Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Climate Change Forum what a difference two years make

longer summers.
2 years ago and today

Not sure what your point is ?

I think on the dates you are comparing (Oct. 12 2006 vs. Oct. 12th 2008), total sea ice is similar.

Looking at the 2 pics, clearly there is less sea ice just north of Alaska than there was 2 years ago .... but the Russian islands of Novaya Zemlya are now ice bound as opposed to being ice free 2 years ago ....

What is your point ?

I dont know !

I just thought that the 2 yr old 2006 picture
showed more ice and snow than the newer 2008 picture.

maybe I looked at it wrong , maybe I should look at it the way you do , that way there would be no significant changes obvious enough to even consider making such a post !

...

You are right - on Oct 12th, there was more ice 2 years ago .... although I think you would have to be pretty eagle-eyed to notice it on a map ....

Oct 12, 2006 : 6,777,344 km2
Oct 12, 2008 : 6,695,000 km2

http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm

OK try this one then

the grey in the 2006 map is not snow.

the white in the 2008 map is snow.

Quite a difference in two years wouldnt you say?

Paul- Did you hear the news this am (Sunday 14th) that more parts of the Arctic would be ice-free at certain times of the year in 5 years, not the 30 years predicted earlier? The report suggested that the environmental effect would be significant, and included the effect on the peoples of the area.

To think that any change in ice volume anywhere, over a period of just two years, could have any signigicance at all is wacky. If it rained a half inch more in Moab, Utah this year than it did last year, would that point to a future global flood?

Ellis

I had heard of this months ago , and according to this winter
I wouldnt doubt that next summer will be a real boiler !!

and along with the additional heat there will of course be additional melting in the antartic that will cool the earth a little more next winter...

its summer down under right now isnt it?
are you experiencing any measurable change in climate?
I mean can you tell a difference?

alot of people might not agree that melting ice will in fact cool the earth due to the decreased pressures , but what else could be cooling the oceans as seen in the last few years?

I am interested in how far down the snow and ice will reach this winter and if the snow and ice will reach into australia in a year or two or not.

seems were in for a few dramatic changes that were not widely broadcasted.

..

http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test...=28&sy=2008

wow not much of a differnce

hmm, but if you gave me tenure and a goverment grant its an end of the world, man made global warming I'd say.

Be like Al Gore think Green, $$$

really?

tell that to the millions who are experiencing record cold temperatures this year and ask them if they would prefer the 2006 temperatures.

btw, I corrected your spelling! LOL ;-)

.

Hey, I couldn't get you, what do you want to say, please explain in brief.

So far in my part of Oz it has been a very cool summer. Actually it hasn't really, it's more that the last five or so years had been horrifically hot. NYE last year was 41c. This year it was 16c !!!!

Personally I believe that the term Climate Change is more descriptive of what is happening now than Global Warming. Here, in the south, we are much much drier than we used to be and the last ten years have seen us in drought. This part of the country used to be very damp and rainy. Not any more! Although rain has been pouring down further north, we only had half the rain we usually get in Spring last year, and this cool summer is welcome as we are still getting less than half our usual rainfall. So much so that a desalination plant is being built (on a lovely stretch of beautiful coastline- but that's another story!) to supply the water needed in future by Melbourne, a city of 4 million people. Apparently weather/climate forecasters see no reason to suppose that rainfall here will return to what was regarded as normal.

PS- I feel I should explain that the hot bits of our country are north-- the south (where I am), is the cooler, wetter bit!

Ellis

Thanks for the reply , yes Climate Change is a more descriptive label to use for now , with Global Warming being the underlying cause of the extreme Climate Changes.

the coolness you are experiencing will not last as it is due to depressurization , as the pressure reduction from the melting of ice ceases then the effects of Global Warming will begin to show its full impact on the climate.

as it stands today , there is still plenty of depressurization to occur before Global Warming will be a continous warming.

if you live around melbourn you can expect to see artic weather
for a while durring the winter at first , then basicaly year round for a few years until the depressurization ceases because there isnt much ice left to melt.

then a slow return to the type of weather you are used too , followed by continous rising temperatures.

there will not be enought energy to keep everyone warm or cool so the underground water may be the way to maintain a average household temperature.

while you have the time and the resources available you might consider using a geothermal system for your homes and buisnesses.

I hope Im not sounding too drastic here , Im just trying to give you guys down there some good advice.

...

I just think that the concept of a change in climate encompsses all the possibilities you outline, whereas Global Warming implies it is going to be warm, so when it isn't people can say---it's all rubbish---, and continue to burn forests to clear land for housing, factories and palm oil crops.

Unfortunately there will probably be little done to provide a source of new energy for us here. In this country of abundant sunshine we make little use of solar power, a stupidity that looks set to continue. You see we have extensive brown coal deposits in our state, whch is ours for the cost of scraping off the thin layer of dirt on top. The field is massive and there is enough to last for thousands of years, producing our energy and polluting the atmosphere in a very significant way. It's a long way from the city it mainly supplies, and provides jobs for many people in an area otherwise without employment except for farming. Politically, on many levels, closure is impossible.

As for the underground water, I am confused with the report as there is a well known and huge artesian basin under a lot of Australia. It provides bore water for a number of outback towns. In many places it is fairly brackish and only suitable for watering of stock, though it does provide some water in towns that do some purification. Often the households have a tap for drinking water from a separate supply, such as water tanks. Some use is made in my area of aquifers underground. The problem is that the replacement of such water is not clearly understood.

Personally I believe that the 'hot rocks' geothermal idea sounds positive, though at pesent. here is no industry to develop it, and we here in Oz need to use the free ever present solar energy all around us!!! At the moment though we just need rain.

OK - I can't stand it any more.

Paul, please provide one, just ONE, reference that suggests melting ice caps is currently causing "depressurization" of the globe, and resulting in global air temperatures returning to normal (the globe is not experiencing "coolness"). Heck, it doesn't even have to be a published paper, even a weblink will do.

If you can't - please stop posting this rubbish. It has absolutely nothing to do with science, and it makes everybody dumber just reading it.

Melbourne will experience arctic like weather? Good grief.
Here's some current arctic weather http://www.climate.weatheroffice.ec.gc.c...nth=1&Day=5
-26oC, with -40oC wind chill.
I'm willing to put money on the line, saying Melbourne will never see these temperatures. Care to take me up on that bet? $1000, $10,000, $100,000?? Whadda say?
Let's see how sure you are about your crazy ramblings.

PRESSURE



Pressure is proportional to Temperature



just pick one



here are a few who believe that the earth is cooling - not sure if I agree to there reasons though.



------------------------------------------------------------
YOUR TURN
------------------------------------------------------------
Cannuck, please provide one, just ONE, reference that suggests melting ice caps are not currently causing "depressurization" of the globe. Heck, it doesn't even have to be a published paper, even a weblink will do.

If you can't - please stop posting this rubbish. It has absolutely nothing to do with science, and it makes everybody dumber just reading it.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Depressurization of magma is what causes a volcano to erupt.
as magma reaches the surface (lower pressure)it expands ,and as it expands due to lowered pressure it releases gasses trapped in the magma by pressure.
----------------------------------------------------------------

Im not going to bet you anything , I know Im right because physics tells me so , and if you can deny the basics of physics
then you could also deny a bet between you and I.

if you just want to throw away your money try buying some stocks or gold...

.

Wrong.

I can not really believe you posted something that ingnorent,or half thought out.
Most Geologists would say that its the buoyancy and the pressure of the gas within the earth’s crust cause the volcano to erupt.



As for my 2 year what a diffence link. and god forbid I leave an E out of a word.

but your premise for this post was stupid in the first place.


but hey, more power to you.

THINK GREEN $$$$, I do, Al Gore does.

but please refrane from ignorence in the future

Its obvious that you dont understand too much about volcanoes!!

and why didnt you inject your opinion of why a volcano erupts?

there are many types of volcanoes , not all volcanoes (erupt) !!

some or most just flow , maybe you need to read a little about what you are posting about before you post such a reply.

and you misspelled ignorant...



crust does not flow to the surface , magma flows to the surface
and inside the magma there are gasses that previously were under tremendous pressures and temperatures , as the magma nears the surface the magma undergoes depressurization , the depresurization that occurs allows the trapped gasses to escape , this happens extremely fast and an violent eruption is the result.

now if you want to inject your opinion of what is the cause of a volcanic eruption then please do so , you replied with this..



which is exactly what I said you just re-worded it.

...

only I added descriptive content.

you might think about reading about what you are replying to in order to avoid comments such as
"refrane from ignorence in the future"

and where can the ignorance be found?

.

.

Paul is now officially on my "Ignore List". No longer will I have to suffer his intelligible posts.

I suggest others do the same. It's easy, just go to the "User List", go to "P" for paul, click on his name, and click on "ignore user".
It really is a wonderful feeling.

Many thanks for the tip, Canuck.

I presume you meant 'unintelligible' ....

To: rednewur , canuck and imrancan

Would you like some crackers and cheese to go with that WHINE?

LOL:-}

Paul
I've had about enough of your childish behavior. This forum is not the place for slanging insults and other such bad behavior. If you can't behave like a responsible adult, you can be banned.


Amaranth

I can not really believe you posted something that ingnorent...JRW #29163

Paul is now officially on my "Ignore List". No longer will I have to suffer his intelligible posts. ... Canuck #29185

I presume you meant 'unintelligible' ....Imrancan #29196

The word prejudice refers to prejudgment: making a decision before becoming aware of the relevant facts of a case or event.

I didnt see any remarks from YOU while they were slanging insults and other such bad behavior's...

and if you would like to ban me then just do it.

allmighty one.

I think your all mostly a great big joke anyway.

BYE BYE...

how do I remove myself as a member from the forum?

or just remove me for me.

thanks in advance.

a very good and easy way to help our planet .. there is a recycling company that buys old things from home .. also help us earn some money!
http://www.tripleclicks.com/10551651/go

If you people have read the news you will know that here in Victoria, the southern part of mainland Australia we have had bush fires of unprecedented fury. The unprecedented bit is because every 50 years or so we have drought--we did--- still heve--- so far this year we have had 1.4 ml of rain. This was a part of the country that had jokes made of the constant rain and drizzle. For the last 12 years this has not been so. We have had the longest drought in the history of this state. Then we had a week of temperatures above 40 degrees. The hottest ever. Then a few days in the high 30s--- then a day when the temp reached a record 48 degrees. As a result the bush literally did explode when fires broke out, some from lightning, some from human carelessness or intent. The gum trees are full of oil and their leaves get burned and then they become embers, which , on the gale force winds I forgot to mention, became a fire front over 30 k wide. There is nothing that can deal with this. People tried, some survived in bunkers, though not nearly enough, others stayed and burned, or ran and were burned in their cars.

Now the point of this story is that these conditions were different and more extreme than ever before. Records have been broken, and it may all happen again next week, and definitely next year. The change is the drought and the extreme weather regarding drought, excessive heat and wind-speed.

There are not many of us here in Victoria who do not believe that at least some of this is due to Climate Change. We are like the canaries in the coal mine. We are living in Climate Ghange.. and a week or so ago 209 people died in it.

Ellis

Im sorry to hear that you guys are having it so rough down there.
that sounds like one of those disaster movies you watch on tv.
one of those that are ficticious that try to warn of climate change , yet this is no movie its the real deal.

being caught in something like that and trying to stick it out and hold your ground is very brave if you have a proper shelter
but I imagine most didnt , running from the fires would most likely be what I would have done.

but there again you cant move the roads to where you want them to be so you need to plan a evacuation route and have some way of knowing where the fires and smoke is in order to make a safe getaway.

I can just picture roads filled with cars that cant go any further because the cars in front have stopped , and then the smoke approaches suffocating those who are trapped.

and making it impossible to see where you are going if you could move your car.

the best thing to do might be to just get the heck out of there when it looks like its time to do so , and have a plan.

now off of that one and for a look at the large area of sea ice that is just not there today...

http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test...=20&sy=2009


look at the areas in black (surrounded by purple)in the pictures , this shows 0% sea ice.

this lack of sea ice means that the water there will get warmed
more by the sun due to its inability to reflect the suns radiation and more heat will be absorbed by the areas that have no sea ice.

also look how far the extent of snow/ice has reached into the place where people have jobs manufacturing the worlds products.
to sell to the rest of the world that is loosing the jobs they used to have because of the way buisness works today.

these buisnessmen are brilliant.

Interesting...That's a lot of ice to melt in one day. The "black" is actually ice concentrations less than 30%.

What could have caused all that ice to melt in one day? The distinct butterfly pattern suggests a meteor explosion in the atmosphere.

Oh, I haven't looked at the link yet, but...

This sounds like an area of ice that suddenly broke up...

...possibly caused by currents from below (or volcanic activity), but I'd guess currents as most likely causing an area of weaker ice to break up.

Sometimes air currents, especially if they deposit soot, can weaken the ice in certain areas... then to be broken by upwelling currents, and lateral movement of the ice.

Sort of like a meteor from below....

~

Hi Paul,
Wish i wasn't so busy and missing these posts.
You have made some good points above--and nicely stated too.


One thing that I have a problem with is this idea of the pressure release causing cooling.
It's a neat idea, and technically reasonable (common sense) if you know physics, etc.
But I wonder about several aspects of scale with this idea. Both in time (time lag) and in magnitude, such as the amount of change in pressure relative to the overall pressure.

I think it more likely that these relatively small pressure changes may allow movement of the lower layers and some volcanic activity may be hastened; but the crust normally is flexed and released as the moon circles around, so it shouldn't be that dramatic of a change--except in relative location. Though I suppose the poles aren't affected as much by the lunar-tidal movement as more equatorial areas, eh? ...hmmm.

Well, also... I don't think the cooling (miniscule as it might be) will travel through the crust of the sea floor, to affect the lower ocean-water temperature, on anything but the scale of centuries. Certainly it wouldn't be an immediate effect, or even delayed by just a few years, would it?

I'd think that volcanic releases of magma to the surface would release more pressure than the amount released by isostatic changes caused by melting icemass. [maybe google: isostatic greenland --to see if i'm using isostatic right]

Gotta run for now.... Keep up the good work. Your under-apprecieated perspective on these things is usually a good challenge for me, and always good for some inspiration too.

~Later

Max



the legend shows the black as 0% and 30% as light blue.

and you might be right about this being an atmospheric anomoly as it only lasted a day.

im not sure if the satelight measures heat or if the data comes from actual imagery.

I just checked todays sea ice
and there are more black areas on the images.
I have never seen the black areas before in winter that I can recall.

http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test...=23&sy=2009

if anyone is interested in seeing the southern hemisphere the link is below.

it seems that the below image will change on a day by day basis.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/antarctic.jpg

and here is the main page

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/

Hi Samwik

nice to hear from you again.

I know it sounds far fetched , but nothing else could be causing the cooling.

I think of the earth as what we think of it to be , a big oval shaped ball of magma with a very thin solid crust on top and a solid metal center.

and in my mind , I think of the decrease of pressure reaching all the way to the core , where the heat is generated.

and I think of the pressure and friction being the reason that heat is generated.

before the ice began to melt there was more pressure pressing down on the northern and southern most poles of the core.

and this pressure causing heat as the faster spinning core rubbed against the slower spinning magma.

since the earth is completely physical , I think that the earth is subject to physics.

more pressure more heat transfered into the magma.

less pressure less heat transfered into the magma.

it might take a year or so for the temperature differences to affect the crust and the oceans but they would be affected.

Im not saying that the full effect will be felt in a year or so , in fact it may take a decade or longer for the crust to feel the full effect of any lowered temperatures due to de-pressurization.

one point I would like to stress is that releasing the pressure might cause the core to spin even faster , but not as fast as it would spin if the pressure release were along the cores equator.

the reason fo this is strictly the amount of friction area at the poles and at the equator of the core.

did you know that the earth used to spin much faster than it does today , and the gravity of the moon (which was much closer then) slowed the earths rotation through the attraction and friction of massive tidal waves as high as thousands of feet high.

probably the reason the core spins faster today than the rest of the earth.

does this make any sence to you?

Thanks Paul,

Yes, frighteningly, it does make sense; but I still think the scales--both time and size--make any effect debatable.
Did you see my post on Crustal Heating?
http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=25277#Post25277
...be sure to scroll down within the first quote box, to see their conclusions.
===

btw, here is what I was talking about with the "butterfly" shape: Polynya
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polynya
...well, sorta like....

~

Good grief........meteor explosions, soot, ocean currents, volcanoes.........people grasping at straws to somehow explain the 'dramatic loss' of ice cover in the Arctic. On Feb 18th 2009, everything is good.......fast forward to the Feb 20th 2009, and the 'dramatic loss' is evident.
http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test...=20&sy=2009

Did I hear anybody ask if something is wrong with the actual satellite they use to monitor this? Na, cause that would involve the need for critical thought - something that's in extremely short supply in these here parts.
Well - how about the caveat that cyrosphere put right under the maps????
And I quote "February 17, 2009 - The SSMI sensor seems to be acting up and dropping data swaths from time to time in recent days."

This has been thoroughly discussed at http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/02/20/sea-ice-sensor-degradation-hits-cryosphere-today/

I'll note that this does not impact the timeseries that cyrosphere publishes, because of their QA/QC - as is shown here http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.365.jpg I don't see any catastrophic loss of ice cover here in the past 4 days, do you?

You may now return to your regularly scheduled programming about the depressurization of the mantel transferring it's "coolness" to the earth - or other such tripe.

Hi,
Thanks for sharing your point of views on climate change.

CSK

LOL Canuk! You ruined the fun I was having! However, I don't see how reading the disclaimer is CT. You're going to have to explain that one.

Paul, the disclaimer also states...

"Sea ice concentrations less than 30% are not displayed in these images."

Meaning anything less than 30% is "black". It helps to read.

Samwik

I wonder if these calculations and measurements in heat gain could reflect a parallel between ice melting and crustal heating due to de-pressurization that could be used in climate models.

Frightening?

have a look , picture a earth that suddenly has the same pressure distributed everywhere to the core.

the core would slow down because there woud be more pressure distributed to its equatorial areas.

you would have a brief moment of extreme high temperatures that would be generated by the additional friction , then you would have extreme cooler temperatures that are the result of less heat generated by the friction at the core.

as the earth slows due to the ice melting and being distributed to the oceans , in effect moving mass outwards from rotation , requireing more energy for rotation , the bulging of the earths oval shape will decrease slightly and apply even more pressure to the equatorial areas of the core causing even more slowing of the core , thus causing even lower crustal temperatures.

soon the earth would only have the suns warmth on the surface because the heat from core friction would cease.

and the earth would soak up any heat so fast you would never even notice it.

Singh001

your welcome

you shouldnt agree with me though because that might
cause cannuck and max and the falliblefiend and other's
to put you on their ignore list !!! oh noooo.

that would be the last thing anyone would want , LOL

and welcome to the forum.

Paul, Someday I'll get to that neat-sounding uiuc/cryosphere site [i can't believe i still haven't, but busy days afoot].
===Yikes! Runaway Icehouse Effect... Snowball Earth....
===

Otherwise....
It should be easy enough to look for data on spin rate and glaciation/ice ages, and see if there is some correlation.

I still think the effect would be slight and very delayed, and probably also attenuated by the moon, and probably distributed through the various layers of the planet before affecting the core much, but possibly still pertinant....

Interesting idea though, because following that logic, at some point the cooling would initiate another glaciation, which would reverse the effect. The poles would gain mass as the oceans lost mass--allowing the planet to speed up once again. This would heat it up the crust--melting the ice--and causing a slowing again.... Rinse and repeat--right?


A very nice self-regulating cycle.
===

Similarly, I've been wondering if the advance of glaciers would destroy enough soil (releasing CO2) to warm the planet and cause glacial retreat. That would allow soil to build up again (sequestering CO2) until enough soil built up to lower atmospheric CO2 levels--cooling the planet. This would cause another glaciation, scraping off and destroying enough soil (and microbes) to release enough CO2 to warm the planet and melt the glaciers again--repeating the cycle.

...another very nice self-regulating cycle.
....But this is just idle speculation. But....
There could be many such self-moderating parameters (insignificant or not) that we don't yet know about; superimposed over the Milankovitch--and other--cycles that we do know about.
===

Speaking of soil and glaciers: Have you read 1491?
1491 is a book by Charles C. Mann. I have this on my Kindle, and have enjoyed it many times over the past year. I'm amazed how many different insights this one book has been key to developing--from microbiology, to history and anthropology, to succession ecology and climate theory.

I'm currently reading The Web of Life, by Fritjof Capra, which emphasizes the holistic, big-picture and long-term perspective on systems. Systems like life, the planet, civilization, and even finance maybe? I haven't read far enough yet to know for sure, but at least it speaks to the value of integrative science.

Keep on workin' & thinkin' & researchin'.

~

the cryosphere today web site seems to be malfunctioning and will not display the year 2009 !! and is reverting to 1979 !!

but you can edit the address to get the desired dates.

http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test...=01&sy=2009

plug in the desired date into the address areas as shown in the brackets below.

&sm=(((03)))&sd=(((01)))&sy=(((2009)))

So just how much Sea Ice has been lost...if any? And over what period of time?
The Cryosphere Website, nor any visual Satellites, cant tell anyone just how much Artic Sea ice has been lost in the Artic ocean, or from the Artic lands and Islands over the last few years.
Satellites cannot read the thickness of the the Artic ice.
Satellite sub-millimeter Radar can only check the Sea height
snow and ice heights. Average heights that are constantly changing, with the seasons

It has been estimated that Two Trillion Tons of ice has melted in the Artic area.
Just how do they reach that figure I wonder?

I suppose one has to believe that a hundred years ago man tried reaching the N Pole by Dog, Ski, Sleigh, and Balloon.
Not that man suceeded, (apart from Peary) if you read what Wiki has to say about it here.
I had to smile about the only man in the World, who stood at the N Pole, Slowly shifting his feet clockwise for 24 hours ...So that he actually never moved!(In Wiki)
According to Wiki...Boats can now sail to the N pole, as well as Submarines. Also the N Pole has been open sea for short times.

So if you believe that the Artic ice has thinned by virtue that Man cannot now reach the N Pole on foot anymore. Then you might well believe that the Ice has thinned?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Pole

It seems to me that in spite of the 'Farsighted three forcasts.
Professor James Hansen, director of Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, James Lovelock, and Al Gore.?
For hav'nt they all predicted Artic and Antartic melts with consequential sea rises. But even they will have to await for the result of the following:-
An actual brave experiment being carried out by a British team pulling an Electronic Radar sled all the way to the North Pole. This sled monitors the actual ice thickness automaticaly every step of the way.
The ice is so poor, that provision has been made for the sled to float should they run out of ice on the way there.
http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSTRE51B5F920090212

http://www.fairhome.co.uk/2009/03/02/british-explorers-measure-arctic-ice-melt/