Climate Change Banter

[AvantHiatus]

You don't need to give up capital to address climate change. What you do is kick out the lobbyists in Washington DC and send the carbon tax directly into people's income tax returns every year.

[stadiumwave]

Take a look at the conus visible. It's full of smoke, the most i've ever seen.

Extreme events won't stop after the strong el nino is gone.

When has there ever been a period of history without extreme weather events? There hasn't been, so you're right.

If PDO goes negative & we have a couple of strong La Nina's expect a couple of huge tornado years...but it's not AGW.

AGW is real but is WAY over hyped in its role in extreme weather. To me extreme weather events that have always occurred has become a launching pad for sensationalists like yourself to say it's a carbon footprint. The last coue of severe winters were blamed on AGW but recent peer reviewed literature has shut that up:

http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/study-climate-change-does-not-cause-extreme-winters.html

[AvantHiatus]

We are just at that weird juncture where tipping points happen. Usually in stable hothouse Earth states the diurnal minimum is very small. The fluctuations we see are more like tri-monthly variations in jet stream orientations rather than biweekly extremes.

 

AGW has not yet progressed to the point where it can significantly diminish cold outbreaks over every region in a given year. I think AGW has recently became a major influence, especially since 2010.

 

The contribution from AGW is at least 35% on current weather variability.

[stadiumwave]

We are just at that weird juncture where tipping points happen. Usually in stable hothouse Earth states the diurnal minimum is very small. The fluctuations we see are more like tri-monthly variations in jet stream orientations rather than biweekly extremes.

AGW has not yet progressed to the point where it can significantly diminish cold outbreaks over every region in a given year. I think AGW has recently became a major influence, especially since 2010.

The contribution from AGW is at least 35% on current weather variability.

There is no way of knowing a %....lol

[LakeEffectKing]

We are just at that weird juncture where tipping points happen. Usually in stable hothouse Earth states the diurnal minimum is very small. The fluctuations we see are more like tri-monthly variations in jet stream orientations rather than biweekly extremes.

 

AGW has not yet progressed to the point where it can significantly diminish cold outbreaks over every region in a given year. I think AGW has recently became a major influence, especially since 2010.

 

The contribution from AGW is at least 35% on current weather variability.

Do you have a citation...or is this more BS?

[LakeEffectKing]

We are just at that weird juncture where tipping points happen. Usually in stable hothouse Earth states the diurnal minimum is very small. The fluctuations we see are more like tri-monthly variations in jet stream orientations rather than biweekly extremes.

 

AGW has not yet progressed to the point where it can significantly diminish cold outbreaks over every region in a given year. I think AGW has recently became a major influence, especially since 2010.

 

The contribution from AGW is at least 35% on current weather variability.

When does AGW "progress" to the point of "significantly diminishing" cold outbreaks over every region? ...or.......More BS?

[LakeEffectKing]

We are just at that weird juncture where tipping points happen. Usually in stable hothouse Earth states the diurnal minimum is very small. The fluctuations we see are more like tri-monthly variations in jet stream orientations rather than biweekly extremes.

 

AGW has not yet progressed to the point where it can significantly diminish cold outbreaks over every region in a given year. I think AGW has recently became a major influence, especially since 2010.

 

The contribution from AGW is at least 35% on current weather variability.

....what else can you pull out of your lower orifice?? Rabbits? Flowers? Solar Panels???...

[ORH_wxman]

Lol. "At least 35%"

Another made up stat by weatherguy. He would do himself a big favor if he started reading the literature on attribution.

[tamarack]

No chance at all? Why?

 

When do people expect AGW to kick into high gear? To reach the IPCC scenarios, effects will have to ramp up this decade. By the way, they already have ramped up unless you are living in a cave. What about the Alaskan wildfires covering 50% of the state? and the newly forming west coast Sahara Desert? Why are the sub-tropcial deserts expanding globally? This is what happened during the Pliocene.

 

We aren't living in 2004 anymore. SLR is starting to accelerate. You (as an individual) live to seek out the most pleasurable outcome regardless if it's backed by science.

 

It's simple logic. Once you go into Pliocene mode, an ice free Arctic is not far away. Your ability to think holistically has been destroyed by socialization. You will be that guy who blames everything on ozone depletion.

 

Had to check on this, and found that Alaska wildfires have burned about 1.9 million acres this year.  That's a huge area, 1.5 times the size of Yellowstone.  However, it's not 50% of the state, but less than 1%.  Maybe the smoke from those fires has spread over 50%, but that's not what is said in the part I boldfaced.  Or maybe if one adds wildfire acrage for the past several decades...

[forkyfork]

it's kinda sad watching people go after low hanging fruit like weatherguy

[LakeEffectKing]

it's kinda sad watching people go after low hanging fruit like weatherguy

It's kinda sad to see the BS being pushed as science....wouldn't you agree?

[T. August]

Ermagherd! Glerble werming!

[AvantHiatus]

All that fuss over a few posts in the banter thread. I am leading edge, people should be citing my work not the other way around.

 

When does AGW "progress" to the point of "significantly diminishing" cold outbreaks over every region? ...or.......More BS?

 

 

Remember, the Arctic was covered by deciduous forests in the early Pliocene. It's really common sense guys, keep burning away and you will inevitably have to deal with ever more extreme scenarios. They seem outlandish now but they are really just lurking around the corner in a geological/paleo sense.

[forkyfork]

It's kinda sad to see the BS being pushed as science....wouldn't you agree?

then i expect an all out assault on JB and friends since they reach far more people

[LakeEffectKing]

then i expect an all out assault on JB and friends since they reach far more people

I don't "follow" JB "and friends"...so your point is moot....

[ORH_wxman]

All that fuss over a few posts in the banter thread. I am leading edge, people should be citing my work not the other way around.

 

When does AGW "progress" to the point of "significantly diminishing" cold outbreaks over every region? ...or.......More BS?

 

 

Remember, the Arctic was covered by deciduous forests in the early Pliocene. It's really common sense guys, keep burning away and you will inevitably have to deal with ever more extreme scenarios. They seem outlandish now but they are really just lurking around the corner in a geological/paleo sense.

 

 

Where can we read your work?

[LakeEffectKing]

Where can we read your work?

[stadiumwave]

Where can we read your work?

My abs hurt now...lol.

[AvantHiatus]

I lold.

[AvantHiatus]

 

[AvantHiatus]

 Have you ever contributed to this forum ever?

 

 

Guys looking at the latest 12z suite. EPIC ice retention/unmeltponding/surface freezing occurs from hr0 to 372.

 

EPIC UNMELT MY DAWGS, check the GFS/GPS, 2015 running suprisingly close to 2006. Why is that? Where is this epic melting the warm globe cries for every day? 

 

Like TGW or Avant have ANY education on this subject AT ALL. They have as much as me. Gavins blogs, and Steve Goddard LOL. Funny how Gavins blogs make experts out of total losers.

Tired of the trolls. You won't be missed.

 

The bolded portion is total BS. Enjoy the 300k drop on JAXA,

 

http://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/surface/level/overlay=temp/orthographic=-66.59,91.48,1216

 

Let me tell you about that ice retention.

[AvantHiatus]

 

 

The "new Ice Age" pundits certainly can't omit the inevitable: If the mid-latitudes cool, the tropics must warm.

Remember, the Gulf Stream isn't the only current connected to the thermohaline circulation. So is the Kuroshio Current. So too are both the Pacific and Atlantic north equatorial currents. When these currents, which normally cool the equator, get disrupted, the result is warming of the tropics.

In fact, Greenland isn't the only place on this planet where ice and snow are melting at an outright alarming rate. In Alaska (the Kuroshio Current's northeasternmost terminus), scientists are also puzzled at the roughly 2 Mississippi Rivers' worth of fresh water getting dumped into the Pacific and sucked into the North Pacific Gyre, resulting in a similar weakening of the Kuroshio Current that is happening as a +6°C (at depth) downwelling Kelvin wave is already making headway in the equatorial Pacific, not to mention westerly wind anomalies and weakening trade winds are also contributing factors.

So, therein lies the problem. When the tropics warm, what they induce is, you guessed it, El Niño. According to some scientists, a drop of only 2°C alone in the North Atlantic related to thermohaline circulation transport is enough to cause a +4°C anomaly in the equatorial Pacific ―double 1997-98. +6°C is triple 1997-98, and that's something we're already seeing, at least if you dive 200 feet below the surface. So, imagine all the impacts that the 1997-98 El Niño had on the world's weather ― drought in Australia and the American Midwest, extreme precipitation in California (probably the only positive that can come out of this IMO) and Peru/Chile, tornadoes in Florida, record-setting hurricanes (i.e. Linda) in the eastern Pacific (but NOT the Atlantic), and extreme Nor'easter-type events, and multiply them by 3. That might get us close to what shutting or slowing down the thermohaline circulation will REALLY result in.

[AvantHiatus]

[LakeEffectKing]

[AvantHiatus]

Don't shoot the messenger.

 

 

In the model employed by Hansen and his coauthors, this cooling and freshening of the oceans eventually leads to a shutdown of the oceans’ circulation, and warm waters trapped at depth below a cold fresh surface layer in the Antarctic region, continually eating away at ice sheets from below. It also triggers a globe with ever-warming tropics but cold poles — leading to a large contrast in temperatures between the mid-latitudes and the polar regions.

 

A larger temperature contrast between the tropics and the poles, the researchers posit, would then strengthen winter storms or so-called extratropical cyclones, which draw their energy from such contrasts. The study therefore contemplates more powerful storms. It notes research suggesting that in the Eemian period, the last time the world saw major sea level rise of as much as 5 to 9 meters (between 16 and 30 feet), gigantic waves apparently moved huge boulders from the seafloor to the top of hills in the Bahamas.

 

 

“During this last warm interglacial, not much warmer than the present, [the world saw] not only a higher than present average sea level, but ultimately a significantly higher sea level that required the melting and or collapse of probably both Greenland and West Antarctica, along with basically this great oceanic disturbance,” says Paul Hearty, a geologist at the University of North Carolina, Wilmington who is one of Hansen’s co-authors on the new paper, and conducted the research on the Bahama boulders. “There were storms, and a lot of more catastrophic type events associated with this big climate shift.”

 

The Eemian, the research suggests, may have only reached global average temperatures about 1 degree Celsius warmer than today — but nonetheless, featured these major changes.

 

This scenario all depends, of course, on major ice loss from Greenland or Antarctica happening relatively quickly — an assumption that lies at the center of the new paper. “Ice mass losses from Greenland, West Antarctica and Totten/Aurora basin in East Antarctica are growing nonlinearly with doubling times of order 10 years,” notes the study. Elsewhere, it notes that “Doubling times of 10, 20 or 40 years yield sea level rise of several meters in 50, 100 or 200 years.”

[AvantHiatus]

Hello Paul...

 

[PhillipS]

Hello Paul...

 

 

That's a great video for information content, I just wish he were as accomplished a speaker as Dr Richard Alley.  Thank you for sharing it.

[AvantHiatus]

That's a great video for information content, I just wish he were as accomplished a speaker as Dr Richard Alley.  Thank you for sharing it.

[AvantHiatus]

[AvantHiatus]

   

 

 

Modeling Land Ice Melt’s Impact in the 21st Century — Facing A Coming Age of Superstorms

So what does all this mean? In the worst case (5-10 year melt rate doubling times), it’s possibly 3 meters of sea level rise by mid Century, perhaps 7 meters by end Century under business as usual fossil fuel emissions. Even in the more moderate cases (10-20 year melt rate doubling times), 1 meter of sea level rise by mid Century and 3 meters or more of sea level rise by end Century is not entirely out of the question, according to Hansen’s new research. These potentials are markedly different than the more conservative rates outlined by IPCC which is still calling for a less than 1 meter sea level rise under even the worst case human carbon emissions scenarios (1000 parts per million CO2, in the range of 1200 ppm CO2e).

 

So much fresh water hitting the oceans would cause a rapid stratification. A rapid loss of ocean to atmosphere heat exchange in the regions impacted. A train wreck of heat backing up at the equator. Such a train wreck would result in temperature extremes and gradient differences that would make the Eemian Heinrich events (mentioned above) seem moderate and slow by comparison.

 

Hansen has been working on global atmospheric models for tracking these events for a number of years now. And this new study is an improvement on his earlier, model-driven “Storms of My Grandchildren” work. Hansen’s new model runs are imperfect simulations of what may happen given large melt pulses from Greenland and Antarctica. The models, according to Hansen, mix the ocean water too much, reducing the overall impacts of stratification through the mechanism of the fresh water wedge. However, even with this imperfection, the temperature gradients displayed by these models are absolutely stunning. A clear warning to anyone who still wants to keep burning fossil fuels that they’re really grabbing the dragon by the tail.

 

 

In the above image we can see just one of these model runs. The model assumes a 10-20 year doubling time for rate of land ice melt. It contributes equal portions of melt from Greenland in the north and Antarctica in the south. Greenhouse gas accumulation is considered to be along the moderate case A1B track. By 2080 we have about six feet of sea level rise globally and about 600 parts per million CO2 in the atmosphere. The more rapid rate of melt has put a temporary damper on the rate of global atmospheric warming which has dipped to 1.11 C above 1880s values (just slightly higher than today). But much of this cooling is localized to the Southern Ocean and to an extreme cold pool in the North Atlantic between Northwestern Europe and Greenland.

There a massive outflow of fresh water has shut down the ocean’s ability to exchange heat with the atmosphere. AMOC has been vastly weakened. The Gulf Stream is backed up along the US East Coast and into the Gulf of Mexico. Heat is building in the Arctic opposite Greenland and all along the Equator. Temperature anomalies in the range of 17 degrees Celsius below average occur over the ocean fresh water pool. This drop is enough to generate year round winter like conditions in the cold pool region even as other sections of the atmosphere around it continue to warm or retain severe excess heat.

  

 

WTF

 

 

For the North Atlantic, it is the greatest of understatements to say that an area of perpetual winter surrounded by warming airs and sitting atop a warming deep ocean is a major storm generator. Summer time temperature deltas between the center of the cold pool will range from near zero C to 20s, 30s and 40s C over nearby ocean and continental land masses. It’s like taking the High Arctic and shifting it to Scotland while all the adjacent airs warm. Temperature gradient and baroclinic (pressure gradient) energy for storm generation will be on the order of something that modern humans have never experienced. The potential for superstorms in this model simulation will, notably be quite high.