Jim, your data reference seems to show no changes whatsoever beyond normal variation from 1750 to 2002.
Now the question is if there has been any change between 2002 and the last 15 years. By the looks of those charts my guess is that there hasn't been any other changes beyond the cycles they noted.
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" wished: ...no changes whatsoever beyond normal variation from 1750 to 2002..... the question is if there has been any change between 2002 and the last 15 years.
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" doesn't wake up fer da real data:
Arctic sea ice extent was the same(13.46 million KM2) for the dates, May 10, 1980 AND March 23, 2017. Also, Arctic sea ice VOLUME is much less in to date 2017 (~18,000+ KM3) than the average of the to date 1980's decade(~30000+ KM3).
All this major break from the past, while solar TSI has been low:
For 387(?) straight 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. 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.
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 07-04-2017 19:57
|Robert Scribbler's articles belong here, too:|
Robert Scribbler on coral bleaching, flooding, icebergs..... :
Wake wrote:James_ wrote:
This link uses different data sets. With myself I have no doubt the Arctic is warming. I tend to believe that the fault that runs into the Arctic controls much of the warming and cooling of the northern hemisphere. At the same time such a change can be accelerated. Since we don't have all of the information we need, it's difficult to say how much natural warming has been affected by industrialization.
They show 4 different eras of Arctic ice.
edited to add; the maps are near the bottom of the page. What started interest for some was that in 1920 White whales disappeared from around Greenland below the Arctic Circle because those waters warmed suddenly.
Edited on 12-04-2017 17:33
|Jim, A quick read article on the NW Passage:|
I'm reading The Elusive Northwest Passage via the Scientific American app
I'm not sure if the link was to the entire article but 30 ships having made the passage is significant. The Northwest Passage has been pursued since at least the 1800's. Now it's becoming like Mt. Everest. Mt. Everest has become the world's highest landfill because of all the traffic to it's summit.
Myself I'd wonder why the U.S. would need to import so much from China ( a communist country) when Mexico (not a communist country) would be just as capable of manufacturing the same goods. Then maybe we could cap/cave in a deep fault or 2 and cool the Arctic some.
James_ wrote:Frescomexico wrote:
If I read correctly, the plate tectonics in the northern Atlantic is characterized by a widening of the plates (plates moving apart), so the vents will become more numerous and larger in the far future.
Left unsaid in the article was the knowledge that solar TSI has remained languid for many decades & the last 10+ years has had a low solar TSI (including a 3+ year period, setting a 100 year record TSI low).
Certainly, low TSI has affected High Arctic temperatures downward during the highest sun positions of the year..... despite the HIGHER THAN NORMAL High Arctic temperatures during the FALL & WINTER & EARLY SPRING, due to AGW GHGs warming Earth's bio-sphere & flooding into the HIGH ARCTIC.
Edited on 22-04-2017 18:14
James_ wrote: And so everyone will understand my position there is what NOAA has posted on it's website and it seems or appears to be that they are quoting the IPCC.
The IPCC is a dishonest organization with an extreme leftist political agenda.
This alone is sufficient to get your "position" summarily dismissed.
James_ wrote: Why this specific information is something that I find interesting is because I have been pursuing an experiment for the last couple of years that would help scientists to understand the link in Atmospheric Chemistry that is missing.
There is no "atmospheric chemistry" component in Stefan-Boltzmann. You're barking up the wrong tree.
James_ wrote: And as I think everyone knows the current belief is that Atmospheric Forcing does not occur in the tropopause. I think successfully demonstrating this would change the discussion about climate change.
Explain how this would change anything.
Have you been able to falsifiably define "climate"? Unless you have a formal specification of "climate" with no ambiguity, none of what you are discussing makes any sense.
James_ wrote: Carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (N2O), and methane (CH4) are each important to climate forcing
There's no such thing in science as a "climate" and there is no such thing in science as a "forcing." You might be able to conclude that there is no such thing as a "climate forcing" in science either.
Those are all terms used in Global Warming dogma.
At the moment, I don't see you changing discussions on "Climate Change" but rather keeping them exactly as they are, i.e. unfalsifiable religious nonsense.
Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit
Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris
Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit
If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles
Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles
Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn
You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.
The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank
:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude
IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
"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" muffed: ... dishonest organization...
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner i b da no sigh-ants mann" is a dishonest dis-organization.
Jim, Is that black ring to be considered a black body? And, if so, how does heating cause it to become so, and how does further heating cause it to stop being so?
James_ wrote:Wake wrote:James_ wrote:
James - look at these pictures. This was taken of the USS Skate Nuclear Submarine in open water at the North Pole in the winter of 1958-1959 I believe.
The USS Sargo surfaced in 1960 through an extremely thin layer of ice.
The human life is short and it is easy to make a man believe that things are peculiar when in fact they are normal.