North pole to melt this year?

I do not know of any climate scientists who forecast anything on less than a ten year time scale and even then it is a trend and they usually indicate that fifteen or thirty years is better. This just is not the way climate science works. They care about the long term statistically significant trend.

It was interesting to me that the science panel which cleared Phil Jones indicated that he should have worked more closely with statisticians because of how much this impacts the validity of the science. A day-to-day or even year-to-year monitoring of the arctic ice cover risks focusing on the noise and ignoring the trend.
 
Except the context might actualy matter just a bit since I did not originate the post. I pointed out that the claim that it was the warmest March in 130 years might actually be inaccurate and it was the warmest March in 10,000 years.

If you could say the arctic winter ice extent was the highet in 130 years or better yet 10,000 years this might mean something. The truth is that you have to articficially select ten years to make it look better than the obviousl trend.
 
ridiculous on several levels...it is most certainly not the warmest march in 10,000 years. we have good reasons to believe that there were warmer periods just 1000 years ago. regardless, we have no idea if it was actually the warmest so to suggest it is a bit silly.

and i don't artificially select 10 years...as i have said multiple times....it is because Jaxa only goes back 10 years and satellite images only go back 30 years. before that time, we have GOOD reason to believe that the arctic was more melted as recently as the 40's.
 
paso...are you not even aware of the MWP controversy? there is a debate raging about whether it is warmer now or during the MWP. there is a good deal of evidence that it was warmer then or at least as warm....then there are those who desperately want to suggest it was not as warm then. regardless, we know that there were grape vineyards in Greenland and that the growing seasons in Europe were much longer than they are now.

bottom line, we don't know, but to suggest authoritatively that it is warmer now is silliness.
 
I am well aware of what the peer reviewed literature indicates. I am also well aware of what quacks and frauds claim. A legitimate scientific controversy only exists if both sides are playing by the same rules. It does not exist because someone claims something.

According to the latest and best reconstruction of past data, current temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere (really good data does not exist for the Southern Hemisphere) are the highest in at least 2,000 (and probably far more like 125,000) years.

mann1.jpg
 
paso...interesting graph...where did you get it? it looks suspiciously like something put out by Phil Jones or someone at the Hadley Centre.
 
here is a little perspective on the history of the MWP. Until Mann published his now questioned hockey stick graph (the one you just kindly put up for us), the MWP was widely accepted and embraced. Mann almost singlehandedly buried the MWP, although climategate showed some dubious things in terms of the strong desires to push forth a particular viewpoint rather than an unbiased scientific approach. at any rate, the debate is still on unless you trust Mann et al, to give us unbiased information. personally, i don't and i don't think it is unreasonable of me to question them.

wall street journal

here is an excellent resource which shows all of the studies which point towards a global MWP:

Global Medieval Warm Period Studies list
 
i notice you ignored the point. you posted a graph done by Michael Mann....i haven't given up all hope on Mann, but this graph has been questioned and criticized for very good reason.
 
Texoz....click on the link i gave and look at how many studies independently question the notion that the MWP was only in Europe (which is a necessary position for those who would argue that this is the warmest we have been in thousands of years).
 
keeping with the OP, we see ice continuing to buck the trend of the last few decades.....still VERY early and september is a LONG way off, but it is at least interesting to see it doing even better than the past 2 years....where it went along reasonably well and then significantly dropped. i am waiting for the drop to come any day now, but in the mean time it seems like it is holding out for as long as possible (to personify it).
 
Don't volcanoes have a significant impact on global cooling? The reason I ask is that I am curious whether the Icelandic volcano will have a significant impact on weather this year.
 
they can temporarily have a large impact, but that is usually only for a year. but considering this volcano only has a VEI of 1, i suspect it won't really affect the weather that much at all...unless it gets much bigger.

as a good comparison, Mt. St. Helens was about a once in 50 years type volcano and was 10,000 times larger. at least so far....i am not sure if this information is updated with the new explosion we had today.
 
2010 continues to remain in the "top" position on Jaxa, which only goes back to 2002/2003. still interesting, but still not terribly noteworthy beyond that fact.

however, if 2003, 2009 and 2008 weren't in the way, 2010 would be almost 600,000 square kilometers ahead of the 4th position 2005 and even further ahead of years 2006 and 2004. Of course, this isn't including 2007 which ended up lowest of all but was currently only in the 2nd lowest position.

Once again, I really do expect it to start plummeting at some point, but continue to be surprised at its relative resilience this year.
 
for the first time in about 10 days the sea ice extent took quite a hit the past 2 days. it is still in 1st position for this time of year (based only upon the past 8 years) but it could quickly begin cutting through the other years at this pace. should be interesting. it has held the #1 position (or tied for it) for about 3 weeks now, but it is about to possibly lose that position before it reaches a month.
 
smallest melt in the past 9 years.....we don't have records on the IJIS before that. still, it has taken a beating the past few days, so it could quickly become all for naught!
 
here is an update from the NSIDC...which shows that the current ice level is just a bit below the 30 year average.

NSIDC
 
well...the new numbers are out for the night and 2010 continues to fare well....it is still in the number 1 position. i suspect it will cross into number 2 within the next 7 days....but who really knows? i certainly didn't expect it to be in this position about 2 months ago when it was faring rather "pedestrianly."
 
well...this could be the last day that 2010 sits in first place. at the rate it has fallen the last few days it is about to cross 2009.....but for one more day, it has remained in 1st place, even if it is only by a little.
 
ok...it's official...as may began, 2010 fell into 2nd place behind 2009. still....all things considered, it has done well up to now so i will be curious to see how it descends.
 
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