Slashdot Mirror


Cold Spring Linked To Dramatic Sea Ice Loss

hrvatska writes "An article at Weather Underground reports that researchers have linked large snowstorms and cold spring weather across Britain and large parts of Europe and North America to the dramatic loss of Arctic sea ice. It is thought that the Arctic ice loss adds heat to the ocean and atmosphere, which shifts the position of the jet stream, allowing cold air from the Arctic to plunge much further south. Researchers expect that a warming Arctic ocean will drive more extreme weather in North America and Europe (abstract)."

20 of 422 comments (clear)

  1. Global warming by cyrano.mac · · Score: 5, Funny

    Yep. Global warming is freezing our asses off...

    1. Re:Global warming by lgw · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Creation "science" has an explanation for all the related scientific data these days, and every time e.g. a geologist discovers something new and interesting, hey, no problem, they can change their story and explain that too.

      Actual science predicts unusual measurements. Junk science says "hey, no problem, our model can explain that too".

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    2. Re:Global warming by Joce640k · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They've been predicting this for as long as I can remember, and I'm quite old.

      North-West Europe is warmer than it ought to be. The reason is warm water currents coming up from the Equator. It's called the Gulf Stream.

      Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_of_Europe#Gulf_Stream

      If anything disrupts the Gulf Stream, eg. extra ice melt at the North Pole, then Europe's climate will become what it ought to be for its latitude, ie. much colder..

      Science. It works.

      --
      No sig today...
    3. Re:Global warming by techno-vampire · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Junk science says "hey, no problem, our model can explain that too".

      You mean like the way the AGW people suddenly realized that adding energy to the atmosphere meant more extreme weather, both hotter and colder, after we had some extra-cold winters? I can't say it's not reasonable, but I would have found it much more impressive if any of them had suggested this before it happened, rather than patching their theory to explain something that otherwise didn't fit.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    4. Re:Global warming by Sique · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They actually did. The last five years were within their margins of error.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    5. Re:Global warming by Sique · · Score: 5, Informative

      It was actually predicted. Continuous global warming will weaken or stop the Gulf stream, and the Gulfstream is responsible for the quite mild European winters. It could be that now the Gulf stream shows the first sign of weakening, leading to a longer, colder winter in Europe.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    6. Re:Global warming by i+kan+reed · · Score: 5, Informative

      Let's see, here's an academic paper mentioning cooler winters as an artifact of global warming, dated from before I was born. And I'm more than old enough to be having this debate with you. What exactly wasn't predicted?

    7. Re:Global warming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      FTFY :

      Science. It works.Bitches

    8. Re:Global warming by lgw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This couldn't be more incorrect. Actual science is a method of observation and has no business in speculation. Either your scientific model describes the behavior of the natural world or you need to change your model to more accurately describe it. It's an ongoing process.

      Creation "science" describes the behavior of the natural world (at least at the shallow level I can be bothered to look at it). For any set of data, there are an unbounded set of hypotheses that describe that set of data. Merely being consistent with existing measurements is necessary, but not at all sufficient to be science, not storytelling.

      Science is about falsifiable predictions. Why is general relativity so certain? Because it predicted all sorts of crazy stuff, such as gravitation lensing, that wasn't known at the time it was published. Why is the Standard Model of particle physics still the standard, despite being so awkward and unloved? Because it keeps making accurate predictions, and more elegant theories don't.

      You can create a million different models to explain anything, but that's not very interesting, nor is such a model chosen at random likely to still be correct once more is known. But a model that accurately predicted new data? That's interesting.

      There are a million climate models now (well, a lot anyhow) - are any of them interesting? A model that made a specific, falsifiable prediction that none/few of the others did, and turned out to be right, that would be interesting indeed.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    9. Re:Global warming by KeensMustard · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What exactly are the margins of error.

      Why are you asking us? If you are ignorant of something, that is not our responsibility to correct. You are criticising the margins of error whilst simultaneously claiming to not know what they are. Hardly convincing.

    10. Re:Global warming by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 4, Informative

      While frozen in the ice and getting transported there by the currents over the course of years. Convincing, mate, convincing.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
  2. Re:so WTF are normal temperatures then? by lgw · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Fundamentally, a stable climate is an illusion of the "short now". We think there's such a thing as "normal" temps because we just don't live very long, compared to a planet.

    Even on a larger scale, the past 10,000 years have been an amazing anomaly, with a relatively stable climate not seen anywhere else in the data (and it's probably no coincidence that mankind happened to emerge technologically during this rare stable-ish window).

    The simple truth about all this Climate Change debate? You don't have an informed opinion either way until you've really looked at the Vostok ice core data. Study the raw data for the past several 100k years yourself - you're intuition is no guide at all for how the climate normally behaves over time.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  3. Re:Queue stupid comments from team creationism! by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Science has an amazing way of reinforcing crazy stupid by presenting contradicting, independently verifiable facts

    I suppose you mean seemingly contradictory, when viewed on a superficial level without real understanding of the matter?

    --
    Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
  4. Re:so WTF are normal temperatures then? by femtobyte · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Of course, large-scale climactic changes over tens or hundreds of thousands of years are a red herring when evaluating the impact of hundred-year rapid timescale changes on human societies that need much longer to adapt without horrific violence and misery. We live in very different places/cities from where we did 10,000 or 100,000 years ago --- but pretty much in the same cities we had 100 years ago. Expecting the populations of entire nations and continents to just up-and-move over a few decades because habitable ranges have shifted (collapsing food and water supplies in once-fertile regions) doesn't play out so well in current geopolitics. As soon as you're ready to welcome a billion refugee immigrants, dislocated by famine, war, and poverty, into your own country, we can get complacent about compressing multi-thousand-year climactic cycles into human-scale time intervals.

  5. Re:so WTF are normal temperatures then? by khallow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Indeed. "Climate change" is an effective propaganda technique for enabling observation bias. Have any weird weather? It's climate change and all due to the evil humans and their fossil fuel based industrial societies.

    As you might have guessed from my sarcasm, I don't buy at all that the phrase, "climate change" is somehow more accurate than anthropogenic global warming. Climate would change even if nothing particular was going on, just due to orbital dynamics of Earth around the Sun, volcanoes, and the subtle effects of continental drift.

  6. Re:how does 2013 compare to the 1980's? by jeffmeden · · Score: 5, Informative

    not over the water you can't

    Exactly. There is no water between Brooklyn and Queens (they are both on Long Island). I LOLed.

  7. Arctic and Antarctic winds key. by chrisale1452 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is just the latest in a series of published work finding that weakening ocean and land temperature contrasts between high and mid northern latitudes is having a profound effect on the Jet Stream. Search for jet stream and arctic on Google Scholar and they'll pop up. They all show that the poles live and die by the circumpolar winds that 'lock' the cold air in those high latitudes (Antarctica included by the way!). If those circumpolar winds diminish, then the cold can effectively 'escape'. In the Northern Hemisphere, it results in the jet stream becoming extremely contorted, sets up 'blocking' and we get these long periods of abnormal weather (extra cold in late winter/early spring, extra heat in late summer/early fall?) The weather channel has a great rundown of the jet stream *today*. Illustrates it perfectly. http://www.weather.com/video/forecast-for-your-spring-35814 Lets just thank our lucky stars that Antarctica is a continent surrounded by ocean, and not an ocean surrounded by continents, like the Arctic. This fundamental difference means the southern circumpolar winds have a huge contrast to work from with the gigantic ice fields of the continent versus the far away lands of Southern America, Oceania, and Africa. Ironically, the ozone hole actually makes the Antarctic colder and the circumpolar winds stronger... so as it fixes itself as human CFC emissions dimish, those winds will start to weaken and warming will be able to creep in there as well. But at least that buys us time. Were the Arctic and Antarctic equal, global warming would have likely been much more immediate. Though who knows, maybe that would have spurred us to action before today (which is still never?) The world and science that attempts to explain it is wonderful and terrifying all at the same time. Lets hope we can get our acts together and change our course before we cause so much change to our atmosphere and oceans that we are unable to avoid the clear and present dangers now on tap.

  8. What's with the anti-environment crowd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I find it really bizarre that Slashdot, a website that usually has intelligent discussion, is filled with climate change naysayers.

    Is this real life?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumental_temperature_record

    The 9 warmest years on record happened this century. The Earth is heating up, and rapidly.

    Who the fuck are you people?

    1. Re:What's with the anti-environment crowd? by meta-monkey · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't get it either. And it isn't just ignorance, it's outright stupidity. If you've been informed, and still don't understand, that's stupidity. And it's been explained over and over and over again.

      Weather is not climate and global warming is not climate change.

      One more time:

      1) Radiation in and out are the only methods of changing the average temperature of the earth.

      2) The sun emits radiation from the near-infrared range up through UV.

      3) When molecules absorb radiation, the reemit it in a random direction.

      4) Oxygen absorbs and reemits UV radiation, spitting most of it back out into space.

      5) Atmospheric gasses are transparent to visible light, so the visible light radiation is absorbed by the surface of the earth.

      6) the surface warms, and reemits lower energy thermal radiation (IR).

      7) So-called "greenhouses gasses" like CO2, water vapor, and methane which make up only small parts of the atmosphere are opaque to IR radiation. They absorb this radiation, gain energy, and physically collide with the other gasses in the atmosphere, heating them. Nearly all heating of the earth's atmosphere is from this interaction.

      8) The GHG's then emit an IR photon in a random direction, where it is reabsorbed by another molecule and reemitted on and on until it happens to ping pong out into space, radiating heat away from the earth.

      9) The higher the concentration of these trace gasses in the atmosphere, the longer it takes for a photon to leave earth, and the warmer the atmosphere is, on average.

      10) Man burns lots of long chains of carbohydrates which result in a forced higher concentration of CO2. This happens slowly over time.

      11) Plants do not gobble it all up, because plants don't live on CO2 alone. Some of it dissolves in the ocean, causing ocean acidification, which is a completely different problem. Regardless, enough of it stays in the atmosphere.

      12) The earth slowly warms because of CO2 forcing. Additionally, higher average temperatures result in more water vapor in the air, and water vapor is an even more effective green house gas than CO2. This leads to the "runaway" greenhouse gas effect.

      13) This process that produces higher average global temperatures from man-made activities is called anthropogenic global warming.

      14) While the global mean temperature is higher, local average temperatures will certainly vary. Some places will become warmer on average, some cooler, some wetter, some drier, on average, than before.

      15) These average changes at different points in the year change the overall climate of those places. This is called climate change. It is a product of global warming.

      16) A changed climate results in different weather patterns for an area than the weather patterns that existed before climate change.

      17) The weather, as influenced by a changing climate as a result of global warming, is not necessarily warmer in every region of at all times. It is simply different than it was.

      This should not be complicated for an educated audience to comprehend.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  9. Gulf Stream has not weakened. by mc6809e · · Score: 4, Interesting

    According to the most recent SST anomaly map found here, much of the Gulf Stream is anomalously warmer than expected.