EnviroLink Forum

There's a dark side of me that craves a post-apocalyptic wasteland a la Mad Max, but Waterworld will do. Not having gas and electricity is going to be the biggest bummer.

Yoo hoo! Snow!

What's your take.....sounds like a lot of melting...

Just picked up a sweet .300 Weatherby Magnum set up with a custom synthetic stock (pistol grip) and variable optics. I have not shot it yet, as they did not have any ammo in stock, but the Weatherby guarantee is to post 1" groups out of the box ...... The effective distance for this is even round better than the M1A1

On the lowest ice extent this mid-September, the lowest since measurements began in 1972, and lower than 2010 or 2007, snowjob is using August measurements to say it does not have the record lowest ice extent and depth for at least 8,000 years. If there wasn't any AGW from all the huge amount of HGHGs, then the ice extent would be on the increase and temperatures going down toward the final two thousand years of the interglacial epoch. The records would me all for low temperatures.
It is people like snowjob who have just about guaranteed people's ignorance and business as usual as long as possible, meaning the ELE 200 to 400 years after the human population crash.

Well Iowa, the title is very misleading, because every single other dataset had the ice extent quite a bit above 2007. Many had the extent as the 2nd lowest, instead of the lowest.

NSIDC, AMSR-E, JAXA, NORSEX, DMI etc. all agree that we have not seen the lowest extent minimum with 2011.

It sounds innocuous, but that's the main problem I have with this thread.

The Weatherby 300 Magnum is the first rifle I had. Kicked like a mule(too much for a 14 year old), but was very accurate. I had to trade it in for a Remington 30.06 auto, which I had targeted in to a dime at 100 yards. I got three deer with that one. My Dad kept his Weatherby 300 Mag, and was good enough to not ruin the meat like a couple of his friends who bought one did. It was a better moose gun, but needed graphite in extreme cold.

So the satellite measurements of temperature are better in your opinion, but the satellite measurements of sea ice extent are somehow flawed?

NSIDC also uses satellite based readings, so I'm not sure what your point is.

You are making quite a claim to suggest that every single other dataset is wrong, and AMSR-E satellites overestimated Arctic Sea Ice in 2011 by 300 K. I just don't buy that.

But according to the statment NSIDC does not have the resolution of the satellite system used by the Germans.

From what I have been reading every other data set is stating there is no statistical significance in the difference between the two years due to the variation in the way the measurements are made, while the dataset with the highest resolution is claiming they have measured a difference. In either case, the Arctic ice extent is clearly staying in decline.

I am sure you would buy anything that could be made to indicate an improvement.

This article addresses probable causes of the observed reduction of the Arctic Ocean’s 179 coverage of MYI [multi-year ice] over that past decade. There is evidence of the increasingly important role 180 of atmospheric thermodynamic forcing in shaping recent changes of the Arctic MYI. In addition to direct MYI melt due to high-latitude warming, the impact of enhanced upper- ocean solar heating through numerous leads in decaying Arctic ice cover and consequent ice bottom melting has resulted in an accelerated rate of sea-ice retreat via a positive ice-albedo feedback mechanism. The pan-Arctic role of this feedback is yet to be quantified. Analysis of satellite ice motion suggests that the role of ice export through straits connecting the Arctic Ocean with sub-polar basins may be elusive. This situation probably differs from the situation that existed in the early to mid-1990s, when enhanced ice export through Fram Strait was caused by anomalous winds associated with the positive Arctic Oscillation phase. The possible long-lasting impact of anomalous winds such as those in 2004–05 or 2007 (especially when superimposed on a warming trend) on the state of MYI should not be ruled out. An intriguing feature of the scenario described here is the potential contribution of oceanic thermodynamic forcing to the recent changes of the high-latitude MYI coverage. Available observations suggest a thermodynamic coupling between the heat of the ocean interior and the sea ice. In the Canadian Basin, the impact of Pacific water warmth has been recently documented. While vertical AW [Atlantic Water] heat fluxes are negligible in the Canadian Basin, turbulent mixing may be strong enough in the western Nansen Basin to produce a sizable effect of AW heat on sea ice. In the eastern Eurasian Basin, double diffusion provides an important alternative to weak turbulent mixing for upward AW heat transport. However, this contribution to sea-ice loss remains uncertain pending new field experiments that will provide estimates of upward AW heat fluxes.

The fact that the rate of MYI recovery observed in recent years shows a delay relative to thermodynamic forcing indicates that MYI is resistant to recovery. However, the relative roles of dynamic and thermodynamic factors in recent changes of the Arctic MYI cover remains to be determined. Quantifying these roles is a high priority if we are to develop reliable forecasts of the future state of Arctic ice coverage.

Regarding your first statement, your own link clearly states that it was the 2nd lowest, and not the lowest on record, which says something about trying to prove that the Arctic Sea Ice reached a record minimum this year, and providing a link for evidence, only to see that it says "Arctic Sea Ice reaches 2nd Lowest Extent."

A 300K difference is most certainly not having just happened by chance. It is likely that 2011 is 300K higher than 2007, and IJIS-JAXA actually adjusts the ice data in the morning, to provide the most accurate Ice Extent Data.

And finally regarding your third statement, I think you would buy anything that indicates a record low... and you did.