.
I hope you accept my sincere apologies.

And just for fun
http://dailycaller.com/2016/11/22/report-satellites-show-the-global-warming-pause-is-back/



Apology accepted. Thank you. I'm sure you will act more responsibly in the future.
04-04-2017 20:05
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
James_ wrote:All you mentioned were observations.

Stuff your shit, you AGW denier liar whiner. I observe a great percentage of AGW denier liar whiners are old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiners. AGW is reinforced by AGW scientists. If you don't believe them, u r here just to spread oil, energy, business & re-pubic-lick-un AGW denier liar whiner PR propaganda pablum & poop.
04-04-2017 20:24
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
James_ wrote:
@litesong just wanted to let you know I was just providing more information. I am not sure if you know that before about 1910 that Arctic pack ice always extended to Iceland.


@litesong,
I thought that you would like the above information as you referenced the Arctic ice pack. And I also acknowledged that AGW is happening.
This is where your attitude is uncalled for. It is sad to see where it is important to say co2 and not waste heat is important.
And yet if we were to understand how geologic activity has been warming our planet then we might be able to reduce the amount of heat being released from the sea floor.
As for human activity, we can't be sure of the impact/total net effect without realising the geological contributions first.

Jim

ls,
Minor point, all scientists agree that warming happens after an Ice Age. Your group is claiming that we should be cooling while heading to the next Ice Age.
What your group is over looking is that post Ice Age warming hasn't peaked yet.

@All,
What hasn't been shown yet is the difference between natural warming and what man's specific influence is.
What people like litesong miss is that the Northern Hemisphere is where the most heat is found. And when the Northern Hemisphere has an Ice Age Antarctica warms.
If hydrothermal vents along the fault line going to the Arctic are a primary source of heat, some might be able to be plugged To give an idea, might be why the Greenland Sea abyss and waters around Greenland are warming so much.
Edited on 04-04-2017 20:50
04-04-2017 22:10
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
James_ wrote:
@All,
What hasn't been shown yet is the difference between natural warming and what man's specific influence is.
What people like litesong miss is that the Northern Hemisphere is where the most heat is found. And when the Northern Hemisphere has an Ice Age Antarctica warms.
If hydrothermal vents along the fault line going to the Arctic are a primary source of heat, some might be able to be plugged To give an idea, might be why the Greenland Sea abyss and waters around Greenland are warming so much.


Surely the amount of heat energy given out by such geothermal activity is small compared to the general heat energy budget?

How much heat do you think is coming out and why is it not obvious in terms of boiling patches in the ocean? Or at least obvious in warm currents that would pop up on the surface.
04-04-2017 22:41
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
Tim the plumber wrote:
James_ wrote:
@All,
What hasn't been shown yet is the difference between natural warming and what man's specific influence is.
What people like litesong miss is that the Northern Hemisphere is where the most heat is found. And when the Northern Hemisphere has an Ice Age Antarctica warms.
If hydrothermal vents along the fault line going to the Arctic are a primary source of heat, some might be able to be plugged To give an idea, might be why the Greenland Sea abyss and waters around Greenland are warming so much.


Surely the amount of heat energy given out by such geothermal activity is small compared to the general heat energy budget?

How much heat do you think is coming out and why is it not obvious in terms of boiling patches in the ocean? Or at least obvious in warm currents that would pop up on the surface.


Tim,
The amount of heat in the Greenland Sea abyss is enough to warm Europe by over 4 C. and as we all knew heat does rise.
A hydrothermal vent will heat water to over 400 C. If you scroll up in this thread you should see 2 links to earthquakes around Greenland that I posted. Earthquakes can cause hydrothermal vents to both open and close.

Jim

edited to add:
What I think needs to be done is to map the sea floor around Greenland and in the Arctic Ocean as well as identify all sources of heat. Then this warming potential can be subtracted from observed atmospheric warming to realize actual AGW heat.
The link is to comments made by an ice core researcher.
www.nbi.ku.dk/english/sciencexplorer/earth_and_climate/golden_spike/video/spoergsmaal_svar1
Edited on 04-04-2017 22:51
04-04-2017 23:26
Frescomexico
★★☆☆☆
(179)
James_ wrote:
James_ wrote:
@litesong just wanted to let you know I was just providing more information. I am not sure if you know that before about 1910 that Arctic pack ice always extended to Iceland.


@litesong,
I thought that you would like the above information as you referenced the Arctic ice pack. And I also acknowledged that AGW is happening.
This is where your attitude is uncalled for. It is sad to see where it is important to say co2 and not waste heat is important.
And yet if we were to understand how geologic activity has been warming our planet then we might be able to reduce the amount of heat being released from the sea floor.
As for human activity, we can't be sure of the impact/total net effect without realising the geological contributions first.

Jim

ls,
Minor point, all scientists agree that warming happens after an Ice Age. Your group is claiming that we should be cooling while heading to the next Ice Age.
What your group is over looking is that post Ice Age warming hasn't peaked yet.

@All,
What hasn't been shown yet is the difference between natural warming and what man's specific influence is.
What people like litesong miss is that the Northern Hemisphere is where the most heat is found. And when the Northern Hemisphere has an Ice Age Antarctica warms.
If hydrothermal vents along the fault line going to the Arctic are a primary source of heat, some might be able to be plugged To give an idea, might be why the Greenland Sea abyss and waters around Greenland are warming so much.


Wow! What an age we live in. Not so long ago we were having a lot of trouble stopping a leak on an underwater oil well, and that had a wellhead and casing. Now were talking about the possibility of plugging hydrothermal vent.
04-04-2017 23:57
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
James_ wrote: This is where your attitude is uncalled for. Your group is claiming that we should be cooling while heading to the next Ice Age.
What your group is over looking......

... AGW denier liar whiners change AGW advocate thought to make it easier to knock down. Oil, energy, business & re-pubic-lick-un propaganda PR poop now foists the idea that mainline AGW scientists ARE ON THEIR SIDE.
Stuff you james, who is truly an old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' AGW denier liar whiner.

Think "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" switched over to james.
I'll start calling james, "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner james".
Edited on 05-04-2017 00:21
05-04-2017 04:27
Frescomexico
★★☆☆☆
(179)
litesong wrote:
James_ wrote: This is where your attitude is uncalled for. Your group is claiming that we should be cooling while heading to the next Ice Age.
What your group is over looking......

... AGW denier liar whiners change AGW advocate thought to make it easier to knock down. Oil, energy, business & re-pubic-lick-un propaganda PR poop now foists the idea that mainline AGW scientists ARE ON THEIR SIDE.
Stuff you james, who is truly an old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' AGW denier liar whiner.

Think "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" switched over to james.
I'll start calling james, "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner james".


I used to be able to discern little patches of clear thinking in your posts, but now you are homogeneous.
05-04-2017 16:53
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
litesong wrote:
James_ wrote: This is where your attitude is uncalled for. Your group is claiming that we should be cooling while heading to the next Ice Age.
What your group is over looking......

... AGW denier liar whiners change AGW advocate thought to make it easier to knock down. Oil, energy, business & re-pubic-lick-un propaganda PR poop now foists the idea that mainline AGW scientists ARE ON THEIR SIDE.
Stuff you james, who is truly an old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' AGW denier liar whiner.

Think "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" switched over to james.
I'll start calling james, "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner james".


litesong,
If I say that a depleted ozone layer is helping to warm our planet then I am saying AGW. And if I say waste heat is helping to warm our planet then I am saying AGW. AGW covers anything mankind does that influences our climate.
This also includes paving roads with asphalt or even building skyscrapers. AGW is not specific to co2. It is a general or vague statement.

@Don,
What scientists acknowledge is that the Greenland Sea abyss is warming 10 times faster than other bodies of water. They also acknowledge that the Arctic is warming twice as fast as the rest of the planet. It's these 2 facts that helped me to consider hydrothermal vents.
What many people are not aware of is that as glaciers melt tectonic plates move upward. This helps to open up the North Atlantic Ridge. And it would be in my opinion that we can close some hydrothermal vents.

"The observation of hydrothermal plumes on approximately 80 percent of the [miniature autonomous plume recorder] profiles was completely unexpected," said Baker. "These observations will be a challenge to interpret correctly, especially the determination, or estimation, of how many vent fields actually produce the plumes."

Researchers offered several possible explanations for the number of plumes they discovered. One theory is that a concentration of magma in a few areas efficiently drives hydrothermal venting along the ridge. Another holds that unusually deep faults along the ridge allows seawater access to heat sources not typically available to vents.

"The fact that we found so many vents, and where we found them, is telling us something fundamental about how heat is delivered from the interior of Earth to the surface at these slowest spreading rates," said Edmonds.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/01/0123_030123_hotspring_2.html

IMO unusually deep faults might allow cooled magma to sink while hotter magma rises to replace it. If so then that fault might not be sealed when magma cools. As they stated, when magma cools it helps to form a new area of the sea floor.


Jim
05-04-2017 20:19
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy AGW denier liar whiner james" jotted: If I say... ozone layer.... if I say waste heat...AGW is not specific to co2...... consider hydrothermal vents.

AGW denier liar whiners been bleating 'bout ever' thang but man-made, infra-red energy absorbing non-phase GHGs (not specific to CO2, but includes all GHGs & their powerful & numerous feedbacks, including increasing water vapor, which is controlled by man-made GHGs & its powerful & numerous feedbacks). What makes you an AGW denier liar whiner is you always goose chase & sidetrack away from vastly increasing man-made GHGs to less important AND TOTALLY UNPROVEN warming factors.
05-04-2017 21:21
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
[b]litesong wrote:
2017 Arctic sea ice maximum extent was well LESS THAN 2 million square kilometers than for the year 1979. 2017 Arctic sea ice extent is so low as of Mar. 22, that 1980 DECADE average sea ice extent was NOT as low until MAY 9. Beyond that tidbit was this largebit:
At these divergent times WHEN ARCTIC SEA ICE EXTENT WAS THE SAME, 1980 decade average VOLUME WAS 30,000+ cubic kilometers, while 2017 VOLUME was 18,600 cubic kilometers.

Graph of same:
http://psc.apl.uw.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/schweiger/ice_volume/BPIOMASIceVolumeAnomalyCurrentV2.1.png
05-04-2017 22:40
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1431)
litesong wrote:
to less important AND TOTALLY UNPROVEN warming factors.


It scares the livin' crap out of you that there may be a natural cause for the sea ice loss. Doesn't it?

How is a natural cause any less important than any other cause?

If you truly had a passion for the arctic as you would have us believe.....

Your passion is not the arctic, it is being right.


I think people screw me over because they don't want to see someone willing to put out the effort that they won't.~James~
06-04-2017 01:59
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
GasGuzzler wrote:
litesong wrote:
to less important AND TOTALLY UNPROVEN warming factors.

.... there may be a natural cause for the sea ice loss.
Your passion is not the arctic, it is being right.

It excites AGW denier liar whiners that science finds underwater volcanoes(of course, they exist). Then, AGW denier liar whiners use "sigh-ants" to say underwater volcanoes cause the Earth warming, leaving unproven any excess volcanic activity in the last century (more?). AGW denier liar whiners haven't taken science, can't do science & can't construct proper science to set forth their oil, energy, business & re-pubic-lick-un PR propaganda poop.
Yeah, AGW denier liar whiners' passion is to dump as much money (using sigh-ants) into the pockets of rich oil, energy & business manipulators as possible, proving they are AGW denier liar whiners.
Edited on 06-04-2017 02:08
06-04-2017 17:06
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
It appears that the past months of wide ranging Siberian warmth that was flowing north, sustaining a portion of the warmth of the High Arctic, is piece-meal cooling. In the days ahead, anomalous cooling from the Greenland Ice Sheet may make a move to the High Arctic (as it has tried to do in past months). As stated earlier, normal direct solar energy is warming the High Arctic also. However, the normal solar energy is NOT countering the two cooling effects on the High Arctic & FAB
could be reaching its end.... altho AFTER a powerful record run of 200+ days of over-temperatures!!!! Just a remarkable & outstanding display of excess AGW energy is still occurring.....BUT !!!
Edited on 06-04-2017 17:10
06-04-2017 20:44
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9573)
litesong wrote:
What makes you an AGW denier liar whiner is you always goose chase & sidetrack away from vastly increasing man-made GHGs to less important AND TOTALLY UNPROVEN warming factors.


What makes you a worshiper of the Church of Global Warming is your totally unproven warming factors.

Greenhouse effect violates the laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law. There is nothing 'magick' about carbon dioxide or any other so-called 'greenhouse' gas.


The Parrot Killer
07-04-2017 03:13
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: What makes you a worshiper of the Church of Global Warming is your totally unproven warming factors.
Greenhouse effect violates the laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law. There is nothing 'magick' about carbon dioxide or any other so-called 'greenhouse' gas.

AGW GHG effects within the laws of thermodynamics have been proven by thousands of scientists. "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" continues to prove he is an old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner.
It is good that "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" continues to show its non-sigh-ants & I am glad it stands on its stupidity.
Edited on 07-04-2017 03:17
07-04-2017 19:47
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9573)
litesong wrote:
AGW GHG effects within the laws of thermodynamics have been proven by thousands of scientists.


Consensus isn't used in science.

No theory of science is ever proven. A theory of science remains a theory until it is destroyed.

'Greenhouse' gas 'theory' violates the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan Boltzmann law.

You can't create energy out of nothing. You can't trap heat.

You can't warm the surface using a colder gas.

You can't reduce radiance and have increasing temperatures using the Magick Bouncing Photon argument.


The Parrot Killer
07-04-2017 19:52
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: You can't create energy out of nothing.

It is good that "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" doesn't understand AGW & GHG effect. I love "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" to continue with its ignorance.
Page 14 of 20<<<1213141516>>>





Join the debate Arctic waters not freezing:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Year Long, Arctic Climate Change Study... How 'Green'?121-09-2019 03:46
Temperatures leap 40 degrees above normal as the Arctic Ocean and Greenland ice sheet see record June mel318-06-2019 06:22
Mike Pompeo: Melting Arctic Ice Presents New Trade Opportunities028-05-2019 15:33
2019 Arctic sea ice wintertime extent is seventh lowest005-05-2019 13:50
Arctic's melting permafrost will cost nearly $70 trillion, study finds101-05-2019 21:12
▲ 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 © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact