Arctic Ice Now A Negative Feeedback

After telling us for years that Arctic ice loss is a positive feedback, climate scientists now claim it to be a negative feedback.

Counter-intuitive but true, say scientists: a string of freezing European winters scattered over the last decade has been driven in large part by global warming.
The culprit, according to a new study, is the Arctic’s receding surface ice, which at current rates of decline could to disappear entirely during summer months by century’s end.

The mechanism uncovered triples the chances that future winters in Europe and north Asia will be similarly inclement, the study reports.

Bitingly cold weather wreaked havoc across Europe in the winter months of 2005-2006, dumping snow in southern Spain and plunging eastern Europe and Russia into an unusually — and deadly — deep freeze.

Another sustained cold streak in 2009-2010, gave Britain its coldest winter in 14 years, and wreaked transportation havoc across the continent. This year seems poised to deliver a repeat performance.

http://www.terradaily.com/

Would cutting off funding to charlatans be considered a negative feedback?

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

23 Responses to Arctic Ice Now A Negative Feeedback

  1. suyts says:

    “Would cutting off funding to charlatans be considered a negative feedback?”

    I’m pretty sure I’d consider it a positive action resulting from negative feedback. lol

  2. PJB says:

    Is the north pole where they will no longer be able to play ice “hokey”?

    Meanwhile in the US…

    http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2010/12/27/weather-concerns-grow-as-winter-classic-nears/

    Very appropriate for the climate “science” crowd as there are a plethora of hockey sticks involved and a lot of people skating around doing a lot of stick handling.

    Will Professor Mann drop the ball errrr puck at center ice?

  3. Dave N says:

    So during the ice age scare of the mid 70’s that was AGW too, right?

    Alarmists either think we have very short memories, or it’s them who can’t remember. They can’t even remember their holy scriptures from the IPCC predicting milder winters, and that wasn’t as long ago.

    • truthsword says:

      No… that is just a myth, there was no cooling scare in the 70’s… so say the AGW crowd.

    • Tony Duncan says:

      Actually there was no real Ice Age scare in the 70’s. There was a manufactured marketing of one. Some scientists were concerned about it because global teems were decreasing As I have repeatedly pointed out here. Steve Schnieder based his claims on the blocking effect of aerosols on solar radiation. This was a serious problem then, and he misjudged the efforts to remove them, and underestimated the effects of GHW.
      I lived during the “Ice Age scare”, and I was very much into science in high school. I don’t remember anyone ever talking about this. It was not anything that was in the public awareness except on a very peripheral level, and by no stretch did all climate scientists agree with this.

  4. Brian G Valentine says:

    “COUNTER-INTUITIVE but TRUE”

    That’s Brenda Echwurzel’s shtick! Without attribution!

  5. MikeTheDenier says:

    Wow. Fox will be slammed by the libtard media because of this. I give Fox credit for airing the “sceptic” (truth) view.

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/mocked-u-k-forecaster-who-predicted-snowy-winter-speaks-out/

    • Tony Duncan says:

      I like this guy. he is straight up in saying his theory is flat out right. it is very specific and at the moment accurate.

      • Mike Davis says:

        OK! Tony:
        He has been speaking out for years now and he has also been more accurate than the MET for as long as I have read about him!

      • Tony Duncan says:

        His theory seems to be independent of what most other skeptics are discussing, like Lindzen, Spencer, Pilke, etc. If he keeps being right that will really throw a wrench into the ball of wax (or am I missing my metaphors?). Easterbrook makes similar predictions but for different reasons I think.

  6. maguro says:

    So far, their feedback loop looks like this:

    More CO2>Hot summers>Melting Arctic ice>Cold winters>????

    What will be the second-order effect of these global-warming-induced cold winters? They need to answer that part of the equation if they want to be taken seriously.

  7. So when you change your mind, that’s called science now? Huh. I thought that was just called being wrong.

  8. Andy Weiss says:

    They are insulting our intelligence!!!

  9. Bruce says:

    Hmm, so they got the sign wrong? Should’ve been a minus not a plus?? And what other equations have the wrong sign in their GCM’s???

    Hint: there is a certain feedback equation you guys just might want to look at.

  10. Tony Duncan says:

    Actually I didn’t see anything in the article or any thing about this from climate scientists that contends arctic ice loss is a negative feedback on climate forcing.
    Could you show me your source for that?
    THAT certainly would be completely contradicting all previous ACC postulates regarding the arctic, albedo and ocean temps.

    • maguro says:

      Hot weather causes sea ice loss, which then causes cold weather.

      Sounds like negative feedback to me.

    • I forgot. Frigid temperatures mean excess heat.

    • Tony Duncan says:

      I assume both of you are joking.
      the actual equation is:
      hot weather causes sea loss ice, which causes more relatively hot weather (in the arctic), which causes weather patterns to change, which causes relatively cold weather to move to places that weren’t as cold before.

    • ianpp says:

      Sorry you are all wrong; my grade 6 teacher taught me this.
      Cold temps in most of the world = negative feedback
      More snow = negative feedback
      Two negatives = a positive
      This is a sure sign of AWG, and it is worse than we thought

  11. Counter-intuitive but true, say scientists: a string of freezing European winters scattered over the last decade has been driven in large part by global warming.

    This is how global warming works:

    Wait to see what happens in the weather. Then afterward say that is what global warming “science” predicted would happen.

    • Tony Duncan says:

      Amino,
      Unless of course an article is published before they see what the weather will be, and make lots of fancy equations and charts that confuse those stupid peer review scientists and therefore make their point BEFORE the weather that supports their premise happens.

      So we are on for that bet?

  12. I don’t remember Al Gore’s movie predicting that.

  13. Mark Wagner says:

    I read a study a while back that made a convincing case that loss of sea ice is, in fact, a negative feedback.

    Even during NH summer, the sun is at such a low angle that the loss of albedo is minor. However, the nice, black ocean is a fine radiator of heat to space during the long, cold NH winter. Making the loss of sea ice an overall negative feedback.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s