Contrasting views on the future of Arctic Sea Ice

Posted: August 20, 2013 by tallbloke in alarmism, Analysis, sea ice, Uncertainty, weather, wind

It’s the late melt season and speculation about the Arctic reaches fever itch over the next few weeks. or maybe not, since the alarmists seem rather muted this year. perhaps it’s because the ice extent is higher and temperatures lower than last year. NoTrickZone contributor Jimbo has put together a number of prognostications from previous years:

polar-bearsXinhua News Agency – 1 March 2008
“If Norway’s average temperature this year equals that in 2007, the ice cap in the Arctic will all melt away, which is highly possible judging from current conditions,” Orheim said.
[Dr. Olav Orheim – Norwegian International Polar Year Secretariat]
__________________

Canada.com – 16 November 2007
“According to these models, there will be no sea ice left in the summer in the Arctic Ocean somewhere between 2010 and 2015.

“And it’s probably going to happen even faster than that,” said Fortier,””
[Professor Louis Fortier – Université Laval, Director ArcticNet]
__________________

National Geographic – 12 December2007
“NASA climate scientist Jay Zwally said: “At this rate, the Arctic Ocean could be nearly ice-free at the end of summer by 2012, much faster than previous predictions.” ”
[Dr. Jay Zwally – NASA]
__________________

BBC – 12 December 2007
“Our projection of 2013 for the removal of ice in summer is not accounting for the last two minima, in 2005 and 2007,”…….”So given that fact, you can argue that may be our projection of2013 is already too conservative.”
[Professor Wieslaw Maslowski]
__________________

Independent – 27 June 2008
Exclusive: Scientists warn that there may be no ice at North Pole this summer
“…..It is quite likely that the North Pole will be exposed this summer – it’s not happened before,” Professor Wadhams said.”
[Professor Peter Wadhams – Cambridge University]
__________________

Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences
Vol. 40: 625-654 – May 2012
The Future of Arctic Sea Ice
“…..one can project that at this rate it would take only 9 more years or until 2016 ± 3 years to reach a nearly ice-free Arctic Ocean in summer. Regardless of high uncertainty associated with such an estimate, it does provide a lower bound of the time range for projections of seasonal sea ice cover…..”
[Professor Wieslaw Maslowski]
__________________

Yale Environment360 – 30 August2012
“If this rate of melting [in 2012] is sustained in 2013, we are staring down the barrel and looking at a summer Arctic which is potentially free of sea ice within this decade,”
[Dr. Mark Drinkwater]
__________________

Guardian – 17 September 2012
“This collapse, I predicted would occur in 2015-16 at which time the summer Arctic (August to September) would become ice-free. The final collapse towards that state is now happening and will probably be complete by those dates“.
[Professor Peter Wadhams – Cambridge University]
__________________

Sierra Club – March 23, 2013
“For the record—I do not think that any sea ice will survive this summer. An event unprecedented in human history is today, this very moment, transpiring in the Arctic Ocean….”
[Paul Beckwith – PhD student paleoclimatology and climatology – part-time professor]
__________________

Financial Times Magazine – 2 August2013
“It could even be this year or next year but not later than 2015 there won’t be any ice in the Arctic in the summer,”
[Professor Peter Wadhams – Cambridge University]
__________________

A different view.

WUWT – 22 July 2013
“…As the Pacific Decadal Oscillation and Arctic Oscillation shift to their cool phases and solar activity wanes, natural climate cycles predict that Arctic sea ice should recover within the next 5 to 15 years. Climate models have demonstrated that Arctic sea ice can recover in just a few years after the winds change.7 Allowing for a lag effect as subsurface heat ventilates and thicker multiyear ice begins to accumulate, recovery could be swift….”
[Dr. Jim Steele, Director emeritus Sierra Nevada Field Campus, San Francisco State University]
__________________

22 March 2012
“Could Arctic Sea Ice Decline be Caused by the Arctic Oscillation?
…In 2002, a paper was published in the Journal of Climate entitled Response of Sea Ice to the Arctic Oscillation, where the authors (one of whom, Mike Wallace, was a co-discoverer of the AO) shows that changing wind patterns associated with the AO contributed to Arctic sea ice declines from one decade to the next: from 1979-1988 to 1989-1998….”
[Dr. Roy Spencer]
__________________

“Climate mechanisms in the Northern Hemisphere and the Arctic are very active research topics, and our understanding of their causes and effects is far from complete. The importance of this wide-ranging research activity is very well stated by Dr. Nate Mantua, a researcher at the University of Washington, as he speaks about the PDO: “Even in the absence of a theoretical understanding, PDO climate information improves season-to-season and year-to-year climate forecasts for North America because of its strong tendency for multi-season and multi-year persistence. From a societal impacts perspective, recognition of PDO is important because it shows that ‘normal’ climate conditions can vary over time periods comparable to the length of a human’s lifetime.””
NOAA

Comments
  1. Kon Dealer says:

    But, but the science is settled…

  2. Stephen Wilde says:

    Although winds are relevant around the sea ice margins the main effect is oceanic.

    It takes about 10 years for waters originating in the Pacific oceanic oscillations (ENSO) to reach the Arctic Circle where they affect ice melt from below.

    The 2007 melt was about 10 years after the 1997/98 El Nino event and the 2012 record melt was about 10 years after the strong El Ninos of the early 2000s

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PDO.svg

    One can go further to link the relative strengths of El Nino (warm) and La Nina (cool) events to solar variations.

  3. oldbrew says:

    Financial Times Magazine – 2 August2013
    “It could even be this year or next year but not later than 2015 there won’t be any ice in the Arctic in the summer,”
    [Professor Peter Wadhams – Cambridge University]

    Cool it Prof.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2013/05/26/to-the-horror-of-global-warming-alarmists-global-cooling-is-here/

  4. ren says:

    What causes such a strong blockade of the southern polar vortex in the middle of winter?
    Someone you know?
    http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/blocking/real_time_sh/real_time_index_nrm.shtml

  5. tallbloke says:

    ren: Good plot, thank you.

  6. hunter says:

    Watch how the AGw famatics rationlize away yet another failed prediction. For me, it is their ability to seamelssly flip from shouting out their latest prophecy of doom, then when it fails to deny the prophecy was ever made, that is the most fascinating aspect of AGW fanatcism. If that one behavior could be effectively shown to be the shameful bit of sophitry it is, a real difference might be possible.

  7. ren says:

    Current absorption of solar energy.

  8. tallbloke says:

    ren: does that plot indicate the oceans are currently less cloudy than the land masses?

  9. ren says:

    It looks that way. More high-pressure system is over the ocean.

  10. michael hart says:

    Ren, does a block in the Southern Polar Vortex imply greater latitudinal heat transfer (or coolth-transfer if you like)?

  11. crikey says:

    REN ..we have currently had a Stratospheric warming event in the Southern hemisphere near the Australian continent.. Unusual l thought?
    For your information if your interested l have taken some study notes on this event in the first week of August 2013 and have posted on my blog the event which is currently just receding

    The lead up to the event .. A record ? minimum in the SAM/AAO a whopping minus 4!

    http://weathercycles.wordpress.com/2013/08/15/antartic-oscillation-ao-finally-plunges-and-westerly-belt-gives-southern-australia-a-lickin/

    Documentary of the event ..

    http://weathercycles.wordpress.com/2013/08/16/another-stratospheric-warming-event-ssw-in-the-southern-hemisphere-august-2013/

    OZONE anomaly during SSW
    http://weathercycles.wordpress.com/2013/08/18/ozone/

    Thanks for your links they are interesting !!..

    Would love to hear your analysis / diagnosis of what you alerting us to?
    I get the feeling you are hinting at something?
    What are you suggesting?

    I have heard of the arctic and Antarctic are bi-polar or that they have inverse cycles
    I will try to find the article/research
    They suggested that when the artic warms , the Antarctic cools?

    Could we be seeing a swing in the dipole currently.. Antartic warming and Arctic about to cool?

  12. ren says:

    Of course, but it is worth noting the strong cooling of the Southern Ocean due to a particularly low AAO, which Jetstream descends farther north.
    http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/daily_ao_index/aao/aao_index.html

  13. ren says:

    I will only add that the extent of ice in the Antarctic in the Atlantic Ocean than -60 parallel.
    http://satepsanone.nesdis.noaa.gov/southern_hemisphere_multisensor.html

  14. Brian H says:

    Notably missing from the quoted predictions: “If these predictions prove to be wrong, our hypothesis and models will be falsified.”

  15. ren says:

    Crikey here you have a pattern. But you can see that the behavior of AO and AAO in the solar cycle surprising. I think that has to do with increased cosmic radiation at high energies, which in this series is extremely high, which focuses magnetosphere at the poles. It’s mainly about temperature spikes in the winter. It seems that this cycle can really surprise us.
    I think the AO and AAO are related, but there is a shift in time.

  16. ren says:

    Warming of Antarctica is of course a relative thing.

  17. docrichard says:

    You could say that the Arctic ice just goes up and down like a Weston donkey. but then again, this: https://twitter.com/ClimateNow/status/356024673567399936/photo/1

    [Reply] It makes you wonder how those Viking settlers ever managed to pry the rocks out of the Greenland ice to build their farmsteads and church doesn’t it doc?

  18. tallbloke says:

    Meet Dr Richard Lawson everybody. Watch out, he’s a psychiatrist.

  19. Roger Andrews says:

    I know about Weston donkeys. I was born in Weston and went for rides on them as a little kid.

    But I’m not so sure about the Kinnard reconstruction docrichard links to. Like Michael Mann’s infamous graph it’s based on proxies, and when we invert it we get yet another hockey stick. Weston donkeys are trained not to bounce up and down like that.

    There are also a number of reconstructions of ice extent based on historic records that go back as far as 1500. None shows any evidence for Kinnard’s hockey stick. Here’s a selection:

  20. tchannon says:

    Mr Lawson’s plot is bad.

  21. ren says:

    Crikey, how could the heat from the surface layer may cause such anomalies at such a height and this winter?

  22. ren says:

    Visible lock up the Atlantic, the jet stream moves over Australia. This shows the importance of the phenomenon in the stratosphere.

  23. docrichard says:

    Þat sumar fór Eiríkr at byggja land þat, er hann hafði fundit ok hann kallaði Grænland, því at hann kvað menn þat mjök mundu fýsa þangat, ef landit héti vel.
    http://www.heimskringla.no/wiki/Eir%C3%ADks_saga_rauða
    Which, for those whose Norsk is a bit rusty, means
    “In the summer Eirik went to live in the land which he had discovered, and which he called Greenland, “Because,” said he, “men will desire much the more to go there if the land has a good name.”

    It is wonderful how one historical anecdote can overthrow painstaking peer-reviewed scientific work. The link does indeed show a sea ice minimum in the centuries prior to Erik the Red (950-1003). However, the present extent shows that sea ice has literally and metaphorically fallen off the cliff.

    I therefore suggest that instead of relying on historical anecdotes and etymological musings to sustain your beliefs, you mount a full-blooded ad hominem attack on Kinnard, linked with line by line Pilgerisation of his paper.

    Best not to use the Greenland mantle heat argument http://www.enn.com/climate/article/46304 though, because that would suggest that Erik had found himself a nice patch warmed by mantle heat to settle on.

  24. docrichard says:

    Roger Andrews said “There are also a number of reconstructions of ice extent based on historic records that go back as far as 1500. None shows any evidence for Kinnard’s hockey stick”

    That would be because they are spatially and temporally more limited than Kinnard. In particular, they tend to stop at 2000.

  25. tallbloke says:

    Yes doc, I knew Greenland’s name was Eric the Red’s tourism PR. But this doesn’t change the facts. Nor does it refute the value of ‘anecdotal evidence’ such as the ships logs of the Hudson Bay whalers. Or newspaper reports from the 1930’s. The regularity of such reports on a ~66yr cycle (confirmed by the GISP2 ice core) indicates that a warm AMO has effects on the temperature of the water circulating through the Fram Strait into the Arctic. And as we know, the oceans are warmed by the Sun when cloud diminishes, not Co2.

    Your graph is partly an artifact of the wantonly charlatonesque recalibration of the Greenland ice cores to the Antarctic cores.
    https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2010/12/28/tom-van-hoof-historical-co2-records/

    I’m sure I don’t need to spell out that since co2 changes lag behind temperature changes at all timescales, the temperature swings indicated by the varying co2 content of Greenland ice cores are driven by natural variation. Given their cyclic nature, a celestial origin is indicated. And these temperature swings are large in magnitude. Or so I was told by the head of the Scott Polar Research Institute as we sat in his office sipping coffee.

    https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2012/09/25/visit-to-scott-polar-research-institute/

  26. crikey says:

    REN asked ..Crikey, how could the heat from the surface layer may cause such anomalies at such a height and this winter?
    As far as l understand. The stratospheric warming events are thought develop from ‘wave perturbations’ at the surface layer and extend vertically to the stratosphere.
    So air from the surface southern ocean at say about 5 deg C extends upward 50 km into the upper layers of the atmosphere. Where the air is very thin. Your link showing 01 hecta pascal which is where the QBO is measured.

    According to the temperature profile of the 01 hPa layer near the Antarctic

    The temperature range is -45 deg c to minus -10 . THe range in temps today is .35 deg .currently ( 22nd August 2013)

    During the stratospheric warming event of the 16th august 2013 the ‘hot spot’ at 01 hPa got to a whopping + 15 deg C
    almost jumper off temperature.
    The range in upper stratospheric temp’ ( 01 hPa) was..
    minus 45 – ( + 15) = a whopping 60 deg c!!

    http://weathercycles.wordpress.com/2013/08/16/another-stratospheric-warming-event-ssw-in-the-southern-hemisphere-august-2013/

    The source of heat of 15 deg c for the SWW warming?
    Air from the Australian interior at 32 deg c or maybe some latent heat mechanism..?

    ———————————–
    comment re:the jet stream near Australia.
    That is the sub- tropical jet which has been dominant all autumn and winter here.
    The sub polar jet has been weak and contracted south consistent with the positive SAM for most of 2013.
    The SSW event appeared to send the SAM temporarily? negative but is currently on the rebound toward neutral
    ———————————————-

    As far as l can see the Arctic and Antarctic have completely different climate patterns

    Getting back on thread topic

    Some temperatures becoming favourable for Ice and snow in the Arctic currently

    Some scientists link negative AO to arctic ice loss
    Research
    Negative AO Phase Triggers Low Arctic Sea Ice Extent ( 2011)
    http://news.softpedia.com/news/Negative-AO-Phase-triggers-Low-Arctic-Sea-Ice-Extent-176475.shtml

  27. ren says:

    crikey says:
    As far as l understand. The stratospheric warming events are thought develop from ‘wave perturbations’ at the surface layer and extend vertically to the stratosphere.
    Where do you see it?http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/strat-trop/gif_files/time_pres_TEMP_MEAN_ALL_SH_2013.gif

  28. ren says:

    Crikey this is the range of the polar vortex and jet stream. Did I see it?

  29. crikey says:

    Here is some research that suggests the cause .
    Stratospheric warming in Southern Hemisphere high latitudes since 1979
    Y. Hu1 and Q. Fu2
    http://www.atmos.washington.edu/~qfu/Publications/acp.hu.2009.pdf

    I am open to suggestions as to the cause.REN.? Research is only hypothesis and tentative conclusion
    open to critique and modification.
    Maybe there are other contributing factors l am sure
    It seems likely that Rossby waves of some some form are invloved

    I actually haven’t gone so far as to look at every possible angle of this event REN
    $ 30 and hour and employment and l would get down to business and document the cause.
    If you know what l mean

    I have observed the SH jetstreams weekly for a number of years
    My source of observation is here

    http://www.bom.gov.au/australia/charts/viewer/index.shtml?type=windbarb&level=200hPa&tz=AEDT&area=G&model=G&chartSubmit=Refresh+View

    You can see quite clearly the strength of the subpolar jet

    cheers

    We are off the thread topic REN.

  30. docrichard says:

    Roger, Tom van Hoof is very interesting. He suggests that the Black Death resulted in trees growing in pasture land because there was nobody there to till it, which resulted in lower CO2 levels, and consequent cooling. This is not however accepted by climatologists (Gavin Schmidt anyway) because the calculated amounts are not sufficient to cause the observed changes.

    Which tells us several things, mainly that van Hoof is not an AGW den…”skeptic”, and that climatology does not simply grab anything that fits its theory, it checks it to see if it can do what it says on the tin.

    Regarding cycles: climatology is perfectly happy with cycles, if they are robustly established, and not based on one or two wiggles. However, as the name suggests, cycles go up and down. What climatologists are concerned about is a steady upward trend irrespective of and superimposed on known cycles.

  31. tallbloke says:

    Doc, I see you’ve veered away from the recalibration of the Greenland ice core with a distracting anecdote about something else Tom van Hoof said. Very wise, you obviously realise you’re on a loser. To be clear, van Hoof *knows* the Greenland ice core data was recalibrated, and polar expert Prof Julian Dowdeswell *knows* Greenland ice core data really shows temperature swings in the Arctic are large on fairly short timescales (7-9C). Not so short that 34 years of satellite data is going to save your graph however, since everybody *knows* the Atlantic Multi-Decadal Oscillation is twice that period.

    The global warmists have only got accurate data for the warming phase. So of course, they tell us we should ignore ‘anecdotal evidence’ from before then.
    As for “climatology is perfectly happy with cycles”, their failure to appear as an emergent phenomena in GCM’s is a clear indication of missing variables. In this case the Moon and the Sun, and all of the rest of the solar system. GCM’s get by with a ‘solar constant’ with tiny variations in overall TSI, blatantly ignoring the fact that the end of the spectrum which strongly affects the upper atmosphere varies by up to 50% on decadal timescales.

    The beat goes on.

  32. Roger Andrews says:

    Here’s a plot comparing the HadISST1 sea ice index for the Arctic against HadCRUT4 Arctic surface temperatures:

    Can anyone explain why the +/-1.5C temperature increase since 1970 has caused Arctic ice to retreat while the +/-1.5C temperature increase between 1870 and 1940 had no impact?

  33. docrichard says:

    Roger, you know that climatological data has to be homogenised and cleaned up in many ways before it is usable. You will remember the mistake Spencer and Christy made because a satellite orbit was decaying.

    Neither you nor I have the competence to know the details of the data management of ice cores.

    The difference between us is that I have confidence that the scientists will try to do their professional best, knowing that if they foul up or worse, they will suffer career death. You, on the other hand, appear to believe that they are involved in some kind of widespread conspiracy to manipulate and falsify data.

    If I have got you wrong on this point, please clarify, because that is the impression you are putting over.

  34. docrichard says:

    Roger Andrews, we can explain how a block of ice in a glass will remain unchanged when its temperature rises from -1.5C to 0.0C, yet will melt when its temperature rises from 0.0C-1.5C. Whether and how this applies to the Arctic situation I do not know. As Tallbloke mentions, the AMO is involved too.

  35. tallbloke says:

    Speak for yourself doc, I know what my competences are. One of them is a professional training in assessing complex theories.

    The Antarctic sea ice is at an all time high as we speak. There is *no valid justification* for homogenising the Greenland ice core data with the Antarctic.

    None. Whatsoever.

    To the tune of ‘Modern Major General’
    By Gilbert and Sullivan (Pirates of Penzance)

    I am the very model of a modern climatologist
    I’m partly statistician, partly palaeo-phrenologist
    I’ve temperature readings from thermometers coniferous
    my data are the same (or not, well, maybe) as Keith Briffa has
    I bought them from a bloke who brought them hotfoot from Siberia
    and mixed them with some algae from the mud in Lake Superior.
    When counting different isotopes I’m really in my element
    and sucking up to journalists from Guardian Environment
    I know what makes the treerings from Siberia to the Rockies tick
    And I can make spaghetti and transform it to a hockeystick.
    My data’s got dark matter that would shatter a cosmologist
    I am the very model of a modern climatologist

    H/T Geoff Chambers

  36. ren says:

    The animation shows how to lock at 10 hPa caused a strong jet stream wave.
    http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/intraseasonal/temp10anim.shtml
    And such was the effect on the amount of 200 hPa.
    http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/intraseasonal/z200anim.shtml
    It is necessary to examine this phenomenon, because it can be repeated in the northern hemisphere. Thanks for your patience.

  37. docrichard says:

    Roger Andrews, here is a more recent plot of Arctic sea ice with NH SST and NH St. It shows, as is only to be expected, that sea ice loss is proportional to increases in temperature. http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadsst2nh/from:1970/mean:48/plot/hadcrut3vnh/from:1970/mean:48/plot/nsidc-seaice-n/mean:48/normalise

  38. ren says:

    Now that we have the current satellite data, anyone who has the analytical mind can be a great climatologist. Yours.

  39. docrichard says:

    Tallbloke, I have trawled through your links. Interesting, but find them unconvincing. Ron Broberg answers David Middleton’s claims about man-made CO2, and even Watts thinks he over reaches in his claims. Stomata are highly variable.

    Your excursion into lyrical parody suggests, but does not unequivocally confirm, that you are a conspiracy theorist, a Moncktonian.

    I cannot comment on the re calibration between Greenland and Antarctic data, because I do not have enough information, but you may be reading too much into it. If the aim was to get a good temporal match between the sets, I cannot see a problem. I suggest you take your concerns directly to the scientists involved.

    All of this detail reminds me of how far we are from the actual core of the science, and my inability to get an unequivocal answer from you on the 2 key issues
    1) do you agree that a doubling of CO2 levels will increase global temps by ~1.2C, and
    2) what range of values do you accept for equilibrium climate sensitivity?

  40. Roger Andrews says:

    @docrichard

    You say:

    “You, on the other hand, appear to believe that (scientists) are involved in some kind of widespread conspiracy to manipulate and falsify data.”

    On this thread I’ve presented three graphs. The first was the Kinnard reconstruction (which you brought up) plotted upside down to show the hockey stick shape. The second showed a number of data sets published by other researchers that don’t match Kinnard. The third compared two “official” data sets that show an obvious and so far as I know unexplained disconnect between Arctic ice and temperature. I have no idea how this makes me a conspiracy theorist. Maybe you could elaborate.

    “Roger, you know that climatological data has to be homogenised and cleaned up in many ways before it is usable.”

    I suggest you spend some time comparing the “raw” GHCN v2 surface temperature data set with the “homogenised and cleaned up” GHCN v3.2 data set. You can find the GHCN data on the KNMI Climate Explorer site at http://climexp.knmi.nl/start.cgi?id=someone@somewhere
    .
    “Neither you nor I have the competence to know the details of the data management of ice cores.”

    How do you know I don’t have the competence to do this?

  41. docrichard says:

    Roger Andrews you are confusing the comments I make to Roger Tallbloke and those I make to you.

    [Reply] Lets get familiar doc. Call me Rog.

  42. Roger Andrews says:

    docrichard

    Apologies. When I saw “Roger Andrews says” followed by your comment addressed to “Roger” I assumed you meant me.

    But you’re right about Tallbloke. He’s a conspiracy theorist from way back 😉

  43. ren says:

    As for the scientists to see how NASA made ​​a mistake as to the course of the current solar cycle.
    As for the story, if it was not “warming of the Roman” Rome would not have reached the British Isles.

  44. ren says:

    The current concentration of ice.

  45. ren says:

    Tallbloke that to your attention the rainfall over the continents, interesting article.
    http://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-blogs/climatechange/global-sea-level-rise-temporar/16790590

  46. Stephen Wilde says:

    Although not from the same cause both sudden stratospheric warming events and a warmer stratosphere above the poles from solar activity changes affecting ozone quantities result in stronger polar anticyclones, more frequent and longer incursions of cold surface air into middle latitudes, more meridional jets and increased global cloudiness so that less solar energy enters the oceans and the Earth system cools.

    We just need to see concrete evidence of my suggestion that an active sun reduces stratospheric ozone especially towards the poles and an inactive sun does the opposite.

    It is the reaction between ozone and incoming solar shortwave that causes the temperature inversion at the tropopause in the first place so it must be changes in ozone amounts that most affect stratospheric temperatures and thus the height of the tropopause.

  47. tallbloke says:

    docrichard says:
    August 22, 2013 at 7:30 pm
    Tallbloke, I have trawled through your links. Interesting, but find them unconvincing. Ron Broberg answers David Middleton’s claims about man-made CO2, and even Watts thinks he over reaches in his claims. Stomata are highly variable.

    So is CO2. But its variations get flattened out in the diffusion of gases in the compacting firn that forms the ice cores.

    Your excursion into lyrical parody suggests, but does not unequivocally confirm, that you are a conspiracy theorist, a Moncktonian.

    Lighten up doc, it only suggests that I enjoy cleverly written witty parody and thought it relevant to the discussion of homogenisation.

    If the aim was to get a good temporal match between the sets, I cannot see a problem.

    If you can’t see that inter-calibrating datasets in the X-axis to help get a temporal match is a wholly different issue to squishing the Y-axis (temperature) of the Greenland ice core data down to Antarctic values then you’re too dumb for me to be wasting my time discussing the matter with you.

    Nearly all paleo proxies show that temperature swings in the deep southern hemisphere are smaller than those in the north, and we understand the reasons why. It’s climate science 101. Antarctica is surrounded by an ocean with a circumpolar current and there is much less landmass in the southern hemisphere to impede flow. Northern hemisphere has larger landmass with altitude relief which causes flow impedance. That amplifies the cyclic climate features such as the AMO. The varying southern extent of ice rafted debris on the ocean floor evidences the repeating nature of the AMO going back thousands of years. The climate models are absent this feature and so the 1970’s-2000’s positive phase of the AMO is conflated with ‘man made global warming’.

  48. tallbloke says:

    Ren: Thanks for the link. It’s unfortunate the article doesn’t link the study, I’d like to see the numbers.

  49. ren says:

    StephenThere you saw exactly the animation. You can see that the first strong impetus came from a height of 10 hPa, and so in the stratosphere. Strange is the strength of the pulse, which resulted in such a strong response of the stratosphere. Your theory is too general for me. For me, the question must also be another factor.

  50. ren says:

    Similarly, there was a strong impetus in the winter in the northern hemisphere, which is very visible. Polar vortex spins from top to bottom, and not vice versa.
    Similarly, there was a strong impetus in the winter in the northern hemisphere, which is very visible. Polar vortex spins from top to bottom, and not vice versa

  51. docrichard says:

    Rog, you say that CO2 is highly variable, but the Keeling curve is pretty smooth, apart from the seasonal variation. You say CO2’s “variations get flattened out in the diffusion of gases in the compacting firn that forms the ice cores”. If this is indeed so, it would simply have the effect of smoothing out the signal, removing the interannual variations, just as we do when we take a 48 or 96 month mean on a graph. If on the other hand you believe that CO2 diffuses right out of the ice layer and back into the air, you need to assemble evidence to make that case, and also study what thought the climatologists have already given to that possibility. After all, they are sitting there in their cabins, obsessing about their ice cores throughout the long dark polar months, and you can be pretty sure they have given more than passing thought to this.

  52. tallbloke says:

    Doc: this has been studied. I doubt you read all this, but Fig’s 3 and 10b in the paper are pretty important. http://www.greenworldtrust.org.uk/Science/Scientific/CO2-ice-HS.htm

  53. crikey says:

    Actually REN the first impetus to the curent upper air perturbation August2013,according to my observation diary came with steep and enduring decline in the SAM /AAO from Last week in July. that dropped a massive 6.3 index points to minus 4 by August 16th. ( It took 4 weeks to drop 6.3 index points to record negative levels)This may be however a coincidence
    but SAM went first.. SWW went 2nd.. stratospheric height anomaly went 3rd around 19th August..

    Thanks REN for your links on the stratospheric anomaly. That is incredible!!

    I am glad there is some interest..Keep me informed if you note anything .

    If this was northern hemisphere data this news would be all over the wunderground blogs
    However here in the sth hemisphere the BOM climate dept and CSIRO would be too infatuated with studying C02 to have notice this spectacular aberration in the upper air over the Antartic and southern ocean
    SWW have been as rare as hens teeth during the modern records.
    They rarely split the vortex like the NH.
    2002 l think was one such occassion

    I took snap of this 200hpa layer response.from your link REN.. wow!!
    https://picasaweb.google.com/110600540172511797362/STRATOSPHERE#5915271860944275330

    I wonder how the lower atmosphere will respond..and the Antarctic?
    —————————–

    SW.. I have seen your work and paper on your blog on how the climate variables are likely to change in a global cooling downturn. I found myself agreeing with your points. However leaving an open mind for surprises

    I find it exciting that we are about to witness first hand how the earths climate behaves as the sun goes quiet.

    I find it a shame that climate researchers could be studying this phenomena. However ..every time there is an unexpected climatic event like the meandering Jetstream in the NH.. The consensus crowd have to contort the findings to fit the 400ppm c02 theory of AGW.

    Notebooks should be out.. Cyclic analysis indicates a global cooling at least until 2030 where there is a considerable consensus in the community of cycles research
    After that there is considerable variation..

    There has been global cooling since 2007 which would be atypical of a downturn in the AMO.

    However mu-cyclic downturn is additive and produces stronger events like the ~200 yrDE Vries events like the Dalton Minimum

    A downturn in the order of 30 plus years
    Sea level should stop rising , Arctic ice should grow, midlatitude extremes as Jetstream meanders

    the Antartic is a mystery..?

    Will Antartic ice melt or grow in a Dalton style global temperature decline?

  54. docrichard says:

    Rog, Jarorowski published in 1992. 21 years have passed. You need to look at the literature since then, and see if he has been refuted, or taken on board. For instance, there is a detailed critique of Jarorowski here: http://web.archive.org/web/20090104033735/http://www.someareboojums.org/blog/?p=7

  55. ren says:

    Crikey mówi:
    I find it exciting that we are about to witness first hand how the earths climate behaves as the sun goes quiet.

    I find it a shame that climate researchers could be studying this phenomena. However ..every time there is an unexpected climatic event like the meandering Jetstream in the NH.. The consensus crowd have to contort the findings to fit the 400ppm c02 theory of AGW.
    That’s exactly what I think.

  56. tallbloke says:

    Doc: my ISP won’t let me look at archive.org for whatever reason. Please could you copy and post the article to your website? Thanks.

  57. ren says:

    Crikey lock on 10 hPa in progress.

  58. ren says:

    Crikey lock can be seen from 2 mbar.

  59. tallbloke says:

    Thanks doc, I’ll take a read when I need a break from helping model the sunspot series.

  60. ren says:

    November 12, 1911, lived 84 years, died prof. Zbigniew Jaworowski. He was a doctor by profession and mountaineer with a passion. For many years he was associated with Polish atomistic. He left in Swierk many friends who will always miss him.
    Prof. dr hab. Zbigniew Jaworowski, b. 10/17/1927, died 12.11.11przeżywszy 84 years. Jaworowski was a pioneer in studies of ice cores, which should be respected. In 2007 he was 80 years old. Strange that now controversial. But he said only that the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is vanishingly small (0.04%) compared to water vapor (up to 4% over the ocean near the equator). Funny is the science that is afraid of the old man.

  61. tallbloke says:

    Ren: We mentioned his passing here: https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2011/11/28/sad-death-of-dr-zbigniew-jaworowski-nov-12th-2011-poland/

    A passionate scientist. Maybe sometimes too passionate in the face of the politicisation of climate science for full objectivity. He fought against what he saw as bad science with the knowledge he had.

  62. ren says:

    See how yesterday’s weak magnetic storm is strongly influenced by the level of cosmic radiation, which is still at a high level.
    http://cosmicrays.oulu.fi/

  63. crikey says:

    Hey! Thanks for those links and information REN

    I have been flat out taking some snaps and making some notes from your information

    Would you agree REN that a massive atmospheric ‘sink hole’ has formed over the southern pole of Antartica .

    The upper stratospheric atmosphere has imploded or caved in..
    What do you think ?REN ..Stephen .W …others?

    SNAP
    https://picasaweb.google.com/110600540172511797362/STRATOSPHERE#5915646828983994818

    Could be caused by dramatic cooling of the upper stratosphere?
    Check ozone ?
    check ALL atmospheric variables in sth hemisphere

    What is happening on solar or planetary realm at the moment?

    Maybe a change of season phenomenon?

    So what caused this sink hole?

    This is exciting…

    Some discussions underway on a thread here
    Stratospheric sudden warmings (SSWs)
    http://forum.weatherzone.com.au/ubbthreads.php/topics/1208196#Post1208196

    As l said. The Antarctic is a mystery