Saturday, April 17, 2010

Warmer Arctic Temperature brings more Arctic Ice

I swear that some of the lunacies that the global warming hysteriacs want us to believe are entirely illogical. Goddard Institute has proclaimed March 2010 as the warmest March in history. (http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/?report=global&year=2010&month=2&submitted=Get+Report
)


Here is a picture of the warm Arctic regions, also from Goddard Institute.



NOte that all around the Arctic Ocean is warm, up to 5 deg C warmer than normal. The strong red all along the coasts of the Arctic ocean should indicate that the Arctic Ocean's ice should be melting. But it isn't.

If this is true, then the climatologists at Goddard need to explain how it is that the arctic ice cover and thickness INCREASED in March. Below is a graph of the ice cover in the Arctic. The light blue curve is the area of the Arctic covered by ice at the end of March.



The area of ice cover in the Arctic Ocean continued to increase throughout March, which was up to 5 deg C warmer surrounding the Arctic. Surely ice cover wouldn't increase as much as it does if the Arctic was as warm as Goddard most assuredly mistakenly claims it is.

This discrepancy shows that the thermometer record is not to be trusted. It is a sham.

13 comments:

  1. Shall I explain it for the retard? Oh ok then...

    You do realise that temperatures in the arctic are VERY cold, right? In fact in winter the average temperature is less than -20 degrees Celsius.

    When air is cold, it can't hold as much water vapour. Warming it up, even when its still near or below freezing, allows the air to hold more water vapour, which in turn can turn into more precipitation, which leads to more snow.

    All perfectly logical and perfectly explainable scientifically.

    Maybe you should learn some basics about weather and climate before you start trying to criticise the people who have.

    ReplyDelete
  2. then again we're talking about sea ice, not snow or precipitation.

    Karmakaze has forgotten that the Arctic ocean already comes with water built in, hence the name ocean.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks PT. Karmakaze can't seem to understand that above normal temperatures in the Arctic were used by the hysteriacs to explain why the Arctic ocean was melting. Now those same high circum-Arctic temperatures are ignored as the ocean continues to freeze. It seems that warmer air melts ice when they want it to and it doesn't melt it when they want it to. Such physics is childish

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks PT. Karmakaze seems to forget that high temperatures in the circum-Arctic have been used by the hysteriacs to explain why the Arctic Ocean is melting. Now, the evidence is that the Arctic Ocean continues to freeze in spite of those high temperatures. That implies either that the thermometer record is no good, or that the physics of ice has change in the past year. It seems that the hysteriacs would rather believe that the physics of ice has changed rather than admit that there might be something wrong with the high arctic temperature record.

    Karmakaze probably doesn't know that the temperature coverage in the Arctic is quite sparse, and since 1900 125 of the 500 stations have been shut down. Each month 30% of the unmanned stations don't send in data. (Nature 441, 133(11 May 2006)

    But of course, we wouldn't want Karmakaze to actually think critically would we?

    ReplyDelete
  5. to 彭志文 Ni hao ma? Wo ke yi shou Zhongwen yi diar diar. Wo zhu zai BeiJing yi nian ban. Xi huan Zhong quo. Xiang Zhong guo, gen wo de hen dou Zhong guo peng you.

    Wo you san ge sun zi. Tamen ban ge Zhong guo ren. Wo hen gao xing!

    Wo shou hua bu hao.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Typo "Zhong quo" yin gai "zhong guo" doi bu qi

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ah Morton.
    You motivated me a little bit.
    I went to the archive for the Sac Metro.
    Normal average high for March in Sacramento is
    64.7 degrees F. Normal low is 44.3 F.

    Averaging 2010 up from the figures provided by the weather underground gave me an actual high of 63.87F and low of 42.8F, about a full degree below average all around.

    That Noaa map shows Sacramento, in fact all of California, as 2 degrees Celsius hotter then average.

    I wonder if this is the case nation wide.

    ReplyDelete
  8. That is an incredibly interesting fact. I think the climatologists are adding heat where they shouldn't

    ReplyDelete
  9. Here's some independant confirmation from Orange County. (You believed me right? Well anyhow it's always good to pile on.)
    More snow falls overnight at local ski resorts.
    The new snowfall – combined with a few inches earlier in the week – brought a total of 10 – 13 inches with this week’s storm in Big Bear.
    Local mountains have had record snowfall this season thanks to El Nino storms.

    That's Southern California.

    Here's a report from the North.
    Snow's great for skiers' last run as Tahoe season ends.

    Snowfall in the Lake Tahoe area is about 110 percent of average, according to the National Weather Service, and officials at Sierra resorts say skiing conditions are great.

    "The snow is wonderful," said Amelia Richmond, a spokeswoman for Squaw Valley USA Ski Resort.
    Squaw Valley typically has great spring skiing, but this year has been exceptional, she said, noting that it's unusual to have snow this late in April.

    Julie Koster, marketing manager for Kirkwood Mountain Resort, said the annual closing date for skiing is dictated by the resort's U.S. Forest Service permit and typically is the last weekend in April.



    They could stay open till June except for the unfortunate liablity of being located in a dictatorship. (Jees who knew?)

    I'm tired of the worn out excuses that Noaa just slipped a digit or left out a minus sign.
    These creeps are straight up lying to push the socialist agenda.

    Is there a complaint form or number to call? I'm a bit limited in my resources but maybe you know of a way I can use legal channels to call these SOB's out?
    I want to force them to retract.

    How do I do that?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Just publicizing your observation is a great way to make people who are not hyper-partisan think about the issues. Look at the polls of whether or not people believe global warming now vs the past few years. Problems like this, a cold winter, climate gate etc have all taken their toll on the public's willingness to be mesmerized by a bunch of hacks living parasitically off the backs of the public's taxpayer and who continually scare the public into giving them more money.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Being new to this argument, I'm not sure that I follow your argument. Say the average temperature in a given location is -40. If it is 5 degrees warmer than average, -35, why wouldn't the ice cover increase?

    ReplyDelete
  12. well, the weather is fine then, right :)
    Congratulations.

    Ever seen those three monkeys?
    Blind, deaf and mute.

    Hope it works for you.
    although mute don't seem to describe you blind and deaf comes pretty close.

    You have Google, you have those doing research all year around. You even have an arctic that this year is traveled by a Russian Gas tanker trying out the North west passage.

    You don't get that local weather, is l o c a l as compared to climate that's global. You don't get that a higher temperature will create humidity and make clouds, clouds that hide the sun creating short-time shade from the sun for some years to come. But as the temperature globally will rise, and as the climate gets hotter you will see them disappear, and then your local papers will write about the 'heat catastrophe' that no one could foresee. Some parts of the country will find itself in a chronic drought, others parts might be flooded as a lot of precipitation will move around when the oceanic streams change their path due to the melt water from the Arctic, and as our new climate starts to take shape. The oceans are already acidic, meaning that the fish are dying out there, and that too accelerates as more CO2 dissolves into the water. They are our biggest heat-sinks keeping CO2 from heating the atmosphere, but they are losing the battle.

    CO2 have an average time-length in the atmosphere around 50 to an ??? years constantly catching and stock piling infra red radiation (heat). So lets say we stopped our pollution today, then it would still take at the extremely foolhardy lucky chance 50 years before the CO2 we already have let out would stop raising the atmosphere. A more realistic number is around a hundred years for the major part of it, and some thousand for the last parts of our CO2 bonanza. In the arctic the frozen methane are getting released now as the sea bottom thaws, 30 times more heat holding than CO2, and the Arctic have already released more methane that the whole Earths Oceans can do together.

    I could go on like this for a long time, but as you don't know how to search independently and look for facts, instead trusting in your mouths to do the work I'll stop here.


    Yoron.

    ReplyDelete