Understanding Polar Amplification

14 Responses to Understanding Polar Amplification

1. Hugh K says:

   August 9, 2013 at 11:37 pm

   “Bipolar amplification” usually refers to those that dubiously claim greater climate change than scientific observation/raw data demonstrate in support of a change in global funding.

   Reply
2. forgottenman2013 says:

   August 10, 2013 at 12:10 am

   Reblogged this on Health Science Watch.

   Reply
3. Gamecock says:

   August 10, 2013 at 12:31 am

   ‘“Polar amplification” usually refers to greater climate change near the pole compared to the rest of the hemisphere or globe in response to a change in global climate forcing’

   Gibberish.

   There has been no climate change near the pole.

   There has been no climate change anywhere.

   Reply
   • F. Guimaraes says:

     August 10, 2013 at 4:23 am

     It happened after the low levels of Arctic ice during the WWII years
     http://hidethedecline.eu/pages/posts/arctic-sea-ice-data-collected-by-dmi-1893-1961-259.php
     *and* after the low ice during the beginning of the 60’s, leading to the maximum of 1978.
     http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/07/31/arctic-ice-growth-since-1971/
     It’s happening now as it did back then, modulated by the intensity of solar radiations.

     Reply
4. SMS says:

   August 10, 2013 at 12:35 am

   Over on WUWT, Anthony has a blog post showing polar ice sequencing from 1958 to present.

   http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/08/according-to-this-dmi-temperature-plot-the-arctic-has-dropped-below-freezing-about-two-weeks-early/

   Could someone please show me the Polar Amplification? I just don’t see it.

   Reply
   • Anthony S says:

     August 10, 2013 at 4:04 am

     It got warmer than average in the arctic in the summer in the 90’s, but not anymore.

     Reply
     • F. Guimaraes says:

       August 10, 2013 at 4:25 am

       Strong solar radiations forcing of the present cycle 24, we’re starting to see its effects.

       Reply
   • F. Guimaraes says:

     August 10, 2013 at 4:34 am

     Thanks for the link to WUWT.

     Reply
5. Brian D says:

   August 10, 2013 at 2:47 am

   Try these on for size. Winter setting in.
   http://weather.unisys.com/gfs/7d/gfs_1000_7d.gif
   http://weather.unisys.com/gfs/10d/gfs_1000_10d.gif

   Reply
6. Anto says:

   August 10, 2013 at 3:09 am

   It’s kind of like the Dome of Silence from Get Smart. There’s an invisible barrier which lets CO2 in, but doesn’t let it back out. The winds that start at the poles, stay at the poles and…..oh, I just can’t do it – the intellectual contortions needed to make this kind of theory work are just too hard.

   Reply
7. Andy Oz says:

   August 10, 2013 at 3:12 am

   “Polar Amplification” has everything to do with the volume of noise coming from the warmists now the game is up, and nothing to do with temperatures. Extending the game extends the money supply. This was never about saving a planet that doesn’t need saving. It was all about introducing a method of global taxation, brought in exactly the same way personal income taxes were after WWI. Create the funding emergency and scare the people into changing the laws. In about 21 days the Australian Carbon Tax will be dead.

   Reply
8. gator69 says:

   August 10, 2013 at 6:15 am

   “The majority of the so-called climate change skeptics (as seen of TV and even popular best-seller lists) have been getting harder and harder to find in recent years as more and more evidence has stacked up against their opinion. When scrutinized most of the skeptics quite often lack creditability and are often book writing lawyers, TV weather reporters, or even if they might be scientists their field of expertise is not in the study of climate.”

   This guy turned it up to 11. 😉

   http://kenburridge.com/climate-crisis-comments-part-1/#comment-6965

   Reply
9. Jimbo says:

   August 10, 2013 at 5:04 pm

   I see that the article image post by Steve is from Cecilia Blitz of the University of Washington. On Dec 15, 2010 there was news report about a study with the headline:

   “Arctic icecap safe from runaway melting: study”
   “”There is no ‘tipping point’ that would result in unstoppable loss of summer sea ice when greenhouse gas-driven warming rose above a certain threshold,” said Steven Amstrup, a professor at the University of Washington and lead author of the study.”

   And who was the co-author of the paper? Cecilia Blitz. They’ll soon call her a denier. 🙁

   Reply
10. slimething says:

    August 10, 2013 at 5:21 pm

    Jimbo, do you have a link to that?

    Reply