The North Pole just surged above freezing in the dead of winter, stunning scientists

Trump U.?

 

For the record I am not Zach Labe and I do not do my own climate research. I'm not even a atmospheric scientist by profession. But, I do work with atmospheric data a lot and have become familiar with it and how to use it over the years. I am entirely self-taught. I spend a considerable amount of time reading academic literature to feed my obsession. And believe it or not most of the atmospheric literature I read has nothing to do with climate change. The #1 thing I've learned over the years is that there's always something new to be learned. And the more I learn the more I realize how little I know. When I use pronouns like "we" I am referring to humanity. We, as in humans, are working towards better understanding the world around us and using that knowledge to make better predictions. We will never make perfect predictions, but we definitely can make useful predictions. Climate science is no exception.

 

Ok Mr. expert on climate change what was the highest temperature recorded at the north pole in the 18 century?

 

Not factual. First, so long as the temps remain less than freezing, we are fine. And of course the north pole is not the thermostat. Why ignore the colder South Pole and it's continent size of ice.

We here in ca would do better a bit warmer so it would rain. We are getting some snow in the mountains and lucky us, our reservoirs are in excellent condition, but a tad warmer and it would rain more.

My daughter lives at Hawaii and gets plenty of rain and it is much warmer.

 

I would encourage you to review this article:

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-whats-warming-the-world/

 

Gore is not a scientist. Please stay on topic.

I'm not sure what you're referring to in terms of the ice caps. Please provide the source. If it's that Watts Up page, please highlight the specific claim you are referring to.

 

You and I both know that Al Gore's Prediction (and he is not a scientists, so I am always loathe to discuss him - and in fact, this will be the last time I reply to any reference to Al Gore), was based on the worst case scenario of one of the most extreme models from 20 years ago.

 

First, the consensus and IPCC's position on the first ice free year in the Arctic is 2050. If anything I think the IPCC will actually lower this estimate in the next installment of their report. Second, Antarctic sea ice extent is near or at record levels at this very moment.

 

I did take multiple earth science courses in college and my law degree does make me quite qualified when it comes to evaluating the logic of arguments.

Now, I asked for you to name your science degree.

 

Why did you bother to make this post?

 

For the record when people use the wrong pronoun it's seldom wrong. You have been pimping this model all over the internet and using first person pronouns. Don't think that others haven't been kicked off this forum because they were using it as a platform for their own research.

 

I started to study this in training to become a pilot. I was in awe of what we had to learn to obtain our license.

I have to stop to comment that this planet though spoken of at times as were it a small ball, is actually quite large so the climate is not of the world, but a lot of climates.

Study of weather exposed that to me. When they claim the North pole is the thermostat, they do not realize that the north pole, while large is not the thermostat. It is too small for that. The South pole is much larger and is colder and has much more ice.

I have yet to read a study of what impact warmer ice has on the colder ice beneath. Clearly not all ice is the same temperature. Ice forms at a warm 32 degrees. Warm compared to the extreme colds such as 100 below zero.

To appreciate my remarks, think of many many layers of ice of which some at the surface might be at 32 degrees so higher temps than that produce meltwater. But below the surface the ice is still very cold. I suggest the layers of ice act as insulators.

Now, I have not studied that part yet and if any of you have other views present them.

 

I don't remember members of the scientific community disputing his widely (as in world wide) publicized predictions, do you?

Why didn't they? If they had no professional intellectual honesty to confront Gore, why should we take anything else they tell us at face value?

 

*sigh*

The OP says that the temperature went above freezing when it is the coldest time of the year. So we are not, based on your criteria, "fine." And I said ice capS (read: that would include the southern ice cap as well)

....why the **** do either of those stories matter?

 

And that's exactly how you are going to explain/justify your current predictions in 20 years, when they also fail to come true, aren't you? Fool me once buddy.....

 

Al Gore's statement from 20 years ago is not relevant to this thread.

 

because your using this antidotal evidence of climate change the north pole going above freezing in the winter time when you haven't a clue if it ever happened before

 

I don't need to justify any prediction. The Earth is warming now. 2017 was the hottest non El Nino year on record. 2016, 2015, and 2014 all occupy the top 5 hottest years on record. The arctic just experienced an event of being 30 degrees warmer than it is normally for this time of the year. The CO2 Concentration is higher than at any point of the last three million years. Low oxygen dead zones in the ocean are spreading. Sea levels are rising. Corals are bleaching and dying permanently.

Now, that was the second time you refused to answer my question. Let's try a third time.

In what do you have your science degree?

 

That's what you will be claiming in 20 years about your today's models and predictions.

The conclusion is unavoidable, the models have failed, the predicted developments haven't happened, the scientists are "stunned", yet you keep insisting that we should take your word for it that they will. Please! Lol

 

Let's pretend that this event did happen in the 1850s, why would that particular data point be relevant? And let me just go ahead and answer that question for you: It is because, if it happened in the 1850s, then it is slightly more likely that the cause of the current warming event is not caused by global warming because, presumably, global warming would not have been the cause of the warming event in 1850.

At this point, you should note that we have made several assumptions just to get you to a semi-decent argument.

But let's analogize the situation. Doctors claim that smoking cigarettes cause cancer. Does the fact that cancer has been around for millions of years, but cigarettes have only been around for 100, mean that the doctors are wrong?

 

Well, they predicted that the Earth would warm. It turned out that it was better than what Easterbrook and company could do.

 

Why do you think climate science, or its ability to create models or predictions, have not advanced in 20 years?

 

It must get a hell of a lot warmer. What do you believe will be the cause of warming at the north pole?

 

Other's have been kicked off the forum by backing up their statements with real research from real scientists publishing in real peer reviewed journals?

 

Why? Gosh, i am sorry. I actually thought you were much smarter. And not to insult you. I honestly did.