MOSCOW, April 23 (UPI) — A Russian scientist says the Arctic may be getting colder, not warmer, which would hamper the international race to discover new mineral fields.
An Arctic cold snap that began in 1998 could last for years, freezing the northern marine passage and making it impassable without icebreaking ships, said Oleg Pokrovsky of the Voeikov Main Geophysical Observatory.
“I think the development of the shelf will face large problems,” Pokrovsky said Thursday at a seminar on research in the Polar regions.
Scientists who believe the climate is warming may have been misled by data from U.S. meteorological stations located in urban areas, where dense microclimates creates higher temperatures, RIA Novosti quoted Pokrovsky as saying. “Politicians who placed their bets on global warming may lose the pot,” Pokrovsky said.
h/t to CTM
George E. Smith (16:27:55) :
Very good!
That was a great article, Richard. Thanks for the link.
In response to the quote, “They were experiencing temperatures [in the Arctic] that weren’t expected with global warming,” the only thing that can be said is that, once more, reality went up against the model and reality won. Hands down. Let’s hope their experience raised their “awareness” of the issue to such an extent that they realize, and the people who read their story realize, they might not actually have all the answers.
“RIA Novosti quoted Pokrovsky as saying. “Politicians who placed their bets on global warming may lose the pot,” Pokrovsky said.
======
Rule 1 in forecasting: Never predict a turning point. You very likely will be wrong.
Pokrovsky is staking his reputation on a long-shot.
“Pokrovsky is staking his reputation on a long-shot.”
That’s exactly what the IPCC did, and what Phil Jones did, and what Michael Mann did, and what Wei-Chyung Wang did, and what Gavin Schmidt did, and what the GCM programmers did, etc.
That’s why all their reputations have been destroyed. They are now looked upon as self-serving, rent seeking charlatans, without the saving graces of Elmer Gantry — who at least made it rain in the end.
Smokey (20:10:46) :
“Pokrovsky is staking his reputation on a long-shot.”
That’s exactly what the IPCC did, and what Phil Jones did, and what Michael Mann did, and what Wei-Chyung Wang did, and what Gavin Schmidt did, and what the GCM programmers did, etc.
That’s why all their reputations have been destroyed. They are now looked upon as self-serving, rent seeking charlatans, without the saving graces of Elmer Gantry — who at least made it rain in the end.
=======
Smokey, you and I are in complete disagreement.
“Smokey, you and I are in complete disagreement.”
I have patience. I’m willing to wait while you get up to speed.
Smokey (21:12:54) :
“Smokey, you and I are in complete disagreement.”
I have patience. I’m willing to wait while you get up to speed.
======
You just want to see my post get snipped, and I’m not falling for it.
Have a nice weekend.
Pascvaks – no need to exchange dollars for pesos if you want to move to a warmer climate : both Panama and Ecuador use the American dollar as their national currency. the cost of living is lower in both those places and you won’t freeze your butt if we have a new Little Ice Age.
Wren (20:00:53) :
Pokrovsky is staking his reputation on a long-shot.>>
When you make predictions for no apparent reason itz a long shot. When you make up evidence to support your predictions itz fraud.
When you take proper measurements, interpret them in proper context, provide logical explanations of the processes and provide the conclusions that result from them, that’s called science. If new evidence suggests that the original interpretation is innacurate, the conclusions are adjusted accordingly, and that’s called scientific process. Allow me the following example.
Having observed the behaviour and expressed thought patterns of Wren in the past, it is my prediction that Wren will either not respond to my comment, or will respond that the actions of Briffa, Jones, Mann et al are in keeping with the scientific process described while those of Pokrovsky are not.
I will monitor this thread to determine if the evidence gathered and the conclusions arrived at need to be modified.
A paper from this same scientists on how North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) effects precipitation distribution, and the Arctic Oscillation (AO).
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1537319.1537571
Oleg Pokrovsky has commented here at WattsUpWithThat. Scroll down to near bottom at this post:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/01/25/warming-trend-pdo-and-solar-correlate-better-than-co2/
oleg pokrovsky (06:17:13) :
Dear Colleague,
Would you, please, to send me e-mail to contact
to you in more flexible way.
In fact, I worked with the same data, but use
more comprehensive stat.techniques.
Best regards,
Oleg Pokrovsky
@ur momisugly Smokey (21:12:54) :
How much patience does it take to wait until a block of granite weathers and wears down? Although with enough periods of freezing, getting ever colder, it might just fall to pieces someday.
I thought this was pretty accessible for us non scientists:
http://sea-technology.com/features/2009/0909/SST_impacts_ice.html
Also found him on Facebook 🙂
http://www.facebook.com/oleg.pokrovsky
Bob,
Thanks.
Mine is not a complete translation – but a summary translation.
I did it myself. No Google translator, which you can forget.
I doublechecked mine – and it is accurate.
The UPI version I feel may have been sanitized and “modified” for cllimate correctness.
I was baffled for a long time too, until I remembered two words: NEVER POSSESSIVE! Thus, “its umbrella” (possessive) is “never” apostrophized.
Russ Blake (12:58:11) :
Several comments:
1. Arctic temperatures coming down; CO2 levels increasing. It’s all caused by Polar SUVs.
Twas the BBC that did it
http://www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/videos/index.shtml?cat=big_races&id=63
H.R. (12:43:29) : If anybody knows cold, it’s the Russians.
As best I know, the Russians don’t have a dog in the AGW fight,
Oh, but they do… a very big dog. You see, if they don’t “get it right” they die.
To survive a very bad Russian Winter you must prepare. You don’t just do it AFTER marching in (as everyone from Napoleon to Germany learned, repeatedly, the hard way, … why can’t people just read a little and find some new mistakes to make? 8-}
So Russia needs to “get it right”. Very right. They need to buy up any excess grain, perhaps even 2 years in advance. They need to build oil storage facilities and maybe drill more wells. They need to make sure contracts with the UK and Ukraine let them get first dibs on natural gas they ship. And they need to “underground” more of their key cities (many already have large underground facilities, so this is a matter of incremental degree, not kind.) Etc. etc. and so on.
Anyone who’s lived long in very cold places knows that you either prepare, or you die. And as folks who have lived a while in warm places know, you can lay around and do nothing and it’s still OK… Dad was from a very cold place and taught me about preparing. He also moved to California so the lessons were largely wasted on me 😉
An example: In California, you stress over 3 or 4 growing seasons. In very cold places you stress over 60 or 80 days of growing season and can you get the ONE crop in before the cold takes it? So in California if you “blow it” on one crop, well, plough it under and reseed. In Russia, you get to wait through a long frozen winter with little to eat and hope next year is better. BIG difference.
Give me a choice between a scientist studying cold and climate in Moscow vs one in North Carolina ( or worse, California) and I’ll trust the Moscow guy first. He’s got a lot more on the line.
Sidebar: Very nice sunny day today in California. First one in quite a while. Reminded me what March is supposed to be like… Oh, wait, its April …
In prior years I’ve had tomatoes in the ground for 2 weeks by now. This year I’ve been watching a cold rain… In prior years I’ve had sunburns and shorts for a week at least. This year it’s hot tea and jackets. Now is much more like the 1950-1980 period. It’s been a good 30 years since it’s been like this. It will be a good 30 years before it changes back.
The Russians have it right.
It must be cold
“Another polar rescue must send chills down spines of alarmists”
It is the Arctic after all
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/another-polar-rescue-must-send/story-e6frfhqf-1225856131380
What did these expeditions prove?????????????????????????????????????????????
2007 – Ann Bancroft and Liv Arnesen – “They were experiencing temperatures that weren’t expected with global warming.”
2008 – Lewis Gordon Pugh – Planned to kayak 1200km to the North Pole to raise awareness of how global warming. No such luck, had to pull out, still 1000km from the finish, when a great barrier of sea ice blocked his route.
2009 – Catlin Arctic Survey – had to be flown out mid-stunt, after battling brutal sub-zero weather conditions that gave the team’s photographer frostbite.
2010 – Tom Smitheringale – He wanted to see the North Pole while it was still there. Rescued by Canadian soldiers after falling through the ice sheet.”(I) came very close to the grave,” he said, on being flown out.
jt (16:09:32) : Has anyone run a simulation of previous, extended cold periods against current food production to determine just how bad things might get?
Simulations are not very useful. Especially for this. Why? Changed varieties and change practices makes prior experience non-predictive.
Also, as others have pointed out, the added growth from CO2 enrichment offsets about 20%. Yes, that high. But there is more… CO2 enrichment looks to also enhance stress response for things like drought and perhaps cold. It’s a very virtuous circle. Also as it gets colder, places too hot to farm become viable. Bigger issues is finding enough fresh water.
(Oh, and sidebar on “its” “it’s”: I just remember to make the contraction of “it is” with an apostrophe, and “other stuff” is the other one… )
bikermailman (17:14:12) : I saw that story yesterday. Am I wrong in thinking that fungi do better in cooler wetter conditions, not warmer?
Depends entirely on the individual fungus. Some like it warm and wet (think about shoes, socks, toes…) while other like it cooler or dryer. Many like warm tropical, though.
“E.M.Smith (03:59:58) :”
Boy! Do you ever have it right or what! Well said!
Ever since I got into this AGW debate (Far too many years than I care to count anymore) I have suggested to AGW supporters to listen to what the Russians are saying. They are suggesting that Al Gore, his “science” and his followers, including the UN and almost all western gubmints, are so very wrong.
The German war machine found that out in 1941. Have we leanrt anything since then?
When looking for cycles, it would easy to suggest that we are due some more years of the warm phase of the AO/NAO; http://jisao.washington.edu/ao/
It is not a well defined cycle, and individual years can be dramatically opposite to the general phase at the time. Years with negative AO values, are mostly the colder winters for Europe/N.America etc.
There are a also distinct lack of Sudden Stratospheric Warmings with positive AO values.
Solar based forecasts can map a scenario for each winter, and so make forecasts based on the (one size fits all!) quasi 60/90yr cycle completely redundant.
pgosselin (13:10:44) :
Also at the Russian site is http://de.rian.ru/science/20100421/126005955.html
which tells of the growth in ice in Antarctica due to the depletion in ozone cooling the upper atmosphere, also promoting the circum-polar current; contributing to the breaking up of the Larsen ice shelf glacier.
I don’t agree. The increase in convection means less heat flux from sub-arctic areas and therefore a reduction in temperatures. A depletion of ozone, which (IIRC) is a “greenhouse” gas should notionally result in less radiation to space from there, resulting in a warmer upper atmosphere, not a colder one.
The Russian researcher mentions that British modellers, using meteorological records, had worked out that the ozone hole drove the increase in Antarctic ice volume.
“Scientists who believe the climate is warming may have been misled by data from U.S. meteorological stations”
A new Cold War?
Climatologists like Gavin Schmidt, Michael Mann and Phil Jones are closer to social engineers than true engineers.
A real engineer is practical, and makes things work, while a social engineer tends toward fuzzy thinking to support their point of view. And social engineers are, deep down, all big government types; Dr Ravetz comes to mind.
Here is a good account of the differences: click [source]
***
[And for E.M. Smith (04:29:33) and others, here’s a handy guide to apostrophe use: click]
R. Gates (17:51:06) :
Yet another Saturday of cancelled soccer due to cold, snow, wind and rain along the Front Range of Colorado. This spring is starting to look more and more like the non-spring of 1995, when it stayed cold and wet until after July 4.