It doesn’t look like there is much sunlight making it to the Arctic Ocean.
http://www.arctic.io/observations/8/2011-07-24/4-N83.440285-W144.911092
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- COP29 Preview
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- A Giant Eyesore
- CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- Rats Jumping Off The Climate Ship
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Spoiled Children
- Great Lakes Storm Of November 11, 1835
- Harris To Win Iowa
- Angry Democrats
- November 9, 1913 Storm
- Science Magazine Explains Trump Supporters
- Obliterating Bill Gates
- Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
- The End Of Everything
- Harris To Win In A Blowout
Recent Comments
- Disillusioned on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- Disillusioned on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Francis Barnett on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- dm on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- arn on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- Tel on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- Gamecock on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- conrad ziefle on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- conrad ziefle on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Terry Shipman on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
As clouds are higher in the atmosphere and contain fewer particulates per area of incidence they would be a greater reflector than ice any day. A cloudy day here is 10 to 15 degrees cooler than a clear day and it is more dramatic in the desert.
How about cloudy nights? They keep the nights warmer than they would otherwise be.
Sounds like clouds are important. How are they handled in GCMs (exactly)?
Cloudy nights don’t melt Arctic ice
Obviously, the nocturnal energy in and out flux are to separate dynamics. But, to demonstrate which dynamic of clouds holds more weight, just do this simple experiment. On a blistering hot day, wait for a cloud to come between you and the sun. Do you feel the physical difference in the temperature? Yes, one does. It is appreciably cooler! Now, during an exceptionally cool evening, wait for a cloud to pass overhead. Do you feel the physical difference in the temperature? No? The net effects of clouds are cooling.
Note! Yes this is an overly simplified physical experiment. And there are occasions which one could feel appreciably warmer when on a cold evening a cloud would pass overhead, however, on those occasions, it is the dynamics causing the clouds rather than the clouds themselves which raises the temps.
In the winter, clouds at night can make a huge difference in how warm it feels. 10F on a clear night is bitter cold, while 10F can be very pleasant on a cloudy night.
“Cloudy nights don’t melt Arctic ice”
Steve, Steve, what am I going to do with you?
Warmer temperatures (below freezing, of course) prevent ice from thickening as much as it could have. The colder it is the thicker the ice gets per any given time unit and vice a versa.
PS: Please give us some frowning smileys.
Ice doesn’t thicken in the summer. What are you talking about?
Steve initially said:
“Cloudy nights don’t melt Arctic ice”
I quoted Steve as saying the above then made my response.
Now Steve replies:
“Ice doesn’t thicken in the summer. What are you talking about?”
Did you forget something Steve.
Nights up there at the moment are very very VERY short!
So, with all its clouds, the Earth should be semi-frozen by now?
When are you going program laughing smileys into the commentary box. Animated, if you can manage it
lol, or, there’s another explanation. The albedo effects of the polar caps are entirely overstated.
“The albedo effects of the polar caps are entirely overstated.”
In your alternative universe, suyts.
The albedo of bare ice varies between .5 and .7. With snow it goes as high as .9. Open ocean is .06.
Sea ice doesn’t have a lot of snow on it in July. However, it does have a lot of soot and dust.
“Sea ice doesn’t have a lot of snow on it in July. However, it does have a lot of soot and dust.”
Why do you keep talking about summer when you said:
“Cloudy nights don’t melt Arctic ice”
And I responded:
“Warmer temperatures (below freezing, of course) prevent ice from thickening as much as it could have. The colder it is the thicker the ice gets per any given time unit and vice a versa.”
I was obviously referring to night time since I quoted your “cloudy nights” statement.
You need some animated head-banging smileys.
The Arctic doesn’t get any SW radiation in the winter and the sea is covered with ice. Clouds have very little effect on winter temperatures in the Arctic.
I’m sure now that the CLOUD experiment is about to validate Svensmark’s hypothesis, clouds will be ‘redefined’ for us.
The effect that clouds have on temperatures is extremely complex and scientists simply are scratching the surface with what they know. However for what it is worth NASA believe there is a small net cooling effect.
The balance between the cooling and warming actions of clouds is very close although, overall, averaging the effects of all the clouds around the globe, cooling predominates.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Clouds/
“I’m sure now that the CLOUD experiment is about to validate Svensmark’s hypothesis, clouds will be ‘redefined’ for us.”
I’m sure you’ll forget all about that 10 years from now.
Why so dismissive? Got agenda?
Nice shark jumpimg!
“I’m sure you’ll forget all about that 10 years from now.”
I certainly hope we have moved on by then. Instead of listening to nature deniers drone on about a disproven hypothesis, maybe we can try and solve real problems and not waste time wringing our hands over the weather.
Damn those climate models are good. Lake Powell and Colorado skiing are gone, forever.
But, but, but the models… ; )
Given that the albedo of open ocean is only 6% then only 6% of total insolation over oceans is available for GHG forcing. And given that open oceans comprise 70% of the planetary surface then most of the atmospheric forcing scam is based on the 30% of planetary surface that is land. True, clouds over oceans deliver higher albedos but if those clouds are higher than 5000 metres then the available atmosphere in which CO2 could operate as a GHG on that albedo is only half of what it would be if the reflective surface was at sea level.
The same applies to high altitude land surfaces which may well have a high albedo in which GHG’s could do their warming but the volume of air that is available above that land surface is correspondingly less. So if the climate muddles are not keeping track of variations in cloud height, as well as cloud density and extent, then they are simply pissing in the wind.