Hudson Bay Winter of 2011-2012 Tracking Thread

[NittanyWx]

Right out of the WUWT/denier playbook.

Enough with the rhetoric, it makes this forum almost unreadable.

[TerryM]

Except I'm not a WUWT follower or denier.

It's fact. The fact that the climate has changed over the past decades does not alarm me. Even without AGW, we would have seen obvious climate changes over the past few decades, especially in areas further north that are more prone to bigger fluctuations.

Why? (We've got a theory that explains it.)

[The_Global_Warmer]

Except I'm not a WUWT follower or denier.

It's fact. The fact that the climate has changed over the past decades does not alarm me. Even without AGW, we would have seen obvious climate changes over the past few decades, especially in areas further north that are more prone to bigger fluctuations.

Time to break out the reasons for this taking place?

[Alpha5]

With the AO remaining positive, it seems likely that ice not only in the Hudson Bay, but the Davis Straight and down to Newfoundland will improve from last year

[tacoman25]

Why? (We've got a theory that explains it.)

Because of natural climate fluctuations like the AMO/PDO, etc. The imprint of natural occilations over the past 100 years is clear. Again, it's not like the climate would be this unchanging, static system without the AGW influence.

Since 1970, we've seen two PDO phase changes and one AMO phase change. Those things alone would have resulted in varying climate trends over that period to present.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Why not show us some examples

[tacoman25]

Why not show us some examples

Of what?

[TerryM]

Because of natural climate fluctuations like the AMO/PDO, etc. The imprint of natural occilations over the past 100 years is clear. Again, it's not like the climate would be this unchanging, static system without the AGW influence.

Since 1970, we've seen two PDO phase changes and one AMO phase change. Those things alone would have resulted in varying climate trends over that period to present.

Yes - oscillations that sometimes amplify, sometimes mask the underlying upward, accelerating change caused by AGW. These are all well known and have been exhaustively studied. Are you postulating a new and as of yet undiscovered driver that is capable of bringing us to where we now are in the Arctic?

[tacoman25]

Yes - oscillations that sometimes amplify, sometimes mask the underlying upward, accelerating change caused by AGW. These are all well known and have been exhaustively studied. Are you postulating a new and as of yet undiscovered driver that is capable of bringing us to where we now are in the Arctic?

I'm saying that rapid changes in the Arctic and elsewhere have been seen before. Is there less ice up there now than at any point in our records? Sure.

But just pointing to so and so trend/decade for a location doesn't prove anything about catastrophic AGW. First of all, that trend is most likely due to a combination of AGW and natural climate phase fluctuations. If you start a trend point during a period that naturally favors more Arctic ice and then end in a period that naturally doesn't, yes, the trend in enhanced. Second, a lot of the talk about doomsday scenarios is simply speculation. Just because the Arctic ice has seen a lot of melting in recent decades doesn't mean the trend is exponential or that there are catastrophic consequences. Not to mention the Antarctic has not warmed as much as expected, regardless of the rationalizations for this out there. Yet of course, because the Arctic has seen more warming in recent decades all the focus goes there.

I am not alarmed by it. I'm sorry if that disappoints you.

[skierinvermont]

Except I'm not a WUWT follower or denier.

It's fact. The fact that the climate has changed over the past decades does not alarm me. Even without AGW, we would have seen obvious climate changes over the past few decades, especially in areas further north that are more prone to bigger fluctuations.

I don't care what you consider yourself: simply saying 'climate was never static' is a transparent attempt to minimize what are unprecedented rapid and largely anthropogenic long-term changes taking place. It's a meaningless deceptive argument straight from the denier playbook that dismisses the scientific attribution of these trends largely to AGW and ignores the possibility that the probable continuation of these trends will be highly costly to humans regardless of the existence of past climate changes.

[WeatherRusty]

Because of natural climate fluctuations like the AMO/PDO, etc. The imprint of natural occilations over the past 100 years is clear. Again, it's not like the climate would be this unchanging, static system without the AGW influence.

Since 1970, we've seen two PDO phase changes and one AMO phase change. Those things alone would have resulted in varying climate trends over that period to present.

Ocean oscillations do not explain why the world is 0.8C warmer than it was late 19th century. We know the Sun explains about 0.1C of it, but what about the remainder?

[Jonger]

So you don't find the fact that Hudson Bay is loosing ice at the rate of 11%/decade - alarming?

No.

[TerryM]

No.

Then you don't find the fact that Davis Strait is losing ice at the rate of 14%/decade - alarming?

[tacoman25]

I don't care what you consider yourself: simply saying 'climate was never static' is a transparent attempt to minimize what are unprecedented rapid and largely anthropogenic long-term changes taking place. It's a meaningless deceptive argument straight from the denier playbook that dismisses the scientific attribution of these trends largely to AGW and ignores the possibility that the probable continuation of these trends will be highly costly to humans regardless of the existence of past climate changes.

You are completely wrong about me.

I am not trying to minimize anything, I am trying to provide a realistic perspective on climate. Which, beleive it or not, a lot of people knowledgeable about AGW seem to lack!

[tacoman25]

Then you don't find the fact that Davis Strait is losing ice at the rate of 14%/decade - alarming?

Starting point?

[tacoman25]

Ocean oscillations do not explain why the world is 0.8C warmer than it was late 19th century. We know the Sun explains about 0.1C of it, but what about the remainder?

Mostly an increase in GHG. I get the feeling you haven't been following what I've actually said.

[TerryM]

Starting point?

Irrelevant

Do you find it alarming? - yes or no will suffice.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Please show us examples of how the PDO and AMO are the main drivers of this. it can't be hard to find real time examples.

You also said a +AMO and +AO were the main cause of the sea Ice decline.

You clearly believed that or your sea ice claims wouldnt have been so far off.

the same way I believed the Hudson would have a later freeze over date because of stored energy due to an increase in solar insolation. I was wrong.

we have recently had la nina, solar TSI bottom out for a few years. -AO and NAO.

Yet the sea ice got much worse over that period.

so we look for more answers. We got them. For this forum was behind the times on this. Finally 2011 broke the walls down. it was only 5 months ago you would get ridiculed for thinking piomas had validity, predicting a 2007 min extent and weather you want to believe it happened or not.it was roughly equal and the sea ice area equaled that of 2011. The NW pasage another subjecT of ridicule back in the day here now has seen abrupt climate change.

The point is if you are going to blaket the rapid CC in the Hudson region with AMO then back I up with evidence. It is out there.

When skier and I miss a prediction you let us know but never correct anyones crap like jongers recent tempetature posts or the months of BS that jusy went down. You go out of your way to margionalize AGW which had already been discussed. You offer very little personal analysis about your views when throwing out AMO or PDO.

Now you say we have you all wrong? We have you exactly how you have shown.

[The_Global_Warmer]

looks like Hudson could freeze over by Christmas.

[Snowstorms]

Please show us examples of how the PDO and AMO are the main drivers of this. it can't be hard to find real time examples.

You also said a +AMO and +AO were the main cause of the sea Ice decline.

You clearly believed that or your sea ice claims wouldnt have been so far off.

the same way I believed the Hudson would have a later freeze over date because of stored energy due to an increase in solar insolation. I was wrong.

we have recently had la nina, solar TSI bottom out for a few years. -AO and NAO.

Friv, you make good contributions to da Climate Change topics and offer great info but your starting to lose your credibility IMO.

The Sea Ice isnt going to improve that fast. Sure we've seen a consistent -AO/-NAO phase since 2008 but its going to take a while for the Sea ice to "recover" esp with the +AMO, ejecting warm Atlantic SST's across the sea ice regions. The consistent +AO/NAO phase from the mid 80's and onwards destroyed the MY Sea Ice and the beaufort gyre. As we've seen, the Wind is one the main drivers in Sea Ice extent, anomly and area, etc across the Arctic. Get a SW Wind cranking across the Sea ice regions from Asia and the Sea Ice will get destroyed or compacted.

Take for example the Kara Sea Ice;

http://arctic-roos.org/observations/satellite-data/sea-ice/Sea%20Ice%20Variability%20in%20Kara

The biggest decline we've seen is in the Summer while the Winter remains near normal. I think its painfully obivious as the SST's warm in the Summer/Spring there anomalies are warmer than they should be given the +AMO decadal phase were in currently. With the momvement of the Oceans, Gulf Stream etc, these warm SST's affect the Sea Ice growth and melt in they're respective season.

Also note the decline didnt really get started till the 90's when the AMO transitioned into its warm Phase.

A -AO/-NAO anomaly in the Winter would be ideal for Sea Ice growth and formation of MY Sea Ice whereas a slightly +AO/NAO would be great in the Summer IMO to avoid heat from the Sun hitting the surface to keep the Albedo effect limited.

Temperature anomalies across Canada are highly dependent on what happens across the Oceans (PDO, AMO, NAO, etc). Canada experienced one of its warmest Winters on record in 2009-10 thanks to the Extreme West Based -NAO anomaly pumping the heights across Northern Canada and the Strong Nino. 2010-2011 was much more closer to normal, in fact many regions had below normal temperature anomalies.

[skierinvermont]

You are completely wrong about me.

I am not trying to minimize anything, I am trying to provide a realistic perspective on climate. Which, beleive it or not, a lot of people knowledgeable about AGW seem to lack!

Then why not balance your posts with a little perspective like

'on the one hand climate has never been static, but on the other the changes we are currently experiencing supersede normal centennial variability and are likely to pose significant costs if they continue'

[The_Global_Warmer]

Lol am losing credibility but you just said a bunch of stuff backing it with what?

The +amo is pumping warm ssts into the arctic? Can you provide examples of this?

The arctic sea ice has been on the decline so ce the 1960s. Satelitte records going back to 1966 verify this.

The sea ice extent in winter obviously wont suffer as much. But volume and thickness have suffered greatly. Not just the kara but nearly everywhere.

2011 had a +AMO. You could use that to show the warm Atlantic ssts being pumped into the arctic but the actual real time events wont concur with the blanket statements youve made.

I lose credibility by asking for real time evidence???????

[tacoman25]

Irrelevant

Do you find it alarming? - yes or no will suffice.

The starting point for a trend is irrelevant? You apparently don't grasp that AGW is not the only factor in trends, especially depending on starting point.

[tacoman25]

Then why not balance your posts with a little perspective like

'on the one hand climate has never been static, but on the other the changes we are currently experiencing supersede normal centennial variability and are likely to pose significant costs if they continue'

My posts have been balanced. I have made it clear I believe AGW is providing the underlying warming trend.

[dabize]

http://www.ec.gc.ca/glaces-ice/default.asp?lang=En&n=CE69E4DD-1

Looks like the HB is getting there.

Interesting how large the effect of cooler weather can translate to a shallow, relatively fresh body of water - even one that is very large.

Note that Hudson Strait has shown very little freezing so far.

[The_Global_Warmer]

http://www.ec.gc.ca/glaces-ice/default.asp?lang=En&n=CE69E4DD-1

Looks like the HB is getting there.

Interesting how large the effect of cooler weather can translate to a shallow, relatively fresh body of water - even one that is very large.

Note that Hudson Strait has shown very little freezing so far.

Remember the system is dynamic. The Bay was sourounded sub freezing air. Expecially the northern half for all of November. I believe it ended up around -8C for the month for the northern third.

So it want all that fast since out stayed almost ice free until Dec 1st.

when I made this thread was completely ignorant in some of the stuff I thought.

I can see why the Hudson won't go passed January as a freeze over any time soon. The dynamics at play are very clear now.

I also way under estimated the suns impact.

I didn't realize how far south the solar blackout impacted.

like the Kara Arctic rim(laptev, kara, beaufort. The sun has a big impact. Once solar energy reaches a certain point the bottom drops out.

In the Kara this was clear. A huge pylonas formed as heat poured out. The areas around the Kara. The shallow grounds held less heat so they froze faster. The areas deeper toward the pole lost solar influence sooner. This left an area in the Kara ice free for a week once the suns energy no longer was available or no longer held an impact the ice forming process went into over drive and we saw SAT anomalies explode.

The Hudson had a less dramatic fate but also required solar influence to stop.

This is not only factor, had to make that clear.

This is like your cell phone battery and the charge is the level of heat energy left in the water. The screen brightness is temp swings, cloudiness, and so on. The dimmer the more positive feedback for no ice the brighter the more positive feed back for less ice.

The wall charge is solar energy as times by the charger is weaker till it stops. Then your phone loses power fast. The remaining charge has an impact on how long the phone holds out.

In 2010 the phone had a good power saving app in 2011 the phone is being used a lot.

just like the arctic we can see the AGW impact on Early then natural factors take over.

This means later start dates and sharper freeze ups.

How much can this change?

Quite a bit long term.

I will throw out ideas on that later. Gotta work now.

[SVT450R]

Past 9 days.

[skierinvermont]

With the near average temperatures persisting over the bay, it's probable that it will freeze before my late Dec forecast.

As I said at the beginning of this thread, it's all about December air temperatures, not SSTs or OHC which have a much lesser effect.

[The_Global_Warmer]

With the near average temperatures persisting over the bay, it's probable that it will freeze before my late Dec forecast.

As I said at the beginning of this thread, it's all about December air temperatures, not SSTs or OHC which have a much lesser effect.

You were definitely right about that.

I had an epic bust which I will continue to learn from. I was extremely ignorant and arrogant when I created this thread about how much I knew.

[superjames1992]

You were definitely right about that.

I had an epic bust which I will continue to learn from. I was extremely ignorant and arrogant when I created this thread about how much I knew.

You live and you learn.

My December 24th-31st prediction may even turn out to be too late.