A new study, published this week in the journal Nature Climate Change, supports predictions that the Arctic could be free of sea ice by 2035.
BRITISH ANTARCTIC SURVEY
A new study, published this week in the journal Nature Climate Change, supports predictions that the Arctic could be free of sea ice by 2035.
High temperatures in the Arctic during the last interglacial – the warm period around 127,000 years ago – have puzzled scientists for decades. Now the UK Met Office’s Hadley Centre climate model has enabled an international team of researchers to compare Arctic sea ice conditions during the last interglacial with present day. Their findings are important for improving predictions of future sea ice change.
During spring and early summer, shallow pools of water form on the surface of Arctic sea-ice. These ‘melt ponds’ are important for how much sunlight is absorbed by the ice and how much is reflected back into space. The new Hadley Centre model is the UK’s most advanced physical representation of the Earth’s climate and a critical tool for climate research and incorporates sea-ice and melt ponds.
Using the model to look at Arctic sea ice during the last interglacial, the team concludes that the impact of intense springtime sunshine created many melt ponds, which played a crucial role in sea-ice melt. A simulation of the future using the same model indicates that the Arctic may become sea ice-free by 2035.
Joint lead author Dr Maria Vittoria Guarino, Earth System Modeller at British Antarctic Survey (BAS), says:
“High temperatures in the Arctic have puzzled scientists for decades. Unravelling this mystery was technically and scientifically challenging. For the first time, we can begin to see how the Arctic became sea ice-free during the last interglacial. The advances made in climate modelling means that we can create a more accurate simulation of the Earth’s past climate, which, in turn gives us greater confidence in model predictions for the future.”
Dr Louise Sime, the group head of the Palaeoclimate group and joint lead author at BAS, says:
“We know the Arctic is undergoing significant changes as our planet warms. By understanding what happened during Earth’s last warm period we are in a better position to understand what will happen in the future. The prospect of loss of sea-ice by 2035 should really be focussing all our minds on achieving a low-carbon world as soon as humanly feasible.”
Dr David Schroeder and Prof Danny Feltham from the University of Reading, who developed and co-led the implementation of the melt pond scheme in the climate model, say:
“This shows just how important sea-ice processes like melt ponds are in the Arctic, and why it is crucial that they are incorporated into climate models.”
###
The work is funded by NERC, grant number NE/P013279/1 and is part of the TiPES project, which has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme https://www.tipes.dk/
Sea ice-free Arctic during the Last Interglacial supports fast future loss by Maria Vittoria Guarino, Louise Sime, David Schroeder, Irene Malmierca-Vallet, Erica Rosenblum, Mark Ringer, Jeff Ridley, Daniel Feltham, Cecilia Bitz, Eric Steig, Eric Wolff, Julienne Stroeve, Alistair Sellar is published in the journal Nature Climate Change: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-020-0865-2
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“Using the model to look at Arctic sea ice during the last interglacial, the team concludes that the impact of intense springtime sunshine created many melt ponds, which played a crucial role in sea-ice melt”
And that it was about 5C warmer in the Eemian should also be taken into account maybe.
https://tambonthongchai.com/2018/12/21/eemian/
In any case sea ice melt in the current warm period of the Holocene does not appear to be driven by atmospheric temperature.
https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/09/28/sea-ice-extent-area-1979-2018/
https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/11/07/precipitous-decline-in-arctic-sea-ice-volume/
Most of the alarmists are predicting that kind of warming, or more.
The real world, still fails to heed the models.
I prdict that by 2035 the climate alarmist movement will be free of any significant political or scientific support.
I predict they will be telling the same stories all over again, with movable dates.
Could Be…
Maybe…Maybe not
You mean like “The Arctic will be ice-free by 2012, er um 2035”
“The new Hadley Centre model is the UK’s most advanced physical representation of the Earth’s climate”
I hope they haven’t disposed of the runes and chicken guts. They were the most accurate forecasting tools they ever used.
I adhere to the pigeon flight school of prognostication.
Climate Models are not “Physical” representations. They are mathematical constructs that are the product of partial understanding of the climate system and contain numerous assumptions that have not been validated. Calling them a Physical representation is a gross exaggeration of what they actually are.
Since climate models aren’t physical anyway, they can’t be a physical representation of anything. They’re a virtual representation, and highly incomplete at that.
Once pon a time, long long ago but on this very planet an 3rd year engineering student class was given the task of choosing something to model and then seek an optimum solution. Being a poor, starving student I decided to model a healthy diet with a view to minimising its cost. My lecturer was not happy with such a non-engineering focus but such is life.
I came up with soy beans and spinach as the cheapest way to supply all the energy and nutrients that the human body needs. So, on the one hand I demonstrated the viability of veganism and simultaneously just what an optimised mathematical modelled world might look like. I did not do a sensitivity study regarding unit pricing or even one which identified the next chepest combinations but hey, thats modelling for you, once you have a result’ ya gotta run with it cos thats what you are being rewarded for. I got a pass and some red ink commentary for my efforts.
They left out the prefix “meta” when describing their models.
Ask them to fix that, and it’s all good, no?
The reported modeling disagrees with paleoproxy observations from 2017. Of course. And with previous simulations based upon such data:
Arctic Ocean sea ice cover during the penultimate glacial and the last interglacial
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-00552-1
Coinciding with global warming, Arctic sea ice has rapidly decreased during the last four decades and climate scenarios suggest that sea ice may completely disappear during summer within the next about 50–100 years. Here we produce Arctic sea ice biomarker proxy records for the penultimate glacial (Marine Isotope Stage 6) and the subsequent last interglacial (Marine Isotope Stage 5e). The latter is a time interval when the high latitudes were significantly warmer than today. We document that even under such warmer climate conditions, sea ice existed in the central Arctic Ocean during summer, whereas sea ice was significantly reduced along the Barents Sea continental margin influenced by Atlantic Water inflow. Our proxy reconstruction of the last interglacial sea ice cover is supported by climate simulations, although some proxy data/model inconsistencies still exist. During late Marine Isotope Stage 6, polynya-type conditions occurred off the major ice sheets along the northern Barents and East Siberian continental margins, contradicting a giant Marine Isotope Stage 6 ice shelf that covered the entire Arctic Ocean.
The Eemian is variously dated from around 130 to 115 Ka, +/-2.
À la recherche d’interglaiares perdus:
MIS 5, Eemian (~130-115 Ka): warmer and longer lasting than the current Holocene.
MIS 7, La Bouchet (~242–230 Ka): two peaks separated by a cool interval, with the first warmer, but less so than the Eemian.
MIS 9, Purfleet (British term) (~337-300 Ka): Less toasty than the Eemian and possibly the Holocene Climatic Maximum.
MIS 11, Hoxnian (British) (~424-374 Ka): Hottest and longest of recent interglacials.
MIS 13, Cromerian (British) (~524-474 Ka): Split into three warm peaks separated by two cooler phases, following a weak glacial.
A 2016 study of sea ice over Fram Strait during the past 2000 years, using actual data:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41063-016-0023-2
LIA ice advance shows up.
If the Arctic Ocean was ice free 127000 years ago, why are so many so-called climate experts wetting their pants over the possibility of that same event occurring once again.
“David Kamakaris August 11, 2020 at 6:12 am
If the Arctic Ocean was ice free 127000 years ago, why are so many so-called climate experts wetting their pants over the possibility of that same event occurring once again.”
Interesting question by David Kamakaris.
Maybe this whole narrative of fearful impacts of fossil fuels is just a case of shit happens but something that can be used to sell the snake oil of your choice. The Eemian would have surely made for a better snake oil sales opportunity because their WAIS + SLR orgasm had come true back then. The whole of the WAIS had had collapsed with catastrophic sea level rise. The Eemian link is in my prior comment.
Good point. There many periods in the past that were warmer than the present. From all indications, life flourished during these periods. So what’s the problem?
To the Left, human life is a problem. They do not wish to see it flourish.
White supremacy must be dismantled to head off climate catastrophe.
https://twitter.com/tan123/status/1267874638211809288?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1267877492486033408%7Ctwgr%5E&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.climatedepot.com%2F2020%2F06%2F02%2Fnasa-scientist-dr-kate-marvel-links-climate-change-to-white-supremacy-well-never-head-off-climate-catastrophe-without-dismantling-white-supremacy-calls-for-climate-racial-justic%2F
Just kill all the white people. They caused the Scientific and Industrial Revolutions, so must must die, especially the males. Then people can live once again in harmony with nature. All 400 million of them.
Agriculture was invented by Africans and Asians, sex indeterminate, so they too must die. But indigenous Americans also independently developed agriculture, so two more continenets’ worth of people must die. At least the Woke can’t pin agriculture on Europeans.
So basically, everyone has violated Mother Gaia and must die.
Those times will not let them seize control of your life.
Another study
Another model
Another scary climate prediction
Ho hum
Also, 2035 does not matter.
The world will end in 12 years
according to Perfesser Greta.
2020 plus 12 years is 2032.
So who cares what is allegedly
going to happen in 2035 ?
These people have some nerve
calling themselves scientists.
…. and then there’s the data. Arctic summer sea ice minima started bottoming out around 2007 (an inconvenient Gore effect on steroids). Looks like this year will be no exception:
https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/charctic-interactive-sea-ice-graph/
The interactivity of this site is really good. Check out 2007 and 2019 traces.
Arctic ice bedwetters do try to save on laundry bills please.
Antarctica is interesting too. When is that sea ice going to disappear? 130,000 years from now?
She said that in January of last year, maybe even before that. We only have until 2030 for that failed prediction to come to pass.
The ice free sea of that time was because of the then orbital mechanics. Without that Milankovitchian influence we today see the lowest ice levels since that ice free period. Or observable impact from climate change.
Perhaps you’d like to tell me why an ice free arctic doesn’t have an influence on future climate from that point? (a warming influence)
Griff,
nothing horrible happened then, thus nothing horrible will happen in 15 years.
How come Polar Bears and the Seals they eat are in abundance today, despite low summer sea ice level values?
Thomas Pearson says :
———————————
They simply refuse to perish, in spite of the warmist’s fervent hopes.
Arctic researchers continue to perish there every year, many freezing to death. This is from yesterday.
https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/leading-swiss-climate-researcher-dies-in-accident/45959190
What polar bears?
They became extinct during the Roman warming period.
Then they became extinct again during the Medieval Warming period.
They first went extinct during the Eemian, warmer and less icy than any time in the Holocene. Then they died out again during the Holocene Climatic Optimum. Then they were yet again wiped out in the Egyptian and Minoan Warm Periods.
They are bears of great resilience. They re-evolve during every climatic downturn, disappear in the following cyclical warming, only to re-re-evolve in the subsequent cooling.
Hard to die, those ringed seal-eating monsters!
A warmer climate is better. Do you disagree with that?
Tom: FWIW: and no-one – nobody on the planet – can tell its inhabitants what the ideal climate should be, or how to achieve it. Thereby lies the scam, and the reason why ‘they’ think it can succeed.
It sure does. For 127,000 years and counting.
Oh griff, you said Milankovitch. Be careful, or you might get trapped into having to explain how CO2 causes orbital irregularities, in addition to its time-traveling control of atmospheric temperature.
Now that we know the arctic has been ice free in the recent past (geologically speaking), griff now has to try and pretend that why the arctic is ice free matters.
The ice levels are low because the current phase of the AMO/PMO are pumping large amounts of warm water into the arctic.
Loss of sea ice in the arctic means the arctic becomes a much more efficient radiator, pumping huge amounts of heat into space. The claims that the sun hitting the waters will cause the waters to further warm has been refuted many times over. But as always, useful lies will be repeated ad infinitum by those who are being paid to do so.
Griffiepoo,
You’ve been asked many, many times how Polar Bears survived the Holocene Warm Period. Why have you never once given an answer?
BTW, you’re beginning to sound a bit desperate and hysterical, almost as though you know deep down the game is up for your lies.
Arctic sea ice was lower than now not just in the Eemian, the previous interglacial, but also during this one, 1000, 2000, 3000, 4000, 5000, 6000, 7000, possibly 8000, 9000 and 10,000 years ago.
Yet again your prediction for Icemageddon this year has been shown wrong, just as in 2013. 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019.
Yes, it’s colder globally now than for most of this interglacial.
Griff, let’s assume for the sake of argument that the Arctic will be ice free by 2035. Can you tell me why the 2035 ice free Arctic was caused by anthropogenic CO2 and not whatever natural forcings that caused the Eemian ice free conditions, poorly understood though they may be? I’ll wait.
Arctic was regularly pretty much Ice Free for most of the first 3/4 of the current interglacial.
Current levels are WAY ABOVE the Holocene norm. !
Previous predictions said the Arctic would be “ice free” by 2013,, 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2018. What makes Griff think that 2035 will be right, other than that no one will have to admit it’s also wrong for a while longer?
https://cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-years-failed-eco-pocalyptic-predictions
WRONG AGAIN griff.
The LIA was the ANOMALY… thank goodness for the partial recovery !
And which Milankovič cycle caused The Little Ice Age?
The 26,000 year precession (only halfway through)?
The 41,000 year axial tilt (only about halfway through its cycle)?
Or the 10,000 year orbital eccentricity (not expected to finish the current cycle for about 50,000 years)?
Show us all your expertise on the Milankovič cycles… LOL
or did you just read the words somewhere! 😉
No need to speculate about an ice-free Arctic and its influence on the climate since it isn’t going to happen for a long time. We don’t know why we entered a glacial period nor when it will end.
griff
Cognitive Dissonance writ large.
1 – The word they didn’t use was ‘seasonally’. There will still be ice in the winter.
2 – There is evidence that the arctic has been seasonally ice free during the Holocene.
3 – The polar bears survived previous episodes of a seasonally ice free arctic. Against the expert predictions of people like Dr. Ian Stirling, for whom I actually have a lot of respect, the polar bears are not doomed by a seasonally ice free arctic ocean.
Yeah…just what is it about perpetually frozen wastelands that is supposed to be so vital for human beings and life in general?
Now, when the polar regions went from being filled with life to all but sterile…now that was a catastrophe!
Imagine how many species and how much habitat must have existed when Antarctica was a covered in plants and roaming with animals?
And when it froze over, imagine the dying that took place.
It’s refreshing that they finally acknowledge it. For years we have heard that the current melt is “unprecedented”.
Cue griff in 3 – 2- 1-
Which is of course totally WRONG
Current levels of Arctic Sea Ice are actually WELL ABOVE the normal levels for most of the Holocene,
Probably in the top 5-10% . !
That is because the world has only recovered partially from the COLDEST period in some 10,000 years.
It’s what happens after the Arctic Ocean is ice-free that is interesting. A ‘for public consumption’ article that looks at that is at:
https://harpers.org/archive/1958/09/the-coming-ice-age/
The gentlemen who were interviewed for the article also had two papers published in “Science”.
Quote: These two serious, careful scientists — geophysicist Maurice Ewing, director of Columbia University’s Lamont Geological Observatory, and geologist-meteorologist William Donn believe they have finally found the explanation for the giant glaciers, which four times during the past million years have advanced and retreated over the earth. If they are right, the world is now heading into another Ice Age. It will come not as sudden catastrophe, but as the inevitable culmination of a process that has already begun in northern oceans. End quote.
It’s a 15 to 20 minute read – well worth the time…..
That’s from 1958, before Betty Friedan gained notoriety.
Scientists now know that there were ten, not just four, glaciations in the past million years.
The abrupt end to the Younger Dryas which the profiled scientists studied is also now better understood.
John Tillman
Thanks for the update on the number of ice ages John. I didn’t become interested in Global Warming till about a year ago – I still have a lot to learn, especially about the earlier work.
I pulled up a web page on one of the papers they had in “Science” – it showed a partial image of the first page. Their thoughts were apparently respectable enough to be published.
When it gets to just who can I believe, I quickly learned about the Bristlecone Pine. I walked among those trees in the White Mountains in 1975. Then I find out – the tree ring data headed down when thermometers went up. Gave me an insight into the thinking of certain researchers. I’m still learning.
It’s the little things. What I knew as the “International Geophysical Year” when I was in High School is now known as the “Third Polar Year” – which meant I had a lot more reading to do; the First and Second Polar Years, and the Fourth and Fifth. So much to look at, so little time.
“low carbon future”…you’re made of carbon–you first!
Yes, lets kill off all plant life because we need to save the ice. Sounds like a great idea!
Meanwhile, in the real world: https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2020/08/11/greenlands-summer-melt-season-set-to-be-shortest-for-years/ , plus countless other papers on WUWT, notalotofpeopleknowthat, and many other sensible sites.
What a load of modelled carp!
“low carbon future”…you’re made of carbon–you first!
Yes, lets knock off all plant life because we need to save the ice. Sounds like a great idea!
*made an oops..used the moderation word K & L L*
The advances made in climate modelling means that we can create a more accurate simulation of the Earth’s past climate, which, in turn gives us greater confidence in model predictions for the future.”
What circular logic!! Because we believe our model’s simulation of the past, er believe even MORE in its simulation of the future. I DO believe in faeries, I DO believe in faeries….
Are systems that appear chaotic actually predictable once enough is known about how they work? Is the climate system chaotic or predictable? Do we just need more model pieces to put the puzzle together? How are volcanic eruptions, extra terrestrial impacts and clouds going to be modeled?
> Is the climate system chaotic or predictable?
Climate is chaotic, you can’t predict it exactly like “it will be raining on the 14th of July, 2044 in Rome at 10 AM”. However, you can calculate the average (or mean) of a lot variables with very good accuracy, like precipitation, temperature, etc. Like rainfall in Italy will be 223 mm plusminus whatever in 2044 (data is made up). Current models match observations very well.
“Current models match observations very well.”
Not even close to being true.
“…we should recognise that we are dealing with a coupled nonlinear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.”
– IPCC AR4 WG1
You got three words right, “Climate is chaotic”. Very good, but if you try harder, you could reach fourth word, sometimes in future. If you´re lucky.
Current models run 3C-6C too hot.
> What circular logic!!
No, it’s not. They have a climate reconstruction for past climates, and simulations match this reconstruction accurately. In other words, models have passed a very strong test. Again.
“models have passed a very strong test”
The ones that sashay down the catwalks at fashion shows certainly have, but the gimpy ones that knuckle-drag out of universities are pathetic.
When have they ever matched these reconstructions “accurately”?
> When have they ever matched these reconstructions “accurately”?
Now and back. “Accuracy” means within error bounds, and they are narrowing those bounds each year. Reconstructions are getting better as well.
Clearly you forgot the /sarc tag.
When your error bars are 10 times the signal seen in the real world, then you haven’t found anything.
Incorrect. Models have been FORCED (“tuned”) by twiddling hundreds of parameters until they reproduce historical data. They have zero predictive skill.
Oh, please. When running climate models for the past they already know the answer. Any fool can predict the past. The models are full of arbitrary factors that can be adjusted – it’s known as parameterisation. Obviously these factors will be adjusted in such a way as to get the best fit with the past climate. It’s little more than curve-fitting and it does not rely on any improved understanding of how the climate works.
With this in mind, an obvious prediction would be that the models predict the past climate quite well, but they fail miserably to predict the future. This is exactly what has happened. Over decades the models have predicted roughly three times more warming than actually occurred. In other words, they are junk, you could probably do better by flipping a coin. And studies, like this one, that assume the models really do model how the climate works are also junk.
Chris
Do those very strong tested passed models show what was the reason to past warmer periods? Like the one in the beginning of last century?
Al Gore, book two.
“Gordon A. Dressler August 11, 2020 at 6:36 am
Al Gore, book two.”
Yes sir.
The Arctic is screaming
https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/11/18/the-ice-free-arctic-obsession-of-agw/
depends on what “ice free” means….
Had a conversation with Julienne one time about that….
…she tells me “ice free” means anything less that 1 million square kilometers
now that’s the size of Egypt…..and for any normal person….that is hardly ice free
That is the official definition, yes.
Griff,
Its a dumb definition, why are you supporting a dumb definition?
The dumb definition is what he is paid to support.
griff….
it’s the size of Texas and California together….
nothing that huge can be called ice free
This is using the same logic that when Al Gore reaches his last 2 billion he’ll declare himself bankrupt.
if you applied that definition to islands, just think how may places would be “land free”.
1 Wadham = 1,000,000 km²
its OFFICIAL !
Yeah, but I can see her point though, if we’re talking about extent, which is 15%. From all I’ve read, this came from shipping projections and, presumably, safety aspects of negotiating such waters.
If you still have a direct line to Julienne, who used to post on here, I would be seriously interested in her take on Antarctic sea ice in 2014 (record high) and 2017 (record low) and it’s a big swing. Surely some kind of instrumentation issue? If not, what?
Two freak weather events in 2016 caused Antarctic low in 2017.
Well yeah, but the 2014 high looks a bit freaky too.
https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/charctic-interactive-sea-ice-graph/
But the trend from 1979 to 2014 was gaining, so it was a record high comparable to the record Arctic low in 2012.
The years before 2014 were high too.
And then 2045… er, 2055… we meant 2065…
As long as there’s money funding this doodoo it will always be just around the corner.
“Free beer, tomorrow”
Waiting for Griff (the slanderer) to come on and say how bad the arctic ice looks now, its going to be the second worst on record, oh wait it took a right turn on him and is now behind even last year.
But last year was the 2nd lowest on record. Even with average melt to end of season it is highly unlikely to come in now lower than third. which would put 4 of the 5 lowest values in the last 5 years.
and it has been at lowest for date for some weeks now, which ought to be of concern
Griff,
Really you are concerned about something, but never tell us WHY you think low summer ice is bad.
Still not as low as 2012.
The world is still warming up out of the Little Ice Age.
You have yet to give a solid reason as to why a completely ice free arctic would be a problem.
2019 was a tie with 2007. That should be telling you something Griff.
Please try to make a habit of checking the nsidc site before posting incorrect information:
https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/charctic-interactive-sea-ice-graph/
Come on Griff. That’s goalpost moving. The predictions are for summer ice-free Arctic, not for low ice. Let’s see the record of failed predictions by climate scientists regarding Arctic sea ice:
9. Arctic sea ice predictions
2007 Prof. Wieslaw Maslowski from Dept. Oceanography of the US Navy predicted an ice-free Arctic Ocean in summer 2013, and said the prediction was conservative.
2007 NASA climate scientist Jay Zwally predicted that the Arctic Ocean could be nearly ice-free at the end of summer in 2012.
2008 University of Manitoba Prof. David Barber predicted an ice-free North Pole for the first time in history in 2008.
2010 Mark Serreze, director of the NSIDC predicts the Arctic will be ice free in the summer by 2030.
2012 Prof. Peter Wadhams, head of the polar ocean physics group at the University of Cambridge (UK), predicted a collapse of the Arctic ice sheet by 2015-2016.
Reality check: No decrease in September Arctic sea ice extent has been observed since 2007.
We’ll just add this new prediction for 2035 to the list of failed predictions in due time.
Didn’t Al Gore claim the Arctic would be ice-free by 2007?
The last time it was this warm, in the Early Twentieth Century, the arctic ice levels were also low.
Then the world cooled off for a few decades and the ice levels increased.
Al Gore isn’t qualified to make predictions about science. He was just repeating Maslowski’s prediction.
Sorry to be pedantic Javier, but that would be Maslowski’s “projection”.
A very different can of worms!
Last year was the fourth lowest:
2012: 3387 M sq km
2007: 4155
2016: 4165
2019: 4192
2011: 4344
Why do you keep lying, when year after year, you’ve been shown reality, according to NOAA?
Griff, for the 1000th time, how long is your record? I’ll wait.
griff, ready to accept, that the Greeland melting period seems to be over ? 😀
4 billion tons new snow in one day
Source
WRONG as always
Biodata clear shows that Arctic sea ice levels were MUCH LOWER during at least 90% of the last 10,000 years
The record you refer to is pitifully short and totally meaningless….
But you KNOW that, don’t you griff..
Why are you such a manic CLIMATE CHANGE DENIER, griff?.
By the way, please provide evidence of my ‘slander’ I can pass to my legal team… or you could just argue based on evidence?
It really is pathetic how griff can’t even remember what he wrote a few years ago.
Has it been that long since he smeared Susan Crockford?
I noticed Susan treated Griff very well in a recent comment. I thought that showed a lot of character on her part.
MarkW
Griff can’t remember what he had for breakfast.
If you had a legal team they would tell you slander is verbal defamation, libel is written defamation.
If you had a legal team they would tell you slander is verbal defamation, libel is written defamation.
Fair point, but you need to direct it to Bob boder, not griff.
Anyone that has been here for a long time will remembesr when Griff made all kinds of accusations about Susan Crockfords credentials only to have dozens of people through it right back in his face. He accused Willie Soon of being both a fraud and being on the take, was made to look like a fool again. Hes done it to many contributes here and when ever someone passes a study he doesn’t like he attacks the author. For him to state” or you could just argue based on evidence?” is beyond laughable. Why Anthony lets on the site i will never know.
I believe the point is that what griff has done is libel, not slander.
My bad
No problem, other than the lawyers, nobody cares.
I have provided it many times, Susan Crockford, Willie Soon and many others.
Griff
Take the bet.
You name the year that the north pole will be open water and if it happens then or before I will never post again. If not you never post again. Your buddy TonyM took the bet and lost and isn’t here any more, but at least he had the guts to take the bet.
Griff has been spewing his none sense for ever now, 6 or 7 (around 2012) years ago he was sure the north pole would be ice free with in a few years, but like all frauds he just moves the goal posts when he’s proven wrong.
Can’t reply to your previous post Bob, but Anthony lets grief on here for laughs. Just picture Ralph Wiggum when you read his posts.
That’s true, we do give griff a lot of grief.
He already took a bet, along with Tony McLeod, and they lost. They both said they would not return to WUWT. But now griff is back, again.
Actually Griff never took the bet, he ducked and dived every time I tried to pin him down, at least Tony was a man and took the bet and lost. He did try to come back a couple times but i kept after him posting the original bet until he finally gave up.
“Bob boder August 12, 2020 at 9:24 am”
May have had a bet with someone else, but he did say he was out of here and would not be back. But now he’s back. At least TonyM had some integrity.
Bob boder August 11, 2020 at 9:42 am
You name the year that the north pole will be open water and if it happens then or before I will never post again.
Here’s a view of the N Pole yesterday:
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2906.0;attach=281581;image
I note that nobody has taken the other side of my bet yet. A wise decision on y’all’s part given subsequent events!
Here’s a picture of the North Pole in 2016, courtesy of the Canadian Coastguard:
https://twitter.com/coastguardcan/status/769867469628596224
grief has a legal team 😀
You would have to be one of the most slimy little climate change deniers there is, griff.
Pretending you have a legal team… LOL
Paid for from the climate trough, no doubt ! 😉
You are a JOKE !
“or you could just argue based on evidence?”
Something that griff is INCAPABLE of doing !
He only know mindless anti-science propaganda pap.
Yessh!
Griff is science denier, like “them” all. I use that term, and “they” turn red and start screaming. It works and it´s funny.
griff
“my legal team”…..Bwahahahahahahahahahahahah!
Where did your Dog get it’s degree in Law from?
The University of Kenneltucky?
I think it’s up to about 5 years he has been bleating on about the ice. We had him shipping up plastic islands for the polar bears for a while, solving both the plastic waste problem at helping the bears. Hey it would be more than any climate scientist has done and at least it would be practical.
its bin a lot more than 5 years, he was sure 2013 was going to be the year and than when it wasn’t he started shifting dates.
take the bet Griff (the slanderer)!
your full sh** and have been since the first post you ever made.
Is there no end to the things that scientists can take money for?
During the Cold War it was nice and simple. They took money for developing weapons. But since the Cold War has ended, we have seem a HUGE expansion in the sorts of things scientists can offer.
We have just closed much of the West’s economy down in order to have a go at eradicating a common flu virus. With no preparation, so much of what we were doing was ill-informed and based on blind hope.
So we’re now going to have a go at eliminating an Interglacial. Good luck with that.
Perhaps the next wild idea will be to reposition Pluto so that it can become a planet again? Really, I think that i might prefer war. At least you know where you are with an enemy…
Keep moving those goal posts.
This is entirely consistent with the observed rate of decline over the 41 years of the satellite record.
NASA says ‘September Arctic sea ice is now declining at a rate of 12.85 percent per decade, relative to the 1981 to 2010 average.’
This year’s extent is just in third lowest for date, after a long spell as lowest for date…
The NSIDC news bulletin from start of august may prove enlightening:
https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
And what is so special about the 1981-2010 average?
Must be cherry-picking time. I can almost taste those cherry pies the Alarmists are cooking up. Mmmmm…..cherry pies.
Yes he dodged giving the 2010 to 2020 decade decline average 🙂
That would be 1991 to 2020 – the so called “Climate Normals” – that will not be available until this time next year. No surprise these were “dodged.”
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/data-access/land-based-station-data/land-based-datasets/climate-normals
Ice free in 2035, but for how long? A month maybe? So what? As Hillary said about a different issue, “at this point what difference does it make.”
The 70’s were a time of record high arctic ice levels.
Until the 1976-77 period when “ice arches” (aka ice dams) fractured, broke apart and the ice escaped to the south, then melted.
That’s when the PDO shifted.
> And what is so special about the 1981-2010 average?
Reliable satellite data. Before 1981, that was patchy or missing.
The models can accurately reproduce Arctic ice levels 127,000 years ago, and exactly fifteen years into the future, but cannot provide useable estimates for the 1970s? That’s your story, and you’re sticking to it, eh?
LOL
> but cannot provide useable estimates for the 1970s?
Wrong, they can.
Only if you use ridiculously large error bars.
Griff,
still worried about low summer ice, but never tell us WHY we should be worried about it.
Polar Bears are not worried about it.
I would have thought before commenting on it, you’d have taken the time to research that yourself…
but hey, here’s a straightforward piece about it:
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/cryosphere-oceans/sea-ice/index
Since the article repeats the lie that a lack of sea ice will mean the sun will warm the arctic waters in the summer, nothing else it mentions is worth paying attention to.
You still can’t answer a simple question.
It is clear you have nothing to show, that little to no summer ice is bad for the planet.
Interesting site. It even has a diagram of circular reasoning. 😀
griff, ready to accept, that the Greeland melting period seems to be over ? 😀
4 billion tons new snow in one day
Source
I’d be much more concerned over increasing sea ice. Don’t give a hoot about loss of sea ice.
Loss of sea ice increases the amount of heat the arctic is able to radiate to space. It’s a very efficient negative feedback.
Sorry MarkW, but the words “heat” and “Arctic” are synonymous with that infamous expression –
“military intelligence”
“Intelligence is what the enemy uses.”
–James Thurber
Except that the rate of decline for the last 12 years (soon 13) has been zero %. That is entirely inconsistent, and puts the usefulness of that decadal rate to shame, because the decadal rate at 2012 and the decadal rate at 2020 are significantly different. Does the decrease in the decadal rate over time mean that global warming is slowing down? It appears so, as the rate of warming is also decreasing:
So at least we now know what the “record” is. 41 years.
Why should anyone give a rat’s ass about a record that goes back barely half a lifetime on a planet that has been around for 4.5 billion years?
“This year’s extent is just in third lowest for date”
WRONG AGAIN
For most of the last 10,000 years, Arctic sea ice levels have been MUCH LOWER.
The period from 1979 starts at ANOMALOUSLY EXTREME HIGH sea ice extents similar to those of the LIA.
STOP DENYING CLIMATE CHANGE, griff. !
**NASA says ‘September Arctic sea ice is now declining at a rate of 12.85 percent per decade, relative to the 1981 to 2010 average.’**
That is a lie as it has not changed in the last decade.
They’ve got the art of goalpost-moving down to a science.
I have noticed that climate alarmists have indeed learned over the past 20 years. Instead of coming up with dire predictions for the next 5-10 years, they are now coming up with dire predictions for the next 15-20 years…
I thought that Arctic became ice free 2013. Did not Mr Gore tell us that ?
I do not at all understand why people are skeptical. Oceania is under water, arctic is ice free, New York is flooded , terrible hurricanes and typhones rages, famine due to climate change is a fact … or ?
Why do anyone listen to all this crap. They have been totally wrong in all their predictions, and I am very sure that they will continue being totally wrong.
2035, 2035, I know that number, IPCC, grey literature, Schellnhuber…..
ahhh, yeah, Himalaya, free of all glaciers, citation of ther error base, and now,
ok, now the Arctic ice free in 2035, the magic year 😀
Maybe I missed it, but how do they “know” how much sea ice there was 17kya?
Oops, should have been 127kya.
Isn’t it time someone suggested that these benighted souls who are so fearful of climate “change” get some professional help with their problem?
I mean, really, when you come right down to it, it’s always about money (preferably yours) and more studies and that excessive use of the word “change”, indicating that there may just be some paranoia about change going on with these poor, lost souls. I mean, seriously (not!), folks, we should have some sympathy for them and their obvious fear of change of any kind.
Even Mars doesn’t have a steady state climate, nor does Jupiter or Saturn, and Uranus and Neptune have their own agendas, too, so — well, you just have to feel some kind of sympathy – maybe about ten cents’ worth – for these lost souls. Buy them a beer or something and have a nice chat, and maybe you can get them to understand how feeble the Hooman Rayss is in regard to controlling anything on any planet anywhere, and that perhaps they get therapy for their untenable Fear of Change.
Just a suggestion, nothing else.
I think professional help with their problem of being defunded would be more appropriate.
I suppose that in 2035 we’ll see another “Ship Of Fools” expedition get stuck in the ice that isn’t there. 😂
They already have polar bears walking on ice that isn’t there in Hudson Bay …
Does this mean that polar bears will have to drink warm beer for the first time in 127,000 years?
The minute you see UK MET office……..(please have fun completing guys!)
The arctic was ice free 127,000 years ago. And nothing bad happened.
Ergo, there is no reason to assume that anything will happen, even if the arctic goes ice free again in the future.
BTW, the arctic being ice free, means that it will be much easier to access the natural resources up there, and that’s a good thing.
> The arctic was ice free 127,000 years ago. And nothing bad happened.
How do you know that “nothing bad happened”? Do you know anything at all about this?
nyolci
did we have run away global warming?
dis we have a mass extinction event?
did early homo whatever get wiped out?
did the seas burn away leaving the planet barren?
did the polar bears even disappear?
Come on, what universe are you living in!
Homo sapiens sapiens, ie we Anatomically Modern Humans, were then probably restricted to Africa, so remained relatively unaffected by Arctic sea ice fluctuations during the Eemian.
Neanderthals in Europe, West and Central Asia; Denisovans in Central and East Asia; H. erectus in South and East Asia, plus undiscovered archaic groups in Asia and Africa, known only from their genetic traces, not fossils most likely did notice climatic changes. Our ancestors by that time had long since wiped out H. naledi, the archaic type holding out in subtropical woodlands of South Africa.
> did we have run away global warming?
Very likely yes.
> dis we have a mass extinction event?
Scientists always talk about the importance of the rate of change. This is unprecedented now. Reconstructions show much milder rates in the past. So the answer is no, and this is what’s expected.
> did early homo whatever get wiped out?
Why should early homo have gotten wiped out?
> did the seas burn away leaving the planet barren?
??? What’s this stupidity?
> did the polar bears even disappear?
A lot of species disappeared, a lot appeared. Polar bears, as a species, is relatively young.
nyolci says in reply to:
did the seas burn away leaving the planet barren?
—————
“??? What’s this stupidity?”
About 12 years ago the North American Great Lakes were at historic lows. Regional and local news agencies published “experts” saying that within 50 years the Great Lakes would be empty and dry … because of climate change.
As of last year the Great Lakes are now at near historic high levels, and the Washington Post says…
wait for it….. “because of of climate change”.
I was already tired of this CO2 prairie fertilizer by 2005.
So where is the evidence of this runaway global warming you assert happened?
How do you know the rate of climate change today is faster than in the past?
And what put a stop to “runaway global warming”?
I assume you know what “runaway” means.
“> did we have run away global warming?
Very likely yes.”
He’s right. There is evidence.
Perhaps try reading nyolci
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runaway_greenhouse_effect
Only a greentard or a climate scientist(tm) would believe you can have a desiccated planet that magically fixes itself so we could live on it.
So try again could Earth ever have gone into runaway greenhouse effect?
LdB says :
So try again could Earth ever have gone into runaway greenhouse effect?
———————————————————
Looking at the long term temperature record of the last 500K Years the “up and down” changes look very similar in steep slope.
So, if one names the up-slope as “runaway global warming” … to be intellectually honest you have to tag the down-slopes into glaciations as “runaway global cooling”. A plunge. The “breadbaskets” of the Northern Hemisphere would be totally unproductive in less than a century, … perhaps as little as a decade from the initial onset of the next glaciation.
nyolci says in reply to:
did the seas burn away leaving the planet barren?
—————
“??? What’s this stupidity?”
Alternate answer to sendergreen’s:
Take it up with Dr. James Hansen sir. It’s not only stupidity, it quite possibly could be the most wrong calculation in the history of this planet.
There is nothing unusual about the rate of change. Regardless, only total idiots try to compare the resolution of century scale proxies with daily and yearly “weather” records.
Polar Bears are young, but they are older than 127K years.
Then it becomes Nick Stokes redefinition games, Thermal runaway has a definition and behaviour and some climate scientist believe that is possible
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_runaway
What is talked about now is “periods of sharp instability” and mixing the two terms just muddies the water and you have to wonder if that is the intent. So it’s the runaway you are having when you aren’t having a runaway because the emotion to the end audience plays better.
Actually we know lots of Neanderthals died that year. About as many as the year before. Summer heat waves may have killed some or at least shortened their lives somewhat. They were better prepared for the cold than us so not having all that ice in the Arctic was a bitch to them 😉
Lol, along with almost every other type of animal. Thank god the run away global warming reversed it self miraculously.
I’ll tell you what “bad happened.”
An Ice age covering all of Canada, 1/3 of the US, most of Europe, etc., etc. 22,000 years ago it started to melt, raising sea levels worldwide about 135 meters until it essentially flattened out about 2,000 years ago, with only minimal rise thereafter.
G’day Tomwys;
You stated I’ll tell you what “bad happened.” An Ice age covering …
Reference https://harpers.org/archive/1958/09/the-coming-ice-age/
Yup – 127,000 years ago the latest ice age began, with an ice-free Arctic Ocean.
Note that the article in Harper’s magazine (written in the 1950’s!!) was intended for the general public. The two researchers involved also had papers published in “Science” during that decade.
Quote: It is this melting of Arctic ice which Ewing and Donn believe will set off another Ice Age on earth. They predict that it will cause great snows to fall in the north — perennial unmelting snows which the world has not seen since the last Ice Age thousands of years ago. These snows will make the Arctic glaciers grow again, until their towering height forces them forward. The advance south will be slow, but if it follows the route of previous ice ages, it will encase in ice large parts of North America and Europe. It would, of course, take many centuries for that wall of ice to reach New York and Chicago, London and Paris. But its coming is an inevitable consequence of the cycle which Ewing and Donn believe is now taking place. End quote.
It was a reprint of this article that I read about a year ago that got me to looking to see what the current state of the research was. Nothing I’ve seen or read in the past 12 months, here or any other web site, negates what was written in the 1950’s. It’s well worth the 15 to 20 minutes to read. (And not a single mention of carbon dioxide.)
Nyolci-“how do you know nothing bad happened?” How do you know something bad will happen?
Nah, he is right as Javier points out lots of “bad things” happened, of course they are the normal “bad things” that happen through out history. But that’s OK because apparently he thinks we had run away global warming! Not sure what planet he thinks he’s living on, but hey whatever. But the one the rest of us are living on is quite cool compared to most of its history.
Hehe, with RealClimate activists like Eric Steig on the menu here, well, then we understand where this comes from. Next please.