North pole to melt this year?

Texoz....the original article got most of its chutzpah from the fact that it was advertising that the Arctic may melt completely this year. do you think that had merit? i am starting to understand how liberals operate. that is frightening.....
 
yes Whitman.....those that would post a fearmongering article (not hornpharmd but the original authors) about how the arctic may melt completely even though it was highly unlikely and has proven to be FAR from true, just because the larger cause is somehow acceptable. that is ridiculous and should be considered anethema to any serious journalist.
 
So, using Mop's logic, if a reporter said about a month ago that our financial institutions were in dire straits and we were at risk of a financial meltdown, that would be fearmongering, not responsible journalism.
 
So, is the ice melt over this year? I suppose at some point it starts adding ice, but I don't know.
 
mop, you keep saying the original article suggests an ice free Arctic this summer. As I pointed out 15 pages or so ago, that is a gross misreading of the original article. As you acknowledged back then, a prediction of an ice free North Pole, not the entire Arctic, would not be that remarkable a prediction.

Now, go back to the original article, read it carefully. See how they talk about the "North Pole" and the Arctic Sea as different things? The references to the merely symbolic nature of no ice at the North Pole?

It's easy to say an article is false and alarmist when you put the alarm in it.
 
i found this graph that is updated daily regarding the north pole. it seems to be recovering quite rapidly to the point where it will soon (if it continues at this pace) catch 2006....meanwhile 2007 is far behind in terms of ice growth.......it should be interesting to see what comes of it this winter:


north pole ice graph
 
the ice in the arctic is going up very rapidly.....each day it makes a fairly significant recovery and should pass 2006 in the next week at this pace. it will be interesting to see if it recovers more than last year (you may remember that last year it made a significant recovery before falling back below all years but 2007.).
 
Mop, you shouldn't get too excited. The "ice extent" is only the surface coverage.

You've been conveniently ignoring the thickness of the ice (aka total mass of Arctic ice).

The decrease in thickness from year to year (also referred to as old ice vs new ice) is the reason that summer 2008 Arctic ice extent almost surpassed 2007 even though the atmospheric conditions (i.e. wind & storms) were more favorable in 2008 for the ice not to break up as compared to 2007.

Additionally, one study that is not official yet, proclaims that by total mass (surface coverage & beneath the water) 2008 summer ice was at a record low.

Thickness. It's what the albedo effect has for breakfast.
 
Texoz, i am more than happy to follow thickness as well. do you know a good place to do this? from what i have read on that subject we don't have very reliable measurements. perhaps that is right-wing claptrap. can you give me a good link to keep up on the thickness with? i would be very eager to do so (seriously....this is like a pet hobby of mine now).

having said that, if the ice area and ice extent continues to grow rapidly, i suspect some of the thickness will take care of itself, but you are correct, thickness seems a far more important measurement to be aware of.
 
johnny, have you ever bothered to look into how much change we could affect by spending trillions of dollars and making drastic reductions? it is very very small, i want to say 10% of what we are supposedly "guaranteed" in terms of climate change over the next century. so i repeat....let's hope that the ice thickness continues an upward trend like the area and extent is experiencing right now.

we need to move towards alternatives to be sure, but not foolishly or with the air of panic that has been utilized to date.
 
The Link

That is one of the best, if not the best, source of Arctic & Antarctic ice coverage data as well as snow coverage around the globe.
 
thanks Texoz.....i already read that fairly often, but it doesn't seem to have much to say about the thickness.
 
sorry to post on this too many times in a few days, but check out the link i already posted. the ice is coming back very quickly. the only question is of the thickness and that is something we just don't have much data on. either way, if it is getting thinner then it is all the more important that extent and area grow:


ice extent
 
hornpharmd....let's see how good this media is. for instance, we are now 25% above last year's ice extent at the same time. the ice is shooting up and has already passed 2005 (the 3rd worst year on record since 1979) and is approaching 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2006.

by the way, i am not trying to glaze over thickness, i did research on it and even reported briefly back, it just seems that there is no reliable and comprehensive data on it at this point. all we have are a few samplings here and there which DO indicate thickness is an issue. in the mean time it seems legitimate to follow area and extent. do you disagree?

by the way....the extent continues to shoot up......




ice extent

and if you want to see how quickly it is approaching the 1979-2007 average, check this out:


1979-2007 average versus this year.
 
horn...i have read far more than that article and i know the overall trend has been downwards in the arctic (not in the Antarctic), but to mention the summer of 2008 as being 2nd lowest on record is not that big of a deal....we only have 29 years and we know that last year was the worst. so for this past year to be the 2nd worst is not terribly surprising.

nonetheless, it is shooting up VERY quickly. in fact, it is more than 25% over last year at the same time. keep watching because we are entering a VERY cold winter. i wouldn't be surprised to see it recover quite a bit this winter and continue for the next several years. remember most of the "record" we have is during a warm PDO and we have just shifted into a cold PDO, which means far more frequent la ninas as opposed to the frequent el ninos that characterized the PDO period that just ended. it will not be at all surprising to see the arctic fully recover over the next 5 to 10 years.

keep watching!

mop
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top