Bishop Hill The Royal and the Arctic
Sep 22, 2014 Climate: other The Royal Society is holding a scientific meeting today on the Arctic and climate change, beautifully timed to coincide with the annual minimum in Arctic sea ice. Unfortunately, the ice, which looks to have passed the minimum over the weekend, has recovered again this year, so no headlines were garnered.
Readers can see a bit of what is going on at the meeting by visiting the RSArctic14 hashtag and it looks pretty interesting. I was amused to see that Julienne Stroeve seems to be tentatively suggesting that the recovery in Arctic sea ice in the last couple of years has made the GCM predictions look rather clever. Put next to their failure in the Antarctic, it feels more like luck than judgement, but perhaps that's just my natural cynicism about climate models.
It does seem to me that we are at an interesting point for the Arctic. In the next few years, natural variability enthusiasts and global coolers are predicting continuing ice recovery. Climate models are telling us that the decline will continue.
We watch with interest.
Bishop Hill
The sea ice itself may have missed its cue, but a press release seems to have gone out anyway. The Sunday Times apparently reported yesterday that the North Pole will be ice-free within five years.
Bishop Hill
BH favourite Peter Wadhams seems to have created something of a stir:
Reader Comments (68)
Amazing coincidence. Yesterday's Sunday Times -
"Arctic ice cap in ‘death spiral’
THE Arctic ice cap has melted so much that open water is now just 350 miles from the North Pole, the shortest distance recorded, scientists say.
Satellite observations, from the US National Snow and Ice Data Centre (NSIDC) last week, coincide with a prediction from a leading British polar researcher that the summer ice cap is now so thin it is likely to disappear within five years, possibly as early as 2015. .... etc. etc. etc. "
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/article1461908.ece
"...perhaps that's just my natural cynicism about climate models."
I think cynicism (rather than skepticism) is the right word to use.
How can one believe in the integrity of people who present the output of unvalidated models as being on a par with physical reality?
We know for sure that if the arctic ice will keep recovering, or will disappear again, or will remain just the same, a herd of climate scientists will explain how that is evidence of anthropogenic global warming
Thank you @omnologos for: "a herd of climate scientists"
I knew there must be a collective term for scientists suffering from confirmation bias :-)
O/T - Is there a problem with the GWPF site? The home page I look at hasn't changed the lead stories for weeks. Or is it me?
http://www.thegwpf.org/
Cheshirered: you have to go to the Global warming forum (box on right on the site), which is now www.thegwpf.com for the update stories. you are going just to www.thegwpf.org instead.
Claiming the science is settled is a good way of not having to spend millions of pounds risking the lives of researchers sending them out to the poles for weeks on end .
Scientists get to sit in a nice offices collating data on a laptop making sweeping declarations instead of freezing their nuts off dodging polar bears and still getting paid for it.
.
That Sunday Times article.
September 2014 ice compared to the summer average for 1981 to 2010.
I presume that September is at the end of the summer melt and will therefore be less than the average for the whole summer.
Also why is the data for 2011 to 2013 not included? Low ice cove years perhaps?
Rbravery
You'll find your answer here
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/old_icecover.uk.php
and here
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icecover.uk.php which was linked in the Bishop's piece.
The Times article mentioned in the update is behind a paywall, but it is available at the Australian.
"the North Pole will be ice-free within five years."
As usual.
Thanks Caroline. Sorted.
Thank you @omnologos for: "a herd of climate scientists"
I suggest a Clut of climate scientists.
This reads as if the GCMs predicted arctic ice increase. I must have missed that gem.
HaroldW, The Australian is also paywalled.
Five years, what a surprise.
steveta_uk,
How odd. I also see The Australian version as paywalled when clicking my own link.
The magic seems to be in arriving at the webpage from Google search, rather than via a direct link. Try searching for "Arctic ice cap in a death spiral", and clicking on the link to The Australian.
Stephen Richards
I will go with Clut on the basis it is short form of clusterf*ck?
By my reckoning according to Charles Windsor there's only three years left to save the planet?
Ne'er cast a CLOUT of cliimate 'scientists' till May is Out...
Wadhams predicted in 2013 that the Arctic would be free of ice by 2015 http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/jul/24/arctic-thawing-permafrost-climate-change?guni=Article:in%20body%20link
This latest prediction moves the disappearance out in time (2015 - 2020). Is Professor Wadhams vying with Paul Ehrlich for the number of failed predictions he can make?
It is significant that even Gavin Schmidt weeted that this is not supported widely. Even the warmists are disowning Professor Wadhams.
Skeptics should support Wadhams because he keeps scoring own goals for the warmists.
"Satellite observations, from the US National Snow and Ice Data Centre (NSIDC) last week, coincide with a prediction from a leading British polar researcher that the summer ice cap is now so thin it is likely to disappear within five years, possibly as early as 2015. .... etc. etc. etc. ""
Are there not photos published of two nuclear subs surfaced at an ice free north pole?
Thanks for the Twitter updates, BH. Interesting that many seem to be distancing themselves from Wadhams' predictions.
Regarding the picture of Wadhams' extrapolation -- free advice from this presentation: "Extrapolation [is] not appropriate for highly nonlinear systems."
Ah - its the THICKNESS, don't you know, not the AREA now.. Area is so 'last century'...
@Stephen Richards:
"I suggest a Clut of climate scientists."
I respectfully suggest a "Cnut", which could imply that they're vainly attempting to prevail against the tide. Or it could be a misprint.
maybe a 'bumclot' of climate scientists?
Is this a sleekit acknowledgement that the 2012 minima was largely as a result of the unusual August storm which broke up much of the ice and quickened its demise? The Great Arctic Cyclone of 2012 - http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2012/08/
Why do these scientists rarely if ever discuss what is likely to be the major cause of Arctic sea ice loss, which is not melting from slightly less cold atmospheric and oceanic temperatures, or higher insolation rates, but transport of the ice by wind down the Fram Strait and into the North Atlantic?
The elephant in the room?
Curious that he is able to show a continuous downward curve, is that data only to 2010?
Here is how the PIOMASS graphs look today.
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/schweiger/ice_volume/BPIOMASIceVolumeAnomalyCurrentV2.1.png
This one shows the reversal in the death spiral for Arctic ice volume.
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/schweiger/ice_volume/BPIOMASIceVolumeAnomalyCurrentV2.1_CY.png
Here are the April and September graphs, again the late summer numbers not obeying the script although a ways to go to match earlier years.
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/schweiger/ice_volume/BPIOMASIceVolumeAprSepCurrent.png
Data etc at http://psc.apl.washington.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/schweiger/ice_volume/
Will be interesting to see the updates on about the 4th October.
Re Nail @ 1h47
Photo here. http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/3-subs-north-pole-1987.jpg
Omnologos
I would suggest a "Murder of Climate Scientists" as a collective term. They remind me of crows, they are noisy, opportunistic, highly visible, wickedly smart, irritating and up to no good.
there very well might be a "climate" problem down the line, but I still fail to see howso further enriching leftwing characters (the RS, the many quangoes and institutes and leftwing city councils "recycling" ) would insure us against any of that.
R&D in bio , algae, thorium, fission, fusion, better nukes.. thats where the beef is.
smaller nannystate, putting education online thereby avoiding 15:00 rush hour out of the skools and univissitties
that's where the beef is.
Might I suggest a Lie of Climate Scientists?
:)
Interesting comments and ideas on the Arctic and climate change. In my oppinion, one of the most interesting Arctic aspect is that almost 100 years ago suddenly a period of poor Arctic sea ice showed up between 1919 to 1943, which Irving I. Schell (JoM, 1956, p.46-57) assumed that a similar occurrence may not have happen since the middle of the 17th century. "This would suggest that the recent relatively warm and wet period in the North Atlantic - Arctic and the adjacent areas may not have been duplicated earlier for 200 years ore more".
Reference located at: http://climate-ocean.com/2014/b/z_8.jpg
Some great suggestions for collective nouns - I also thought Cnuts would be good, although probably far too flattering in both likely meanings - so may I propose a Dissembly of Climate Scientists™?
From Dictionary.com:
'it is likely'
heads you lose , tails I win may be a rather dishonest way of acting for a scientists. But important to be fair and say this is the 'standard ' way to work has a climate 'scientists' so those pursuing it are merely following the norm for the area they work in . That this 'norm' is a rather sick joke is another issue but you certainly cannot argue with all the grant money this approach has brought in so why change from an approach that is both profitable and very easy to do.
omnologos
Good attempt, but the correct collective noun is a 'glut' of climate scientists.
A "Cult of Climate Scientists"?
Niall, John Dr Melle
The three submarines at the North Pole in 1987 were in a polynya. Look behind them and you will notice ice to the horizon. An opening in the ice large enough for submarines to surface does not qualify as an ice free North Pole.
Scientists debate polar sea-ice opposites
Quite remarkable:-
Now how come the whole wide wonderful world, already knew that?
But then again this is the BBC reporting
Que? Not according to this peer reviewed metric where it is not only greater than 2013 but also larger than 6 out of the last 7 years?
Or possibly NOAA's own darling"MASIE" which also shows this year's extent higher than 2013.
But as a BBC source why should I expect even a modicum of fact checking? Unless it involves the antics of a dodgy builder, which of course keeps the masses amused and away from the major aspects of life?
This game sounds fun.
How about a "denial" off sceptics?
ITV news earlier tonight (22nd Sept) included a video which began:
“Scientists announced today that the ice in the arctic has reached its lowest level for a decade”
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2014-09-22/leaders-under-pressure-over-climate-change-promises/
"Thank you @omnologos for: "a herd of climate scientists" I knew there must be a collective term for scientists suffering from confirmation bias :-)" --RayJ
Candidate collective nouns that might be metaphorically extended to cover lock-step climatologists should include: a rookery of albatrosses, a wreck of sea birds, an obstinancy of buffalo, a nuisance of cats, a coalition of "cheetahs," a storytelling of crows, a mob of emus, an implausibility of gnus, a bloat of hippopotamuses, a plague of insects, a tribe of monkeys, a fever of stingrays, a posse of turkeys, and a descent of woodpeckers. My favorites are a bloat, rookery, or fever of climatologists.
Green Sand
You quote three different analyses of sea ice extent, using different techniques, different sensors and different resolutions; intended for different purposes.
The source most generally used is the NSIDC Arctic sea ice extent published here . This is the source the BBC used.
Twelve billion tonnes of snow accumulated on Greenland on 21 September, almost exceeding the upper limit of the y axis scale on the DMI surface mass budget graph for Greenland (the largest daily accumulation in the record which began in 1990 - possibly?):
http://www.dmi.dk/en/groenland/maalinger/greenland-ice-sheet-surface-mass-budget/
Antarctic ice has gone off the scale at the AMSR2 website run by the University of Bremen:
http://iup.physik.uni-bremen.de:8084/amsr2/extent_s_running_mean_amsr2_previous.png
Entropic man you are indeed prophetic:-
Entropic, level 5 of Entropy
5. Inevitable and steady deterioration of a system or society.
If you actually believe you can restrict the development of homo sapiens without any ensuing conflict, you either have no understanding of history or you truly are a misguided fool
"If you actually believe you can restrict the development of homo sapiens without any ensuing conflict, you either have no understanding of history or you truly are a misguided fool"
Sep 23, 2014 at 1:03 AM | Registered CommenterGreen Sand
To the contrary. I expect our civilisation to default to peasant farming and local feudalism within 200 years under the combined stress of overpopulation, resource depletion and climate change, with no human management involved. I also expect the transition from high technology and high population to low technology and low population to be extremely chaotic and bloody.
Why else call myself Entropic Man?
For me the question becomes, how to manage the transition with minimum bloodshed?
And before you ask, I hate the idea but see no way to avoid it.
I
Billy liar
Have you considered the implications of the increased Greenland snowfall?
Increased precipitation comes form increased water vapour, which comes from increased evaporation which comes from higher sea surface temperatures.
That extra snowfall comes from this year's high sea surface temperatures in the Pacific.
EM Your view seems to be very much in the same spirit as this. Would you agree ?
It is, it seems, our civilisation’s turn to experience the inrush of the savage and the unseen; our turn to be brought up short by contact with untamed reality. There is a fall coming. We live in an age in which familiar restraints are being kicked away, and foundations snatched from under us. After a quarter century of complacency, in which we were invited to believe in bubbles that would never burst, prices that would never fall, the end of history, the crude repackaging of the triumphalism of Conrad’s Victorian twilight —
Hubris has been introduced to Nemesis. Now a familiar human story is being played out. It is the story of an empire corroding from within. It is the story of a people who believed, for a long time, that their actions did not have consequences. It is the story of how that people will cope with the crumbling of their own myth. It is our story.
Looking at the picture with the slide, there is absolutely no reason why Wadhams' prediction should not be believed by a herd of climate scientists. After all, it looks exactly the same as a global temperature graph where a smooth line is sent soaring off toward the ceiling from the high point of a temperature peak, for e.g., from 1998. Ever heard of any climate scientist not believe those?
A "decline of climate scientists".
How about "a coven of climate scientists?"