A Hot Day’s Night: The Beetles

By: Dr. Ricky Rood , 3:33 AM GMT on April 11, 2012

Share this Blog
14
+

A Hot Day’s Night: The Beetles -

The semester is almost over here in Michigan, and I am looking forward to more regularity in writing these blogs. Sorry for the recent infrequency, and the occasional excursions into the arcane. I am looking for well posed, interesting, new questions to focus on, and you know how to find me if you have a good idea. In this entry I want to build of the recent heat and the early spring.

The thread I made through the last blog ended up with Plant Hardiness Zones, which are those maps that gardeners and farmers use to decide when to plant seeds. Over the last 20 – 30 years the warming of the planet has caused the northern migration of these zones. The Washington Post has an excellent graphic that shows the changes between 1990 and 2012. Since I am not so facile, I have taken from this graphic the two extremes, 1990 and 2012.



Figure 1: 1990 U.S. Plant Hardiness Zones. (From Washington Post)




Figure 2: 2012 U.S. Plant Hardiness Zones. (From Washington Post)


What I want to look at here are the very coldest temperatures, the purples. If you look at Zone 2b, the zone below -40 degrees F, it essentially disappears between 1990 and 2012. Zone 3a, which is between -35 degrees F and – 40 degrees F becomes much smaller.

So this past winter, and especially March 2012, was extraordinarily warm in the 48 contiguous states. In fact, I, who fly too much, had one of the easiest winters of travel. Based on Jeff Master’s blogs, I chose several times to go through Chicago, and for the most part I have landed with splendid views of a blue Lake Michigan. There was an interesting piece on Talk of the Nation, noting the relation between a warm winter and the lack of flu. So what is the problem? It’s not below -40 degrees anymore. Air travel is easier. We might have less flu. Does anyone besides me, planting potatoes on a dry 80 degree day in March, worry about this?

I have been spending a lot of time with beetle-killed wood this year. You might recall a couple of blogs back in 2009 where I talked about the pine beetles which are killing millions of acres of pine trees in the western U.S. and Canada. (Climate Change and the Forest, Climate and the Beetle) It is beautiful wood, often with a light blue tint. I am using it to restore a couple of 100 year old out buildings. There is a LOT of it; in fact, more than one can imagine managing. There is some lumber being made, some fire wood being made, but for the most part there are millions of acres of dead trees. I have talked to a couple of people who wonder why there is not more outrage about these massive forest kills. That’s fodder for the comments.

Back up to the maps. The pine beetle responsible for killing the pines in the Rockies is itself killed, controlled, by temperatures less the -40 degrees F. This is at the edge of the coldest temperatures normally seen in the U.S., and these cold extremes have largely disappeared since 1990. In the map below, I have used the interactive version of the map from the US Department of Agriculture to extract the State of Colorado. There are only very small areas of Zone 3a remaining.



Figure 3: Plant hardiness zones in Colorado for 2012. From US Department of Agriculture.


We adapt to climate change – or we will. Now, one of the most effective adapters seems to be the Mountain Pine Beetle. In The American Naturalist there is a pre-publication posting of an article on the Unprecedented Summer Generation of the Mountain Pine Beetle. That is, rather than there being one generation of Mountain Pine Beetle during the year, in Colorado, in recent years there have been two broods. The paper is by Mitton and Ferrenberg. There is a press release of the paper here.

They noted in 2008 pine beetles flying and attacking pines more than a month earlier than the historic norm. They set up experiments to test three hypotheses: 1) That temperature had not changed; 2) That the length and timing of the flight season had not changed; and 3) the life cycle of the beetle had not changed. Their results found that there had been significant warming, with spring coming earlier. They found that the behavior of the pine beetle was explained by earlier emergence of the beetles, followed by a second brood of the beetles in the summer. Figure 4 shows this schematically. It is striking to see the move to earlier springs in the figure – as with the hardiness zones.



Figure 4: The historical mountain pine beetle (MPB) univoltine life cycle (above calendar arrows and linked by black arrows) and the observed MPB bivoltine life cycle (below calendar arrows and linked by red arrows). Univoltine means one brood per year, and bivoltine means two broods per year. Calendar arrow colors represent monthly temperature regimes: blue for <0°C, yellow for 0°–4.99°C, orange for 5°–9.99°C, and red for 10°C and higher. From Mitton and Ferrenberg, Mountain Pine Beetle Develops an Unprecedented Summer Generation in Response to Climate Warming.


This research took place in an area that in the 1970s was judged to be “climatically unsuitable for Mountain Pine Beetle development … .” The study is convincing that the devastation of the forest due to the pine beetle is directly related to the warming planet. It points out the vulnerability of the tree populations, as the trees that are being impacted now have not developed a historical resistance to the pine beetle. Since most of the beetles that are born live, this impact is not incremental, as that second generation is enormous.

So, yes, this warm winter has had its advantages - less fuel oil was needed. But in the western forest we are seeing this case study of wide ranging ecological disruption. The consequences of the disruption will unfold in the next decades. Questions of fire and soil erosion will emerge. The impact on tourism will be realized - and, of course, water quality and the change in the ecosystems of the western forests. The Mountain Pine Beetle is adapting rapidly to global warming, what are our strategies to adapt to the Pine Beetle?

r

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 144 - 94

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6Blog Index

Quoting iceagecoming:
So much for Mainstream science pubs, just like the
shills at NPR and NYT.

April 11, 2012

~snip~
So yet another denialist opinion piece written by an oil company shill. Shocking. I would ask why it is that you denialists can't produce peer-reviewed science to bolster your beliefs, but I may as well ask why I haven't yet dug up the ten tons of Mayan gold buried in my backyard, for in either case, the answer's the same: it doesn't exist.
Quoting martinitony:
I suspect over the next few years many more of the exaggerations and misstatements of the IPCC and other warming fanatics will be shown to be false.
"More"? I haven't seen any yet. In fact, nearly every forecast has underestimated the amount of change. To which "more" do you refer, kemosabe?
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13629
One Humans thought's do not change the facts as they are,..and the mind cowers when faced with reality.


Milk Dud?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Patrap:
USGS
Glacier Monitoring Studies
Monitoring and Assessing Glacier Changes and Their Associated Hydrologic and Ecologic Effects in Glacier National Park



Purpose:

To systematically monitor changes in Glacier National Park’s namesake glaciers and to determine the causes of changes, assess their ecological and hydrological effects, and predict future changes and effects.


Glacier National Park’s namesake glaciers have receded rapidly since the Park’s establishment in 1910, primarily due to long-term changes in regional and global climate. These changes include warming, particularly of daily minimum temperatures, and persistent droughts. This warming is ongoing and the loss of the Park’s glaciers continues, with the park’s glaciers predicted to disappear by 2030.


"One possible explanation is that previous estimates were based on measurements taken primarily from some of the lower, more accessible glaciers in Asia and were extrapolated to infer the behavior of higher glaciers.'


I don't think so

We see what we want to see. I suspect over the next few years many more of the exaggerations and misstatements of the IPCC and other warming fanatics will be shown to be false.


Member Since: July 29, 2009 Posts: 0 Comments: 970
So much for Mainstream science pubs, just like the
shills at NPR and NYT.



April 11, 2012
Atmospheric Aerosols and the Death of Nature
Filed under: Climate Changes, Gulf Stream —
Big news last week was that new findings published in Nature magazine showed that human emissions of aerosols (primarily from fossil fuel use) have been largely responsible for the multi-decadal patterns of sea surface temperature variability in the Atlantic ocean that have been observed over the past 150 years or so. This variability—commonly referred to as the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, or AMO—has been linked to several socially significant climate phenomena including the ebb and flow of active Atlantic hurricane periods and drought in the African Sahel.

This paper marks, in my opinion, the death of credibility for Nature on global warming. The first symptoms showed up in 1996 when they published a paper by Ben Santer and 13 coauthors that was so obviously cherry-picked that it took me and my colleagues about three hours to completely destroy it. Things have gone steadily downhill, from a crazy screamer by Jonathan Patz on mortality from warming that didn’t even bother to examine whether fossil fuels were associated with extended lifespan (they are), to the recent Shakun debacle. But the latest whopper, by Ben Booth and his colleagues at the UK Met Office indeed signals the death of Nature in this field.


The U.K. Met Office issued a press release touting the findings by several of their researchers, and didn’t pull any punches as to the study’s significance. The headline read “Industrial pollution linked to ‘natural’ disasters” and included things like:

These shifts in ocean temperature, known as the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation or AMO, are believed to affect rainfall patterns in Africa, South America and India, as well as hurricane activity in the North Atlantic - in extreme cases leading to humanitarian disasters.

Ben Booth, a Met Office climate processes scientist and lead author of the research, said: “Until now, no-one has been able to demonstrate a physical link to what is causing these observed Atlantic Ocean fluctuations, so it was assumed they must be caused by natural variability.

“Our research implies that far from being natural, these changes could have been largely driven by dirty pollution and volcanoes. If so, this means a number of natural disasters linked to these ocean fluctuations, such as persistent African drought during the 1970’s and 80’s, may not be so natural after all.”

An accompanying “News and Views” piece in Nature put the findings of Booth and colleagues in climatological perspective:

If Booth and colleagues’ results can be corroborated, then they suggest that multidecadal temperature fluctuations of the North Atlantic are dominated by human activity, with natural variability taking a secondary role. This has many implications. Foremost among them is that the AMO does not exist, in the sense that the temperature variations concerned are neither intrinsically oscillatory nor purely multidecadal.

But not everyone was so impressed with the conclusions of Booth et al.

For instance, Judith Curry had this to say at her blog, “Climate Etc.,”

Color me unconvinced by this paper. I suspect that if this paper had been submitted to J. Geophysical Research or J. Climate, it would have been rejected. In any event, a much more lengthy manuscript would have been submitted with more details, allowing people to more critically assess this. By publishing this, Nature seems to be looking for headlines, rather than promoting good science.

And Curry has good reason to be skeptical.

“In press” at the journal Geophysical Research Letters is a paper titled “Greenland ice core evidence for spatial and temporal variability of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation” by Petr Chylek and colleagues, including Chris Folland of the Hadley Centre of the UK Met Office.

In this paper, Chylek et al. examine evidence of the AMO that is contained in several ice core records distributed across Greenland. The researchers were looking to see whether there were changes in the character of the AMO over different climatological periods in the past, such as the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Warm Period—periods that long preceded large-scale human aerosol emissions. And indeed they found some. The AMO during the Little Ice Age was characterized by a quasi-periodicity of about 20 years, while the during the Medieval Warm Period the AMO oscillated with a period of about 45 to 65 years.

And Chylek and colleagues had this to say about the mechanisms involved:

The observed intermittency of these modes over the last 4000 years supports the view that these are internal ocean-atmosphere modes, with little or no external forcing.

Better read that again. “…with little or no external forcing.”

Chylek’s conclusion is vastly different from the one reached by Booth et al., which in an Editorial, Nature touted as [emphasis added]:

[B]ecause the AMO has been implicated in global processes, such as the frequency of Atlantic hurricanes and drought in the Sahel region of Africa in the 1980s, the findings greatly extend the possible reach of human activity on global climate. Moreover, if correct, the study effectively does away with the AMO as it is currently posited, in that the multidecadal oscillation is neither truly oscillatory nor multidecadal.

Funny how the ice core records analyzed by Chylek (as opposed to the largely climate model exercise of Booth et al.) and show the AMO to be both oscillatory and multidecadal—and to be exhibiting such characteristics long before any possible human influence.

Judith Curry’s words “By publishing this, Nature seems to be looking for headlines, rather than promoting good science” seem to ring loud and true in light of further observation-based research.

May God rest the soul of Nature.

References:

Booth, B., et al., 2012. Aerosols implicated as a prime driver of twentieth-century North Atlantic climate variability. Nature, doi:10.1038/nature10946, http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent /full/nature10946.html

Member Since: January 27, 2009 Posts: 25 Comments: 1083
Simply awesome:

Weather Underground Launches New Climate Change Center in Honor of Earth Day. New Resource Center Provides Information on the Effects of Our Warming Climate and What We Can Do to Change It

SAN FRANCISCO, CA, Apr 19, 2012 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) -- Weather Underground, the world's first online weather service, announced today that it has added a new Climate Change Center to its popular site, wunderground.com. The primary goal of the new center is to present users with hard facts about how climate is changing in their local neighborhoods and empower people to form their own opinions on the climate change debate. The center is now live at wunderground.com/climate.

To understand how climate change is affecting local neighborhoods, users can access the Local Climate Change tool to review data from local weather stations reporting conditions from as far back as the early 1700s. In addition, this feature has the ability to see how climate could change in the future, as far forward as year 2100.

"Earth's climate has changed dramatically in recent years, and there is strong agreement among climate scientists that the current climate changes are mostly due to human activities. It is important for people to understand the changes happening to our atmosphere and what we can do about them," said Dr. Jeff Masters, co-Founder and Director of Meteorology at Weather Underground. "The Climate Change Center provides some unique resources to do just that."

The 'Skeptical Science' section debunks common myths about climate change. The new center also features blogs and videos for users looking to learn even more about the science behind climate change and understand how to reduce personal impact. With educational resources covering topics such as the greenhouse effect, Arctic sea ice decline, and extreme weather, the Climate Change Center will appeal to scientists, students, and anyone interested in the science behind climate change.

"Our new Climate Change Center is a one-stop shop for information about our warming climate," according to Weather Underground Climatologist Angela Fritz. "We want people to understand that climate change is not intangible, especially when looking at how your own neighborhood is being affected. Our ultimate goal is for people to use our content and resources to understand that climate change is happening and we can do something about it."
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13629


Free will is what has gotten us into this unprecedented situation, but it will take courage, insight and a Global effort to reverse it.

But I highly doubt I shall live to see it.


Junior Mint anyone?


Member Since: Posts: Comments:
USGS
Glacier Monitoring Studies
Monitoring and Assessing Glacier Changes and Their Associated Hydrologic and Ecologic Effects in Glacier National Park



Purpose:

To systematically monitor changes in Glacier National Park’s namesake glaciers and to determine the causes of changes, assess their ecological and hydrological effects, and predict future changes and effects.


Glacier National Park’s namesake glaciers have receded rapidly since the Park’s establishment in 1910, primarily due to long-term changes in regional and global climate. These changes include warming, particularly of daily minimum temperatures, and persistent droughts. This warming is ongoing and the loss of the Park’s glaciers continues, with the park’s glaciers predicted to disappear by 2030.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:
Of course, climate change theory is supported by billions of data points and hundreds of millions of independent observations made across a wide range of time (millennia, in the case of proxy data) and locations (every bit of land, sea, and air), and validated through countless independent lines of research undertaken by tens of thousands of highly educated, highly qualified scientists. Call it "a patchwork of random events" if you wish, but anyone with even a smidgen of scientific or common sense knows by doing so you're just blathering more inanities.

The planet has been warming for decades, and the pace is picking up. Sea levels are quickly rising; glacial and polar ice is disappearing at an alarming rate; extreme weather events are rapidly increasing in severity and frequency. And our wanton extraction and burning of fossil fuels is primarily--if not solely--to blame.


No, the planet has been warming for at least 150 years. Started doing that well before man-discharged CO2 mattered. So warming in and of itself is irrelevant. You really need to tie it to CO2 and the climate isn't cooperating very well. The glaciers are not in major retreat as previously lied about or exaggerated. The sea ice extent is currently on a worldwide basis above the mean and in the northern hemisphere very near the mean. Average worldwide temperatures are also approaching the mean.

Now those are pretty significant issues, aren't they? However, when one can't use his predictions to support his case, he points elsewhere. Oh, I know, let's talk about extreme weather. Geez, that is certainly proof that something must be going on that man is causing. And we can drum up a pretty good case because we have so very many more people and structures that can get blown down or flooded and weather stations and radars that can record so very much more. No one will think about that as we tell them how many more tornadoes there are or seaside damage from hurricanes or more people displaced than ever before by floods.

Really, guys, every time I stop by to read this blog I see the same people blowing more and more smoke up our a......s, well you know what I mean. Forget about ice extent, talk about volume. Forget about temperatures, talk about extreme weather, just forget and believe. Have faith guys. You're gonna need it.
Member Since: July 29, 2009 Posts: 0 Comments: 970
Quoting martinitony:


About 20 years ago I went to a seminar about the secrets in the Torah. It was really fascinating. They went through pulling out all kinds of series and sequences of dates, numbers and other statements in the Torah and tied them into a series of connections to pretty much explain everything good, bad and evil that has happened to the Jewish people over the last century. It was truly amazing.

When you really try hard you can take a patchwork of very random events and put them into a quilt that actually looks like it tells a true story. The religion of Global Warming is just exactly that. It is a patchwork of random events pulled together to explain pretty much all that is happening. Truth is, it's a crock as was the Torah scam referred to above.

It's actually easy to do. Just use those facts that work well to tell the story you want to tell and discard or discredit those that don't help. Politicians can do it extemporaneously and that's okay. It's what we expect. It's sad when "scientists" try the same thing.

Of course, climate change theory is supported by billions of data points and hundreds of millions of independent observations made across a wide range of time (millennia, in the case of proxy data) and locations (every bit of land, sea, and air), and validated through countless independent lines of research undertaken by tens of thousands of highly educated, highly qualified scientists. Call it "a patchwork of random events" if you wish, but anyone with even a smidgen of scientific or common sense knows by doing so you're just blathering more inanities.

The planet has been warming for decades, and the pace is picking up. Sea levels are quickly rising; glacial and polar ice is disappearing at an alarming rate; extreme weather events are rapidly increasing in severity and frequency. And our wanton extraction and burning of fossil fuels is primarily--if not solely--to blame.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13629
Quoting martinitony:
It's sad when "scientists" try the same thing.


Then I guess it's a good thing scientists aren't doing that.

Oh, and cool story, bro.
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5469
Quoting martinitony:
When's all the sea ice going to be gone?






All of it? Several years to several decades from now.

However, the vast majority of the Arctic Sea Ice will be gone by September. You can safely bet the farm on that.

You can then double your money by predicting that the ice will grow again by March.
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5469
Quoting vanwx:
I found this tied many questions together for me.

http://youtu.be/HTAZue6ylZ8


About 20 years ago I went to a seminar about the secrets in the Torah. It was really fascinating. They went through pulling out all kinds of series and sequences of dates, numbers and other statements in the Torah and tied them into a series of connections to pretty much explain everything good, bad and evil that has happened to the Jewish people over the last century. It was truly amazing.

When you really try hard you can take a patchwork of very random events and put them into a quilt that actually looks like it tells a true story. The religion of Global Warming is just exactly that. It is a patchwork of random events pulled together to explain pretty much all that is happening. Truth is, it's a crock as was the Torah scam referred to above.

It's actually easy to do. Just use those facts that work well to tell the story you want to tell and discard or discredit those that don't help. Politicians can do it extemporaneously and that's okay. It's what we expect. It's sad when "scientists" try the same thing.

Member Since: July 29, 2009 Posts: 0 Comments: 970
When's all the sea ice going to be gone?





Member Since: July 29, 2009 Posts: 0 Comments: 970
131. vanwx
I found this tied many questions together for me.

http://youtu.be/HTAZue6ylZ8
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting biff4ugo:
P.S.
Please limit your project graphic to one per page. Every 50 posts say?
This isn't the place to get your project built, but I'm not saying don't post it.
However...
74,92,98 and again on 99!, 117 too. It is excessive and annoying. You could just make it your icon. That way it would be on all your posts but it wouldn't be In everyone's face 5 times on one page.
Why not contact folks in Borneo or Australia? Nice places with a steady current near shore... See the video you posted.
You might get better results or at least some results.


Thanks I'll try your suggestion about every page. They can be placed anywhere deep western boundary currents are. They work in the Gulfstream and Kuroshio currents to produce electrical power,regulate climate,restore Arctic Ice,restore sea levels, reduce tornadoes, severe weather, weaken hurricanes and many other effects which I can list if you want. The currents off of Borneo and Australia may also work to a lesser effect but we may need to find all of the currents to make the idea more controllable or to have a quicker effect if needed.....
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Birthmark:

Okay, that's a painfully good pun. :)

I've taken to ignoring nymore since he's just stirring the pot. He's not interested in discussion. He's interested in getting a rise out of people.

I didn't put him on ignore. I "-" his posts instead. "Don't feed the troll" is about the only piece of internet wisdom I abide by, though some of the advice on bacon is mighty tempting.


Why thank you Birthmark my intent is to show it is not all about extent,in fact Mass is probably more important when we talk about Arctic sea ice.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
128. vanwx
Here is a somewhat mild article on Pine Beetles.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/st ory/2012/04/18/bc-timber-supply-mpb.html

As you know, not only is there a loss of CO2 binding but a release even without the fire hazard.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting cyclonebuster:


Like the "No Mas" Roberto Duran fight against Sugar Ray Leonard your ice argument carries "No Mass" with it.

Okay, that's a painfully good pun. :)

I've taken to ignoring nymore since he's just stirring the pot. He's not interested in discussion. He's interested in getting a rise out of people.

I didn't put him on ignore. I "-" his posts instead. "Don't feed the troll" is about the only piece of internet wisdom I abide by, though some of the advice on bacon is mighty tempting.
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5469
Sea level continues to rise at one of the fastest rates in the satellite record after the past year's profound La Nina dip. Now, that's what I'd call "a recovery":

Water

(I see our self-confessed troll cutting and pasting the rants of fellow denialists without even the courtesy of an attribution [comment #125]. You'd think with their numbers being so limited, and decreasing every day, they'd look out for each others backs a little better.)
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13629
It seems they like to adjust sea level rise too.

Well, Jason II finally updated! Yea!!

Back in March, yours truly wrote When Even Pretending Seems Dishonest……. and I chronicled what they were doing. I’ve got to give them credit. The adjustments to Jason II are more subtle, so the get style points over Envisat’s adjustments. But, they’re doing something odd. They’ve only updated to 2012.097091, that’s Feb. 4th. It had been stuck on Jan. 15th. Here are their last 3 renderings. All graphs have the insipidly vapid alterations from Aviso removed. The first graph was created March 17th. The second graph was created March 28. And the last one today. At a time when the arc at the apex to the sine wave should be declining, Jason II’s increase is quickening!







Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
More evidence the antarctic ice sheet not melting as previously claimed. Source Geophysical Research Letters

Link
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Antarctic ice going nowhere. source New Scientist

Sinking land shows East Antarctic ice sheet is stable

Updated 17:58 19 March 2012 by Sara Reardon
Magazine issue 2856. Subscribe and save
For similar stories, visit the Climate Change Topic Guide

THE East Antarctic ice sheet looks unlikely to release its frozen grip any time soon. A new model suggests that prehistoric sea-level rise long thought to have been caused by the ice sheet melting was actually the result of local subsidence.

About 400,000 years ago, Earth went through a warm interglacial period similar to today's. The geological record shows traces of beaches and marine fossils in areas of Bermuda and the Bahamas far from the coast, suggesting that sea level was 20 metres higher than now.

Global sea level could have been that high only if the East Antarctic ice sheet melted at the time, according to climate models. And that is odd: this ice sheet doesn't seem to have melted at any other point in its long history.

Others have looked for more exotic explanations - for instance, that a mega tsunami hit Bermuda and the Bahamas and formed the confounding shoreline.

Maureen Raymo of Columbia University in Palisades, New York, thinks there is a simpler explanation. Ice sheets are heavy and weigh down the crust, while the ice-free areas just beyond the sheet bulge upwards as a consequence. When the ice melts, the crust beneath the former sheet rebounds, but the crust in the peripheral bulge subsides, making the land there dip and sea-level rise appear more extreme.

Bermuda and the Bahamas lie where the peripheral bulge of the North American ice sheet would have been 400,000 years ago. When Raymo and colleagues corrected the climate model to include Earth's elastic response to losing a heavy ice sheet, it added the missing metres to the lower sea level calculated for the Caribbean at the time. It means that the apparently extreme sea-level rise was only a local phenomenon (Nature, DOI: 10.1038/nature10891).

The results, Raymo says, mean "it is extremely unlikely the East Antarctic ice sheet can melt catastrophically in a slightly warmer climate".

"Putting constraints on how much sea levels rose is very important as we evaluate climate models [coupled with] ice sheet models," says Bette Otto-Bliesner of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado.

Stefan Rahmstorf at Potsdam University in Germany says the unusually high sea level figures from Bermuda and the Bahamas had been considered "rather puzzling". "Now it all makes much more sense," he says.

Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Quoting biff4ugo:
Please click on the "more info" button in the upper left corner of your posted video.

When I do, It clearly states they are surface currents.


Correct. However,Gulfstream and Kuroshio currents are well known for both upper and lower currents.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
P.S.
Please limit your project graphic to one per page. Every 50 posts say?
This isn't the place to get your project built, but I'm not saying don't post it.
However...
74,92,98 and again on 99!, 117 too. It is excessive and annoying. You could just make it your icon. That way it would be on all your posts but it wouldn't be In everyone's face 5 times on one page.
Why not contact folks in Borneo or Australia? Nice places with a steady current near shore... See the video you posted.
You might get better results or at least some results.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Please click on the "more info" button in the upper left corner of your posted video.

When I do, It clearly states they are surface currents.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting biff4ugo:
Cyclone,

I'm very glad to see the arctic ice inside of the 2 standard deviations grey bar. Grateful for the little things.

Neat oceans video, too bad it is just the surface circulation but it is hard to show it all in 3D at one time anyhow. Never saw all the gyres spinning south from Madagascar before.

here is one that is live for surface winds in the US. Very beautiful...and Live!
http://hint.fm/wind/index.html


Please note not all are surface currents hence DEEP Western Boundary currents...

Cool wind map.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Cyclone,

I'm very glad to see the arctic ice inside of the 2 standard deviations grey bar. Grateful for the little things.

Neat oceans video, too bad it is just the surface circulation but it is hard to show it all in 3D at one time anyhow. Never saw all the gyres spinning south from Madagascar before.

here is one that is live for surface winds in the US. Very beautiful...and Live!
http://hint.fm/wind/index.html
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Perpetual Ocean.......

With the Ocean currents in motion you can now visualize how my idea will work to cool the planet once placed in deep Western boundary currents such as the Gulfstream or the Kuroshio currents...........


img src="">




Perpetual Motion almost...............



.....
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting nymore:
Unprecedented Record breaking Bering Sea ice



OUCH


Like the "No Mas" Roberto Duran fight against Sugar Ray Leonard your ice argument carries "No Mass" with it. We are fighting a losing battle!










No Mass means watch how fast it melts this season...............
I will have so much fun charting it for you.












.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Birthmark:

This is no surprise. A similar study was done years ago that also noted some Himalayan glaciers growing. It wasn't really a surprise then, either. Local weather will still occur, even with AGW.


I remember that. I think also in the Andes in or around Chile. Anyways, Fox News is really out of touch with reality when it comes to climate change. They need a good dose of how climate works......... Perhaps,they can start here:

Link







.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting nymore:
I see the NSIDC likes to change their measurements too.



Versus later on the same day (today)



Amazingly if you go to the NSIDC that page is unavailable (not found) now. I wonder if Hanson the master of adjusting data called since the NSIDC is partly funded by NASA
How many times will these orgs. change data and you people just keep buying their drivel?
Only the truly gullible would point to a year with ice that's stayed well below the long-term average--despite a deep La Nina--as evidence that the planet isn't warming.

Silly denialists...
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13629
Quoting nymore:
Unprecedented Record breaking Bering Sea ice



OUCH
You've highlighted a single-year spike. Now let me show you a multi-decade trend: Barentsz Sea ice

Barentsz

OUCH
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13629
112. vanwx
nymore,
I've got bucks on the lowest ice ever.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting nymore:
I see the NSIDC likes to change their measurements too.



Versus later on the same day (today)



Amazingly if you go to the NSIDC that page is unavailable (not found) now. I wonder if Hanson the master of adjusting data called since the NSIDC is partly funded by NASA
How many times will these orgs. change data and you people just keep buying their drivel?


I think, I haven't bothered to check, that it is a moving average. The same thing wall Street and so on use.

Before you start screaming about it, go investigate why it happens. For the record, it has been happening for years now and works both ways.

Your desire to jump on anything yuo don't understand and claim evidence of fraud starts making you sound like not just a denialist but a conspiracy nut.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
110. vanwx
re post 108,
There is a thing called 'snow belts' where arctic and wet oceanic airs meet. In Michigan they are called 'lake effect' snows but where I came from they moved 60 miles North before I got here to where they are about 100s miles north now. The high latitudes are/were deserts, though covered with snow in the winter, it wasn't much in centimetres of water. Innuit didn't have rain coats. Moisture did not much accumulate in either the far North or South(Antarctica), they were deserts, all those ponds were on top of permafrost. Our 'ice highways' are going from 9 wks. to 6 wks or less. Fewer are being built as not worth the expense. If you want accurate climate records you could look at the winter road on the McKensie River though it's probably easier to wait for the summer barges. Climactic change is much more seen the further north you go.
I told myself I wouldn't get sucked in to trying to explain the arctic to a southerner and there I go! Snow to a Somalian. Size to a New Yorker(yes, it's bigger than the Bronx).But one can't explain anything to a contrarian, ie, how small the Arctic Sea is or that the Antarctic ocean has infinite fetch.
Why do you always sign your notes 'LOL' when your name is Nymore?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
109. vanwx
Quoting nymore:
"And what have you done to stop this so called problem. Do you live off the land so as not to add any additional CO2 to the atmosphere. Answer NO.

You remind me of someone screaming the victim is bleeding to death and continue to point out why, while standing around and doing nothing to stop the bleeding. Talking all day about a problem will not stop or fix the problem. You should either step up or shut up."

That coming from you is rich. You say it's 'fun' and 'stir the pot'; I say it's sick and disruptive. Like messing with the first aid attendant's kit.
I too am interested in the Bering ice incident but your 'style' of contribution makes it hard to ask if it was there because of a massive out flow of lower salinity water through thru the Bering Strait stemming from the Thermo Haline intrusion into the Barent's or just the effect of the off-centre freeze up of last winter.
And, BTW, the kill of pine beetles is usually figured at a minimum of 3 wks. at -40. In Canada the problem is about the size of 1/2 the USA. I don't know about Siberia. I suppose our methane release is about the same.


Member Since: Posts: Comments:
What some call local weather and no surprise, scientists call something different when it comes to glaciers.

Here are a couple of quotes


The GRACE results in this region really were a surprise," said University of Colorado at Boulder physics Prof. John Wahr, who led the study

Why the Karakoram range isn't melting is still a mystery. "For now we don't have any explanation," Gardelle said.

Local weather, no surprise LOL
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Unprecedented Record breaking Bering Sea ice



OUCH
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
I see the NSIDC likes to change their measurements too.



Versus later on the same day (today)



Amazingly if you go to the NSIDC that page is unavailable (not found) now. I wonder if Hanson the master of adjusting data called since the NSIDC is partly funded by NASA
How many times will these orgs. change data and you people just keep buying their drivel?
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Quoting NeapolitanFan:
"You can't cherry-pick when the orchard is loaded." Words from my favorite long-range forecaster.


Link

If only that saying applied to the cherrypickers. They appear to be loaded all the time. Bastardi is a prime example of that. LOL
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5469
Quoting cyclonebuster:
Ignorance over at Fox News again...


What Global Warming? Glaciers Grow in Himalayas

Some Himalayan glaciers actually growing, scientists find

A new study reveals that some Himalayan glaciers in the Karakoram mountain range may actually be getting bigger, according to a study published in the April issue of the journal Nature Geoscience -- a surprising quirk in the planet%u2019s response to a changing climate.

This is no surprise. A similar study was done years ago that also noted some Himalayan glaciers growing. It wasn't really a surprise then, either. Local weather will still occur, even with AGW.
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5469
"You can't cherry-pick when the orchard is loaded." Words from my favorite long-range forecaster.


Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Ignorance over at Fox News again...


What Global Warming? Glaciers Grow in Himalayas

Some Himalayan glaciers actually growing, scientists find

A new study reveals that some Himalayan glaciers in the Karakoram mountain range may actually be getting bigger, according to a study published in the April issue of the journal Nature Geoscience -- a surprising quirk in the planet%u2019s response to a changing climate.

The Karakoram range runs along the India-China-Pakistan border and is home to about half the volume of the Himalayan glaciers, including K2 -- the world's second highest peak. Using computer models to compare the ice volume in satellite photos from 1999 and 2008, the study showed that some glaciers are holding steady and even gaining ice mass.

The new finding appears to align with another startling report published Feb. 9 in the science journal Nature, which found that the Himalayas have barely melted at all in the past 10 years.

Yet the surprising growth of some glaciers isn%u2019t commonplace, said study researcher Julie Gardelle, of CNRS-Universit%uFFFD Grenoble, France. She told LiveScience that the larger trend was clear: all the other glaciers are melting.

"The rest of the glaciers in the Himalayas are mostly melting, in that they have negative mass balance; here we found that glaciers aren't," Gardelle told LiveScience. "This is an anomalous behavior."

The earlier study disagreed.

The Nature report offered the first comprehensive study of the world%u2019s glaciers and ice caps, using GRACE -- a pair of orbiting satellites racing around the planet at an altitude of 300 miles. That study concluded that the Himalayas have barely melted at all in the past 10 years.

"The GRACE results in this region really were a surprise," said University of Colorado at Boulder physics Prof. John Wahr, who led the study.

Glaciologist Jonathan Bamber (who was not part of the research team) cautioned that the Nature study doesn't alter his view that the climate is changing.

%u201CThis new study doesn't change our view of the risks and threats from climate change,%u201D he said in an online chat at the Guardian. %u201CWhat it does do is improve our knowledge of the recent behavior of one part of the climate system.%u201D

Indeed, Wahr%u2019s study clearly notes that lower-altitude glaciers and ice caps are melting, to the tune of about 150 billion tons of ice annually, which the study predicts could lead to an overall rise in sea levels. He concluded that the higher altitude and therefore colder Himalayan peaks may be temporarily impervious to factors causing melting.

"One possible explanation is that previous estimates were based on measurements taken primarily from some of the lower, more accessible glaciers in Asia and were extrapolated to infer the behavior of higher glaciers. But unlike the lower glaciers, many of the high glaciers would still be too cold to lose mass even in the presence of atmospheric warming," Wahr said.

Glaciers grow and shrink based on how much snow falls and the temperatures in the area, LiveScience said. Why the Karakoram range isn't melting is still a mystery. "For now we don't have any explanation," Gardelle said. "There's been a study reporting an increase in winter precipitation; this could maybe be a reason for the equilibrium, but that's just a guess."

The United Nations%u2019 climate arm warned incorrectly in 2007 that the Himalayan glaciers would melt completely in 25 years, vanishing by the year 2035 due to the effects of climate change.

Rajendra Pachauri, head of the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and director general of the Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) in New Dehli, India, ultimately issued a statement offering regret for what turned out to be a poorly vetted statement.

Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting TemplesOfSyrinxC4:
When will you be denied the tasty burnt ends from Arthur Bryant's BBQ?

Is there a point? What am I missing?
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5469



This





prevents war...







The new cold war: Militaries eying Arctic resources



OKOSUKA, Japan – To the world's military leaders, the debate over climate change is long over. They are preparing for a new kind of Cold War in the Arctic, anticipating that rising temperatures there will open up a treasure trove of resources, long-dreamed-of sea lanes and a slew of potential conflicts.

By Arctic standards, the region is already buzzing with military activity, and experts believe that will increase significantly in the years ahead.

Last month, Norway wrapped up one of the largest Arctic maneuvers ever -- Exercise Cold Response -- with 16,300 troops from 14 countries training on the ice for everything from high intensity warfare to terror threats. Attesting to the harsh conditions, five Norwegian troops were killed when their C-130 Hercules aircraft crashed near the summit of Kebnekaise, Sweden's highest mountain.

The U.S., Canada and Denmark held major exercises two months ago, and in an unprecedented move, the military chiefs of the eight main Arctic powers -- Canada, the U.S., Russia, Iceland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway and Finland -- gathered at a Canadian military base last week to specifically discuss regional security issues.

None of this means a shooting war is likely at the North Pole any time soon. But as the number of workers and ships increases in the High North to exploit oil and gas reserves, so will the need for policing, border patrols and -- if push comes to shove -- military muscle to enforce rival claims.

The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that 13 percent of the world's undiscovered oil and 30 percent of its untapped natural gas is in the Arctic. Shipping lanes could be regularly open across the Arctic by 2030 as rising temperatures continue to melt the sea ice, according to a National Research Council analysis commissioned by the U.S. Navy last year.

What countries should do about climate change remains a heated political debate. But that has not stopped north-looking militaries from moving ahead with strategies that assume current trends will continue.

Russia, Canada and the United States have the biggest stakes in the Arctic. With its military budget stretched thin by Iraq, Afghanistan and more pressing issues elsewhere, the United States has been something of a reluctant northern power, though its nuclear-powered submarine fleet, which can navigate for months underwater and below the ice cap, remains second to none.

Russia -- one-third of which lies within the Arctic Circle -- has been the most aggressive in establishing itself as the emerging region's superpower.

Rob Huebert, an associate political science professor at the University of Calgary in Canada, said Russia has recovered enough from its economic troubles of the 1990s to significantly rebuild its Arctic military capabilities, which were a key to the overall Cold War strategy of the Soviet Union, and has increased its bomber patrols and submarine activity.

He said that has in turn led other Arctic countries -- Norway, Denmark and Canada -- to resume regional military exercises that they had abandoned or cut back on after the Soviet collapse. Even non-Arctic nations such as France have expressed interest in deploying their militaries to the Arctic.

"We have an entire ocean region that had previously been closed to the world now opening up," Huebert said. "There are numerous factors now coming together that are mutually reinforcing themselves, causing a buildup of military capabilities in the region. This is only going to increase as time goes on."
Noting that the Arctic is warming twice as fast as the rest of the globe, the U.S. Navy in 2009 announced a beefed-up Arctic Roadmap by its own task force on climate change that called for a three-stage strategy to increase readiness, build cooperative relations with Arctic nations and identify areas of potential conflict.

"We want to maintain our edge up there," said Cmdr. Ian Johnson, the captain of the USS Connecticut, which is one of the U.S. Navy's most Arctic-capable nuclear submarines and was deployed to the North Pole last year. "Our interest in the Arctic has never really waned. It remains very important."

But the U.S. remains ill-equipped for large-scale Arctic missions, according to a simulation conducted by the U.S. Naval War College. A summary released last month found the Navy is "inadequately prepared to conduct sustained maritime operations in the Arctic" because it lacks ships able to operate in or near Arctic ice, support facilities and adequate communications.

"The findings indicate the Navy is entering a new realm in the Arctic," said Walter Berbrick, a War College professor who participated in the simulation. "Instead of other nations relying on the U.S. Navy for capabilities and resources, sustained operations in the Arctic region will require the Navy to rely on other nations for capabilities and resources."

He added that although the U.S. nuclear submarine fleet is a major asset, the Navy has severe gaps elsewhere -- it doesn't have any icebreakers, for example. The only one in operation belongs to the Coast Guard. The U.S. is currently mulling whether to add more icebreakers.

Acknowledging the need to keep apace in the Arctic, the United States is pouring funds into figuring out what climate change will bring, and has been working closely with the scientific community to calibrate its response.

"The Navy seems to be very on board regarding the reality of climate change and the especially large changes we are seeing in the Arctic," said Mark C. Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center at the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences University of Colorado. "There is already considerable collaboration between the Navy and civilian scientists and I see this collaboration growing in the future."

The most immediate challenge may not be war -- both military and commercial assets are sparse enough to give all countries elbow room for a while -- but whether militaries can respond to a disaster.

Heather Conley, director of the Europe program at the London-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, said militaries probably will have to rescue their own citizens in the Arctic before any confrontations arise there.

"Catastrophic events, like a cruise ship suddenly sinking or an environmental accident related to the region's oil and gas exploration, would have a profound impact in the Arctic," she said. "The risk is not militarization; it is the lack of capabilities while economic development and human activity dramatically increases that is the real risk."


Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:




This puts us back to pre-industrial revolution values.........

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting nymore:
Do you think I get up in the morning longing for your or anyone else's approval. ROFLMAO

I could care less if you respond or not, no that is not accurate. It is not possible to care less because I do not care.

You care enough to post...and to tell me that you don't care.

You may want to look up what "don't care" means. I suggest starting with honey badgers. ;)
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5469
Quoting Birthmark:

Question: Since you have stated that your purpose in being here is simply "stirring the pot" --trolling, in intertube talk-- why should anyone bother to respond to anything you post on this board?

Why shouldn't everyone serious about this topic, from whatever POV, simply put you on ignore?
Do you think I get up in the morning longing for your or anyone else's approval. ROFLMAO

I could care less if you respond or not, no that is not accurate. It is not possible to care less because I do not care.
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Quoting cyclonebuster:
Greenland May Be Slip-Sliding Away Due to Surface Lake Melting

ScienceDaily (Apr. 16, 2012) %u2014 Like snow sliding off a roof on a sunny day, the Greenland Ice Sheet may be sliding faster into the ocean due to massive releases of meltwater from surface lakes, according to a new study by the University of Colorado Boulder-based Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences.Such lake drainages may affect sea-level rise, with implications for coastal communities, according to the researchers. "This is the first evidence that Greenland's 'supraglacial' lakes have responded to recent increases in surface meltwater production by draining more frequently, as opposed to growing in size," says CIRES research associate William Colgan, who co-led the new study with CU-Boulder computer science doctoral student Yu-Li Liang.

During summer, meltwater pools into lakes on the ice sheet's surface. When the water pressure gets high enough, the ice fractures beneath the lake, forming a vertical drainpipe, and "a huge burst of water quickly pulses through to the bed of the ice sheet," Colgan said.

Link
This is taken from the article

During a typical catastrophic lake drainage, about 1 million cubic meters of meltwater -- which is equivalent to the volume of about 4,000 Olympic swimming pools -- funnels to the ice sheet's underside within a day or two. Once the water reaches the ice sheet's belly that abuts underlying rock, it may turn the ice-bed surface into a Slip 'N Slide, lubricating the ice sheet's glide into the ocean. This would accelerate the sea-level rise associated with climate change.

Alternatively, however, the lake drainages may carve out sub-glacial "sewers" to efficiently route water to the ocean. "This would drain the ice sheet's water, making less water available for ice-sheet sliding," Colgan said. That would slow the ice sheet's migration into the ocean and decelerate sea-level rise.

"Lake drainages are a wild card in terms of whether they enhance or decrease the ice sheet's slide," Colgan said. Finding out which scenario is correct is a pressing question for climate models and for communities preparing for sea-level change, he said.

More proof of absolutely nothing despite the fear mongering headline.
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Quoting nymore:

Question: Since you have stated that your purpose in being here is simply "stirring the pot" --trolling, in intertube talk-- why should anyone bother to respond to anything you post on this board?

Why shouldn't everyone serious about this topic, from whatever POV, simply put you on ignore?
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5469

Viewing: 144 - 94

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6Blog Index

Top of Page

About RickyRood

I'm a professor at U Michigan and lead a course on climate change problem solving. These articles often come from and contribute to the course.