Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's pretty clear the current sea ice loss is a function of wind patterns and ocean currents.
Yep, it caught many by surprise with that cyclone storm. Predictions from many at the NSIDC were only expected to be around a 4.5 million sqkm and obviously that was beat already.
Here is some imagery from the NSIDC of before and after the storm. You can really tell it did a number on the ice. (source is in the URL)
Dont forget folks, look at "both" sides to avoid the hype out there regarding sea ice loss and Global Warming. The Antarctic is growing with ice and last I checked that was part of our "Globe". :-)
Dont forget folks, look at "both" sides to avoid the hype out there regarding sea ice loss and Global Warming. The Antarctic is growing with ice and last I checked that was part of our "Globe". :-)
There's good reason why one is hyped over the other; the change in one has been much more drastic. Look at the raw data rather than a biased site. Graph of arctic sea ice anomaly:
rather large decline, never recovering to pre-2007 levels.
above average, yes but nowhere as near and not as consistently. Furthermore, the total sea ice around Antartica is larger than the Arctic, so the percentage and deviation change for the same absolute change. One can do statistics to see how significant the sea ice changes are in each hemisphere. Some climate scientists have made arguements that Antarctic sea ice is less responsive to global temperature change. Antartica is isolated and the amount of sea ice in the winter is controlled by the of the polar front rather than temperature.
There's good reason why one is hyped over the other; the change in one has been much more drastic. Look at the raw data rather than a biased site. Graph of arctic sea ice anomaly:
rather large decline, never recovering to pre-2007 levels.
above average, yes but nowhere as near and not as consistently. Furthermore, the total sea ice around Antartica is larger than the Arctic, so the percentage and deviation change for the same absolute change. One can do statistics to see how significant the sea ice changes are in each hemisphere. Some climate scientists have made arguements that Antarctic sea ice is less responsive to global temperature change. Antartica is isolated and the amount of sea ice in the winter is controlled by the of the polar front rather than temperature.
There are a lot of speculations, but unfortunately, there is no real solid evidence to support a given assumption. Even if the Arctic goes completely ice free, it won't be a feather in the cap of any side as it doesn't properly establish anything.
Would be interesting to see it ice free during a melt season though and personally, I am hoping that will be the case.
As for the statistics... well... it all depends on who is hiding behind the curtain.
There are a lot of speculations, but unfortunately, there is no real solid evidence to support a given assumption. Even if the Arctic goes completely ice free, it won't be a feather in the cap of any side as it doesn't properly establish anything.
Would be interesting to see it ice free during a melt season though and personally, I am hoping that will be the case.
As for the statistics... well... it all depends on who is hiding behind the curtain.
I gave graphs. The change in the Arctic Ocean is much larger than the Antarctic. Unless you want to say the numbers are wrong, there's little to argue on them. My last sentence was speculation, but it could be backed up if there's solid meterology behind it; I don't know enough.
I wasn't particularly interested in having this thread "establish" anything but claiming the Antarctic changes are similar to the Arctic sea ice changes is misleading.
I gave graphs. The change in the Arctic Ocean is much larger than the Antarctic. Unless you want to say the numbers are wrong, there's little to argue on them. My last sentence was speculation, but it could be backed up if there's solid meterology behind it; I don't know enough.
I wasn't particularly interested in having this thread "establish" anything but claiming the Antarctic changes are similar to the Arctic sea ice changes is misleading.
It would still be speculation and it is still a roll of the dice. Things could change, we really don't know and the time frame we are basing our evaluation on is so small that it would be dishonest to say that we do. You can back up your speculation all day long, and all you would be doing is speculating. So any real conclusions we make are just guesses.
The Antarctic growth does not prove anything, just as the Arctics loss does not prove anything. We just don't know enough to be sure. Time will tell, and I think those that attempt to use the loss this year as a sign of anything are pushing politics, not science. The NSIDC can't even be sure if we would have had the extent of loss that we had if we did not have that storm. We can "speculate" either way on the issue, but the fact is, we don't know. As I showed in the post above there, the storm really did an number on the ice and when ice is broken up, it is more susceptible.
In the end, I really don't care, but I am not looking past anything other than what is happening (ie not attempting to correlate it with any specific position as some surely do).
The Antarctic growth does not prove anything, just as the Arctics loss does not prove anything. We just don't know enough to be sure. Time will tell, and I think those that attempt to use the loss this year as a sign of anything are pushing politics, not science.
I think you're either missing the point, or switching the topic to a general proof of global warming discussion. The comments I posted on Antarctic and Arctic growth (except for the last sentence) are based off eyeballing the graphs. The graphs of Antarctic growth compared to Arctic growth do prove something rather obvious and important: that the change in Antarctic sea ice is of a much different character than the change in Arctic sea ice and describing the two as similar is misleading. What that implies is another issue entirely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomander
It would still be speculation and it is still a roll of the dice. Things could change, we really don't know and the time frame we are basing our evaluation on is so small that it would be dishonest to say that we do. You can back up your speculation all day long, and all you would be doing is speculating. So any real conclusions we make are just guesses.
Absolute certainties are difficult, if not near impossible. That does not mean educated inferences are impossible nor does it mean they are the same as mere as mere guesses without any basis on observation and scientific knowledge. If meterology and atmospheric science have found good evidence that the ocean and air surrounding Antartica is rather isolated from the rest of the globe, that is meaningful. Dismissing it as speculation isn't really credible without some justification.
In any case, I made the thread for the purpose of speculation (read the OP), hopefully intelligent speculation. It's a weather forum.
Quote:
In the end, I really don't care, but I am not looking past anything other than what is happening (ie not attempting to correlate it with any specific position as some surely do).
If you don't really care, why do you bother post on the thread?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
