Shooting At a Rapidly Moving Target
Guest post by Steven Goddard
Arctic ice area has recovered to normal (one standard deviation) levels, so ice area no longer matters. The issue is now thickness, which is measured by a team of explorers (Catlin) with a tape measure, who intentionally seek out flat (first year) ice for their route.
The team systematically seeks out flatter ice because it is easier to travel over and camp on. Typically, the surface of first‐year ice floes is flatter than that of multi‐year ice floes.
Arctic ice area back in the normal range
Antarctic ice extent has been setting record highs, so the AGW team now claims that Antarctica doesn’t matter.
the scientific community has known for some time that that on a warming planet, sea ice in the global North (Arctic) is expected to melt while sea ice in the global South is expected to remain constant or even sightly grow.
Buoy data which shows thickening doesn’t count, because buoys don’t cover a wide enough region. Even though their region is much larger than the Catlin coverage.
Thus, while the buoys provide an excellent measurement of thickness at a point through the seasons, they do not provide good information on the large-scale spatial distribution of ice thickness.
Two year old multi-year ice no longer counts, the ice now has to be three years old to matter.
The Arctic is treading on thinner ice than ever before. Researchers say that as spring begins, more than 90 percent of the sea ice in the Arctic is only 1 or 2 years old. That makes it thinner and more vulnerable than at anytime in the past three decades, according to researchers with NASA and the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Colorado.
Dr. Hansen’s original prediction that Antarctic ice would diminish symmetrically with Arctic ice no longer matters, because the models have improved since he made that prediction.
A new NASA-funded study finds that predicted increases in precipitation due to warmer air temperatures from greenhouse gas emissions may actually increase sea ice volume in the Antarctic’s Southern Ocean. This adds new evidence of potential asymmetry between the two poles, and may be an indication that climate change processes may have different impact on different areas of the globe. … numerical models have improved considerably over the last two decades”
Apparently the only valid target are the latest computer models, which are constantly backfitted to mask their failures to date. Is this how science is supposed to be done?
Anthony this is a little of topic , however very exciting. First news reporter in the States breaks the silence.
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/10456
“”” Benjamin P. (20:17:06) :
“Heat rises!”
Warm things rise! 😛 “””
Well “heat” is not a noun, so it can’t rise because it isn’t; and I assume you know what is is; well isn’t is just the opposite of is.
Now air or sea water that has bean “heated” (verb) will expand, and therefore rise because of Archimedes principle. Fresh water that is heated may actually sink; because fresh water does not always have a positive temperature coefficient of expansion; so if fresh water is colder than 4 deg C, it will contract if heated (but still below 4 deg C so therefore it will sink instead of rising.
George
Douglas DC:-)
I expect you’ll find that both Galileo & Galielo were probably arrested because they both violated the consensus!
I say again, ban beer, fizzy water, fizzy drinks, Champagne & all sparkling wines (the French have gone to war for less), ban exercise – all that exhaled CO2, ban sex (ouch – even more CO2) what on earth they’ll expect us to do in penitence for that I dread to think, no tonic water for the gin (outrageous sacrilege)!
When will these half-wits (polite) realise that CO2 is essential for all life, up to & including their own! All plants need it , our blood needs it for buffering acid -a coma results without it, no urea production without it either, it enables the digestion of food, frankly we’d be dead within seconds without it! Just keep chipping away & the scam will eventually collapse, the thing is already looking shakey. We’ve recenty had Dr Pope at the Met Office Climte Change Unit (it’s actually the “Research” Unit but that’s irrelevant) saying that natural warm currents could be the cause of the Arctic melts observed of late, no kidding she did! Rear end covering is suspected. She of the climate alarmism lectures has been caught out on video You-Tube spreading the alarm albeit in a somewhat calmer manner than some of her professional colleagues. They’re all being very coy at present over this quiet Sun, probably figuring out how to explain it in a computer model so that they can say we knew this all along, or something.
You scientists out there. I would like an explanation for that fascinating & amazing video of clear liquid water freezing in the bottle. Firstly why did it freeze from top to bottom or was that mere coincidence? How is the water supercooled in the first instance? AND why did that plastic bottle not distort under the rapid expansion of the water as it turns into ice, or the lid pop right off under the same conditions? Or was it just a cut clip from the The Day After Tomorrow dvd?
You guys are free to do so on the site I setup http://whatcatastrophe.com
If you decide to, let me know if there’s anything I can do to make it easier to use.
Have you noticed that you in NA are having a delayed sprigtime or prolonged wintertime while we in SA are having a prolonged summer or delayed autumm. Perhaps due to a cooler pacific and lesser evaporation rates. Where can we get some Svensmark’s clouds?
Well from a scientific point of view, the Catlin expedition’s data; if any is quite worthless.
No matter how they are measuring whatever they are measuring, it has no value unless someone actually has some reason for wanting to know the ice thickness in the locations of the exact set of holes that they dug.
But by tomorrow those locations will have moved anyway.
Why is it that the first lecture in a freshman course on “climatology” or “Climate science (oxymorons) is not a discussion of the general theory of sampled data systems, and the Nyquist Theorem.
You can’t drill a rock core in spokane, and another one in Atlanta, and then explain the entire geology of North America from any data you extract from those cores.
You can probably identify what rocks and minerals and anything else there are in those cores and their order, and likely deduce how those layers came to be; but they will tell you nothing at all about any other place on the continent, from which you have no rock core.
So this silly expedition was doomed to failure before they ever left the comfort of their homes.
Ozone and Zero Ice: A problem for us AGW skeptics ??
“Ozone Hole Causes Antarctic Sea Ice to Expand, Slows Warming”
April 23 (Bloomberg) — The ozone hole over the South Pole is canceling out the effects of global warming and causing sea ice production to build up around Antarctica, researchers said.
The human-induced depletion of the protective ozone layer has altered wind patterns and caused temperatures in most of the southern continent to fall so that more cold air flows over the Southern Ocean, freezing the water, the scientists said today in the journal Geophysical Research Letters.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601124&sid=a5EI1Y8ZCL9Y&refer=home
Why worry about ice extant/area at all? It grows and shrinks based on natural cycles. Heck, as cold as it was in the Alaskan arctic all winter I’m surprised it’s not frozen solid. By pretending it matters at all you play right into the hands of the Doomsday/chicken little crowd, who want to track each (naturally) melting floe with a disturbing eagerness, considering they believe it portents their own demise.
And what makes the 1979-2007 time frame such a perfect number to compare current ice to? Oh that’s right, 1979 is when we got our first satellite data, therefore, the ice extent at that time must have been optimal, ergo any change from optimal is bad, thus less ice now is the result of humans driving SUV’s for the last 15 years. Case closed. Isn’t science wonderful?
Since that 1 and 2 year ice is more vulnerable, shouldn’t we see it melting faster than in previous years rather than the exact opposite which we see now?
Why am I not suprised? The increase in CO2 can cause global warming, global cooling, floods, droughts, huricances and anything else they can blame on man . I didn’t know man was so awesomely powerful.
http://ice-glaces.ec.gc.ca/App/WsvPageDsp.cfm?ID=1&Lang=eng
Canadian Ice Service, some good info there, the time lapse of the “ice tongue” developments this year is interesting.
Replying to…
Jim Papsdorf (10:49:48) :
Ozone and Zero Ice: A problem for us AGW skeptics ??
“Ozone Hole Causes Antarctic Sea Ice to Expand, Slows Warming”
April 23 (Bloomberg) — The ozone hole over the South Pole is canceling out the effects of global warming and causing sea ice production to build up around Antarctica, researchers said.
The human-induced depletion of the protective ozone layer has altered wind patterns and caused temperatures in most of the southern continent to fall so that more cold air flows over the Southern Ocean, freezing the water, the scientists said today in the journal Geophysical Research Letters.
If the AGW crowd can believe that anthropogenic CO2 emissions can drive climate change…Then I guess it shouldn’t be a big surprise that they believe that stratospheric ozone concentrations cause the Polar Vortex.
When in fact the Polar Vortex and lack of Antarctic winter sunlight are what drive the annual ozone thinning.
urederra (02:51:06) :
The cooling mechanism is fairly straightforward. Sulfur dioxide is transformed in the atmosphere into sulfate aerosol, a fine particle that reflects away the sun’s radiation. The particles also serve as the condensation nuclei for cloud droplets which also reflect away the sun’s energy.
Although the above is a cut and paste, it is not possible for me to give you the IR absorption bands of all those molecules. So I will just give you my opinion.
Obviously the SO2 levels in our atmosphere don’t reflect all the UV. The UV that is converted to IR can be absorbed by SO2 but H2O covers most but not all the IR spectrum available.
More interesting to me though is, if SO2 reflects UV on the way in does it reflect back to earth any wave length that is not IR on the way out?
Common sense would suggest it may but common sense seldom works in science. I think in the absence of H2O, SO2 would play a greater part in atmospheric heat retention.
And from Bloomberg, we learn that global warming is being held up by the hole in the Ozone layer:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601124&sid=a5EI1Y8ZCL9Y&refer=home
Who’dda thunk it? Probably someone desperately searching for excuses.
Sorry, I see someone’s beaten me to it. It’s been a busy day at work.
Steven Goddard (07:23:48) :
re freezing water in bottle. When I was a kid, myself and friends went to the family summer log cabin in the Lake of the Woods area to camp around Xmas time. We found a 24 of beer (Canadian size boxful) in the cabin not frozen. However, as soon as we pried a cap off it began to freeze instantly from the top down before we could get a drop. We warmed up the rest for the next trial.
David Segesta (07:56:45) I agree. I would add though, the longer a time range is considered (more data points), the larger the sigma gets. Therefore, I would bet the longterm sigma is at least a few multiples of that shown at the top of this post, and all the variation we see over the past thirty years is ‘normal’. But then, everything within +/- three sigma is ‘normal’. There can be trends within the dataset, biased to one side or the other of the mean, and that is normal too. Flanagan (07:19:13), “BTW, if one must consider +- std, then one must also draw the conclusion that the Antarctic hasn’t been growing at all.”, doesn’t seem to grasp this.
ozone paper: http://www.agu.org/journals/gl/gl0908/2009GL037524/
On the site I linked to about the ozone hole, on the lower left area click on pdf version. you get much better graphics etc.
The one assumption I would add re: my comment regarding sigma is the bias that there is more variation in the longer term dataset. The climate varies much more long term than the past 30 years, in spite of the Hansen/Gore/Mann et al fantasy of it being stable until humans ruined it.
Supercooled water freezing:
The second video notes that the bottle doesn’t freeze solid; instead you get slush. Presumably enough tiny ice crystals form to cloud the water, but most of the water remains liquid.
For pure water to freeze it has to give up ~80 calories (small c) per gram of ice formed. But if the water starts at -3 degreees C, it would only take 3+ cal per gram to raise it above freezing and stop the process. So one would expect only a fraction of a supercooled water sample to actually crystallize.
A bit more on Ozone
http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/press/press_releases/press_release.php?id=838
Encroaching Ice tongue (Mars 2009) – south of Cabot Strait:
Persistent westerly winds during the second and early part of the third week of March, as well as below normal temperatures, resulted in ice flushing out of the Gulf of St Lawrence through Cabot Strait and drifting southwards. Towards the end of the third week of March the winds shifted, becoming north north-easterly drifting the ice towards the Sable Island Offshore Energy production area. While this ice event did not surpassed the record for a maximum ice extent, it was unusual and resulted in the issuing of ice warnings for the Sable and Banquereau marine areas. Climate records indicate an ice extent this far south occurs less than fifteen percent of the time. In the last 16 years only in year 2003 have we seen more ice south-southeast of Cape Breton than this year.
http://ice-glaces.ec.gc.ca/App/WsvPageDsp.cfm?ID=11930&Lang=eng
Encroaching Ice tongue (March 2009) – East Newfoundland:
Persistent westerly winds and colder than normal temperatures during the second and third week of March resulted in sea ice from the East Newfoundland waters being pushed eastwards. The eastward extent of this tongue of ice resulted in the unusual presence of ice in the vicinity of the Newfoundland offshore energy production sites. At its most extreme extent, the ice pack was approximately 30 kilometres northeast of the oil platforms. A similar scenario developed last year and in 2003. In both cases it developed two to three weeks later in the ice season. While ice in the vicinity of the oil platforms has been relatively rare in the last 12 years or so, it was a more common occurrence prior to 1995.
http://ice-glaces.ec.gc.ca/App/WsvPageDsp.cfm?ID=11929&Lang=eng
Front page news? Or just more sea ice is weather not climate?
The supercooled water vid does look a lot like sodium acetate though, or am I just becoming cynical about everything now.
@ur momisugly George E. Smith (10:24:56)
Oh! an OT semantics discussion about heat!
My original response was directed at Geo who said “Heat rises” which we all know (or should know) is not true. Heat flows from hot to cold (good ol’ thermodynamics). At any rate, heat is BOTH a noun and a verb, so you are wrong in your response. Sorry.
You can heat (verb: to make warm or hot) something up by adding heat (noun: added energy that causes substances to rise in temperature, fuse, evaporate, expand, or undergo any of various other related changes, that flows to a body by contact with or radiation from bodies at higher temperatures, and that can be produced in a body (as by compression)).
And yes, water is most dense at 4 C, that’s why lakes don’t freeze in the winter (good for the fish).