Greenland’s surface gained mass yesterday for the first time this summer. The net surface gain over the past year has been 300 billion tons.
Criminals at the Guardian, New York Times, academia and government agencies will continue to lie about this for as long as they can get away with it.
This plot is also very informative. No net mass loss here!
http://beta.dmi.dk/uploads/tx_dmidatastore/webservice/b/m/s/y/a/todaysmb.png
Obama will not finish his second term! Banned independent documentary
reveals the truth. This will scare millions! Current Events Linked to Ancient Biblical Propheciey.!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dWwkX3oUtI
And all this after hearing all the hype and hand wringing earlier this year about the Arctic Ice extent having the lowest maximum during the satellite record. http://nsidc.org/news/newsroom/arctic-sea-ice-maximum-reaches-lowest-extent-record
Here is what I think NSIDC is conveniently hiding: the PDO has reached its warmest level since 1997,
http://www.climate4you.com/images/PDO%20MonthlyIndexSince1979%20With37monthRunningAverage.gif
The present spike is *the largest in amplitude* (7 years average) since the end of the 1950’s
http://www.climate4you.com/images/PDO%20AnnualIndexSince1900%20With7yearRunningAverage.gif
and it coincided with the local maximum of solar radiations (2nd peak) from the end of 2013 to January this year, as happened with the solar maximums of cycles C21 (~1982-83), C22 (~1992-93) and C23 (~2002-03), which also corresponded to local spikes of the PDO.
The large oscillation of 1997-98, coincided with the largest El Nino on record, and a step change of Earth’s climate from a warming phase into the present “hiatus” or “slightly cooling” phase,
https://i0.wp.com/i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a532/dhm4444/wood4trees-Interactive-step-change-1979-1997-2001-2015-trend_zpse26f9b04.png
I believe the low level of the Arctic ice of the beginning of this years was *entirely* a consequence of relatively strong solar radiations in 2014 that importantly favored the abnormal warming of the Pacific, but for the NSIDC folks it was caused by CO2! 🙂
I guess if the present PDO, coinciding with a (not so strong) El Nino, would not be the harbinger of another step change in Earth’s climate, obviously toward a colder climate.
One thing is very clear from the PDO graph since 1979, the general trend of the Pacific is into a negative phase.
The PDO plummeted in ’98/’99 after the ’97/’98 El Niño ended and went into La Niña crash. I see no reason that won’t occur again. When the AMO, at its height now, goes negative, I believe AGW (which is already a dead hypothesis walking, thanks to billions of federal dollars to keep the corpse artificially simulating life) will collapse.
I agree, I’m expecting a cold start of 2016, possibly like 2013.
The AMO tends to follow world temperatures, then it also could go into negative phase very soon.
The difference of the present AMO levels to the lowest of the XX century is *only* ~ 0.5 C,
http://www.climate4you.com/images/AMO%20GlobalAnnualIndexSince1856%20With11yearRunningAverage.gif
(from http://www.climate4you.com/SeaTemperatures.htm#AMO%20(Atlantic%20Multidecadal%20Oscillation)%20Ind)
The non detrended AMO index (average North Atlantic sea surface temperatures (SST)) is probably below 21 C now.
I suspect that over the next few years we will see the satellite temperatures ease off somewhat, actually going the opposite direction to the models.
I don’t like the cold, so hopefully not too quickly.
(Although if it were a steep drop it would be fun to watch the AGW mob scuttle.)
The artificial warming in the surface records will be much harder to budge 😉
Well, eliminating the Super El N and La N, even the satellites show us the lower troposphere global average temps haven’t really cooled; rather they haven’t continued to go up. That C4U AMO graph shows us it can stay on top around where it is now for over two decades. The wild card question is, could a prolonged low solar count speed up an AMO fall. I don’t know. The “triple crown” of global cooling, according to Joe Bastardi, is when we have both in the mix. The North Atlantic is cooling, but the AMO is firmly in pinnacle territory. So the AMO may take awhile. When it does eventually fall, combined with low solar count, Katy bar the door. The exodus from AGW will be massive, I believe.
Dmh, in my post to you I should have said, “I think.” I just don’t know. But IF we do get the triple crown – low solar count, low major ocean cycles and volcanism, simultaneously, I believe it could get brutal – they’ll be ice skating on the Thames.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_Thames_frost_fairs
@ Disillusioned: I agree it’s likely air temps will return within decades to those that permitted skating on the Thames. However I’m not certain this will then freeze the river enough to safely skate on, due to the additional waste heat load added to the river in recent times. It will be interesting to find out, if I live that long.
Snowleopard – good point, UHI effect does warm. The Ohio River froze over in winter 1977 – with lots of UHI effect up and down the river. If the temps get down to where they were in the 17th century, I would not be surprised if the Thames freezes. I’ll probably be too old to skate on it, but yes, I hope to live long enough to watch the collapse of the biggest scientific scam ever known.
You can see the 2010 El Nino and easily conclude that it did not cause a step up like the 1998 El Nino did..
Apparently we are meant to be in El Nino conditions at the moment, but I see no sign of it in the tropospheric temperatures.
Something very obviously turned around after the 1998 El Nino.
It wasn’t atmospheric CO2,
and looking into the sky on this lovely sunny morning, I ask myself..
what could it possibly be. 🙂
Well we know it can’t be the sun. After all, the government climate scientists tell us so! That nuclear furnace has nothing to do with warming and cooling trends on earth you know. Man, using CO2 as the thermostat control knob is the only thing that can possibly effect global temperatures you know.
I have no proof but it looks like the El Nino (EN) and the PDO have somewhat complementary effects on climate.
EN seems to correlate with sudden increases in tropospheric temperatures, which then plunge into the opposite direction when the subsequent La Ninas occur.
Usually the EN and the spikes of the PDO don’t coincide, but when they do it would cause a global change in Earth’s climate- either a step change or not, but a clear change in the “derivative” of the graph of the average temperatures.
This happened in 1982-83 when Earth’s temperatures started to increase fast and was one of the main fuels of the AGW propaganda (to a certain extent AGW looked a reasonable hypothesis at that time and fooled many, me included). It also happened with the strong EN of 1997-98 which coincided with a strong warming of the Pacific.
I’m considering the following data for EN,
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ensostuff/ensoyears.shtml
and the graph above of “climate4you” for the PDO since 1979.
In 1992-93 there was another spike of the PDO but no strong EN, and the relatively strong EN of 2009-10 had no correspondent sudden increase of the PDO, and in both cases the tropospheric temperatures didn’t change their general trend (“derivative”).
Now, we’re having the great warming of the PDO of the last 1 + 1/2 years coinciding with EN conditions.
I think this indicates that the direction of Earth’s temperatures is about to change again.
I believe it’s toward a cooling period, similar but opposite to the warming phase of the last 2 decades of the XX century.
Nothing there with Greenland. That poster child is dead and buried.
I recently posted a comment on the blog “Really Sciency”. The blogger claimed Steven Goddard’s qualifications (geology and engineering) are irrelevant in the climate debate. Being a geologist too, I corrected him in my comment. The relevant disciplines in the climate debate are geology, physics, chemistry (I have varsity training in all these), statistics, meteorology and history. To a lesser extent botany, zoology. I’m not convinced that climatology is a real science. No real scientist accepts AGW because it ignores scientific laws as well as recorded history.
Someone help me out here… I keep looking at the graph and it looks like the accumulated surface mass balance is just a bit above 200 GT for the year, not 300 GT. Am I misreading something?
Remember this map shows the growth since the beginning of September. You’d have to look at last year’s level for this time of the year to get the full 365 day story.
The study – Climate driven vertical acceleration of Icelandic crust measured by CGPS geodesy – was carried out by researchers from the University of Iceland and the University of Arizona. The group studied data from 62 GPS sensors around Iceland to work out how the earth responded to climate change-driven glacial melting; they found that the country is actually rising by as much as 35 millimetres a year.
Researcher Kathleen Compton explained that as the glaciers melts, the pressure on the rocks beneath lessened, and that rocks at a high temperature could remain solid if the pressure was high enough. She further explained that as the pressure was reduced, the melting temperature was effectively lowered.
According to Compton, this means that Iceland could expect more volcanic eruptions like the Eyjafjallajokull one in 2010.
http://www.icenews.is/2015/08/08/iceland-volcanic-eruptions-could-be-a-consequence-of-melting-glaciers/
But you don’t need climate change-driven glacial melting .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laki
If I’m not mistaken Iceland has been in anomaly blue for most of the summer.
http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp4.html
Of course not, what about the AMO+ of the recent 2 decades? How could it possibly have no effect on Iceland, but looks like Kathleen knows nothing (or doesn’t want to know) about it. 🙂
Also the increase of Iceland volcanic activity in 2011 (Grimsvotn) and 2014 (Bardarbunga) coincided with the 1st and 2nd peak of the present solar cycle, but this is probably too “inconvenient” to analyze.
Nevermind that Iceland seems o experience century scale cycles in activity, and is currently going into an active period.
OT, but a very topical posting over at Tim Blair’s blog. Please read it, its fun. 🙂
http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/timblair/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/we_were_only_nineteen/#commentsmore