Barrow is surrounded by pack ice extending hundreds of miles, which is covered with fresh snow.
In about half of years, ice breakup in Barrow has occurred this week. Some years it breaks up next week. In 2004, it broke up a week earlier.
As usual, alarmists have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.
Oooooo Bazinga!!!!!!!!
It’s funny that alarmists always claim that they have all the facts, and to oppose them is to oppose reality, but they are the ones always caught lying.
You can’t fight religous fanatacism.
The thing that disturbs me most about this thinking, is these people are able to convince themselves that all of this occurs as a result of an additional 2.6 W/m**2 directed downward from a dim sky.
It is so completely absurd that it leaves me gasping
What disturbs me even more is that most of these simpletons that know nothing of physics are allowed to drive on the roads along with the rest of us.
Surfs Up!!!!
http://feeder.gina.alaska.edu/dragonfly/2013/06/26/05_52_49_818_ABCam_20130626_0535.jpg
On the 25th there was Ice, on the 26th it broke up. What’s your point?
I was wondering what your definition of “surrounded by pack ice” is? Whilst simultaneosuly pursuing Steven’s Arctic surfing metaphor:
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/06/24/another-fine-surfing-day-in-the-alaska-heatwave/
Barrow is surrounded by hundreds of miles of ice, and you are advertising that it moved a few hundred yards off the beach?
Jim has discovered ‘Summer’! 😆
No fair Jim, don’t confuse the so called skeptics with facts from the reality based universe.
Is THAT what you guys call the place you came from? We were wondering. 😆
Gator, maybe you should check out reality for a change, you might learn things are much different there, as compared to the circle jerks like Willard Watt’s pseudo science blog.
Do you think blowing hot air will raise Arctic temperatures above their record summer lows this year?
Reggie if you think you are correct then why not offer to debate a skeptic like Watts, or Steve or RGB or Monckton etc. If you have the facts on your side you win. If not well…
Monckton ran away from his debate with journalist Peter Hadfield. Willard Watts now deletes any comments that merely mention Hadfield’s name, or for that matter mention Peter Sinclair.
Try asking Watt’s why he is banning comments that bring up the fact that Chris Monckton ran away when he knew he was in over his head with regards to a debate with Hadfield. I guarantee your comment will disappear down the memory hole.
http://climatecrocks.com/2012/03/23/dear-chris-potholers-open-letter-to-lord-bonckton/
Nitpicker54 is just another one of you alarmist nutters who cannot point to any evidence that man made CO2 is altering the Earth’s climate. In the chaos of natural variability, there is no discernible CO2 signature, it is pure fantasy and speculation.
Run Chicken Little, run! 😆
Talk of Arctic sea ice extent is really not that important at the moment (though I do comment occasionally on the issue). As I have said before let’s wait till mid September. That’s when the howling and gnashing of teeth reaches fever pitch. The graphs of today are not a great indicator of mid September. Just my 2 cents.
Polar amplification has produced the coldest summer on record in the Arctic.
Keep talking. Maybe you can melt the ice.
Coldest summer on record? I suspect not. So far it’s been two standard deviations wetter than the 1979-2000 average, if we measure by pack ice extent. Per NSIDC.
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
I’ve shown you mine, Steve. Now how about showing me yours? What I’d like to see is your temperature records, Arctic-wide. Not just at some single point showing lower temps this year. Show us how it’s colder across the Arctic than it was in 1976, -77 or -78, for example.
Not to mention the fact that we’re only five days into summer, 2013. A little early to be making broad judgments, eh? Or did you mean spring?
Michael:
We are 27 days into meteorological summer! STFU if you do not know what you are talking about. JJA is Summer! Summer is almost one third over according to WMO and other climate reporting groups!
Reggie Love, I have spent three decades being force fed the AGW crap from all corners of society, and alarmists have yet to prove that man made CO2 is doing crap to the Earth’s climate. They have zero evidence, just zombie parrots like yourself yammering about a non-existent consensus.
You people use names that sound creepy. You use creepy pictures to identify yourself.
You SOUND creepy. You ARE creepy
Brian-poohie – you are the ONE of the few creepy TROLLS on this web site. Are you someone’s valentine, Brian-poohie? You ugly, brain-dead creep!
Most of the time, I have to agree with the “brain-dead” part
“It moved a few hundred yards off the beach?”
A few miles at least, according to Barrow radar – http://feeder.gina.alaska.edu/dragonfly/2013/06/26/07_30_34_261_SIR_20130626_0714_masked.png
A few miles out of 3,000, and you are making a big deal about it? ROFLMAO
BTW – east side of the point is full of ice all the way to the beach.
Steve, are you still on speaking terms with Willard Watts since your inglorious departure from his blog? If you are, would you please be kind enough and do me a favour?
Ask Watt’s why is currently banning all comments that mention journalist Peter Hadfield’s debate with Chris Monckton?
Reggie-Pooh – would you please be kind enough and do me a favour, and take your head out of your RECTUM?? ? All you can see and talk about is YOUR FECAL MATTER. I am sure you just LOVE your POOP, but is is UGLY, UNINFORMED, STUPID and BRAIN-DEAD!.
I thought you were the one “making a big deal about it” Steven? Hence your headline!
Here’s another NASA piccy, doing its best to peer through all the clouds over Barrow shown in your own initial image. Looks to me like the open water off Barrow is actually about 10 miles across at the moment?
http://earthdata.nasa.gov/labs/worldview/?map=-2086112,632896,-1674208,890176&products=baselayers,MODIS_Terra_CorrectedReflectance_Bands721~overlays,arctic_coastlines_3413,arctic_graticule_3413&time=2013-06-26&switch=arctic
Ouch!
I bet that left a mark.
What do you think happens when ice breaks up and the tide comes in you psychotic idiot?
Steve,
According to your own graph, only 2004 has had ice break up sooner. 2003 broke up on the same day as 2013 and 2007 a day after that and 2002 a day after that. The other years were many days later. Weren’t you crowing about how much ice there was at Barrow just 2 days ago?
Summer is shaping up to be a disaster for climate alarmists.
You announced a week ago that Arctic ice extent was about to plummet. I’m amazed that you have the mendacity to even bring up the subject of Arctic ice.
Steve,
The same storm that is keeping the Arctic cold is tearing the heart out of it. The extended fringe will, of course, melt out. The thin and fragmented central ice has nowhere to go except into liquid. I just hope you will have the grace to admit that PIOMAS is not crap when you see the state of the ice in mid-September
Harold Camping is back.
Huh?
He doesn’t know about the storm that has been turning the Arctic into a slushie. Probably hasn’t read about Russian research station NP-40 that needed to be evacuated, because the ice floe it was sitting on was breaking into pieces. It was amazing how the Yamal was able to plow through the ice as if it wasn’t there.
http://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2013/06/yamal-to-the-rescue.html
You people are beyond amazing
Steven, I think you should take a look at my post at the bottom of this page before you go on about a person’s mendacity.
T.O.O. one. Steven zero.
Strike two
It was 62 degrees today in Barrow Ak
http://www.wunderground.com/cgi-bin/findweather/hdfForecast?query=Barrow+AK
So you agree, then. Barrow’s ice broke up June 19-20.
You were wrong. T.O.O. was right. Not, as you said just this morning, “Barrow is surrounded by pack ice extending hundreds of miles, which is covered with fresh snow.”
You have the mind of a two year old.
Michael,
When Steve insults you, you know you scored. Its just that you won’t hear any applause on this site.
[Strike 3]
Never admit you’re wrong, SG. That’s how we know your blog is “real science”. The fact that you won’t address information adverse to your pronouncements when it’s shown to you. A real scientist would address it and either admit error or offer some explanation.
BTW, no fair signing something with my name. I assume the [Strike 3] comment was yours?
gator69 says:
June 26, 2013 at 3:44 pm
” Nitpicker54is just another one of you alarmist nutters who cannot point to any evidence that man made CO2 is altering the Earth’s climate.”
If Peter Hadfield (potholer54) is so wrong, why didn’t Chris Monckton stand his ground and have an honest debate? Hadfield is a seasoned journalist with a science background. Have you actually watched the Potholer54 Monckton videos? I doubt it, because if you had seen all the videos you would know that Monckton was caught out in so many lies, he had no choice but to turn tail and run.
Did you know that the prissy lord is a birther too? He is a regular guest on Alex Jones weird conspiracy show, Prison Planet.
And you would be wrong, again, I had another alarmist point me to them when they were new. Nitpicker54 is as Brian said ‘creepy’, his videos reminded me of the 911 Truther crap you see on the internet. Based upon just enough ‘science’ as to be truly deceitful, alot of hand waving and meaningless charts.
And I cannot recall ever seeing him ever produce one shred of proof that man made CO2 is altering the Earth;’s climate. Did I miss one? 😆
Run Chicken Little, Run! 😆
Gator, that last comment was projection on an IMAX scale!
Did you know that Monckton claims to have discovered a cure for AIDS, the common cols, flu and Graves disease?
If Hadfield is so inept, why did Chris Moncton run away from the debate? If you had really watched Hadfield’s videos, you would have noted that he posts foot-note links, so you are able to check the source of his claims.
Monckton is the creepy one and does the conspiracy theory circuit. He once did a truther radio program where he went full “agenda 24”
If you have any balls, why don’t you mosey over to Watts’ science fiction blog and ask why Monckton ran away from his debate with Hadfield?
See below! 😆
You guys are soooo predictable!!! What you fail to understand, is that we STUDY you guys, AND your lame ‘arguments’.
Rant on Chicken Little, we need some entertainment! 😆
I don’t know about Hadfield and Monckton nor is it important to the issue you seem to be supporting which appears to be something about AGW. If that’s so, I’d like you to point me to one empirical proof that temperature rises follow rises in CO2. History doesn’t support you, nor am I aware of anything at present despite the billions that have been spent looking.
There’s lots of arm-waving going on but so far there isn’t even simple correlation on this trend, and without that correlation there can be no causation. Perhaps you can show that real world proof? Maybe I’ve missed it.
As for the Arctic, I am quite familiar with its studied natural history and I’ve been there a number of times and if you look at the research, you’ll find that it was largely ice-free in summers for several thousand years some 7,000 years ago, was non-existant 4 million years ago, and supported 60 foot tall pine forests 5 million years ago.
There is nothing in recorded observations from the last smaller scale 150 years even, that is any different. The ice comes and goes in extent, and there’s no reason to believe the future will be any different than the past.
If you believe however that there is something different then show the proof. And as you already know, extradordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Arm waving computer projections won’t do. You already know what they’ve been shown to be and their accuracy. So stop whining about some debate which no one has any interest in, and show me your proofs instead. Otherwise natural variability is the null hypothesis.
mikegeo: I’d like to offer a comment concerning that Null Hypothesis.
It’s logical to assume that when everything’s going along the same, the forces bringing it about are unchanged. One doesn’t rule out it’s being normal.
But when all of a sudden major elements in our climate regimen are all seen to be going out of whack in tandem, that tells the logical person that something is going on outside the usual forces. And the scientist looks for what that may be: either a novel expression of a natural force, a novel force entirely, or some combination of more than one force changing together.
Our current Arctic trends haven’t been seen for the past 800,000 years. That’s our signal that something out of the ordinary is taking place– and needs looking into.
There is nothing unusual or unprecedented about our current climate, or how we got here. Nothing at all. Period.
We have covered this before michael, are you a liar or just stupid?
Also, why all the obsession over Monckton? Did he invent natural variability? I didn’t say Nitpicker54 was outright wrong. In case you missed it, I gave you a hint when I slighlty changed his name, and then clearly said he had nothing to offer. Are nitpickers wrong Reggie?
Now, back to this failed hypothesis of CAGW. Get a paper bag and cover your mouth, breathe slowly, and then tell me why you are so very excited. 😆
Are you refering to this http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/01/11/monckton-responds-to-potholer54/ ?
The section “ON THE COOLING EARTH” has been rendered obsolete with all the official admissions of “warming plateaus” and “warming stalling” and so on. Monckton was vindicated without having to respond. Here is an excellent presentation of the cooling / flat trends that Trenberth & pals claims to not exist: http://rankexploits.com/musings/2013/hide-the-decline-trenberths-trick/
The section “ON THE MELTING OF GREENLAND” has been rendered obsolete by Ola Johannessen’s actual paper ( http://www.uio.no/studier/emner/matnat/geofag/GEO4420/h07/papers/Greenland-johannessen.pdf ): “An increase of 6.4 ± 0.2 centimeters per year is found in the vast interior areas above 1500 meters, in contrast to previous reports of high-elevation balance. Below 1500 meters, the elevation-change rate is –2.0 ± 0.9 cm/year, in qualitative agreement with reported thinning in the ice-sheet margins. The spatially averaged increase is 5.4 ± 0.2 cm/year, or ~60 cm over 11 years, or ~54 cm when corrected for is ostatic uplift.” In other words, contrary to previous reports of no change, they found an increase of about 6.4 cm/year in the interior and an average of about 5.4 cm/year across “all elevation bands” (not just above 1500 meters). Notice that potholer54’s claim that “Johannessen said he only measured the interior of Greenland above 1,500 metres” is immediately proven false. The other quote is simply take out of context – it was just part of the disclaimer where the auther was stating that more research needs to be done. If you had bothered to read the study, you would see that Monckton is factually correct.
The section “ON THE LOSS OF ARCTIC ICE” is just stupid. Look at http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20091005_Figure2.png and see that 2007 was the lowest since 1979 and that the two years following were almost back to normal. Suck it up buttercup.
The section “ON THE CORRELATION BETWEEN CO2 AND GLOBAL TEMPERATURES SINCE THE CAMBRIAN” claims “Neither researcher supports Mr. Monckton’s ‘no correlation’ conclusion”. Yes, and when a judge is presented with evidence in a murder trial, he should only listen to the interpretation from the accused and not examine the data. The rest of the dribble demonstrates that potholer54 has no clue what “cuasation” and “correlation” means.
The section “ON MISQUOTING MURARI LAL” – take a look at the actual article at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1245636/Glacier-scientists-says-knew-data-verified.html where Lal says “We knew the WWF report with the 2035 date was “grey literature””. Lal knew he was quoting literature that was from activists not scientists and therefore not fact checked. It is clear that potholer54 is lying when he says “Nowhere does Lal say he knew the figure was erroneous.”
The section “MISQUOTING SIR JOHN HOUGHTON” complains that Monckton miquoted Houghton. It is a frequent misquote from Piers Akerman http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_T._Houghton#Falsely_attributed . Quite frankly, the actual quote is a little more malthusian than Akerman’s version.
The section “ON HIS CLAIMS ABOUT THE ROLE OF THE SUN” – potholer54 once again takes some liberty here assuming that no one will bother reading the study. First of all, they claim: “the rarity of the current episode of high average sunspot number may be taken as an indication that the Sun has contributed to the unusual degree of climate change during the twentieth century” and “This implies that not only is the current state of solar activity unusually high, but also this high level of activity has lasted unusually long.” They do caution that “at the most 30% of the strong warming since then can be of solar origin.” In other words, the sun has been very active and may be responsible for a portion of what has been claimed to be all man made warming. Potholer54 proposes a strawman argument that Monckton references the study to “suggest the sun is a likely culprit for recent warming.” As we all know a strawman argument is a logical fallacy by which you falsly represent your opponents argument in order to attack that rather than the original argument.
The section “ON THE ROLE OF THE SUN IN RECENT WARMING” – potholer54, amazingly, once again misrepresents the research http://people.duke.edu/~ns2002/pdf/2007JD008437.pdf (JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 112, D24S03, doi:10.1029/2007JD008437, 2007) : “By assuming MOBERG05, the Sun is responsible for ? 0.45K (or ? 56%) with LEAN2000 and ? 0.55K (or ? 69%) with WANG2005 of the warming that occurred from 1900 to 2005, and ? 0.15K (or ? 20%) with LEAN2000 and DT ? 0.25K (or ? 42%) with WANG2005 of the warming that occurred since 1950.” Potholer54 pretended that the source came from an opion piece rather than a peer reviewed scientific study. Once again, Monckton is correct.
I’m sure I missed a lot of petty little lies, but you get the gist: potholer54 is simply a liar. But, feel free to keep worshipping your high priest of the cult of “misanthropic delusional Malthusian spackheads”
That’s is quite a gish gallop you posted, give me a few days to write a proper reply.
In the meantime is there anyone here going to answer my question, why is Monckton afraid to debate Hadfield, and why does Willard A Watts continue to ban all comments that mention Hadfield and Sinclair?
I doubt he is afraid of the debate, he is probably afraid of just wasting his valuable time on a nonentity.
gish gallop? These are straightforward responses to potholer54’s claims and they are clearly marked as such. Furthermore, I didn’t realize that we were having a real-time debate. I’m going to have to assume that you don’t understand the words that you used. The alternative is that you are a liar.
You didn’t answer my question: “Are you refering to this http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/01/11/monckton-responds-to-potholer54/ ?”
How did you know they are gish gallop if you never read them before,but you need a few days to know what is in them to then make a reply agaisnt them.
You are a bigot….
The “Gish Gallop” knee jerk response is just another pathetic liberal attempt to deflect attention away from the fact that their core beliefs are completely unsupported. In general every single liberal belief is so wrong that indeed a large number of facts can be brought out to counter that belief.
And csb has accurately noted that this is not a real time debate, so even here the warmist clown is using the stupid liberal knee jerk when it does not apply.
Let’s settle the argument, gentlemen.
Steven says “Barrow is surrounded by pack ice extending hundreds of miles, which is covered with fresh snow.” And adds “As usual, alarmists have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.”
T.O.O. maintains “I just read that Barrow Alaska is ice free– three weeks ahead of its normal time.”
Okay, let’s go to the books. In a dispatch dated June 21, 2013, we read this: “Sea ice break-up, characterized both by melt and off-shore movement of surface ice, has now occurred off Barrow, Alaska. The event usually happens around July 8th. Since break-up was confirmed by visual yesterday, we are about three weeks early. If you want to see the video of off-shore ice breakup and movement, you can view it here.
“Satellite images provided by Lance-Modis shows break-up and off shore ice motion between the days of June 19 and June 20.”
http://robertscribbler.wordpress.com/2013/06/21/barrow-alaska-heatwave-hosts-early-sea-ice-break-up/
“Has now occurred”? Looks like he’s got you, Steve. Any last words?
What did the motion of the tides do, flea bag?
Thanks for your earlier kind words Brian. In answer to your question, subsequent motions of the ice have revealed this today on radar:
http://feeder.gina.alaska.edu/radar-uaf-barrow-seaice-images/2013_06_27_02_30
along with a relatively clear satellite image, which makes a nice change:
http://earthdata.nasa.gov/labs/worldview/?map=-2076896,647975.527385,-1692640,900135.527385&products=baselayers,MODIS_Terra_CorrectedReflectance_TrueColor~overlays,arctic_coastlines_3413,arctic_graticule_3413&time=2013-06-27&switch=arctic
Irrelevant what the ice does, the only place for it is in our drinks. The CAGWists still haven’t proven CO2 does anything besides making plants grow better.
You quote “ROBERT SCRIBBLER ” as a source – ROBERT SCRIBBLER.
Oh, well, the case is closed then isn’t it. ROBERT SCRIBBLER said so!!!
michael-poohie you just keep demonstrating how stone cold STUPID you are.
terrence,
Robert Scribbler posts references on every article he writes, often with images. Where are your references?