Comments on: Antarctica’s Bipolar Disorder

By: C Colenaty

C Colenaty — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 23:09:02 +0000

I think Anthony willl be interested in this. While the well-publicized Catlan expedition has been underway at the Arctic. there has been a non-publicized Google (and Virgin) funded expedition going on in the Antarctic area –an attempt to circumnavigate the Antarctic continent by a Brit in a rowboat!
http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-times/news/2367225/Rower-determined-to-make-it-on-his-own

By: JThomas

JThomas — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 18:44:22 +0000

~snip~ [Ad-hom attack on this site and its readership, with no specifics. ~dbstealey, mod.]

By: C Colenaty

C Colenaty — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 09:19:34 +0000

There is apparently a pattern of both short-term (200-300 years) and long-term(1,500) years periodic warming of the West Anarctic Peninsula. Two studies supporting this notion are discussed in http://www.theresilientearth.com/?q=content/melting-antarctic-ice-part-natural-cycle.

By: Raff

Raff — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 03:39:17 +0000

In the article on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vostok,_Antarctica – it specifies that: Vostok in Antarctica is a place where “A lack of carbon dioxide in the air leads to irregularities in a person’s breathing mechanism.”

Why not send some of our politicians who want to label CO2 as poison and pollutant a few weeks to Vostok?

By: Smokey

Smokey — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 23:04:40 +0000

ccpo (06:42:54), You don't indicate who you are responding to, but if you think data isn't manipulated by the government, you are very mistaken: click1 click2 click3 click4 click5 click6 click7 So you see, the government is spoon feeding you data that has been tampered with. And the gov't resists releasing the unadjusted data. Anyone who still believes that CO2 = AGW at this point is suffering from cognitive dissonance.

By: Francis

Francis — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 18:32:04 +0000

slowtofollow(03:52:57)……….Adding-on would seem to be the appropriate correction for public theorizing. The only popular discussion of calving from floating ice shelves was:…..ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITTANICA…..The ice behind the floating ice shelves, “moves seaward at…(().2-1.6miles) per year. The exposed seaward front of the ice shelf experiences stresses from subshelf currents, tides, and ocean swell in the summer and moving pack ice during the winter. Since the shelf normally possesses cracks and crevasses, it will eventually fracture to yield freely floating icebergs…Iceberg calving may be caused by ocean wave action, contact with other icebergs, or the behaviour of melting water on the upper surface of the berg.” Also, they’ve “been able to link the breaking stress occurring near the ice front to long storm-generated swells originating tens of thousands of kilometres away.” For Larsen B, the fractures are believed to be due to “frost wedging”, after meltwater filled crevasses…..FROM AN ABSTRACT…..(I’ve not been very successful at getting to page 2.) By the Amundsen Sea, “Warmer ocean waters are circulating beneath the (shelf) ice and melting their bases at a rate of 50 meters a year.”…PS…Another theory…In the age of Google…Informally, it will become acceptable to omit references when giving a (proper) quote???

By: Mike Bryant

Mike Bryant — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 15:05:51 +0000

I guess the computers are down at NSIDC.

http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/daily.html

By: Richard Sharpe

Richard Sharpe — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 14:37:57 +0000

The Arctic seems unwilling to cooperate. Could it be that cold AMO and PDO phases are introducing waters that are not so warm into the Arctic and thus delaying the melt?

By: JPK

JPK — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 14:07:15 +0000

Since the vast majority of the Antartic is one of the driest places on earth, a simple sampling of absolute humidty should indicate an increase of some kind in water vapor (assuming that AGW is occuring to the degree Mann, Steig et als say it is). I wonder if NOAA has archived polar orbiting satellite films which include the vapor channel (IR)? Otherwise, a sample of dry bulb and wet bulb temps could derive the needed info. Of course, what intrepid artic explorer is willing to that?

By: ccpo

ccpo — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 13:42:54 +0000

Quote
But after three more years of cooling, they changed the map to show a warming trend in 2007.
Endquote

so, they just changed it, eh? They didn’t use any measurements or anything? And you’re comfortable conflating trends (a period of years) with single-year measurements?

If the science behind ACC was as you like to pretend it is, you wouldn’t need to manipulate the date, nor your readers.

By: Ric Werme

Ric Werme — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 13:07:52 +0000

One image I’d like to see is an Antarctica map showing the typical number of “melting degree days” where each point is the sum of the degrees above freezing for the high temperature over the course of a year, or zero if the high does exceed freezing. This would help show how much of the continent (fifth largest? It’s third smallest) is not melting.

By: Pat

Pat — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 11:10:51 +0000

Once really has to question the reliability of information at URL’s that end in .gov.

By: slowtofollow

slowtofollow — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 10:52:27 +0000

Francis (21:34:44)

Hi Francis – thanks for responding. Good info. on sea ice formation and fracture is here:

http://www.coolantarctica.com/Antarctica%20fact%20file/antarctica%20environment/seaice%20formation.htm

There is also a paper I have seen which mentions elestic/plastic properties of ice shelves but I can’t find it right now. However my query is to find actual sea temp. data for the Southern Ocean from physical measures over the same time period as the satellite measures. As mentioned I’m wondering if the mechanism and process of sea ice formation and melt described in the link above will tend to give the satellite data, as processed for the top image on this thread, a warming trend. IMO it would be good to see if there is agreement to the physical measures.

I’m sure the data is out there and again I think I have seen a paper with relevant info. but have not saved a copy. If/when I refind I’ll post a link.

By: Mike Bryant

Mike Bryant — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 08:47:43 +0000

Am I the only one having trouble getting NSIDC website up?

By: pkatt

pkatt — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 08:42:36 +0000

oops screwed up my map link http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/~mstuding/tam_map_large.html

By: pkatt

pkatt — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 08:40:49 +0000

Well, there is an east and west side, and a volcanic rift in between:) , and look at the area it effects, gosh, isnt that the area in contention?? So is it bi polar or deceptive twins:P : http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/~mstuding/ /tam_map_large.html

http://www.geosc.psu.edu/~pwinberr/Site/J%20Paul%20Winberry_files/WinAnanGeology.pdf

The site with the large map has some pretty interesting stuff, most of which goes right over my head.. http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/~mstuding/

By: Ohioholic

Ohioholic — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 04:44:56 +0000

Francis (21:34:44) :

3…..ANYTHING ELSE?

How about gravity? Warmer water is not what NOAA has found. In fact, they made an ‘embarrassing correction’ to the data to show that the ocean temperature trend is actually flat. Warmer air? Over the Antarctic, warmer is relative.

Conclusion? Re-submit with the above corrections.

By: Francis

Francis — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 04:34:44 +0000

slowtofollow (15:43:13)………. I can’t help you with your quest. But I was able to work up my own theory of calving for floating ice shelves……1…..WARM WATER…..From the link in WUWT 17-4-09 (The Antarctic Wilkins Ice Shelf Collapses)…..For the calved flat topped ice shelf shown, “shear failue of the ice slabs…the weakness of the ice shelf structure is from thinning ice due to the warmer local sea temperatures below.” The weight of the ice above water is supported by the flotation of the ice below, plus shear forces in the plane of attachment to the stationary ice. Melting ice below reduces the upward flotation force, and the block falls down……2…..WARM AIR…..Conceivably, warm air could melt enough ice above water, that the upward flotation force would overcome the shear force. And the block would be lifted up……3…..ANYTHING ELSE?…..That might cause shear failure? Wave action would have negligible lifting effect. And wave action would be dampened by any floating ice, so abrasion wouldn’t be a factor. It would take a lot of snow on top to add a significant downward force. Tidal lift would be a factor only when the stationary ice is on land. A tsunami or an earthquake would presumably be a rare event……4…..CONCLUSION…..The cause of shear failures in floating ice shelves is melting.

By: Mike Bryant

Mike Bryant — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 04:21:49 +0000

The Antarctic cold’s multiplying
At the same time the heat’s amplifying.
How can you tell
If it’s truth or a sell?
If it’s been peer reviewed then they’re lying.

By: hunter

hunter — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 04:12:51 +0000

Actually, the amount of change in either direction is minuscule.
AGW promoters depend on fooling people into thinking, among the many things AGW works to fool people about, is that small changes well within the MOE or actually very significant.
The bipolar dat is so people like the Texas state meteorologist can claim that the Antarctic cooling is proof of AGW, even after he says Antarctic warming is proof of AGW.