Jason Box: Big Melt Year Shaping up in Greenland

May 31, 2019

Posted by greenman3610
Filed in Crock of the Week

18 Comments »

18 Responses to “Jason Box: Big Melt Year Shaping up in Greenland”

dumboldguy Says:

May 31, 2019 at 9:34 am
WOW! (and S**T!) Excellent visual display of data, and quite scary. It’s too bad Box still feels the need to use “probably”—-maybe he’s still leery after the “we’re fucked if…” episode, but it’s time for everyone to jump on the Bill Nye bandwagon and tell people that “the planet’s on fire” and it’s time to “grow the fuck up” so that we can deal with the crisis in time.

Reply
- rhymeswithgoalie Says:
  
  May 31, 2019 at 10:29 am
  To be fair, the jet stream is so messed up that there’s always a possibility that a cold lobe will park over Greenland and some other area of the arctic will take the hit.
  
  Reply
- redskylite Says:
  
  June 1, 2019 at 3:40 am
  Truly excellent job Jason Box is doing, also one of the saddest jobs watching and reporting the ever decreasing spiral of albedo.
  
  We are just about out of time, there are global signs that we are beginning to understand this – but so many nations and politics and business interests.
  
  There is no shortcut to put it all back together, man’s concept of time is pitiful against nature. Soon the fat lady sings.
  
  Reply
Boyd Carter Says:

May 31, 2019 at 11:36 am
Try this: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/05/30/cycles-of-rapid-climate-warming/

Reply
- redskylite Says:
  
  June 1, 2019 at 12:36 am
  Well I guess on the plus side (by talking about the temperature increase) that’s immense progress for Watts, just 9 years ago the site was denying that any increase in temperature was happening in the Arctic with Watts blaming faulty measuring thermometers in the weather stations.
  
  Maybe in another 9 years Watts will agree that those vibrating molecules in Carbon Dioxide and Methane cause the Green house affect as described in all reputable books on physics. I’m not holding my breath.
  
  Reply
  - redskylite Says:
    
    June 1, 2019 at 12:48 am
    I usually attach a link – but I cannot bring myself to attach a WUWT link It was called Watts Up With Nuuk by Watts (Oct 3 2010) and involved that person who goes under the alias of Steve Goddard.
    
    Reply
    - redskylite Says:
      
      June 1, 2019 at 12:49 am
      yuk
      
      Reply
Boyd Carter Says:

May 31, 2019 at 11:42 am
And this one also: http://landscapesandcycles.net/arctic-iris-effect-and-dansgaard-oeschger-event.html. Both explain this naturally-occurring event.

Reply
- jimbills Says:
  
  May 31, 2019 at 11:40 pm
  Meh. I’ll take this. I’m going to give this commenter the benefit of doubt that he isn’t just a troll.
  
  D-O events are well known by climate scientists. Both of your links are written by Jim Steele – so you’re essentially using the same reference twice. The WUWT article is recently dated, so maybe you just found out about this and are excited. Before you get too excited, here are a few things:
  
  1) D-O events are recorded during the glacial period ending 12,000 years ago. The Holocene, or the modern era, has been marked with slight fluctuations, but nothing along the lines seen during D-O events:
  http://www.iceandclimate.nbi.ku.dk/research/climatechange/glacial_interglacial/the_glacial_instability/
  
  ‘The figure shows that the glacial climate was much more unstable than the current interglacial, the Holocene. The most prominent climatic event in the Holocene was the 8.2ka event which is barely visible compared to the climate swings of the Glacial.’
  
  2) D-O events are always marked with a distinct cooling in the Antarctic as the Arctic warms. We don’t see that currently. Peter has a video on that from 2009, and the info is available in many other places:
  
  3) Steele lists many different periods of warming in the Arctic, and not just D-O events, such as a period in the 1920s. However, that was a local event around Spitzbergen, and it was noted briefly by one Associated Press article. The current warming has been noted for decades, is progressing, and is not localized to just one region of the Arctic. Additionally, Steele isn’t saying what natural cycle he thinks this is – he simply implies it’s a natural cycle. That’s not science – it’s conjecture.
  
  4) Blaming the current Arctic warming on a natural cycle (in this case, ocean circulation) ignores all the science regarding CO2 levels rising and its effects. I know, that’s easy to dismiss for some. It’s not so easy to dismiss for others.
  
  What you’ve done, as well as Steele, is leapt at a little detail of actual climate science (D-O events). You trust that, even though it’s done by the same people producing all the other climate science you don’t trust. But you haven’t fully understood the intricacies of that little detail. It just looked good because in your mind it confirmed what you already have decided is true.
  
  Steele himself in your WUWT link writes: “Either way, natural climate cycles predict Arctic temperatures will not experience further accelerated warming. We will soon see which theory is most accurate within the coming decade.”
  
  Assuming none of the above changes your mind on this, and I’m reasonably sure it won’t, would you change your mind if a decade from now the Arctic is still warming? Or would you just find another little misunderstood detail to cling to?
  
  Reply
  - rhymeswithgoalie Says:
    
    June 1, 2019 at 1:11 am
    D-O events are well known by climate scientists.
    
    Are you sure? I mean, if climate scientists aren’t taking into account sunshine or cooling of the stratosphere or Milankovich Cycles or past changes to the planet’s climate in pre-human epochs, aren’t they just too stupid to have considered Dansgaard-Oeschger Events?
    /s
    
    Reply
  - redskylite Says:
    
    June 1, 2019 at 4:13 am
    Jimbills: Thanks for excellent information: I just hope the originator understands how those D-O events belong to a different era and have no relevance to now,
    
    It truly does matter – there should not be doubt among the honest. Watts stoops to any level to spread his seeds of doubt.
    
    Reply
    - jimbills Says:
      
      June 1, 2019 at 9:44 am
      Cyclicity has continued into the Holocene, but in reference to ice cores they’re called Bond events for this interglacial period. However, Bond events are tiny when compared to D-O events. The Holocene has been remarkably stable – at least until now. Also, Bond events generally refer to cooling periods.
      
      The causes of D-O events, and Bond events, are not entirely known. Gavin Schmidt wrote a paper attributing the largest Bond event known as 8.2ka to sudden freshwater release. However, they tend to be spaced about 1,500 years apart for D-O and 1,000 years apart for Bond.
      
      Steele references a warming report in the 1920s. However, now and then cannot both be a Bond event – they’re too closely spaced.
      
      Steele is a biologist whose main focus is birds:
      https://co2coalition.org/members/jim-steele/
      
      He’s essentially putting up his own blanket conjecture that the current warming is a cycle against all the other climate science, then saying the next decade will determine who is right. It’s catnip for some, like WUWT readers.
      
      Reply
      - grindupbaker Says:
        
        June 1, 2019 at 10:29 am
        It’s my understanding that all D-O events have been accompanied by a Heinrich ice-discharge event that dumped the characteristic red clay from Hudson’s Bay scraped off by glaciers into the North Atlantic. That seems like quite a clue that ice discharge from Hudson’s Bay was involved somehow.
      - jimbills Says:
        
        June 1, 2019 at 12:28 pm
        https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/abrupt-climate-change/Heinrich%20and%20Dansgaard%E2%80%93Oeschger%20Events
        
        ‘Heinrich events occurred less frequently than D-O events. D-O events repeated every several thousand years on average, while ~10,000 years elapsed between Heinrich events.’
        
        ‘The cause of these glacial events is still under debate.’
        
        Freshwater discharge is a leading theory, though.
- grindupbaker Says:
  
  June 1, 2019 at 7:36 am
  DO is in a cooling forcing for Greenland right now, AMOC down 15%. The bipolar see saw heat anomaly is east of North America, further south.
  
  Reply
- grindupbaker Says:
  
  June 1, 2019 at 7:47 am
  The scientist who penned the notions at your link is a idiot because he/she opined “These rapid temperature fluctuations not only rivaled the 100,000-year fluctuations between maximum glacial cold and warm interglacial temperatures” but the DO events (the bipolar see saw) didn’t “rivaled the 100,000-year fluctuations between maximum glacial cold and warm interglacial temperatures” in the slightest, maybe 3% of the deglaciation global warming at first (but more likely <0.5%) then tapering to zero as clearly shown in the ice core proxies that he/she included. Why would a person want to simply announce to the world that they are an idiot by lying massively and showing the proof of their lie immediately following ?
  
  Reply
rsmurf Says:

May 31, 2019 at 12:09 pm
But of course this has nothing to do with ANYTHING HUMANS HAVE DONE!

Reply
redskylite Says:

June 3, 2019 at 2:35 am
First data sets from ICESat-2 data now available through NSIDC Distributed Active Archive Center.

“When combined with data from the original ICESat mission and the airborne data from Operation IceBridge, users will have a decades-long, high resolution view into the dramatic changes taking place in the cyrosphere.”

https://nsidc.org/news/newsroom/first-data-sets-icesat-2-data-now-available

The NSIDC DAAC provides general data and information services to the cryospheric and polar processes research community.

https://nsidc.org/daac

Reply