I don’t put much merit in this study especially when we see statements like “statistically significant, though minor, increase in extreme Arctic cyclone frequency” because we really haven’t had good observational capability until the satellite era to check their model output against back to 1850. Recent improved observation would have more effect than anything, but that isn’t even a factor in this case, it’s a model simulation. I wonder if they factored in this paper, which said that Arctic Cyclones are more common than previously thought, even in the satellite era? I reckon if we don’t even have a good handle on Arctic Cyclones in our current satellite observations, what possible hope could anyone have of determining an accurate historical trend back to 1850? Guesswork GIGO IMHO.
Increase in Arctic Cyclones is Linked to Climate Change, New Study Shows
Winter in the Arctic is not only cold and dark, it is also storm season when hurricane-like cyclones traverse the northern waters from Iceland to Alaska. These cyclones are characterized by strong localized drops in sea level pressure, and as Arctic-wide decreases in sea level pressure are one of the expected results of climate change, this could increase extreme Arctic cyclone activity, including powerful storms in the spring and fall.
A new study in Geophysical Research Letters uses historical climate model simulations to demonstrate that there has been an Arctic-wide decrease in sea level pressure since the 1800’s.
“This research shows that the Arctic appears to be expressing symptoms expected from ongoing climate change,” said Dr. Stephen Vavrus from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. “The long-term decline in atmospheric pressure over most of the Arctic is consistent with the response typically simulated by climate models to greenhouse warming, and this study finds a general corresponding increase in the frequency of extreme Arctic cyclones since the middle 19th century.”
Tracking changes in Arctic cyclone activity through time, Vavrus calculated a statistically significant, though minor, increase in extreme Arctic cyclone frequency over the study period, with increases strongest near the Aleutian Islands and Iceland. Dr. Vavrus suggests that, as of yet, the effect of climate change on Arctic cyclone activity has been minimal, but that future changes in polar climate will drive stronger shifts.
“One societally relevant implication is that more storminess probably means more erosion of Arctic coastlines, especially in tandem with declines in buffering sea ice cover and increases in thawing coastal permafrost,” concluded Dr. Varnus. “Erosion of Arctic coastlines has already been growing more severe during recent decades, and this study points to a contributing factor that will likely become an even more recognizable culprit in the future.”
Source: GRL press release
===============================================================
Extreme Arctic cyclones in CMIP5 historical simulations
Abstract
[1] Increasing attention is being paid to extreme weather, including recent high-profile events involving very destructive cyclones. In summer 2012, a historically powerful cyclone traversed the Arctic, a region experiencing rapid warming and dramatic loss of ice and snow cover. This study addresses whether such powerful storms are an emerging expression of anthropogenic climate change by investigating simulated extreme Arctic cyclones during the historical period (1850–2005) among global climate models in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 5 (CMIP5) archive. These general circulation models are able to simulate extreme pressures associated with strong polar storms without a significant dependence on model resolution. The models display realism by generating extreme Arctic storms primarily around subpolar cyclone regions (Aleutian and Icelandic) and preferentially during winter. Simulated secular trends in Arctic mean sea level pressure and extreme cyclones are equivocal; both indicate increasing storminess in some regions, but the magnitude of changes to date are modest compared with future projections.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2013GL058161/abstract
“… A new study in Geophysical Research Letters uses historical climate model simulations to demonstrate that there has been an Arctic-wide decrease in sea level pressure since the 1800′s.”
Have we not had enough of these computer simulations pretending to be real observational data? I bet their simulation is not even as good as Angry Birds. 🙁
Only the header was sufficient to draw my conclusion without any risk I would miss any significant “scientific information”. Shredder please.
Only in climate science do GIGO computer models trump data and observation.
For once, I agree. A quiet Sun supplies less energy. Climate Change will occur, except this time with Global Cooling. Warm oceans, cool lands [cooler non-melting ice sheets] will force the maximum heat transfer to the edges of the ice sheets [edges of the lands]. At the edge of the ice sheets, the Polar Vortex will find some warmth to fuel its insatiable demand for heat.
‘Climate science’ at its best – creative, illusionary, misleading and always on the hunt for more funds for ‘important research’.
What is going on here?
“This study addresses whether such powerful storms are an emerging expression of anthropogenic climate change by investigating simulated extreme Arctic cyclones during the historical period (1850–2005) among global climate models in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 5 (CMIP5) archive”
They simulate storms and compare with other models!
And that even if real data exist from Greenland, Iceland, Norway, Canada, Russia, Alaska. At least i know that data exist for Greenland and Norway and Iceland.
Maybe they could not find anything from the observations, so you can always start a computer game.
How reliable, exactly, are these computer models? I suspect that the answer is only as good as the information used to create the model.
Way back in the days when dinosaurs roamed the Earth there was a movie starring the Governator way back before he ever got elected. The movie was called “The Running Man”. The movie depicted the comparative ease that professional liars would have with computer-generated imagery, making it possible to see any outcome you wanted the people to see. Today that technology isn’t as much scifi as it was back then. Want to make it appear that the Arctic was significantly different in 1850 than it is today? Just toss the actual observations made by scientists on scene at the time and produce a computer model. You can make anything that way.
I assume the PR proclaimed a “state of the art model” executed on a really fast computer, which in actuality simply means that their inaccurate predictions are available much faster than before.
At least we will have a lengthy record of climate science fraud in the end. Let’s just hope its cycle is attenuated sooner than the exoneration of Copernicus.
The results show that the areally averaged Arctic pressure in the early instrumental period (1861–1920) was 0.8 hPa lower than today (1961–1990).
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/joc.3546/abstract
The quote was taken from the linked paper. The pressure was lower back then not now.
“Global warming could cut number of Arctic hurricanes, study finds”
Global warming could halve the frequency of Arctic hurricanes – extreme storms that strike the north Atlantic during winter – by 2100, according to a new study, potentially encouraging exploitation of the region’s oil reserves.
Low prospects for consensus on polar
the study
AS I have mentioned before, I am not a scientist but a (never) retired farmer that has had to live with the weather in one area for over 40 years , My partner and I also started keeping records for the Canadian Government over 20 years ago. We have seen and observed no real change at all, other then the terminology used by the warmists it is apparent every time they get called out and proven wrong they change their “attack” . The hoopla over AGW now morphed to Climate Change? And we are seeing and learning HOW and the threatening ways it is being done, it is truly frightening.
As soon as I read the headline I realized there was no use in reading the rest of the article. Therefore, you will be pleased that I don’t have anything to say about the following piece of smelly batshit quoted above.
“…as Arctic-wide decreases in sea level pressure are one of the expected results of climate change..”
Surely this is not the ‘higher temperature from CAGW leads to rising air and low pressure’ stuff. We have already seen that the arctic vortex is a cold core low pressure system. This science is far too complex for the linear thinker-Ship of fools -“consensus climate scientist type”. Steve McIntyre was right on about most of these-lesser university climatologist PhDs likely being high school science teachers in an earlier generation, if they were lucky.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/04/quote-of-the-week-high-school-climate-science/
Scroll down to the second quote.
“expected results”, “this could”, “uses … model simulations”, “appears to be”, “is consistent with”, “typically simulated”, “general corresponding”, “suggests that”, “future changes”, “implication”, “probably means”, “will likely become” and then they cap it off with “in the future”.
And that is just the press release.
One of the tell-tale indicators of B.S. are what I call “probable-extremes, such as “this could increase extreme [whatever]”, the use of words like “could” with words like “extreme”.
Next! (shakes head)
Last night the lead story on the PBS Newshour was the more than dubious rants of Sec. of State John Kerry on climate change. And, unlike other subjects, both guests who commented were chiming in.
I don’t know why I am so blessed–don’t watch the Newshour except when at my folks house less than a few times a month and almost every time there is some schtick about climate change.M
Whatever just happened? Yeah, I predicted that. Serious, you guys!
It’s those damn Arctic cyclones that are screwing up our predictions…
…therefore, there must be more of them
I have been forecasting for many years and for the Canadian Arctic for a good portion of that time. I started not that long after satellite pictures came on the scene. Before that, and with the sparse data in the Arctic, you had to do a lot of classical modeling of the weather. When satellite pictures came along it was like a whole new world opened up. We saw lots of things we never expected to see. Needless to say, a lot of our previous weather modeling was not anywhere close to what we could now actually see on the satellite pictures. To our surprise, there are a LOT of cyclones/storms that move through the Arctic, way more than we had previously thought. With the sparse data network many of these storms can move in between data sights and never even get detected. It was an eyeopening experience to see what was actually in the Arctic as satellite observations kept improving.
@MaxLD @.18,. With the sparse data network many of these storms can move in between data sights and never even get detected.
Thanks great stuff, as an observer for our Gov I have wondered about that lack of data sites as well, especially in the Arctic and Antarctic, I guess we can just maybe include a bit of the ocean surface in that equation??. Add those gaps up and I guess even with all the new data from satellites that seem to be interpreted differently by everybody (depending seemingly where the money comes from) ?
We know Dick.
( I always chuckle sarcastically when at the end of some of these discoveries the scientist ALWAYS add ” You understand every one IT WILL TAKE YEARS to learn about what is going on” ! just keep sending the money).
What is the basic function of a cyclone?
How does that fit in the Arctic environment which has had ice issues lately?
Yep, thats what I thought…
Then when the researchers discover a new set of high pressure systems moving around the Arctic, they will say those were predicted as well.
Man made global warming is mostly man made excuses and conjectures, supported by after the event explanations cloaked as predictions.
Another antroproghenic made up data simulation shows that the climate in Arctic is antroproghenic influenced?
Wow, outstanding modelling guys! We finally understand why global warming is accentuating blizzards in spring and autumn, and powering enhanced frigid conditions for longer. But it also may explain the anomalous wide-spread snowfalls during summer in Tasmania, Victoria and New South Wales last December. Plus the sprinkling of other examples of this that have occurred over summers, in south eastern Australia, over the past decade. Finally we have part of the mechanism for how a hotter earth is counter-intuitively getting colder!
/new-daytime-record-maximum-sarcasm
You can model anything. Proving that your model matches reality is just a little more tricky. Even at the current day, let alone in the past.
GIGO probably as you said.
And the measurements in their centuries long database brings them these conclusions?
“A new study in Geophysical Research Letters uses historical climate model simulations to demonstrate that there has been an Arctic-wide decrease in sea level pressure since the 1800′s.”
Major fail.
I am sorry but a ‘climate model simulation’ can’t demonstrate that anything has occurred in the real world. All it can do is tell us what happened in its simulated world which may have no relationship to the real world.
These scientists never tell us where the energy is coming from, if you shovel extra gigajoules of energy through cyclones, and radiate it to space, something is gonna get colder. Problem is these so called scientists want to expend terrajoules on their superstorms but never bother to test whether CO2 warming supplies sufficient energy to support their claims, I say, show me the energy!
There are atypically warmer conditions in the Arctic at the moment according to http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/plots/meanTarchive/meanT_2014.png
Going back in recent years, there was a strong warm pulse in 2005 & 2006. 1990 and 2012 were similar but more jagged and a little cooler. 1958 had one too.
So it just got me wondering if there a relationship between this warmer condition early in the year to stronger/frequent Arctic cyclones and more perturbation of the circumpolar vortex?
I agree that the virtual world of models can’t trump actual observations, even when the observations are sparse.
That being said, it would be interesting to look at their virtual history. I imagine they would have to tinker with the model to make it agree with the sparse history we do have. I wonder how they explain the retreat of the ice in the 1920’s and 1930’s? (If their virtual models don’t match up with the sparse data we do have, then their “history” isn’t worth considering.)
I imagine the positions and tracks of the lows matter more than a slight increase or decrease of their frequency.
For example, Iceland has had a kindly winter, with more sun and calm than they are used to, as the Icelandic Low has been often displaced down over the British Isles, creating a semi-permanent feature I suppose you could dub the “Britannic Low,” (and giving them a wet, stormy winter.)
A person on this site posted a very interesting thought, (I can’t recall his name and give credit where credit is due.) He pointed out the changed location of the low created a very different fetch.
When the Icelandic Low is in its ordinary position the fetch agrees with the movement of the Gulf Stream, and hurries the water on and up past Norway into the Barents Sea. However this winter, with the ordinary position over the British Isles, the fetch southwest of Iceland is across the Gulf Stream, aiming more towards Spain.. Would that not move warm surface water further south, and in the long term lead to less mild water reaching Barents Sea?
I don’t know the answer. I am just making a point that the location of a low influences the movement of air, both at the surface and aloft, and also influences the movement of water.
In attempting to grasp the engineering of a sixty-year-cycle, one would expect to see shifts in the location and tracks of lows.
Cold core lows and unnnnnnnnnnprecedennnnnnnnnted global warming, a match made in Heaven.
Col Mosby says:
February 18, 2014 at 1:48 pm
I assume the PR proclaimed a “state of the art model” executed on a really fast computer, which in actuality simply means that their inaccurate predictions are available much faster than before.
—————————————————————————————————————————
Great comment. Maybe they can get a Nobel for modeling a way to reach inaccurate conclusions at a faster rate. This could lead to the supremacy of the warmist premise by overwhelming the slower pace of discovery that skeptics are limited to.
I missed a bit there….”Maybe they can get a Nobel for modeling a way to reach more accurate inaccurate conclusions at a faster rate.”. That has a bit more bite to it.
The cyclone in the photo is a small size one, and its kind is sometimes referred to as an “Arctic hurricane”. I would not link increased presence of these to modelled decrease in Arctic overall surface pressure. Instead, I would link any increase of these to increased presence of uniced water at times and places where the upper troposphere (cooled by greenhouse gases via radiation) is very cold.
Overall Arctic surface-level barometric pressure drop appears to me as driven by the Arctic warming more than the rest of the world. Horizontal temperature gradients drive large scale horizontal pressure gradients. This means that the Arctic warming more than the rest of the world means *reduced* large scale pressure gradients, and *reduced* winds in large scale northern hemisphere extratropical-type windstorms. Including major tornadoes despite their microscale size, and the mesoscale size of their parent thunderstorms, because they mostly depend primarily on strong wind shear patterns in megascale extratropical-type storms.
I forgot to mention that the poles should have higher sea level surface pressure than global average. This is because at the poles, air mostly sinks by being cold, and needs to have above-average surface pressure to flow away after sinking.
So, I expect north polar sea-level pressure to decrease its excess above global sea-level pressure as the Arctic outwarms the world.
The Antarctic is a different story. For one thing, most of Antarctica is at least 2 kilometers above sea level. For another, a fair amount of the global warming from the early 1970s to 2005 is from the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation in a “north-warming” phase, and Arctic and near-Arctic regional surface albedo feedback is strong enough to leave a mark on the world. Unlike the Antarctic, due to where land and sea are.
“Increase in Arctic Cyclones is Linked to Climate Change, New Study Shows”
Cyclones all over the place from the surface (sfc) to 10 hPa and above.. hello.. everyday all over the planet.
Take the time to check out the Earth Wind Map. http://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/isobaric/850hPa/overlay=temp/orthographic=-92.14,58.10,742
Pairs of them set up and look like pulleys with belts creating a 3rd vortex (cyclone).
The Earth Wind Map has some very cool features. I pull the globe down so the north pole faces me and do alittle zoom, then click on the temp and go through all the altitudes and watch for those cyclones, where if you click on the map at different locations, it will bring up the location with wind speed, and temp which can also be tweaked for, kn, k/h m/s, mph, F, C etc..
At present my weather here in Wisconsin has a double vortex (pulleys with a belt) affecting the system.
Zoom into Midwest, set for 850 hPa (1500m or 0.932mi.) and it is quite visible..
You can also see, the warm tropicals air trying to force its way into the Arctic circle, punching in and vortexing out..Atlantic anom. side seems to be fairing better than the Pacific side..
So.. if the Earth rotates abit faster during lower solar activity cycle periods and the plasmsphere super-rotates at lower solar activity cycle periods and the thermosphere is lowered during this lower solar activity cycle, what affect might this have on Arctic vorticity or cyclones? Now spray or spallay some GCR and we have one heavy cold massive.. something or another..
The GCR spray nice thin laminar like horizontal layers .. wonder if those horizontal laminar like layers have that unusual tilt angle about them.
Would not like to see this layer become evenly distributed over the poles and mids..
Those multiple vortices in the atmosphere look like bipolar regions and now wonder more about the tilt angle of the structures.. oh dear..
“Increase in Arctic Cyclones is Linked to Climate Change, New Study Shows”
Maybe should call them “co-rotating interaction regions?” Instead of Arctic cyclones..noooooooooooo