http://www.livescience.com/56935-north-pole-heats-up-36-degrees.html

The North Pole — the northernmost point on the globe (where Mr. Claus lives) — is more than 36 degrees Fahrenheit (20 degrees Celsius) warmer than it has been in past decades, a new report finds.

Moreover, the entire Arctic, a region that includes the North Pole, is almost 13 F (7.2 C) warmer today (Nov. 18) than in past years, the report found.

These analyses come from Sean Birkel, a research assistant professor at the University of Maine’s Climate Change Institute. He updates the temperature difference for the Arctic every day on ClimateReanalyzer.org, saying he hopes to raise awareness about how the Arctic is heating up overall, in some places as much as 36 F above normal.

Birkel calculates his forecast temperature anomaly maps for the Arctic by comparing the current day’s values against a 1979 to 2000 climate baseline period for the same day of the year. The method uses U.S. weather forecast and reanalysis models, he said.

The finding is no surprise to climate scientists who have kept a close eye on the Arctic for years.For most of 2016, the Arctic has had record-low sea iceand record-high temperatures, said Jennifer Francis, a research professor in the Department of Marine and Coastal Sciences at Rutgers University in New Jersey.

“The Arctic has been in uncharted territory pretty much all year long, ever since last fall,” Francis told Live Science.

Though a variety of factors are likely behind the record-breaking temperature spikes, overall, “the broader background is that the climate is warming, the Arctic is warming very much so, more so than any other part of the globe,” Birkel said.

Ice sheets reflect the sun’s energy back into space, but as ice melts, the newly exposed ocean absorbs the sun’s heat instead. As the water warms, it releases water vapor, which traps heat within the Earth’s atmosphere. The vapor also leads to cloud formation, which traps even more heat, Francis said.

In turn, the warmer ocean and increased water vapor and clouds further decrease sea-ice cover, which exacerbates the problem, she said.

dv said:

http://www.livescience.com/56935-north-pole-heats-up-36-degrees.html

The North Pole — the northernmost point on the globe (where Mr. Claus lives) — is more than 36 degrees Fahrenheit (20 degrees Celsius) warmer than it has been in past decades, a new report finds.

Moreover, the entire Arctic, a region that includes the North Pole, is almost 13 F (7.2 C) warmer today (Nov. 18) than in past years, the report found.

These analyses come from Sean Birkel, a research assistant professor at the University of Maine’s Climate Change Institute. He updates the temperature difference for the Arctic every day on ClimateReanalyzer.org, saying he hopes to raise awareness about how the Arctic is heating up overall, in some places as much as 36 F above normal.

Birkel calculates his forecast temperature anomaly maps for the Arctic by comparing the current day’s values against a 1979 to 2000 climate baseline period for the same day of the year. The method uses U.S. weather forecast and reanalysis models, he said.

The finding is no surprise to climate scientists who have kept a close eye on the Arctic for years.For most of 2016, the Arctic has had record-low sea iceand record-high temperatures, said Jennifer Francis, a research professor in the Department of Marine and Coastal Sciences at Rutgers University in New Jersey.

“The Arctic has been in uncharted territory pretty much all year long, ever since last fall,” Francis told Live Science.

Though a variety of factors are likely behind the record-breaking temperature spikes, overall, “the broader background is that the climate is warming, the Arctic is warming very much so, more so than any other part of the globe,” Birkel said.

Ice sheets reflect the sun’s energy back into space, but as ice melts, the newly exposed ocean absorbs the sun’s heat instead. As the water warms, it releases water vapor, which traps heat within the Earth’s atmosphere. The vapor also leads to cloud formation, which traps even more heat, Francis said.

In turn, the warmer ocean and increased water vapor and clouds further decrease sea-ice cover, which exacerbates the problem, she said.

Nothing new here. Move along.

From that piece:

“Birkel calculates his forecast temperature anomaly maps for the Arctic by comparing the current day’s values against a 1979 to 2000 climate baseline period for the same day of the year. The method uses U.S. weather forecast and reanalysis models, he said.”

Any ideas why that particular period is used for baseline?

buffy said:

From that piece:

“Birkel calculates his forecast temperature anomaly maps for the Arctic by comparing the current day’s values against a 1979 to 2000 climate baseline period for the same day of the year. The method uses U.S. weather forecast and reanalysis models, he said.”

Any ideas why that particular period is used for baseline?

http://cci-reanalyzer.org/dailysummary/#T2_anom

Temperature refers to air temperature at 2 meters above the surface. The temperature anomaly is made in reference to a 1979-2000 climatology derived from the reanalysis of the NCEP Climate Forecast System (CFSR/CFSV2) model. This climate baseline is used instead of the 1981-2010 climate normal because it spans a period prior to significant warming of the Arctic beyond historically-observed values. For context, see this timeseries plot showing how various climate baselines compare against the NASA GISS 1880-2014 global land-ocean temperature index.

might want to go to the site and look at the links in that quote

https://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/baseline-change.html

ChrispenEvan said:

buffy said:

From that piece:

“Birkel calculates his forecast temperature anomaly maps for the Arctic by comparing the current day’s values against a 1979 to 2000 climate baseline period for the same day of the year. The method uses U.S. weather forecast and reanalysis models, he said.”

Any ideas why that particular period is used for baseline?

http://cci-reanalyzer.org/dailysummary/#T2_anom

Temperature refers to air temperature at 2 meters above the surface. The temperature anomaly is made in reference to a 1979-2000 climatology derived from the reanalysis of the NCEP Climate Forecast System (CFSR/CFSV2) model. This climate baseline is used instead of the 1981-2010 climate normal because it spans a period prior to significant warming of the Arctic beyond historically-observed values. For context, see this timeseries plot showing how various climate baselines compare against the NASA GISS 1880-2014 global land-ocean temperature index.

might want to go to the site and look at the links in that quote

You know, in devil’s advocate mode, that looks suspicious. It reads as if baseline is chosen for a particular outcome. I’ll go and read a bit.

ChrispenEvan said:

https://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/baseline-change.html

I must be getting old. This all seems to be so recent. I guess it is only since satellite data, but I feel uncomfortable about comparing to a period well within my lifetime. I also think the title Reanalyzer might not be a good choice. Again, it tends to sound like you are fiddling the stats.

buffy said:

ChrispenEvan said:

https://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/baseline-change.html

I must be getting old. This all seems to be so recent. I guess it is only since satellite data, but I feel uncomfortable about comparing to a period well within my lifetime. I also think the title Reanalyzer might not be a good choice. Again, it tends to sound like you are fiddling the stats.

Makes you think don’t it.

buffy said:

ChrispenEvan said:

buffy said:

From that piece:

“Birkel calculates his forecast temperature anomaly maps for the Arctic by comparing the current day’s values against a 1979 to 2000 climate baseline period for the same day of the year. The method uses U.S. weather forecast and reanalysis models, he said.”

Any ideas why that particular period is used for baseline?

http://cci-reanalyzer.org/dailysummary/#T2_anom

Temperature refers to air temperature at 2 meters above the surface. The temperature anomaly is made in reference to a 1979-2000 climatology derived from the reanalysis of the NCEP Climate Forecast System (CFSR/CFSV2) model. This climate baseline is used instead of the 1981-2010 climate normal because it spans a period prior to significant warming of the Arctic beyond historically-observed values. For context, see this timeseries plot showing how various climate baselines compare against the NASA GISS 1880-2014 global land-ocean temperature index.

might want to go to the site and look at the links in that quote

You know, in devil’s advocate mode, that looks suspicious. It reads as if baseline is chosen for a particular outcome. I’ll go and read a bit.

(Shrugs) If you choose an earlier starting baseline it will look even more extreme.

We don’t have earlier ones to use. This is satellite data, isn’t it?

buffy said:

We don’t have earlier ones to use. This is satellite data, isn’t it?

There is scattered relevant satellite data from 1973 bbut 1979 makes the start of a good continuous baseline of satellite data.

Srsly though, changing the comparison baseline might change things by a Kelvin or two but it is not going to make a dint in a 20K anomaly. There isn’t any way an anomaly that large is an interpretation artefact.

We had better start making a lot of those carbon sequestering machines they claim to have invented damn fast. People are unable to quickly change their way of life to any meaningful degree.

I mean shit … it is November, the arctic ice extent is supposed to be increasing quickly but it isn’t, it is flat. That’s pretty weird in itself.

dv said:

I mean shit … it is November, the arctic ice extent is supposed to be increasing quickly but it isn’t, it is flat. That’s pretty weird in itself.

that point stood out to me … when i noticed the headlines prior to you posting the thread. I thought…hmm…Northern Hemisphere should be cooler this time of year. One would think.

dv said:

I mean shit … it is November, the arctic ice extent is supposed to be increasing quickly but it isn’t, it is flat. That’s pretty weird in itself.

Most co2 and methane is produced in the Northern Hemisphere, which I think would have some impact on their climate.

monkey skipper said:

dv said:

I mean shit … it is November, the arctic ice extent is supposed to be increasing quickly but it isn’t, it is flat. That’s pretty weird in itself.

that point stood out to me … when i noticed the headlines prior to you posting the thread. I thought…hmm…Northern Hemisphere should be cooler this time of year. One would think.

This shows a comparison between this year’s temperatures and the average.

Ice extent is also tracking at record lows in Antarctica.

—-
Amid higher global temperatures, sea ice at record lows at poles

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/18/world/sea-ice-arctic-antarctic-lows/index.htm

For what appears to be the first time since scientists began keeping track, sea ice in the Arctic and the Antarctic are at record lows this time of year.

“It looks like, since the beginning of October, that for the first time we are seeing both the Arctic and Antarctic sea ice running at record low levels,” said Walt Meier, a research scientist with the Cryospheric Sciences Laboratory at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, who has tracked sea ice data going back to 1979.

Why is that done as global sea ice? Wouldn’t Arctic and Antarctic run different seasons, ie more area at opposite times for Northern and Southern hemispheres? Wouldn’t this affect things a bit?

buffy said:

Why is that done as global sea ice? Wouldn’t Arctic and Antarctic run different seasons, ie more area at opposite times for Northern and Southern hemispheres? Wouldn’t this affect things a bit?

Not as simple as that as the winds and sea current revolve around Antarctica, which will help to keep temperatures lower than the Arctic.
https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/surface/level/orthographic=-208.71,-93.16,671

Yes, but wouldn’t there still be seasonal stuff, which is opposite to the Northern hemisphere. Perhaps I don’t understand that graph, pretty as it is.

buffy said:

Yes, but wouldn’t there still be seasonal stuff, which is opposite to the Northern hemisphere. Perhaps I don’t understand that graph, pretty as it is.

Yes of course that happens.

buffy said:

Why is that done as global sea ice? Wouldn’t Arctic and Antarctic run different seasons, ie more area at opposite times for Northern and Southern hemispheres? Wouldn’t this affect things a bit?

Hmm?

There are separate Antarctic and Arctic sea ice maps if you want them. They are both showing record low sea ice extents for November.

The point being made is that this is first time both the Arctic and Antarctic have record low sea ice extents at the same time. The global sea ice map highlights how unusual the situation is.

So on that graph, maximum area is in November. Is it a congomerate of worldwide? Or is it Southern Hemisphere? I can’t go searching on the dialup. I’ll have to wait until I get home. What exactly is that particular graph?

dv said:

buffy said:

Why is that done as global sea ice? Wouldn’t Arctic and Antarctic run different seasons, ie more area at opposite times for Northern and Southern hemispheres? Wouldn’t this affect things a bit?

Hmm?

There are separate Antarctic and Arctic sea ice maps if you want them. They are both showing record low sea ice extents for November.

The point being made is that this is first time both the Arctic and Antarctic have record low sea ice extents at the same time. The global sea ice map highlights how unusual the situation is.

I think the seasonal variations mean it’s a bit pointless combining Northern and Southern stuff on a straight calendar timeline. You need total Winter and total Summer, because they are offset.

buffy said:

dv said:

buffy said:

Why is that done as global sea ice? Wouldn’t Arctic and Antarctic run different seasons, ie more area at opposite times for Northern and Southern hemispheres? Wouldn’t this affect things a bit?

Hmm?

There are separate Antarctic and Arctic sea ice maps if you want them. They are both showing record low sea ice extents for November.

The point being made is that this is first time both the Arctic and Antarctic have record low sea ice extents at the same time. The global sea ice map highlights how unusual the situation is.

I think the seasonal variations mean it’s a bit pointless combining Northern and Southern stuff on a straight calendar timeline. You need total Winter and total Summer, because they are offset.

The seasonal variations don’t obfuscate the extent of this anomaly. This is a graph of global sea ice extent for each year since the start of continual record. There is a clear seasonal pattern and you can also see how much range there is from year to year at a particular time of year.

Every year, EVERY year, there is a maximum in November, as the north freezes faster than the south melts, with a range from 20.3 to 22.4 million square km.

Except this year. That red line is 2016 (check the legend). It’s obvious by inspection how anomalous it is but mathematically it is more than 6 standard deviations away from the seasonal mean.

Update. I said the Arctic sea ice extent was flatlining but it has actually been decreasing over the past week.

Note that it is unusual for there to be a melt on in the Arctic when it is nearly fucking winter.

Update

Probably nothing to worry about

dv said:

Update

Probably nothing to worry about

Pfft

waves arms

Just an outlier.

dv said:

Update

Probably nothing to worry about

It is worthwhile reading this in its entirety

https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2016/12/arctic-and-antarctic-at-record-low-levels/

Comparison with previous Novembers

dv said:

It is worthwhile reading this in its entirety

https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2016/12/arctic-and-antarctic-at-record-low-levels/

You bastards!!!