Forums

Arctic Temperature Data

Arctic Temperature Data

To melt away the Arctic ice, it will take a lot more than 274 deg. K!

http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php

See the 2019 summertime temperatures north of 80 deg. North latitude? Same as the 1958-2002 mean!

greg | 4 augustus 2019

Who cares?

Most of the ice thats currently melting or is relevant in any way to sea level rise is on land in Greenland and most of Greenland south of 80 deg North.

SCCRENDO | 4 augustus 2019
Tesla-David | 4 augustus 2019

Yep, and this satellite image of Greenland confirms the warming everywhere. Stop wasting our time moron!

Tesla-David | 4 augustus 2019
MitchP85D | 4 augustus 2019

Hey Tessie flaggie boy, are you trying to show me a satellite image?

http://www.arctic.io/explorer/4Xa5A//4-N90-E0

Not that is a satellite image, in August! Anybody here in Tesla world actually believe that snow and ice is going to melt away to oblivion?

It is going to take an awful lot more than 1 deg. C to do that!

MitchP85D | 4 augustus 2019

Make that...NOW that is a satellite image!

Tesla-David | 4 augustus 2019

Mitch you are a complete idiot, you miss the forest for the trees! The satellite image I provided show an incredible melting of ice.

"But if the fire is ominous, what’s happening to Greenland’s ice is truly terrifying. A heat wave has essentially acted like a blow torch on the ice sheet’s surface, causing a widespread melt. The ponds visible in the satellite image are indicative of a much broader meltdown. An estimated 56 percent of the ice sheet surface went into meltdown on Thursday, sending 10 billion gallons of water into the ocean. "

MitchP85D | 4 augustus 2019

Here is a Greenland weather map of today.

https://www.weather-forecast.com/maps/Greenland?symbols=none&type=lapse

The temperatures are well below freezing across most of Greenland. Any of you global warming zealots care to tell me how all of the snow and ice over Greenland is going to melt to oblivion?

MitchP85D | 4 augustus 2019

No Tessie flaggie boy, quite the opposite! YOU ARE LOOKING AT THE TREES!!!! I am looking at the forest.

MitchP85D | 4 augustus 2019

Let's put things into perspective about Greenland ice loss. The Greenland ice sheet contains 2.6E+15 tons of snow and ice. If Greenland loses 103 billion tons of ice per year (per 1981-2010 avg.), it would take 12,500 years for Greenland to lose HALF of its snow and ice.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/08/03/greenland-endures/

When you look at the forest instead of the trees, you get a much better perspective of what is actually going on!

teslu3 | 4 augustus 2019

A web search for "greenland ice loss per year" gave a nas link for greenland-ice-loss-2002-2016.
GRACE measurements over this period averaged 281Gtons/year. The loss trend is not linear.
After the Arctic goes nearly ice free, what where will all that heat go?
Ice cubes in a glass of water keeps water temp near 0 degrees C, but after the ice is gone...
Greenland will be the a big target for all that heat.

teslu3 | 4 augustus 2019

nas -> Nasa

greg | 5 augustus 2019

@Mitch

You make lots of erroneoeus assumptions, several of which you do and should know are false.

1. The rate of ice loss will not stay the same over the entire melt period. It will increase, and dramatically in faster and faster bursts.
The Graph in the article you linked to makes that clear.
The article also makes it clear you cannot assume the present ice melt rate is an accurate predictor for any future levels of ice melt. Let alone assume the rate for even 10 years let alone 100 or a 1000.

2. Free running water over/on top of any ice mass will significantly hasten the rate of ice mass melting
(thats why putting ice cubes in a drink cools the drink down and melts the ice).

3. Free running water UNDER the ice mass of a glacier (Which is what most of Greenlands ice sheets are) acts as an almost perfect lubricant, causing the entire glacial ice mass to move downhill en-masse into the sea far faster than any ice melt will achieve on its own. Once the ice begins to move, friction will block any ice refreezing so the ice continues to move even in winter..

4. The ice mass at the edge (seaward part) of a glacier acts as a dam holding back the ice further uphill. Removing this barrier ice too quickly [2 and 3] will allow the glaciers melt rate and the ice mass movement from land into the sea to accelerate further accelerating further the ice melt and loss of ice mass in an ever increasing feedback loop.
This is like kicking the chocks out from under a ship on a slipway, the boat move slowly but as it gather momentum becomes unstoppable.

5. As the ice mass uphill pushes on the ice further down, large parts of the lower ice mass will break off and float off into or fall into the sea. Exposing the ice mass leading edge now exposed to even more melting and more downhill movement from the ice mass above.

So while you may think it will take 12,000 or whatever years for a sizeable part of the Greenland ice sheets to melt.
The reality is that it will happen much much faster. At an ever increasing rate.

Science tells us the last ice age ended about 12,000 years ago. It was a little while after that before the ice age glaciers across the globe mostly melted [that is the climate warmed a little, then the glaciers melted a whole lot].

But the Ice Age glaciers didn't meltdown in a linear fashion. They melted down in an exponential growth fashion.
So that the bulk of the melt was mostly done within a very,very short time.

The only argument over this is whether the exponential function governing that process then and now was a X to the power of 2, 3, 4 or something higher. Not whether it will take 12,000 years.

It won't.

jimglas | 5 augustus 2019

@greg:
mitch is not interested in fact. He just reposts his disinformation over and over and over.
Don't bother engaging him, he is impervious to fact and unwilling to engage in a meaningful conversation.
Better to ignore him or flag him, but don't engage him, it just encourages him to post his BS
Just Move on ....

SCCRENDO | 5 augustus 2019

@greg. He has the lethal combination of dishonesty, stubbornness and lack of scientific understanding. That make education a challenge. Just flag and move on. Btw that was a great summary of Greenland. Appreciate the succinct way you explained it. It does make a lot of sense.

Techy James | 5 augustus 2019

@MitchP85D Forget the ice, answer the last fact I presented about the amount of Greenhouse gases I presented where the Carbon Dioxide parts per million using Ice Records in the last 100 years has exponentially grown to be the highest ever recorded in last 800,000 years. Greenhouse gases are on the rise and continue to rise at a rate never seen in the 800,000 years of data they pulled from the ice core samples. Say what you will, but the more Greenhouse gases continue to rise, more of the solar heat trapped in the atmosphere will cause temperatures to rise. Regardless of the Ice Melt (which all the data shows is on an upward trend and expected to continue the melting at ever increasing raise, what effect is those Greenhouse gases having on the lifeforms on the planet?

andy.connor.e | 5 augustus 2019

Im surprised this has not been flagged away yet. Are you all having fun talking to @Mitch?

SCCRENDO | 5 augustus 2019

@andy. I think some of the team may be away. It will be flagged when they return.

MitchP85D | 5 augustus 2019

Hey jimmy flaggie boy, quit telling greg what to do!

MitchP85D | 5 augustus 2019

teslu3, those are GRACE measurements. Those are not confirmed to be 100% accurate. I think the Polar Portal is the best place to go for Greenland Ice Sheet data.

http://polarportal.dk/en/groenlands-indlandsis/nbsp/viden-om-groenlands-...

The total contribution to sea level rise since 1840 from Greenland is 25 mm, 2.5 cm, about an inch!!!

You see why I call you global warming zealots hysterical?

MitchP85D | 5 augustus 2019

greg, Techy James, thank you very much for your comments!

I have another night shift tonight before I go on break. I will address your points while I am off. Hopefully, the flaggie boys, won't erase this thread before then!

MitchP85D | 5 augustus 2019

greg, Techy James, save your posts!

MitchP85D | 5 augustus 2019

Good point andy. I hope they don't erase it!

MitchP85D | 5 augustus 2019

Same goes for you SCCRENDOD. Quit telling others what to do!

SCCRENDO | 5 augustus 2019

@teslu. So he posts a link to refute your comments that support exactly what you have been saying. I guess the part he forgets to mention or perhaps does not understand is that the loss is not linear and is increasing exponentially so it will be exponentially larger

MitchP85D | 6 augustus 2019

SCCRENDOD, many of the Scandinavian scientists accept GHG theory. And they are doing the politically correct thing to announce their concerns. But many of those scientists are HONEST! They do their painstaking best to accurately determine how much actual melting of Greenland ice is contributing to sea level rise.

They "snuck in" 25mm since 1840. That's one inch SCCRENDODO! Yes, they say it is accelerating. But at least you now can have some perspective about what is going on. And this shows your rantings about global warming are hysterical!

Remember this. For these research organizations to receive government funding, they have to show some link of humans to global warming. And these geoscientists are playing the game well. But they are also honest enough to be as accurate as possible!

andy.connor.e | 6 augustus 2019

Idk Mitch. Since the ice age sea level has rose some 400ft. The extreme majority of that height was in two instances where sea level rose 100-200ft each. But if you average it out 400ft over 10000 years, thats not really accurate. Like average tornadoes per year, because tornadoes dont spawn for 6/12 months.

MitchP85D | 6 augustus 2019

Here is the Post-Glacial Sea Level Rise andy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Past_sea_level#/media/File:Post-Glacial_Se...

You can clearly see that the "extreme majority" was well before the fossil fuel age!

MitchP85D | 6 augustus 2019

OK greg, your points -

1. You are making a forecast that the global temperature will increase and the ice will continue to melt. Take it from a weather forecaster. That does not mean it will happen! I think the global temperature rises and falls in cycles. We can take observations and see what happens. My bet is that I am right on this.

2. Yes water on top hastens melt, but it does not stay summer all year long!

3. The so-called "lubricant" you are talking about is on the edge of Greenland. 3000 meters of ice is piled up on top of the big island. Gravity pulls the glacial ice out to sea while new snow continues to pile up on top. What happens on the edges will have very little effect on the glacial ice speed. That is more of a function of how much snow builds up from year to year, decade to decade. The more it snows, the more glacial ice there will be to flow out to the Atlantic.

4. Ice is a solid. It is not a fluid. You are using "fluid" thinking when you are comparing the Greenland ice edge to a dam. Gravity slowly and methodically pulls the glacial ice out to sea regardless of the edge.

5. The only thing that will accelerate the speed of the glacial ice is an excessive amount of snowfall over the decades. If there is a drought of snow, then the glacial ice slows down.

greg, most of the melting has already occurred! Just look at the Post-Glacial Sea level rise. The next big climate event is the next glacial period!

teslu3 | 6 augustus 2019

"Take it from a weather forecaster." OK:
https://news.yahoo.
com/july-hottest-month-measured-2019-set-among-warmest-171720639.html
World Meteorological Organization (WMO) Secretary-General Petteri Taalas said in a statement a few days ago.
Global warming, he added, was clearly to blame.
"This is not science fiction," he said. "It is the reality of climate change."

MitchP85D | 6 augustus 2019

Techy James, take a look at fig. 3 - scroll down

http://www.climate4you.com/GlobalTemperatures.htm#An overview to get things into perspective

There you can see from Greenland ice core data from the past 11,000 years. There are two graphs. The top one shows the air temperature at the summit of Greenland on the left ordinate. The right ordinate shows the global temperature anomaly. You can see a general downward trend of the temperature in the past 11,000 years with a few intermittent spikes. The most recent spikes are the Minoan, Roman, Medieval, and Modern warming periods.

Below the temperature graph is the CO2 graph. You can. see a gradual increase of CO2 while the temperature is declining. There really is no compelling evidence that CO2 is the control knob of global temperature. CO2 may be a reaction to climate, but not a cause of climate.

MitchP85D | 6 augustus 2019
jimglas | 7 augustus 2019

I want the WD40 for my knees in the ad

Techy James | 7 augustus 2019

@MitchP85D CO2 is not a reaction currently of actual climate, but a the extreme amount of CO2 gases we are producing. You say the recent trend is towards a cooling of the planet not a heating of the planet, yet you post graphs that show that since 1979 (Last 30 years) the global average temperature has risen. So if why does a planet wide comparison graph of average temperature comparative to previous year data so a consistent rise in average temperature variation over the previous year.
Also another factor that was briefly mentioned in previous argument was Sea Level. That in addition to Temperature has been consistently on the rise since 1880 when we first had recorded measurements. Two good reads on this factor are:
https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-sea-level
https://www.neefusa.org/nature/water/warming-ocean

jimglas | 7 augustus 2019

Mitch doesn't read factual information
Or if he does, he doesn't believe them.

MitchP85D | 7 augustus 2019

Techy James, 9 inches of sea level rise since 1880. Is that something to get hysterical about?

Also, Techy, are you aware that the greenhouse effect on the atmosphere is logarithmic with CO2 concentration levels?

What about you jimmy? Did you know that? Or are you oblivious to that.

MitchP85D | 7 augustus 2019

Also Techy, the cooling trend I am referring to is over an 11,000 year period. The current warming period we are in is the short-term Modern Warm Period. The previous 3 warming periods were warmer than our current one according to proxy data.

jimglas | 8 augustus 2019

nonsense

SCCRENDO | 8 augustus 2019

I am not sure why we have let this thread survive so long. It is a variation of the same old bullshit he keeps posting. The strawman argument that he is using is that 8-9 inches of sea level rise since 1880 is a joke and does nothing. Unfortunately facts once again get in the way of his bluster. This is impact of 8 inches of sea level rise. Remember this is not 8 inches in a bath tub. It is 8 inches AVERAGE over the whole ocean. And remember the ocean is moving all the time.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/sea-level-...

jimglas | 8 augustus 2019

let it live
He spews on normal threads more often if he doesn't have this place to post his gibberish

jimglas | 8 augustus 2019

BTW: try walking around Venice or Miami at high tide

MitchP85D | 8 augustus 2019

Guess what SCCRENDODO? There is a tide gauge in Micronesia - Pohnpei B. It has been recording tides since the 1970s. Check out the data.

https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?id=710...

Sea level is rising at the rate of 0.66 foot in 100 years. About 8 inches. What's the joke? What is the strawman? As you can see from the data, there is about a 1/2 meter short-term variation of the tides. All one has to do is wait for a high tide, take a photograph, then yell "climate change," "global warming," "look at what America is doing to these poor people!"

THAT, is the joke SCCRENDODO!

MitchP85D | 8 augustus 2019

What is the nonsense jimmy? Greenland ice core data?

MitchP85D | 8 augustus 2019

Also SCCRENDODO, the short-term tidal variation over the period of a few years far exceeds the overall global sea level rise during the past 100 years!

SCCRENDO | 8 augustus 2019

I guess National geographic articles are above 3rd grade level. Either he cannot read or his comprehension is not quite at that level. The article pretty much destroys his strawman argument. An acceptable response would be to read the article and explain with good science where it is wrong. If he cannot refute the article then I guess we shouldn't need to hear much more that an 8 inch sea level rise is irrelevant..

MitchP85D | 8 augustus 2019

8 inch sea level rise, IN A 100 YEARS!!!!

Got that SCCRENDODO?

That was an inconvenient truth you left out.

RedShift | 8 augustus 2019
MitchP85D | 8 augustus 2019

That is less than an inch per decade. Are you trying to tell me humans can't adapt to that??!!!

MitchP85D | 8 augustus 2019

By the way, a little bit off topic. I was watching the History Channel a month ago and watched an Ancient Alien episode for the hell of it. They actually show some interesting stuff on that show without having to believe we have been visited by aliens. Ancient cultures all over the earth have a creation myth that includes a story about the great Universal Flood. A really plausible idea came from that show to explain why. When our Interglacial Period began about 12,000 years, the ice melt was quite rapid. And settlements along the shores all across the earth got swamped by the massive glacial melt back then. Our sea level has risen about 120 meters since the Holocene began. And the rate of sea level rise was by far higher back then than what it is now. The Persian Gulf was formed by the Holocene. The Noah's Ark story could well be a spin-off story passed around from Ancient Cultures having to deal with the rapid sea level rise of the early Holocene.

Just a theory, but it makes a lot of sense.

SCCRENDO | 8 augustus 2019

If you learnt to read you would see that the article addresses the impact of an 8 inch sea level rise since 1880. You would be tolerated a little better here if you actually read the responses you were given, use a little brain power to understand what was being said and then outputting a well thought out response rather than your reflex response which is usually totally irrational.

Pages