This is Vsaluki's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Vsaluki's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
snip... [Now, what did I say about not posting uncritically accepted, regurgitated disinformation? N.]
It's interesting that Neven describes climate skeptics as "old white men". But here is a clip of the New York climate protesters proving that the skeptics characterization of the alarmists and their motives is the correct one. By the way, note the old white men.
And is that same thing causing the Arctic to go ice-free this century (mainstream opinion is somewhere in the 2030's)? If you are going to talk about the cause of the Arctic going ice free you will have to snip yourself in order to be consistent. [I'll take that as 'I don't know'. Thanks for pointing that out. Now, please go back to your own echo chamber, and believe whatever it is you want to believe; N.]
Neven, no one gives a rats behind about melting Arctic ice. There are peer reviewed scientific papers that claim the Arctic sea ice melted completely as little as 6,000 years ago. The only reason that Arctic sea ice is of any significance at all is because it supports the larger AGW narrative. But the question then arises about what happens when it no longer supports that narrative. [Snip. I'll let the rest stand, because it's interesting (see comment below), but you clearly haven't visited this blog a lot, since your simplistic characterization doesn't do the community here honour; N.]
Neven, thanks for proving that you do nothing but run an echo chamber for sycophants here. Anyone with a shred of honesty would have dealt with "disinformation", even NASA "disinformation", by countering it, not deleting it. The fact that you deleted it proves that you cannot counter it and you are afraid that your regulars cannot either. Thanks for showing the true colors of yourself and your blog. Censorship is and will always be the only way that alarmists can win arguments. [Sigh. I don't have the time or inclination to counter fake skeptic stuff that has been countered countless times already, especially if it's not related to Arctic sea ice, you know, the subject of this blog. Read the comment below; N.]
By the way D, while you were telling us about the Arctic having a +1.35 anomaly, did you notice that the Antarctic had a minus 2.84 C anomaly. [Snip. Last partial snip; N.]
D, what does a day of NH SSTs have to do with anything?
[snip] I talked about the shore ice effect at the poles before Neven decided that he couldn't have any truth on this forum and deleted most of my post. [snip] [You're on an alarmist watermelon CAGW blog, what do you expect? That I'm going let regurgitated disinformation stand? No, it gets snipped. Please, go back to WUWT to converse with the scientifically minded elite; N.]
Neil, nothing has been done. Go review what Berkley did, then we can talk. For now you are simply repeating all the alarmist talking points about Berkley and that is a waste of my time. For example, go look at the effect of UIH that Berkley came up with and then look at this NASA report,
[Snip. Sorry, no UHI BS that's been debunked about a billion times; N.] Is the past two years of ice melt action an anomaly or natural variation, or is it simply lagging the surface temperature trend. If it is the latter, then we can reasonably expect the summer time shrinkage of the ice sheet to also stabilize.
Cryosphere Today shows 6 years where the NH ice reached lower levels than this year. Antarctic sea ice has now reached an all time record high. This was after reaching an all time record high anomaly earlier this year. The global sea ice anomaly looks like it has spent more time in the positive anomaly area than in the negative for the past 3 years. So is it natural variation, and if so, can we explain and scientifically quantify that natural variation. Or is it the beginning of a change in trend.
@LRC, looking at the Southern Hemisphere chart for sea ice area since 1979, it looks like the low for each year is moving the same way as the high. In other words, the sea ice is not melting back as far each year. It also looks like for most of the past couple of months the extent for any day was a record extent for that day. Since area is something we can measure with relatively little error or need for adjustment, I consider it an important indicator. I also believe that there must be at least some correlation between ice area and ice thickness. For example, if you have a one square mile sheet of ice that is one foot thick and another that is two feet thick, then if you have a foot of ice melt the first will disappear and the second will remain. Real ice will vary in thickness, but the bottom line is that when the melt starts thin ice will reduce surface area faster than thick ice. So I believe that the fact that Antarctic sea ice has less melt back each year is either an indicator that the water is colder or that the ice is thicker or both. And of course the growing maximum sea ice area in the Antarctic indicates that either the water or air temp or both are colder.
Does anyone expect that there will be a record high Antarctic sea ice area this year?
What I find interesting is the build of Antarctic sea ice that is shown on Cryosphere today. For two years now there has been no instant were the anomaly has been negative. It has been consistently positive and growing for the entire two years. There is no other two year period like it on the chart. Arctic snow, temperature and ice may well be effected by black soot due to the industrialization of the northern hemisphere, but that would be a much smaller problem in the Southern Hemisphere. Regarding a record November global temperature, RSS and UAH don't even show November as being in the top 10.
Vsaluki is now following The Typepad Team
Dec 22, 2013