UK Glaciations – Source: Western Washington University
Just prior to Copenhagen, there was a flurry of news stories about Greenland melt accelerating and sea level rising up to seven meters, like this one from Spiegel.
11/13/2009
A Warming Arctic
Greenland’s Ice Sheet Melting Faster than Ever
By Christoph Seidler
Everyone knows that the ice sheet on Greenland is melting. But new research shows it is disappearing much faster than previously thought. The findings could mean that ocean levels are also rising more quickly.
As a corollary, some climatologists have speculated (as recently as this week) that cold water pouring into the North Atlantic from Greenland melt will cause the Gulf Stream to collapse and an ice age to set in across Europe.
‘Glaciers on Snowdon’ warning by climate expert
Jan 12 2010 by Rhodri Clark, Western Mail
THIS winter’s prolonged cold spell could be a taste of things to come for Wales – with glaciers a possibility within 40 years. That’s the chilly message from a leading Welsh climate expert who has warned that global warming could paradoxically trigger a collapse in temperatures in western Europe.
It is simple enough to show how unlikely these claims are. If the Greenland ice sheet was melting at an accelerated rate and pouring cold water into the North Atlantic, we would necessarily see two side effects:
- Increased rate of sea level rise
- Cold water around Greenland
In fact, we see neither of these things happening. Over the last four years sea level rise has slowed, and over the last fifteen years sea level has been rising at an average of only 32cm per century. This is an order of magnitude less than the predictions of alarmists.
Source: University of Colorado Sea Level Lab
The Spiegel article further claims:
In the period between 2000 and 2008, the dwindling glaciers have been responsible for the sea level rising by an average of about half a millimeter per year. However, during the last three years of observation, the value rose to 0.75 millimeters per year. According to the researchers, these results could indicate that the sheet of ice is melting at an accelerated rate.
These claims are not supported by the University of Colorado data. Since 1900, sea level has been rising at about 20cm per century, and hasn’t changed much recently – as seen in the graph below.
Is there evidence of cold water around Greenland pouring into the North Atlantic? No, quite the opposite. Sea Surface Temperatures around Greenland have running consistently above normal. Below are SST maps for the end of July (peak melt season) for 2007-2009. Maps from Unisys.
http://weather.unisys.com/archive/sst/sst_anom-070729.gif
http://weather.unisys.com/archive/sst/sst_anom-080727.gif
http://weather.unisys.com/archive/sst/sst_anom-090726.gif
How about winter? Same story – warmer than normal temperatures around Greenland at the end of December 2007-2009.
http://weather.unisys.com/archive/sst/sst_anom-071230.gif
http://weather.unisys.com/archive/sst/sst_anom-081228.gif
http://weather.unisys.com/archive/sst/sst_anom-091227.gif
Even if all this speculation was true and the Gulf Stream did slow down and colder weather started to set in – Greenland would stop melting, causing the whole process to reverse. In other words, don’t book any glacier climbing vacations in Wales quite yet.
h/t to Steve Goddard
Seems like the feedback to warming that would cause the “collapse” of the Gulf Stream would happen much faster than the warming itself. Thus there is no real danger of a “collapse” happening and swinging to a sudden glaciation.
The dangers of a sudden collapse would only be possible if the feedback mechanism of shutting down the thermohaline exchange was delayed and slow to respond to a warming and decreased salinization of the polar waters.
This suggestion that warming would drastically outpace feedback is completely unsupported.
I thought everyone knew Global Warming causes Global Cooling? Isn’t it settled science? Like everything else needed to raise taxes and control other people’s lives?
Seems to me that the easiest way to keep watch on it is to monitor salinity.
Does such data exist?
As a german I am sorry to say this, the “spiegel” is in behalf of the climate an alarmist organ mostly read green left people.
seems to me that the upwelling of cold water off the eastern coast of Greenland is an integral part of the thermohaline conveyor (Gulfstream included) and the decrease in it’s presence is a sign that the GS is diminishing. That said, lower temps in Europe would be forthcoming. Measurements since the late ’80s show that the GS is diminishing in heat transport so….
Hard to believe that Wales will get much ice before Iceland refreezes. I believe the Little Ice Age freeze was West to East (opposite the melt from East to West). Thought the same happened in the Far East, West to East to freeze and East to West to melt. Kind of a continental thing?
Furthermore, some other research, discussed here
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2003-01/teia-crr012203.php
and
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/forget-about-the-gulf-stream-britain-is-really-kept-warm-in-winter-by-the-rocky-mountains-597214.html
for example, questions the idea that the gulf stream is primarily driven by differences in salinity.
And I should have added — or that the gulf stream is primarily responsible for relatively mild weather (for the latitude) in western europe.
“Everyone knows that the ice sheet on Greenland is melting.”
Ah, the simple world of Der Spiegel. How refreshing. That was the original reason i started to get my news from the BBC… before they turned into Gordon’s goons.
I’m ashamed that our decedents will know we were on board this ship of fools!
CH
“…32cm per century.”
Type: Either a missed decimal point, or that should be millimeters.
The only flurry was the blizzard that was Copenhagen: The catastrophic melting of wax figures occured in that little shop of horrors.
Call up the Caitlin Team: We must mount an expedition to Greenland immediately, to survey the winter melting that nobody in thier right mind would step foot in that awful place to ascertain.
Pen should be sufficiently thawed by now.
The graphs and schematics makes Mr. Watts’ argument easy to follow.
The historical slight sea level rise, “Over the last four years sea level rise has slowed, and over the last fifteen years sea level has been rising at an average of only 32cm per century.”, and the current slowing of sea level rise, suggest that sea level rise at present does not pose a significant issue.
In geologic time scales, millions of years ago, there is evidence of sea levels receding — and rising — for instance receding from the North American continent, where evidence exists of an “inland sea” present running North and South, East of the Rocky Mountains.
Other evidences point to the possible receding of sea levels in more recent times.
It seems to me that this whole thing about the Gulf stream warming the British Isles is just another Myth. What really causes us to have mild winters or cold winters is the Jet Steam as has just recently been proven.
When the Jet Stream went further South we had a very cold period even though the Gulf stream was still working, and now the Jet Steam has regained it’s more normal flow it’s turned milder.
I’m not saying the Gulf stream does not have any effect but it’s not the main driver of our winter climate.
We don’t know the trigger and we don’t know the timing, but we do know that we are in an ice age with regular stable periods of glaciation and warmer interglatial periods. The glaciation lasts about 100,000 years and the warm interglatial period lasts about 20,000 years. This cycle has repeated about 20 times over the last 2.5 million years.
So it isn’t a question of whether rather it is when. Considering its been about 20,000 years since the last glatial maximus, it doesn;t seem to me to be too early to start anticipating the potential consequences of an abrupt climate change to very stable cooling.
what is this about point 5 and point 75 MM/year that is only 2 and 3 inches per century. normal sea level rise is 2 to 3 MM/year or 8 to 12 inches per century.
“In the period between 2000 and 2008, the dwindling glaciers have been responsible for the sea level rising by an average of about half a millimeter per year. However, during the last three years of observation, the value rose to 0.75 millimeters per year. According to the researchers, these results could indicate that the sheet of ice is melting at an accelerated rate”
The Arctic Circle will be ice free in 100 minutes unless we do something about it. Forget about it. Send me your cash now, I need climate compensation because I’m two feet below sea level and it’s your fault.
Yours sincerely,
A Bather
the 32cm is correct – 320mm = approx 1 ft.
Funny that everything in “Der Spiegel” is side-inverted, as it should be, but in the “Daily Mirror” it is not.
The Guld Stream doesn’t collapse. It diminishes and kinda gets sucked into the Bermuda Triangle; just kidding. Now the North Atlantic Drift takes a hit from all the cold arctic weather and when that happens Europe freezes.
Since it’s all rotten ice, maybe it becomes warm water when it melts… 🙂
And BTW, Anthony seems to be about right with 20 cm /century; Jasper Kirkby also mentioned a number like that – 1.9 mm/year IIRC – in his presentation about the CLOUD experiment.
The Holocene Optimum, Roman Warm Period, MWP and Modern Warm Period all form a slope…downwards. The next warm period may be slightly less than the Modern Warm Period, or it may be 1/3 the way down to the Next Ice Age.
No need to hit the panic button, think of all that continental shelf just waiting to re-emerge when the sea levels drop. The Sahara will be a grasslands again, as well as the American Southwest.
What’s an Alarmist to do?
A marvelous computer scientist at my church, clued me into his observation that the DOCKS at Pompei are located about 3/4 mile INLAND from the current Medditeranian shore. The elevation difference is about 50′.
THUS when Mount Vesuvius went off in something like 70 B.C., the Medditeranian was up 50′ from where it is now.
HUM, that seems like a HELL of a lot more water in the oceans (assume Straigths of Megellan were NOT closed!) than now.
Whence comes this water? Did the land around Pompei elevate 50′ in 2000 years? (A possibility!)
Or are we talking massive “climate cycles”. Was Greenland completely green?
Was Antartica very diminished?
These are now important questions.
” In other words, don’t book any glacier climbing vacations in Wales quite yet.”
True, but you can still book mountain climbing vacations in Wales, while studying the evidence of the glaciations of the various ice ages, and the ancient rock formations (Ordovician, Silurian).
You might even find the odd trilobite here and there …
How much of this sea level rise could be attributed to other anthropogenic causes, such as agriculture, deforestation or the concrete umbrellas that sweep so much rainwater straight into rivers instead of into wetlands? My first though is it wouldn’t be that significant, but yet it still nags at me. Even Suzuki says the residence time for water on land has been significantly reduced and it has been blamed for extreme flooding (i.e. New Orleans).
just had my first game of golf for over 5 weeks at Carnoustie North Of Moscow. Last longest recorded closure of the courses we had, was 11 weeks in 1993.
The good news is that things are nicely bubbling up here in the Sociliast Rebublic of the Great Britain.
We have the BBC ‘overseeres’ looking into the Biased Broadcasting Corporations coverage of their science. We have the Sunday Telegraph running an article on the Ethics of the chairman of the IPCC. We have the Sunday Times running a front page article on the BBC possibly ditching the Met Office because of it’s AGW forecasts.
What is obvious is that we need to keep the pressure up, and continue to write letters to editors and on BBC blogs (look at Hudsons blog on BBC Science and Environment site) – hidden away I know, but about 75% anti AGW. There seems to be a perceptible shift towards printing uncensored points. I do believe that eventually the truth will out. That is why such sites as WUWT and Steve McIntires are invaluable.
A great, but dated map of currents and old (relatively speaking) ice sheets can be found at
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/67/Ocean_currents_1943_%28borderless%293.png
ChisM is correct – the “whole thing about the Gulf stream warming the British Isles is just another Myth”. The oceanic warming is independent of the GS. Richard Seager debunked this myth a couple of years ago.
See this: Gulf Stream page for details.
More glacier nonsense:
World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown (Times)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6991177.ece
Politicians like to make exaggerated claims about sea level rise.
Tuvalu’s president said gllobal warming was like a slow insidious form of terrorism. Then they issued an Obama stamp sheet.
See: http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/SeaLevelRising.htm
Ref – Claude Harvey (10:29:03) :
“I’m ashamed that our decedents will know we were on board this ship of fools!”
__________________
I have no doubt that we will be remembered as the “children of the gods” or some other title to explain the fantastic difference between now and then. After a 95% (or more) reduction in population and the passage of a hundred years or so after civilization collapses, we will be the subject of myths and wild fantasies told around campfires by beings we would scarsely recognize (or understand).
“Max Hugoson (11:00:37) :
A marvelous computer scientist at my church, clued me into his observation that the DOCKS at Pompei are located about 3/4 mile INLAND from the current Medditeranian shore. The elevation difference is about 50′.”
They have a volcano there. Well in fact lots of them if you look around: Vesuv, Aetna, Stromboli. I would guess that there is a strong likelihood that the land has risen due to a refilling magma chamber. Sea level will also have changed but it would take scientific studies (no, not that science, *real* science…) to examine what influenced it.
UNIPCC caught out – glacier claims wrong!
http://www.twawki.com
Max Hugoson (11:00:37)
Former coastlines in a tectonically active region like near Vesuvius are completely irrelevant to sea level changes. The land moves much faster than the sea.
As a matter of fact it is extremely difficult to find any coast in the World that is stable enough to measure sea-level changes for periods of more than several thousand years (for example the previous interglacial c. 120 000 years back) .
“Pascvaks (11:55:37) :
[…]
I have no doubt that we will be remembered as the “children of the gods” or some other title to explain the fantastic difference between now and then. After a 95% (or more) reduction in population and the passage of a hundred years or so after civilization collapses, we will be the subject of myths and wild fantasies told around campfires by beings we would scarsely recognize (or understand).”
Any prognosis as to the exact year so i can stock up on canned foods, Mr. Malthus?
Ref – DirkH (12:15:10) :
“Pascvaks (11:55:37) :
“Any prognosis as to the exact year so i can stock up on canned foods, Mr. Malthus?”
_____________
That’s Dr Malthus. And yes, if you are already on SS, you’re probably OK. If not, don’t worry about. Enjoy your life and occassionally, stop and smell the roses. G’day:-)
Alan Cheetham (11:39:25) :
ChisM is correct – the “whole thing about the Gulf stream warming the British Isles is just another Myth”. The oceanic warming is independent of the GS. Richard Seager debunked this myth a couple of years ago.
See this: Gulf Stream page for details.
I don’t dispute that the jet stream has a much greater role to play in determining UK weather than it gets credit for, but it is too simplistic to say the warmth from the Gulf stream is just a myth. Just ask the residents of Tiree or Barra etc., – in the recent cold spell, when we (in the Perthshire highlands, about as far from the sea you can get in Scotland) were typically getting night minimums of -15C and daytime peaks of -8C, the coldest they got was -1C or -2C, and their daytime temperatures got up to 5 or 6C. The fact is the North Atlantic off Scotland rarely gets below 8C and that mass of relatively warm water, even when the wind is not from the south or west, protects us from what (given our relatively northern latitude of 56-57) would otherwise be much colder climate. http://ocean.dmi.dk/satellite/index.php is a good place to check Atlantic temperatures.
Speaking of the Gulf stream, can some help in relocating an article that Crosspatch posted some time ago?
It was an actual newspaper report (Boston or New York newspaper?) dated 1907? stating the Gulf stream was observed to be slowing.
Can anyone help? Moderators do you remember it? Can’t find it on a search here or on the Internet but I’m sure I wasn’t imagining it.
Obviously the best solution would be if someone would give me a large grant to fund the full time employment of a professional archivist to look after my growing collection of climate data. 🙂
Tonyb
Last I’ve been able to find… the gulf stream was picking up speed.
http://icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog/surprising_return_of_north_atlantic_circulation_pump/
Tuesday, January 06, 2009 Surprising Return of North Atlantic Circulation Pump Media Newswire
Andrew P. 12.43.46
Allen Cheetham left the link at 11.39.25 and if you study it you will see the following:
“Average January air temperatures are warmer over oceans than they are over land, because the sea retains more summer heat, which can then be released to the overlying air in winter”.
So you don’t actually need the Gulf steam, just the normal sea temperatures in January will cause the effect that you observe.
You get a similar effect in Vancouver, Canada it’s called a maritime Climate.
The Africa plate subducts beneath the Aegean Sea plate along the Hellenic arc, from the western Peloponnesus through Crete and Rhodes to western Turkey, at a rate of almost 40 mm/year.
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/world/greece/tectonic_summary.php
The Africa plate also subducts the Eurasian plate, lifting Italy. I don’t know the rate of the rise, but the volcanoes and obducted ophiolites are pretty much smoking guns.
Andrew P. (12:43:46)
ChrisM is correct (13:19:01)
I live in Seattle where we have been having a mild January while most of the continent has been freezing – this is the “warm” ocean effect (the east side of the ocean) – we don’t have a Gulf Stream.
The dates on the graphic depicting the Welsh ice sheets are a bit misleading.
The main Devensian cold phase ended some 12,000 years ago followed by a short warm period lasting approximately 1000 years. The temperature then again dropped into glaciation mode for another 1000 years. It is this last cold phase before the onset of the Holocene that is known in the UK as the Loch Lomond Advance or Re-advance and is directly equivalent to the Younger Dryas.
One theory for the cause of the Younger Dryas invokes the the catastrophic collapse of the remains of the Laurentide ice sheet and / or the Western Arctic ice sheet. Flooding the North Atlantic with fresh water and icebergs in what is known as a Heinrich Event. Thus disrupting the ocean circulation systems etc and producing a rapid cooing.
It is from the above theory that I suspect that the AGW idea of fresh water disrupting the thermohaline circulation and producing cooling comes from.
However a Heinrich event was many orders of magnitude greater and faster than anything proposed from the melting of the Greenland and Icelandic icecaps.
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/wuwt_icecoreanim_image51.png
The above is one of Anthony’s graphics from a few weeks ago, the Younger Dryas is the dip at the far left of the graph around 10,000 yrs bp.
What is interesting to note is how rapidly the temperature rises at the end of the Younger Dryas, only matched by the rate of decline at the start and all without any help from humans.
I hope the above makes sense.
Regards
Dave
If the Gulf stream was weakening the Greenland would stop melting at an accelerating rate amd actually retreat, wouldn’t it?
Max Hugoson (11:00:37) :
A marvelous computer scientist at my church, clued me into his observation that the DOCKS at Pompei are located about 3/4 mile INLAND from the current Medditeranian shore. The elevation difference is about 50′.
THUS when Mount Vesuvius went off in something like 70 B.C., the Medditeranian was up 50′ from where it is now.
HUM, that seems like a HELL of a lot more water in the oceans
Max-
Did the sea sink or did the land rise?
IanM
Claude Harvey (10:29:03) :
> I’m ashamed that our decedents will know we were on board this ship of fools!
You must have an interesting family. 🙂 (You wanted descendants.)
IPCC has egg on its face over claims of glacier retreat:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/united-nations-blunder-on-glaciers-exposed/story-e6frg6n6-1225820614171
Alan Cheetham (13:49:57) :
Andrew P. (12:43:46)
ChrisM is correct (13:19:01)
I live in Seattle where we have been having a mild January while most of the continent has been freezing – this is the “warm” ocean effect (the east side of the ocean) – we don’t have a Gulf Stream.
Apropos of nothing in particular
Stornoway Lewis Scotland 58º 11’N
Oslo Norway 59º 57’N
La Rochelle France 46° 10′ N
Seattle-Tacoma United States 47° 27′ N
I attempted to send email to Rhodri, and after filling it all out and hitting send, I was informed that the function “…has been temporarily disabled.”
Hmmmmmmmmm….have other WUWTers been doing the same?…could Rhodri’s mailbox be overflowing?
I really do think we have an obligation to send emails to these folks when possible. Mine simply said “Rhodri, I assume you’ve seen your story discussed here (insert WUWT link). It seems you’ve got the whole thing wrong.”
They should know that we’re watching them.
JimB (USA)
Ian L. McQueen (14:25:27) :
“Did the sea sink or did the land rise?”
_______________________
Yes? Maybe?
If you haven’t already looked at this graph or one similiar check out temperature for the time. Colder = lower sealevel. Warmer = higher sealevel. Looks warmer and therefore higher sealevel to me.
Fantastic read about how a speculative phone conversation in 1999 became IPCC ‘fact’!
This ought to be put on this site as a topic :
World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown :
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6991177.ece
This link was previously posted on this thread – recommended reading.
Ref – Pascvaks (15:56:56) :
Ian L. McQueen (14:25:27) :
“Did the sea sink or did the land rise?”
_______________________
Sorry! Forgot to give the link:
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/wuwt_icecoreanim_image51.png
Salinity data ?
http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/General/salinity.html
I recall from my postgrad research into the end of the last glaciation (admittedly in the 90’s) that rapid post glacial warming from the Bølling/Allerød interstadial caused rapidly melting ice and influx of cold freshwater (primarily from the Gulf of St Lawrence) into the North Atlantic – the theory was that this “pushed” the gulf stream south to France/Spain, disrupting the warm water/cooling circulation for the Arctic/North Atlantic which allowed a stable “cold” high pressure to form over the ocean, drawing the cold air down from the Arctic. I think re-glaciation (Younger Dryas stadial) happened pretty quickly – 50 years or some such (temp ranges from mollusc and beetle habitat studies).
We don’t have the build up of ice in North America and on the Laurentitde ice sheets to cause the same effect today, but who knows – if we happen enter a global cooling phase just after the ice melting? its still interesting to note that the effects of warming aren’t always more warming..
oh, and I just saw David Williams comments on the same thing..
This is a good explanation of Gulf Stream’s impact. Another case in point is Murmansk (68:58 N). It is almost 10 degrees lat higher than St. Petersburg (59:57 N). Yet, Murmansk’s seaport is open to traffic all year round while St. Petersburg’s is closed to navigation in winters since the sea freezes up. Gulf Stream has no effect on temperatures in Baltic Sea.
Vancouver and Seattle at latitudes 49.25 N and 47.76 N respectively are not good candidates for comparison.
DirkH (11:56:23) :
“Max Hugoson (11:00:37) :
A marvelous computer scientist at my church, clued me into his observation that the DOCKS at Pompei are located about 3/4 mile INLAND from the current Medditeranian shore. The elevation difference is about 50′.”
They have a volcano there. Well in fact lots of them if you look around: Vesuv, Aetna, Stromboli. I would guess that there is a strong likelihood that the land has risen due to a refilling magma chamber.
Try this: http://www.livescience.com/environment/070223_ground_uplift.html
Sea level looks pretty stable from here.
http://nzclimatescience.net/images/PDFs/paperncgtsealevl.pdf
Your questions are based upon some misinformation. The land did not “elevate 50′ in 2000 years”, and the sea level did not fall 50′ in 2000 years. Instead, there were other activities going on.
The city of Pompeii was built upon a plateau and ridge extending as a spur of volcanic lava flow from Mount Vesuvius during earlier volcanic eruptions. The Sarno (Sarnus) River flowed along the base of this plateau and ridge at a lower elevation, and the mouth of the river may have originally terminated in the sea as a braided marsh about a kilometer to the west of Pompeii’s walls.
The 50 foot elevation you commented about was inside Pompeii’s walls and higher on the volcanic ridge overlooking the harbor at sea level. The city’ was built upon the slopes of the ridge and plateau with differences in elevation. To reach the harbor, you had to leave one of Pompeii’s gates, Marina Gate or Stabian Gate, descend in elevation to the quay built along the Sarnus River at the base of Pompeii’s walls, and walk some distance to the sea level harbor at Porto Ercolano. Today’s seacoast is now something more than 1km to the west of where the harbor used to be when Vesuvius buried Pompeii and its harbor in 79AD. In previous millenia, the seacoast was as much as 2km on the east side of Pompeii’s location.
The changes in location of the seacoast in the vicinity of Pompeii are due to multiple causes. First, the volcanic eruptions of Mount Vesuvius have been altering the areal extent and the elevations of the coastline over the most recent millenia. Secondly, the changes in topography wrought by Mount Vesuvius’ volcanic activities has altered the course, erosional activities, and depositional patterns of the Sarno (Sarnus) River with respect to the seacoast. Thirdly, the area has been subject to about 30 meters of tectonic uplift of the terrain during the past 6,000 years as the African Plate dived underneath the Eurasian Plate, generated the volcanic eruptions of Mount Vesuvius overlying the plate boundaries, and contributed further uplift of the Alpine, Dalmatian, and other mountain ranges bordering the basin of the Mediterranean Sea. Fourthly, there has been some post-glaciation estatic uplift of the continents. Since the burial of Pompeii and its harbor in 79AD, there has probably been no more than about 10 meters or less of uplift for Pompeii’s harbor. As the uplift of the terrain increased, so too has the mean sea level of the Mediterranean Sea been increasing in the past two millenia. What we see today is the balance of all these effects.
No docks at Pompei–too far inland. However, at Herculaneum, the old seashore has been excavated, complete with docks and boats and boat houses and the impressions of many people who tried to escape to the sea when the pyroclastic flows came down from Vesuvio. If you have the chance, go see it–very impressive and more compact and better preserved than Pompei. The excavation is massive since Herculaneum was covered with a lot of tuffa. I don’t know the height exactly, but 50′ is in the ballpark. The land rose and was extended into the sea by the eruption. It’s not a good spot to measure ancient sea level.
Pompeii had one of the most important and thriving ports and harbors in the region in 79AD at the adjoining Porto Ercolano. Archaeologists are now in the very early stages of digging into the harbor area.
Fred (10:06:25) :
“I thought everyone knew Global Warming causes Global Cooling?”
Actually, it appears that a few cold winters around 1975-1982 “caused” the global “warming” we hear so much about from the warmists. Warmer winters (but not unusually warm) since 1998 give an apparent upward trend to average temperatures from 1975 to present.
I’ve been examining individual U.S. city temperature records, and the small cities show a consistent pattern.
see http://sowellslawblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/no-warming-from-co2.html
Well it’s starting by the look of it. There are a few stories lately about getting colder due to climate change, little ice ages, now Wales getting Glaciers. It’s almost in the same sense as Global warming changed to Climate change overnight and everyone didn’t bat an eye lid, all of a sudden people will forget that we were being told that the world was going to fry us to death, and be worried that we are going to freeze to death!
When will people wake up to this #$@$??
The ancient port at Ephesus (near Kusudasi, Turkey) is also well inland today.
Glaciers in Wales? That is a problem?
And how do they propose we get them to stop swallowing ice chunks? 😉
Hi all
As a complete layman – but a natural cynic on almost everything – I have been trying to follow and get up to speed on MMGW debate.
Looking at just one aspect of the debate, i.e. sea levels, surely increases or decreases in sea level must be a result of all manner of issues other than just melting ice caps?
In terms of effects likely to decrease sea levels then do these issues have a “material” effect?:
1. the amount of damming of rivers
2. the storage of water on land by humans (reservoirs, water heaters, header tanks in every new house, swimming pools, etc)
3. the pumping of sea water “underground” to force out the oil for driling
Then, on the other side:
1. over 100,000 ships have been launched in the last century. what is the total tonnage/displacement of the loaded ships sailing the seas and does this have a material affect?
2. Coastal erosion. from my geography O level, we were told that the sea wages a constant attack on all coastlines. Isn’t the effect of this to remove land from “above sea level” – to underneath it, thus increasing sea level? I remember being told, that given enough time, the effect of coastal erosion will eventually be to remove all “land” from the earth’s suface.
3. undersea volcanos. do the new volcanos have the effect of increasing sea levels?
Are any of these taken into account or are they not material?
Dave
sHx
“This is a good explanation of Gulf Stream’s impact. Another case in point is Murmansk (68:58 N). It is almost 10 degrees lat higher than St. Petersburg (59:57 N). Yet, Murmansk’s seaport is open to traffic all year round while St. Petersburg’s is closed to navigation in winters since the sea freezes up.”
Murmansk temps: Jan avg low = -13.8c; feb avg low = -13.4c
St. Petersburg: jan avg low = -8.8c; feb avg low = -8.8c
Thus St. Petersburg enjoys milder winters than Murmansk in complete contradiction to you claim.
sHx 17:40:51
The point I was making in my original comment was that when I was at school we were told that the Gulf stream controlled the weather in the British Isles, and that is still trotted out today as gospel like in the film the Day after tomorrow.
I have spent most of my life as a farmer and amateur sailor and I have always taken note of the position of the high pressure area over the Azores and the jet stream to tell me what the Summer or Winter were going to be like (not the met office).
When the Azores high sinks to the south, southern Britain has wet Summers/mild wet winters. When the high moves North of the Azores the jet steam moves over Scotland and they get wet Summers/mild winters and Southern Britain get nice dry warm weather.
In the recent cold spell in Northern Europe the Jet steam moved as far south as Spain allowing in Arctic air.
So it seems to me that the Main driver of the weather in Britain is the jet Stream not the Gulf stream but as I said in my first comment I am not saying it has no effect.
Not wishing to be pedantic but although the water is warm enough to stop sea water freezing at Murmansk it does not warm the air temperature the highest max. temp in January is -7C
No need to book a mountain-climbing tour. Just driving through the mountains provides recognizable signs (between speed cameras 🙂 ) that there was glacial activity; “not so long ago”.
My question about this is that if both the West and East Greenland currents are cold currents then why is the Eastern side of Greenland showing warmer temperatures. I know that the Irminger Current (Warm offshoot of the Gulf Stream) flows around the Western side of Iceland and thus modifies the weather there, but it doesn’t appear to have any influence on the Eastern side of the Greenland. The reason I’m wondering is because I’m wondering how this might affect the credibility of this product.
Now, the Southern Tip of Greenland is showing colder temperatures which I’m guessing is from the convergence of both the East and West Greenland Currents.
yonason (20:58:45) :
Sea level looks pretty stable from here.
http://nzclimatescience.net/images/PDFs/paperncgtsealevl.pdf
That is a very interesting Link and so is this link http://www.bom.gov.au/ntc/IDO60101/IDO60101.200809.pdf back to the original report which was last updated in 2008. It would be interesing to see it updated to 2010.
One of the items of most interest in Figure 11, MONTHLY MEAN SEA LEVELS is the amount of change over the years and the Rate of Change, especially during 1997.
What is also very obvious is that the Australian Government have the data to dispute the AGW claims about alarmingly rising sea levels currently being used and has chosen NOT to do so.
MELTING OF POLAR ICE CAP
The density of water at zero degrees centigrade is 0.9999 grams per cm. The density of ice at zero degree centigrade is 0.9150. In other words, 1 cc of ice weights only 0.91 gm and hence will displace only 0.915cc of water, when the ice is floating in water. When the ice float, almost the whole of body sinks below the surface of water, expect a small portion projecting above the surface. In the North Pole area, there is no land. The crust of the earth forms a huge bowl filled with seawater and a huge mass of ice floating in it just like an ice cube placed in a bowl of water. The volume of ice submerged below the ice may be almost 9 times more than the icecap which we observe above the surface of water. The molecules covering the underwater portion of the icecap absorb heat from the sea water in which it floats and melt into water. This is a continuous process happening round the clock, allover the year, irrespective of summer or winter. As I have explained in my booklet, the necessary energy is supplied by the earth itself. The role of the Sun which shines only for a limited period is too insignificant to have any impact on this process. As the density of water is more than that of ice, the volume of water generated by the melting of ice is less than that of water originally occupied by the ice block in the ratio 9999:9150. Therefore the sea level will actually come down because of the melting process. In practice, this may not happen because of the continuous deposition of snow in the polar region which will continuously push down the ice cap.
A lot has been talked about the rising of sea level because of Global warming. This is a misconception. In some places, the sea level goes up and in other places, it recedes. This phenomenon has been extensively discussed in Milner’s geography.
My contention can be tested by a simple experiment. Place ice cubes in a tumbler and fill it with water until the water overflows. Leave it until all the ice melts. Watch for any overflow of water during this process.
FOR BOOK global warming is a myth, contact: waterfriendkks@gmail.com
D. Patterson (22:22:25) :
GeneDoc (21:49:17) :
No docks at Pompei–too far inland.
Pompeii had one of the most important and thriving ports and harbors in the region in 79AD at the adjoining Porto Ercolano. Archaeologists are now in the very early stages of digging into the harbor area.
Ercolano=Herculaneum. I think of Ercolano as a separate town from Pompei, but they are certainly not too far from one another (15km). But the center of Pompei is well inland today. Sorry to make assumptions based on that and thanks for the correction. If Pompei had a harbor, Vesuvius filled it in (as it did at Ercolano). In any case, it doesn’t say much about sea level!
Ullapool, Scotland is at the same latitude as the central Hudson Bay, yet it has palm trees. This is because of the Gulf Stream.
You won’t find a lot of palm trees around the Hudson Bay.
Steve Goddard 06:52:08
The comparison of Hudson Bay and Ullapool is not a good one.
Ullapool has a maritime climate like much of northern Europe whereas Hudson Bay has a continental climate which is exacerbated by a very low salinity of the sea water due to low evaporation in the Summer and a large flow of fresh water from the numerous rivers flowing into it. In fact the average yearly temperature is -2C which is lower than other places of a similar latitude.
It is very difficult to separate the effects of the Maritime climate from the effect of the gulf stream so we should not assume that its because of the Gulf stream just because we have been told it is. I don’t
Sorry pressed the send button before I had finished!
I was going to say: I don’t normally use wikipedia but if you search for Maritime climate they have a very good map of areas of Maritime climate.
Mark (04:23:22) :
My question about this is that if both the West and East Greenland currents are cold currents then why is the Eastern side of Greenland showing warmer temperatures. I know that the Irminger Current (Warm offshoot of the Gulf Stream) flows around the Western side of Iceland and thus modifies the weather there, but it doesn’t appear to have any influence on the Eastern side of the Greenland. The reason I’m wondering is because I’m wondering how this might affect the credibility of this product.
Now, the Southern Tip of Greenland is showing colder temperatures which I’m guessing is from the convergence of both the East and West Greenland Currents.
The E & W Greenland currents don’t converge, the W current flows S through the Fram Strait along the E Greenland coast then turns N and flows along the W Greenland coast to form the W Greenland Current.
sHx
One reason St Petersburg freezes where Murmansk does not is that the salinity of the Gulf of Finland on which St. Petersburg sits, is one quarter as saline as coastal water in the Barents Sea on which Murmansk is situated.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic_Sea
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barents_Sea
“Alan Cheetham (13:49:57) :
“Andrew P. (12:43:46)
ChrisM is correct (13:19:01)
I live in Seattle where we have been having a mild January while most of the continent has been freezing – this is the “warm” ocean effect (the east side of the ocean) – we don’t have a Gulf Stream.”
I am a native of Puget Sound. We do have a “Gulf Stream” and its name is the Japan Current. But Puget Sound weather may be moderated by the heat released over the Olympic Peninsula by over 100 inches/year rainfall (mostly in winter) and over the Cascades by ~ 50 inches/year rainfall (also mostly in winter).
Roman Sea levels
I seem to recall a study on the excavation of the Roman port at either Porto Vecchio or Aleria in Corsica dating from about 200BC showing sea level at this time being approximately 40 feet above current sea level. No volcanic eruptions here?
GeneDoc (06:30:11) :
Historians report usage of Pompeii’s harbor by a succession of conqueors and their naval fleets, with a naval fleet stationed in Pompeii’s harbor at one time. Pompeii’s industry is often described as being based upon the maritime trade flowing through its port, with Marc Monnier writing in his 1877 book The Wonders of Pompeii:
“All that can be positively stated is that the city was the entrepôt of
the trade of Nola, Nocera, and Atella. Its port was large enough to
receive a naval armament, for it sheltered the fleet of P. Cornelius. […] it is now conceded that Pompeii, like many other seaside places, had its harbor at a distance.”
Archaeologists are only recently exploring outside the Porto Marina (Sea Gate) in search of the buried harbor. Some recent news stories noted the discovery of earlier Samnite ruins while the arcaeologists were searching for the port and its rich community. Finding the port could result in even more enlighteneing discoveries given its diverse nature, presence of ancient ships and boats, warehouses, and more. Hints of what may someday be discovered can be seen in the ~1st Century AD fresco depicting Pompeii’s harbor. See the USA Today article:
Digging deeper: Archaeologists race to show Pompeii daily life
A fresco circa 1st century A.D., “View of a Harbor Town,” shows Pompeii.
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/discoveries/2009-07-15-pompeii_N.htm
Pliny the Younger described an alarming receding of the sea as the eruption of Mount Vesuvius was underway in his Letters about the death of his uncle, Pliny the Elder. Informaton about the geological uplift in recent millenia is from:
Marturano, A. et al. Evidence for Holocenic uplift at Somma-Vesuvius. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research; 184(2009). http://hdl.handle.net/2122/5370; DOI: 10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2009.05.020.
To make a long story short, the story of Corsica’s changes and non-changes in elevation gets complex. Some areas of Corsica have not undergone much uplift during the Holocene, while other parts of Corsica have experienced some significant changes. To get some idea of these complexities, see an example of one research point of view (not the only one).
Lambeck, Kurt; Bard, Edouard. Sea-level change along the French Mediterranean coast for the past 30 000 years. CEREGE, Universite¨ d’Aix-Marseille III, CNRS UMR-6635, Europole de l’Arbois, BP80, 13545 Aix-en-Provence Cedex 4, France. Received 18 August 1999; accepted 15 November 1999.
D Patterson: Thanks! I’ve learned a lot from your patient teaching. Visiting Pompei today, it’s hard to imagine it as a port, but clearly it was, which helps to explain its wealth.
The sea rose at the rate of 16 mm per century during the twentieth century according to tide Gage empirical measurement in Australia and the recent year’s sea level rise was nil according to a nearby tide gage on the south coast of Australia. Australia is a very stable land with very little vertical movement and so is a reasonable place for sea level measurements.
The sea level measurements quoted by alarmists are the output of models and not empirical observations. The ICE-3G model was in favor some years ago and it or a subsequent model is likely in use to produce these doggy figures. The ICE-3G model includes corrections for post glacial rebound (PGR), that is the earth’s resilient mantel rebounding from the weight of the immense weight of ice which was removed when the ice melted at the end of the last ice age. This applies in the North Atlantic basin, norther Europe and Russia, to some extent, but not elsewhere on earth. However, the model is applied across the globe, most of which it is inappropriate to do so. This produces an apparent sea rise where one does not exist. Australia’s empirical data demonstrates less than one tenth of the sea rise that the IPCC claims for the twentieths century.
These empirical observations are from the National Tidal Facility at Flinders University in Adelaide Australia, a very reliable source.
Empirical data run through a model equals modeled result, not empirical observations.
DirkH (11:56:23) :
“Max Hugoson (11:00:37) :
A marvelous computer scientist at my church, clued me into his observation that the DOCKS at Pompei are located about 3/4 mile INLAND from the current Medditeranian shore. The elevation difference is about 50′.”
They have a volcano there. Well in fact lots of them if you look around: Vesuv, Aetna, Stromboli. I would guess that there is a strong likelihood that the land has risen due to a refilling magma chamber. Sea level will also have changed but it would take scientific studies (no, not that science, *real* science…) to examine what influenced it.
REPLY:
This correlates with Roman seaports found inland in England, Libya and Ephesus (Turkey)
HMMMmmm, Google no longer shows the references, imagine that.
The post glacial rising sea levels drowned and landlocked a number formerly used in Roman Britain. The old Roman seaport near Lympne and the Saxon Shore became landlocked when the rising seas and resultant tides washed away the north shore and broadened the estuary along the south shore until the alluvial deposits silted the bay until the old seaport was quite landlocked kilometers from the new seashore.
Meanwhile, the rising sea level drowned other seaports in Roman Britain such as the old Roman seaport at Hastinsgs.
Tectonic uplift in Ephesus (Turkey) caused the mouth of a river to move farther away from the old seaport and silted in the old harbor and waterways until the new seashore extended miles away from the old seaport and city.