Is "global warming" driving the very snowy winters we've seen in recent years?

I will ask again: Why??
And another question: How many and what are the names of "most scientists"? Links to peer-reviewed papers would be nice?

 

Asked and answered.

Is anthropogenic global warming causing the Arctic sea ice to melt? The correct answer is "No". Most scientists now attribute the loss of this ice to the North Atlantic Oscillation, which introduces warm air currents and the Thermohaline Circulation, which introduces warm water currents into the Arctic region, respectively.

What is the "Thermohaline Circulation"? As surface water sinks in the frigid Arctic through thermohaline action, warmer water is "pulled in" to fill the void left by the sinking water. It is this warmer water that causes the Arctic sea ice to melt from underneath.

Scientists now know warmer water is also "pushed" into the Arctic by the pressure of the Gulf Stream, and given added impetus by the prevailing south-westerly winds that sweep across the North Atlantic.

Thus, we must conclude the recent loss of Arctic sea ice in a purely natural phenomenon and has nothing to do with man's combustion and use of fossil fuels as a reliable energy source.

NASA: The Thermohaline Circulation (The Great Ocean Conveyor Belt)

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3niR_-Kv4SM"]NASA: The Thermohaline Circulation (The Great Ocean Conveyor Belt) [720p] - YouTube[/ame]

 

Is "global warming" driving the very snowy winters we've seen in recent years?

Yes, obviously. Are you totally dim? You expect the temeperature everywhere to go up every week? Yes, you are totally dim, obviously.

 

Please provide scientific proof that "global warming" is driving the very snowy winters we've seen in recent years.

No opinions or "arm waving" or personal insults, please.

We want to see your reliable scientific proof for these "non-supportable" conclusions.

 

Good comment, Trinnity.

The liberals in this group are good at "arm waving" and frequent insults and nothing else.

Their understanding of the science involved is woefully inadequate.

It is really sad to see adults in this group with such a poor understanding of science and the natural events that drive global warming.

Their conclusions are always based on "emotions" and "politics" and hardly anything else!

 

The paper that fireallpoliticians reports on:
Impact of declining Arctic sea ice on winter snowfall

Please show where it concludes that anthropogenic global warming is not causing the sea ice to melt.
fireallpoliticains is drawing conclusions not evident in the paper. IOW, FAP is making (*)(*)(*)(*) up. Something they and yo have in common.

And once again I must ask you to name "most scientists" and their peer-reviewed papers.

 

You are indeed correct, barcardi.

The liberals in this group are good at "arm waving" and frequent insults and nothing else.

Their understanding of the science involved is woefully inadequate.

It is really sad to see adults in this group with such a poor understanding of science and the natural events that drive global warming.

Their conclusions are always based on "emotions" and "politics" and hardly anything else!

 

I thought we were talking about how our use of oil is warming the earth? Who mentioned CFCs? I never did. Why ban oil until we have a cheaper alternative?

 

Oil is the MOST EXPENSIVE fuel we use. We simply are postponing PAYING those costs onto our children.

No one is suggesting BANNING the use of oil, the proposals are to add more of the REAL costs of using oil to the CURRENT PRICE of oil, which will level the playing field for alternative fuels and power sources whose use is NOT incurring a BILL that the future humans cannot pay.

 

It would seem that real science is taking the place of the alarmist doomsday redictions of the UN IPCC manufactured catastrophy think (so-called) tank. Ocean currents, atmospheric conditions, and the sun that drives it all are all part of the global climate that has not been fully assessed by a science that is barely 100 years (generous alotment) old of a system millions of years old.

 

From the bottom of the article, you probably did not make it that far, which is obvious from the above contribution.

Huijun Wang and Mirong Song of the Chinese Academy of Sciences Institute of Atmospheric Physics and Radley Horton from the Columbia University Center for Climate Systems Research also contributed to this work.

 

Carbon credits? That market closed because it was based on BS, which is the same with the science that created it.

 

Please provide proof that it isn't. We want to see your reliable scientific proof.

 

The thread-as ever with Mr. Cessna, is attempting to debunk the fact that man can have an adverse effect on climate. I posted a response which clearly shows that has happened. I have had no response (not surprisingly) from Mr. Cessna.
Nobody is talking about banning oil.

 

When the liberals run across a subject they do not know or understand, they quickly change the subject. They like to see us chase “rabbits” down “rabbit holes”!

It's a common attempt at deflection most liberals use when they do not understand the subject matter!

 

I would have more respect for leftists if they admitted that they are drinking the kool-aid of the AGW myth and that real science and thinking are beyond their capabilities and that because they are leftists they have cultural and evironmental limitations to their cognitive abilities.

 

Ha-Ha!

These comments are by far the best I've seen that correctly describe the leftisits and the "warmies" in our group!

 

Ha-Ha!

Very good, PatriotNews.

If proving carbon dioxide were indeed a dangerous gas that will cause our climate to increase to a very high temperature from which we would not recover, were that easy to do, there would be absolutely no doubt about the scientific evidence, and we would all agree.

But the "warmists" can't prove this theory, and this is why they must result to childish insults, taunts and dishonest data and phony conclusions to try and prove their point.

What childish little children the "warmists" are!

 

There were Herbivore Dinosaurs and the vegetation to support them between 400 to 1200 miles from the North Pole. The fossilized remains of both don't lie. Something caused the Earth to warm to that extent, man didn't exist and the fossils for oil were still walking around and growing that close to the North Pole. So what caused the Earth to warm that much? If they don't know, then they can't be sure that the same process isn't happening again.

 

Yes, weather extremes are caused by putting masses of dosis of energy in the Earth's atmosfeer, energy that is coming from 'our' very inefficient cars/trucks/boats, etc (combustion engines are less than twenty percent efficient) The eighty percent losses are heat and hot exhaust gasses. Ofcourse the MSM and 'new' media will never tell you these facts (because the media is there to propagate the massses, defend the oil)
Over the last century the eskimo cultures have almost disappeared (look at old pictures from the 1900s you can see the old Inuit culture)
Not mentioned by politics, scientists or the media.
They just need their global empire whatever is takes. People are so propagated today they can't think clear, their minds are stark influenced by the propaganda from the controlled media.
The next four years will be again four years of the same, serious change to alternative energies (more geothermical/tidal) and real electric/hydrogen transporation (advanced technology that is hold back by this system, again because of oil, power greed, empire)

 

You are indeeed correct, Professor Peabody.

These discussions were very good.

 

What Snow?

Who would have thought someone from The Chicago Area would be saying that.

 

It seemes to be snowing everywhere these days.

These discussions were very good. The snow arises from too much moisture near the Arctic Circle.

Is anthropogenic global warming causing the Arctic sea ice to melt?

The correct answer is "No". Most scientists now attribute the loss of this ice to the North Atlantic Oscillation, which introduces warm air currents and the Thermohaline Circulation, which introduces warm water currents into the Arctic region, respectively.

What is the "Thermohaline Circulation"? As surface water sinks in the frigid Arctic through thermohaline action, warmer water is "pulled in" to fill the void left by the sinking water. It is this warmer water that causes the Arctic sea ice to melt from underneath.

Scientists now know warmer water is also "pushed" into the Arctic by the pressure of the Gulf Stream, and given added impetus by the prevailing south-westerly winds that sweep across the North Atlantic.

Thus, we must conclude the recent loss of Arctic sea ice in a purely natural phenomenon and has nothing to do with man's combustion and use of fossil fuels as a reliable energy source.

"The circulation changes result in more frequent episodes of atmospheric blocking patterns, which lead to increased cold surges and snow over large parts of the northern continents."

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3niR_-Kv4SM"]NASA: The Thermohaline Circulation (The Great Ocean Conveyor Belt) [720p] - YouTube[/ame]

 

Ha-Ha!

Very good, Cuban Cigar!

You get 5 stars for this one!

 

JC IS SERIOUSLY CONFUSED AS USUAL. He has read an article identifying a natural and very important climate system phenomena that has definitely changed dramatically comparatively quickly in the past AND DOESN'T REALIZE THAT THIS IS A WARNING. What he failed to show, and thus grasp, was that the accelerated melting of the polar ice (arctic and antarctic) is due to AGW. It's a bit like looking at the engine system of a car and ignoring the effect of stepping on the gas pedal.

Please read the following for a more complete explanation:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermohaline_circulation
http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?cid=9986&pid=12455&tid=282
http://www.pik-potsdam.de/~stefan/thc_fact_sheet.html

Non-linear behaviour of the THC

Highest surface densities in the world ocean are reached where water is very cold, while lower densities are found in the saltier but warmer tropical and subtropical areas. In this sense the THC is thermally driven. Nevertheless, the influence of salinity is important and is what causes the non-linearity of the system. This was first described in a classic paper by [10] with the help of a simple box model. Salinity is involved in a positive feedback: higher salinity in the deep water formation area enhances the circulation, and the circulation in turn transports higher salinity waters into the deep water formation regions (which tend to be regions of net precipitation, i.e., freshwater would accumulate and surface salinity would drop if the circulation stopped). Put simply, in Stommel's model the high-latitude salinity increases linearly with the flow, and the flow increases linearly with high-latitude salinity, which combined gives a quadratic (i.e., non-linear) equation. This leads to two possible equilibrium states, the system is bistable in a certain parameter range. This becomes more than an academic point as complex circulation models behave in the same way, and as the present North Atlantic in many models is in the bistable regime. The first coupled climate model to show these two equilibria (discovered quite by accident) is the one by

An important point is that the salt transport feedback is not the only feedback rendering the system non-linear. The convective mixing process is itself a highly non-linear, self-sustaining process. In models this can lead to multiple stable convection patterns which on one hand can cause artefacts related to the coarse model grid. On the other hand this may be part of a real mechanism for shifts in convection location, as have apparently occured during glacial times. The bottom line is: salinity leads to non-linearity which causes the existence of multiple equilibria and thresholds in the THC.

Sediment data document that the THC has undergone major changes in the history of climate. Three major circulation modes were identified: a warm mode similar to the present-day Atlantic, a cold mode with NADW forming south of Iceland in the Irminger Sea, and a switched-off mode. The latter appears to have occurred after major input of freshwater, either from surging glacial ice sheets (Heinrich events) or in form of meltwater floods (e.g., Younger Dryas event). The most dramatic climate events recorded in Greenland, the Dansgaard-Oeschger (D/O) events, were probably associated with north-south shifts in convection location, i.e. transitions between warm and cold modes of the Atlantic THC. Recent simulations of such shifts show encouraging agreement with paleoclimatic data.

The THC in anthropogenic global warming

Global warming can affect the THC in two ways: surface warming and surface freshening, both reducing the density of high-latitude surface waters and thus inhibiting deep water formation. [25] was the first to warn that this could lead to a breakdown of the THC and to abrupt climate change. Subsequently, [26, 27] showed that this could indeed occur for strong global warming (i.e., for a quadrupling, but not for a doubling of CO2). In these scenarios there was no surface cooling, as the high CO2 levels more than compensated for the reduced ocean heat transport. The possibility of a real cooling (both a relative cooling, i.e. a drop back to roughly pre-industrial temperatures after an initial warming phase, and in the longer run an absolute cooling below preindustrial values) as a result of anthropogenic warming was first demonstrated in a sensitivity study by [20]. Significant absolute cooling can arise after CO2 levels decline, but the THC remains switched off after its collapse is triggered in a rapid warming phase.
A THC collapse is now widely discussed as one of a number of "low probability - high impact" risks associated with global warming. More likely than a breakdown of the THC, which only occurs in very pessimistic scenarios, is a weakening of the THC by 20-50%, as simulated by many coupled climate models).

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/12/041219153611.htm

down Of Circulation Pattern Could Be Disastrous, Researchers Say

ScienceDaily (Dec. 19, 2004) — CHAMPAIGN, Ill. — If global warming shuts down the thermohaline circulation in the North Atlantic Ocean, the result could be catastrophic climate change. The environmental effects, models indicate, depend upon whether the shutdown is reversible or irreversible.
See Also:
Earth & Climate

* Climate
* Global Warming
* Geography
* Environmental Issues
* Water
* Ice Ages

Reference

* Ocean current
* Gulf Stream
* Greenland ice sheet
* Ice sheet

“If the thermohaline shutdown is irreversible, we would have to work much harder to get it to restart,” said Michael Schlesinger, a professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and a co-author of a report to be presented at the American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco, Dec. 13-17. “Not only would we have the very difficult task of removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, we also would have the virtually impossible task of removing fresh water from the North Atlantic Ocean.”

The thermohaline circulation is driven by differences in seawater density, caused by temperature and salinity. Like a great conveyor belt, the circulation pattern moves warm surface water from the southern hemisphere toward the North Pole. Between Greenland and Norway, the water cools, sinks into the deep ocean, and begins flowing back to the south.

“This movement carries a tremendous amount of heat northward, and plays a vital role in maintaining the current climate,” Schlesinger said. “While shutting it down due to global warming would not cause an ice age, as was depicted in a recent blockbuster movie, ‘The Day After Tomorrow,’ eastern North America and western Europe would nevertheless experience a shift in climate.”

Paleoclimate records constructed from Greenland ice cores have revealed that the thermohaline circulation has, indeed, shut down in the past and caused regional climate change. As the vast ice sheet that covered much of North America during the last ice age finally receded, the meltwater flowed out the St. Lawrence and into the North Atlantic.

“The additional fresh water made the ocean surface less dense and it stopped sinking, effectively shutting down the thermohaline circulation,” Schlesinger said. “As a result, Greenland cooled by about 7 degrees Celsius within several decades. When the meltwater stopped, the circulation pattern restarted, and Greenland warmed.”

Since the system has previously shut down by itself, “it is not unlikely that it will do so again, especially with our help in pouring greenhouse gases into the atmosphere,” Schlesinger said. “Higher temperatures due to global warming could add fresh water to the northern North Atlantic by increasing the precipitation and by melting nearby sea ice, mountain glaciers and the Greenland ice sheet. This influx of fresh water could reduce the surface salinity and density, leading to a shutdown of the thermohaline circulation.

Schlesinger and his team simulated the potential effects with an uncoupled ocean general circulation model and with it coupled to an atmosphere general circulation model. They found that the thermohaline circulation shut down irreversibly in the uncoupled model simulation, but reversibly in the coupled model simulation.

“The different results occurred because of a crucial feedback mechanism that appeared only in the coupled model simulation,” Schlesinger said. “Enhanced evaporation increased the salinity and density of the ocean surface, offsetting the effects of additional fresh water.”

“The irreversible shutdown of the thermohaline circulation thus appears to be an artifact of the model, rather than a likely outcome of global warming,” Schlesinger said. “But, because the possibility of an irreversible shutdown cannot be excluded, suitable policy options should continue to be explored. Doing nothing to abate global warming would be foolhardy if the thermohaline circulation shutdown is irreversible."