Typhoon Tip

Okay ... .this is just quick and dirty Web goop but... IMS is being used by the National Snow and Ice Date Center ... IMS Daily Northern Hemisphere Snow and Ice Analysis at 1 km, 4 km, and 24 km Resolutions, Version 1. This data set provides maps of snow cover and sea ice for the Northern Hemisphere from February 1997 to the present from the National Ice Center's Interactive Multisensor Snow and Ice Mapping System (IMS). That's what's confusing ... if we say "...2nd lower behind NSIDC" ( which I'm not trying to refute...) but this statement above says they are using the same IMS tech, and said tech is showing 2019 has been lower than 2012 the whole way... that's a discrepancy.

I have a question - which may be fairly 'duh' but since I haven't been by those other sources ... Are those more comprehensive than "sea ice only" ? That IMS product is sea ice only ... And also, just fyi ... the IMS product comes from NSIDC - we may be able to put the pieces together here on why the disparity. It's gotta just be some dumb product thing I'm not seeing shit

I don't doubt there is/was relevant science and/or postulate content that predates the shenanigans that go in here I mean ..it's a public forum ... to which a social media outlet certainly qualifies, and folks rarely cite their sources, anyway. That said ... this came up back in Eastern days... from which this site really owes it's heredity of users ... (initially anyway ...that's probably obscured by now), but unfortunately, content didn't follow. Also, I frankly wouldn't put it past anyone in the general ambit of research ... regardless of affiliation and rank, elsewhere ...to poach ideas from dialectical free-for-all sources ( like the Web when it's not degrading into vitriol ) and then run with it using the wherewithal they have at their disposal. Much of that wouldn't even be malfeasance ... not the point. If I'm in a conversation with someone and it triggers a thought progression...and I science it and make discoveries... It's just where the 'idea zygote' took place. But like I said...like mindful quorums and consortia and who-knows-what intelligentsia ... they will tend to converge on similar ideas at the same time - this has taken place throughout human history. I probably shouldn't have mentioned it as an afterthought .. .

Firstly ... I like the opening thought here ... There are indeed vying forces ...some more dominant than others, in every multiplex system of Nature - to which the governing atmosphere/climate forces certainly fall into this give and take. Secondly ... you know it's funny - this business about "fossil" fuels... It took this planet some 100's of millions of years to sequester carbon out of the global biota ...and inter it all into these VOC chemistries ... then, Humanity comes along. With its ingenuity ( which has clearly out-paced any pragmatic checks and balances in the evolutionary sense of it...) we've managed ( ..if left to our own devices ) to liberate all of it back to environment in unbounded form in just 1,000 years. 100s of millions 1,000 The idea that there is anyone at all who would have the audacity to even try and ask anyone to negate ramification - ...that's incredible. I suppose it is possible ( tho proven not the case on Earth...) to find a system somewhere in Nature where you can completely forcibly infuse change without actually witnessing change ...

Fwiw - as of two days ago ( 18th ) from IMS: https://www.natice.noaa.gov/ims/

Really ... Not looking for credit per se ... but, I haven't heard about the gradient hypothesis from anyone other than the person who proposed it five years ago ... and has been heavier about it over the last two. Now, it's owned by someone else - Heh... I suppose - fire was quasi implemented as a formal tool in human history at the same time every, too, so ...it's possible more than one person had the exact same to the letter ...inference regarding climate variations and large scale circulation forcing -

ISM is lagging by date ... as of last check... They seem to update that about every 10 days...and it's for the previous week, too...so by the time it's published it's an addition three or so days beyond that week... Aug 11 ... That's what I've seen from them since July. They'll probably release an analysis for the 18th in about two days... oy - As far as the subject crap - nah dude. More like concern... I don't really care if people want/need/do/or don't have biases... I just want to know that what I'm reading isn't that - which admittedly is probably not going to happen in a public social media source. word. Just so we're clear. In order to make that assessment... I may sound I like I care about specific posting behavior ... but that's not it. I'm not sure anything you have said should invalidate IMS inclusion - not that you mean to... I think it is at least worth it to vet why their plots vary... interesting. I'm wondering if it's density related.

I don't know… It strikes me a bit like people just not wanting a record to be broken I'm sorry it does. Otherwise the IMS plots I supplied would've been part of the discussion all along and looks a bias when potentially valid data is elided. Maybe it's not that way OK…

We keep saying this ...than it's not - where are y'all getting your data... I've been utilizing NOAA's IMS ...and admittedly, it has not updated since the 11th ...but there curve was substantially more loss than 2012 as of the 11th ... it'll be interesting to see if that tend trajectory could have down such a drastic 45 deg angular change so abruptly and gone back across the 2012 slope - which is what would need to have taken place according to their products in order for the current 2019 to be less disastrous - Anyway, may be a moot point - the AO is trying to rise in the GEFs ensemble. I don't get to see the Euro EOFs but... should it rise, that may alleviate the ice loss rates - slow it down ...and in fact, if that's true they may be one in the same already... I want to stress though, that there's nothing gained in the longer run by 2019 failing to surpass 2012 - it means nothing.... The longer termed issue with the polar ice cap remains dire... I'm hoping there isn't some coveted like idea that we are coming out of the arctic crisis? ... just sayn'

Yeah that IMS chart post just updated as of the 11th and looks nothing like that - interesting

Looks like everyone's referring to different data ... The curve I'm looking at ... 2019 has more ice loss than 2012 to date.... not saying the season ends up that way - or even if that date relative measure is correct ... but

Free fall... The vector of the current NSIDC graph has now fallen below all curves since 1998 like I ship headed for the open sea -

Well...be that as it may, the graphical presentation being perhaps a week behind other sources... The dailies depict illustrations that clearly still put 2019 ahead of 2012 as of August 8 from the same source as that graph. one, it will be interesting to see the graph update... heh.. But two, I've annotated and it's pretty clearly obvious ...if said graph is based upon anything resembling these [crude] cartoons... it's just as likely to update still below the 2012 curve..

Do y'all have some access to extra-double, top -secret data that is different than this ...? Cuz just from where I'm sitting... 2012 is getting it's ass handed to it - I dunno.. you tell me. Yeah some 'gap' closure there but t-heh... that integral ain't supporting any kind of angst that we'll have trouble ousting 2012 in this 'race'

You know ... not to make light of this ...but it's funny how we are proverbially bargaining with cumulus cloud shadows to prevent ice loss ... heh. But yeah, it's actually true - when we are teetering at the edge of the 2012 comparison...that closing margin does get sensitive to intra-weekly perturbations passing through the the domain. Fascinating actually -

thanks

Source?

Deniers deny because they can. That simple. If a person is standing on a train track and there is a one-eyed headlight monster roaring and rumbling metallic horn blowin' warnings at them ...they'll be less apt to deny how standing on said tracks would be detriment to their well-being... The problem with Human response to this crisis ...particularly as it relates to the slowness and/or stopping the denying "idiocracy" ... we simply cannot hear, see, touch, smell, or feel AGW or GW or whatever comfortable or uncomfortable euphemism there is that labels what's going on with the planet. When that happens, the denying will stop. But for the interim... it's not in a guy's living room... It's not stopping them from driving to work. Taking their kids to Soccer. Going on that family vacation... sitting around and opening presents on Christmas morning ( if that's your bag...). All there is are dire warnings that attack the ability to engage in all that... A human being... which billions of create this thing we call Humanity ... never react to warnings. They only agree to them in principle. What resonates is pain - it has to register as an inconvenience to the corporeal senses... That's perhaps an evolutionary catch-22 ( as a digression...) but, we have evolved now the ability and ingenuity to improve survival chances ...beyond ecological balance.... Which Terra-forms this world whether we are intending to or not... and...more likely toward a realm that is no longer going to sustain those same advancements. That's the C-2-2 We are capable of these advances... but the capacity to predict and anticipate consequence for action has not kept pace with the powers of ingenuity. In the mean time, it's a nice summer day out there ...and that's the validation for the warnings - good luck.

Firstly, I'm not sure the social-media community in this particular web destination really IS of the 'wanting/wishing' ilk ... I'll just expand on that a little more... but it was really a 'just in caser' Imho, should 2019 somehow by excruciating number crunching ( less than obviously ) fall short of 2012 ... was it really worth all the effort and writing...and annotated graphs and monitoring and ..well, basically obsession? We are not "making sure that happens" - by plying that effort. I can understand statistical accuracy but I wonder if the real motivation for doing so lurks behind that excuse, because the bigger, longer term consequence of what the world faces is so dire right now that to do so ...could not be any more futile. If it falls short, nothing's different. Why then? The longer vision, we're still f*!&ed folks. As far as that article... There's a lot of complexity that is not really discussed in that... In a general scope and concept it's not "un-clad" exactly ...But, there are ... synergistic effects that are 'emergent properties' and aren't really predictable... More over, those can have secondary ...tertiary spontaneities too... The blocking idea can come from other sources: First, ... extinguishing planetary wave/dispersion into higher altitudes. Think of it as where warm advection plumes go to die. The vagaries of R-wave undulations over time, can create episodes where/when warm fluxes cause/contribute to tropospheric blocking .. These are ephemeral in nature... If they persist ( causally ) it's the underpinning pattern that's supporting it.. The NAO domain is a good teleconnector to exemplify this.. It can fluctuate at intraweekly time scales because of this sort of transient phenomenon... And is why seasonal predictions for that teleconnector - heh... good luck. Second ... blocking anywhere from that can happen in any era. Third, ... it is not abundantly clear that GW would in fact promote more of that to happen, because ... it's all still based upon gradients. Without gradients...no air movement exists at all. From that very fundamental requirement of physics, working together with gravity over a curved surface... without the first initial requirement of changing PV=NRT from one point to another...not of this, in fact, this conversation, can happen.... Why is that important? Beyond the obvious ... the arctic also is said to be differentiating warmer/faster than everywhere else... Is that true in the middle troposphere? If so... than the gradient is not necessary increasing because of GW... but, I suspect it is anyway... The arctic is just trying to catch up ...and in the interim ...we are witnessing extraordinary jet speed anomalies and have been now over the recent decades. Flights between NY and London...also across the expanse of the Pacific have registered historically fast ground-based velocity speeds in that time. This is happening because the warmer equator/sub-tropical latitudes are storing more water vapor ( concomitant with the GW ...) and fiddling with the math ... that is keeping heights slightly elevated; pressing ( as it were) against seasonal nadirs in the winter. Even if they are warming...they are not warming fast enough to compensate for the ambient steepening of that gradient that exists between ~ 35N and the 60 N girdle around the hemisphere. This creates the hurried velocity saturation being observed... Lastly ... folks are forgetting that we are still moving through the 11, 22 and 300 year temporal super-position of the Max(min) solar. Those times have been correlated strongly with -AO tendencies... That makes it incredible difficult to untangle 'how much' of blocking is a result of warming arctic ( as it relates to GW ) - vs how much was destined to take place as this solar expectation has arrived and we transpire through... I suspect like everything...there's shared forcing there... ** The gulf stream stuff and the AMOC - that's a whole 'nother ball of wax. The warming in the previous ... probably going back to the early 1980s is when it really started... has been adding fresh water to the surface of the Atlantic... That's been accelerating particularly in the latter half of that multi-decadal time span. At some critical threshold the specific gravity has changed too much...and the buoyancy gained in the aqueous saline waters (at a given temperature).. slows and/or can stops the sinking water process... No sink = no drawing surface water N = break down of the Gulf Stream. This was theorized back then, too... We are ( more likely so ) now seeing this being measured in the environment... Altering the transport of warm surface waters to higher latitudes certainly would effect circulation tendencies through the various meteorological circuitry over time...and time being a variable in climate - there we go... It's a mind boggling array of countermanding forces and whatever is left after canceling out ...dictates the systemic character.

It seems there's an underpinning 'agenda' to keep this year elevated above 2012 ... I guess for the sake of records? I'm curious because I'm not sure why we are so preoccupied by finite distinctions and what those mean to specific records, when the specter of what's happening over the last 20 years is far more telling. I would certainly hope that no one is coveting or even abstractly taking comfort in a acre less melt if it comes to that... In any case, last week I mentioned that the heat wave in western Europe was modeled to plausibly affect Greenland and now ..headlines to that effect are indeed foisted. Granted CNN, https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/31/europe/greenland-heatwave-climate-crisis-intl/index.html , ... tends to spin toward aggrandizing in any attempt toward ratings that turn the gears of their media-profit-machine ... we'll just have to see if corroboration surfaces ... I believe some acceleration is likely though. The deep tropospheric heat anomaly effectively severed, formulated a high latitude blocking node ...and that feature has since been retrograding toward Greenland. Still carrying along with it actual warm thicknesses within the anomalously tall H500 isohypsotic surfaces - in other words...a balloon of warm rich ice-sheet melting air - I was wondering if this may enhance the seasonal melt rate. Seems to be at least according to CNN's dystopian formula - The question is, if so ... does any of this also effect an acceleration of ice loss in the total arctic?

Europe's recent heat wave is pinching off a warm secluded ridge node and is modeled to slide west toward Greenland. I'm wondering if that may bring warming conditions to the terrestrial interface/boundary layer

GW as being a fallacy: objectivity elided/forced by an opposition that is more likely incapable of perceiving consequence for their stance - 'else, they would not do that. The reasons for that inability are varied from individual to individual, special interest group to special interest group... But by and large, mostly because the specter of what it all means is probably just too untenable within the vaster multi-facets of society, and would not resonate based on verbal warnings alone. However, written on the epitaph of Humanity's headstone, "this is just a fad concern". The human gestalt has never responded as well to threats that are vocal, ..which, compounding, the early efforts to do so attacked the institutions that have procured multiple generations of successful living ( by and large ...) - very bad PR. Compared to when the perception of the threat is corporeal in nature? If a threat can be seen, touched, smelled, felt, or tasted ... people move out of the way. Even now... as the measurements are arriving in clear, coherent datum ... Pompeiians tried to run - when they could finally see it... For everyone else, it would most certainly be abhorrently stirring to deny what was scienced decades ago...and is verifying in the Global environment today. Akin to being warned not to grab the red hot poker... grabbing it, then attempting to persuade people it is not really hot - the onus of persuasion really falls on the other side of that debate at this point if anything at all.... The correlation to the ending preposition - related to global warming - is more likely true than not, given all science on the matter. This all hearkens to a separate issue having to do with modern technology and conveniences effecting perceptions. People are being protected by the former, in such a way ...a bad decision here and there...is no longer resulting in as dire of consequence for a miss-calculation. Integrate that culturally over... it's not helping the AGW--> consequence model in a positive way. As my professorial circle of associates and I have discussed, ...this is as much a sociological crisis as it is a physical sciences one - and until the former is equally addressed... the solutions for the latter will be partial at best.

I don't deserve any credit - I repeat ...no credit. Mainly... because I did not cobble together a seasonal forecast late last summer/autumn. What I did instead ... was drive-by snark post pot-shots at other's gallant, back-of hand pressed to forehead over glazed eye efforts. I mean... veritable Master's caliber dissertations, replete with advanced word processing and state of the art graphical annotations... and me, blithely and assholier than thouly reducing them in two flippant sentences. Nice. That's the way I roll - Kidding... still, I distinctly recall warning contributors often enough, that gradient saturation, a paradigm shift that has occurred since ~ 2000 and continues to become more destructively interfering as the decades click away ... is muddling the climatology of longer termed multi-seasonal teleconnector packages. The ENSO relative numbers and how they have come to correlate ( hypothetical/supposition ) in the past, .... don't work. They didn't work in the powerhouse mega ENSO ( warm phase ) several years ago; and in fact, ...papers were submitted and peer reviewed successfully noting the startling lack of correlative impacts Globally by one of ...if not the, hot ENSO events ever recorded. ...etc...etc... It becomes less likely ( intuitively..) that minoring standard deviation events could impact the circulation of the Global very meaningful, when the massive momentum contributors, could not. ( I have physical hypothesis why that is, too ) I for one am frustrated by GW/climate change...and the continued reticence to even acknowledge that we are living in times that are increasingly rendering all heretofore correlative expectation-sciences ... less than germane. Perhaps not entirely ... please don't read this as absolute. As we know ... the gears of the environment are lubed by balancing forces ...So...threshold and partials are in play at all times...such that result sets both do and do not represent suggestively... At times, demonstratively so, at others...seeming to have returned to the prior expectation...and so on and so forth. But, given the longer time spans...eventually the new paradigm does take over - we're not there yet... But, I do believe that veracious attempts, from the ranks of aficionados that are fortunate enough to have been born and live in an era that provides them any sort of pulpit at all... ( where social media's "peer review" process is tantamount to popularity politics ), to the exulted societal offices of the science... I'm sensing we are all being bamboozled by our own lack of consideration to the changing paradigm that for some reason... no one considers when they engineer their expectations. So how do we do it? Don't... It's irrelevant. I know it's an interest area... but the sad reality we've come to is that party favor seasonal outlooks are a distraction to the real dystopian storm on the horizon. In 50 years... approximately mid way through the big kill-off ... is this going to matter? ( more snark relax...but, ) if we turn to examining seasonal variance as it relates and is pertinent to the Global crisis...that has some substantive value in it. But hell... this is an open forum to the public hoi polloi...and that's not hand-cuffing students to their desks... it's an entertainment/hobby past-time .... and entertainment and responsibility ... mm, usually part company.

You mean like this ... https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/14/us/greenland-sudden-ice-melt-wxc/index.html ...course, it is CNN -

Not sure if this has been discussed so excuse any redundancy - I've accepted the notion smoldering underneath all this monitoring that the perennial ice is on a course toward extinction ... whether that reality is observed next year or decades away, notwithstanding. What I'm interested in is the "rate" of recovery over the seasonal transition. Those modalities are perhaps more telling about the drivers and forces effecting a system than the scalar statuses. Many of these more impressive cold wave winters (that may or may not have had concomitant snow storm efficiency) were led off by fantastic recovery rates with sea ice expansion, as well, with land-based cryospheric metrics, during the preceding autumns. I think it is also less systemically observable over antiquity because passed decades did not have as much exposed naked sea-surface, having ice more enduring during warm months ...such that said rates more likely merely went unnoticed. So, it's supposition...but, I suggest a rapidity in areal ice recovery ... along with land-based numbers, can be telling signs for an ensuing winter's arctic contribution to modulating middle latitudes around the Hemisphere - notice I said 'Hemisphere' and not 'local-yoke's backyard'...