You Know There’s Something Wrong When Vast Expanses of Greenland Look Like A Blackened Volcanic Crater

Lowest albedo on record for Greenland.

That’s what data provided by NASA and processed by polar scientist Jason Box are showing for August of 2014.

But it doesn’t take a polar scientist to tell you something is dreadfully wrong with this:

(Swaths of Greenland’s Ice Sheet look more like a volcanic crater than mountains of frozen water. Video source: Dark Snow.)

The above video, provided by the Dark Snow Project and featured on Peter Sinclair’s fantastic Climate Crocks blog, shows a vast swath of the Greenland Ice Sheet from helicopter. Miles and miles of previously pristine ice now show a blackening similar in color to volcanic basalt. A color vastly uncharacteristic of Greenland and more suited to melting and salted snow in an urban parking lot.

Melt is a primary driver of such widespread blackening of the Greenland Ice Sheet. Compaction and removal of snow through melting of the surface layer uncovers dirt, dust and soot left over through the years and millennia, depositing it in a dense layer just beneath the newly melted and washed away snow.

Snow and ice darkening is also compounded by vastly expanding Arctic wildfires. And this year featured the most severe outbreak of wildfires on record for the Northwest Territory of Canada together with extreme and explosive fires throughout Arctic Siberia.The dark soot ejected in immense plumes from these fires is borne aloft by the winds, eventually falling together with rain and snow over the Greenland Ice Sheet.

Lastly, manmade sources of black and brown carbon are also implicated in the great ice sheet’s blackening. And, during recent years, with the explosion of dark particulate sources in developing countries and through global slash and burn agriculture, more and more dark particulate from human activities is finding its way to the great ice sheet.

The net effected is Greenland ice sheet albedo dropping like a rock.

Greenland Ice Sheet Albedo Loss

(Falling like a rock. Greenland Ice Sheet albedo hits record low for August of 2014. Data source: NASA MOD10A1. Data Processed by: Dr. Jason Box.)

Albedo is a measure of reflectivity. The less reflective an ice sheet is, the more vulnerable it is to melting through direct heating by solar radiation. The ice sheet surface absorbs more energy from the sun’s rays as reflectivity falls and this process, in turn, further hastens a melt that is already being amplified by human-caused atmospheric and ocean heating.

But charts and graphs do little justice to this ongoing tragedy. In looking at vast stretches of ice, now colored an ominous grey-black, blanketing Greenland, it becomes all-too-easy to realize that we are likely witnessing the start of the Great Ice Sheet’s demise.

Links:

Dark Snow Project

Dark Snow

Climate Crocks

NASA MOD10A1

Dr. Jason Box

Leave a comment

86 Comments

  1. Amazing, Robert. I liked your description of the melting water acting as a settling pond, or catchment basin for the black carbon.
    In Santa Barbara, a few years ago, I saw something similar on the down slope of a sidewalk near US Hwy 101. The sidewalk was surrounded by lawns that were frequently watered. The water evaporated leaving thick puddles of sticky black soot. All this near a school.
    I believe those black finger tips in my dtlange identifier photo to the left is from that puddle of soot.
    If we can’t connect these two types of reasons to reduce dangerous carbon pollution, we are in big trouble.

    Reply
  2. Phil

     /  October 1, 2014

    An additional factor that seems to be coming more into play. Those images are shocking. Do you know whether and the extent to which the soot from the fires might also have ‘blackened’ the sea ice. Do not have to lose ice sheets and sea ice to reduce albedo if the ice sheets and sea ice are that colour.

    Do you know if ocean water has a greater reduced albedo effect than ice that colour?

    Reply
    • Fantastic question, Phil. I honestly don’t know the albedo difference between blackening snow and open ocean. That said the uniform darkness of open ocean is almost certainly lower overall except in the possible most extreme cases.

      Sea ice darkening is a bit more complex due to the higher rate of seasonal melt and reformation. But the deposition of dark particles likely has an affect over a period of years. If the rate of dark particulate deposition keeps rising, then that’s almost certainly a threat to sea ice as well. But the land ice probably takes the bigger hit.

      Reply
  3. Des conséquences déjà des changements climatiques?

    Another Record Rainfall in Southern France

    http://www.wunderground.com/blog/weatherhistorian/comment.html?entrynum=308

    Reply
  4. Griffin

     /  October 1, 2014

    This hurt to watch. All I can think of is how many times I have seen a light snowfall stick to the grass while the driveway quickly melted it off. This is terrible to see.
    I have read about past experiments in iceberg control that was conducted by the International Ice Patrol to try and protect shipping from bergs. One of the methods utilized in 1960 involved dropping bombs of “carbon black” which was actually a mix of sand, gravel, metal filings and oil on the offending berg. When the bombs didn’t work, men were sent to spread the stuff on the berg with brooms! Apparently the concept of Dark Snow was well understood back then. Sadly, I guess we found a better way to destroy more ice faster.

    Reply
    • Painting ice bergs black to clear shipping lanes. Now whole sections of the GIS is black, and sunlight absorbing. 5-10 years and the melt ponding is likely to be extraordinary and freakish.

      Reply
  5. Apneaman

     /  October 2, 2014

    “…it is the system itself that is unsustainable.”

    “Whether it’s driven by fossil fuels or biofuels or even massive solar and wind installations, the system will continue to devour ecosystems, displace forest-based communities, Indigenous Peoples and subsistence farmers from their lands, crush labor unions and generally make life hell for the vast majority of the world’s peoples. That is what it does.”

    http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/05/17/mckibbens-divestment-tour/

    Reply
    • Capitalism has to go.

      What this means is that the wealthiest among us need to stop consuming 100,000 times the resources of a subsistence farmer. And that we all need to think about the thousands of things we can do without. But the wealthiest need to give up the most.

      We are looking at materials and energy consumption cuts on the order of 50 to 80 percent. At that point, we can probably safely sustain economies on renewables.

      We can’t do it without renewables, we can’t do it without large consumption cuts, and we can’t do it without the wealthiest of us giving up much of what they have. We can’t have a system that’s just built to serve the desires of the wealthy any longer. We need to look more toward life and generosity at all levels.

      But pure capitalism must go. That will kill us– fast or slow. Greed is very dark and dirty in the end.

      Reply
      • More to the point, we need to stop monetizing resources and human lives (all life). One you put a price on these things, someone (capitalism) will find a way to skew the ledger. Politics can be bought and sold, and rationals for any, and all, sundry deeds will be found.

        Reply
      • Somewhat apropos is Ian Welsh’s article: A New Ideology (http://www.ianwelsh.net/a-new-ideology/).

        Reply
        • A gem, that!

          From the article:

          “There are, ultimately, two dominant strategies: cooperate or compete. If you want widespread prosperity, the dominant strategy in your ideology must be cooperation, though competition has its place. And ultimately the difference between the right and the left is this; the right thinks you get more out of people by treating them badly, the left thinks you get more out of people by treating them well.

          An ideology that believes treating people well is the better way to do things is a lot better to live under. And as a bonus, happy people are a lot more fun to be around. And societies with that ideology, all other things being equal, will tend to out-compete those who believe that fear, misery and the whip are the best way to motivate people.”

    • As for the article, I agree with many points and I disagree with many more. Just a few:

      350 chose the Keystone as the bit of the tar sands they could effectively target. Of course it is the goal of the movement to shut down tar sands.

      The notion that divestment is purely ineffective is highly overblown. Loss of investment capital damages companies ability to generate capex for new projects. That said, there are flaws inherent to working within the capitalist system and, yes, some of the losses to fossil fuel companies will be off set. But short of declaring the entire market a public asset, you have to work within the existing structure to generate an energy transition.

      Demonizing Bill McKibben based on how much money he raises at dinners is a bit disingenuous. To my knowledge, McKibben is not a glutton of conspicuous consumption. That said, I would be more comfortable if he came out against the meat industry.

      A green revolution would be quite helpful so long as we replace fossil fuel burning infrastructure with renewables. It will not be helpful if renewables are only marginally added as the fossil fuel infrastructure expands. Outright, complete replacement with renewable sources can reduce carbon emissions by about 80 percent if you look at the entire chain. Beyond that, you need consumption reductions in key areas such as meat, steel, concrete and other materials.

      Overall, 350.org has been far more effective than any other aspect of the environmental movement to date. So my view is that attacking it is generally not helpful. Further, there are many individuals who are a part of that movement who are well aware of the failures of pure capitalism and aim to have that problem rectified. As such, the demonization of progressives is also not helpful.

      As for the bit about the report she mentions… Entirely true and one of the reasons why I’m writing this blog. In fact, we’ve locked in about 1.8 C warming this century and 3.6 C warming long term if paleoclimate is any guide, which I believe it is.

      As for the final bits RE NGO conspiracy theory … I’m going to have to go on a digging expedition to parse fact from fiction. But my general sense is that attacking elements of the green movement, established or not, isn’t helpful at this time.

      Finally, the assertion that African Americans are worse off now than under Jim Crow is frankly ludicrous. Yes, we still have racist orgs in this country. But they are private and not run by states or the federal government. That bit of this piece is utter and complete nonsense.

      Reply
    • Lastly the attack on Hansen as conservative is nonsense. His carbon tax and transfer program would be one of the greatest redistributions of wealth from rich to poor ever enacted. He is a Trojan horse to conservatives and a very savvy one at that.

      Reply
  6. 35,000 walrus in Alaska sought refuge onshore, without the usual sea ice to rest on, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The gathering of 35,000 walrus in Alaska is a phenomenon that has accompanied the loss of summer sea ice as the climate has warmed.
    – Corey Accardo/NOAA/AP

    Reply
  7. Apneaman

     /  October 2, 2014

    The forces who wish to maintain BAU have a great deal of power and will go to any lengths. As an example of their reach, this piece of shite appeared in the supposed premier science publication Nature. Read it and weep …………..then scream.

    Climate policy: Ditch the 2 °C warming goal
    http://www.nature.com/news/climate-policy-ditch-the-2-c-warming-goal-1.16018

    Joe Romm weighs in
    http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/10/01/3574471/2c-climate-pollicy/

    Reply
    • Very bad idea.

      Just a few points. The 2 C warming goal is for this century. So the 2 C goal, once you factor in the long term effects is really at least a 4 C goal.

      In any case, the goal should be to stop all warming related activities as swiftly as possible. We should be setting goals for lowering carbon emissions every year after now.

      2 C is catastrophic. Hell, 1 C is pretty catastrophic. But if you go to say 2.5 C this century, that’s a 5 C ESS warming — almost enough to take down all ice on Earth. Bad outcomes.

      Reply
      • Phil

         /  October 2, 2014

        My understanding was that the UN scientists originally flagged 1 degree warming as the dangerous threshold level. However, then some economists got involved arguing that the 1 degree limit was incompatiable with economic growth and that 2 degrees was a more appropriate limit using models to show that the system could support 2 degrees warming. Those red bar charts showing that on most measures most of the impacts of 2 degrees warming were not catastrophic were produced to support a 2 degrees c limit even though the UN scientists had previously said 1 degree.

        Since then with further research coming out around 2011 re-designed those bar charts and the new dangerous limit had shifted back towards 1 degree.

        More recently, Lord Stern has said that the ‘go-to’ economic models that had underpinned the economic analysis of 2 degrees warming had also significantly understated the economic impact of global warming as well.

        My understanding from all the evidence I have seen is that the 2 degree limit should now be a 1 degree limit. Certainly, the 2 degree limit was not scientific but political and the scientific evidence would point to something lower than 2 degress.

        Reply
        • We could reverse the statement and say that economic growth, the way they envision it, is not compatible with life. If growth required a 2 C limit then, growth requires a 3 C limit now. Hence, the growth model they are working from is flawed and must change for life support to remain in tact.

          We approach the 1 C limit now. And as we approach it, we see ramping and dangerous impacts. Hitting 1 C within less than 150 years is extraordinarily rapid and stressful to the Earth climate system. But it will be nothing like hitting 2 C in 2-3 decades under the current growth model.

          One thing has to go. The growth model that requires more warming. Or a world that can support us. The two are not compatible.

      • Phil

         /  October 2, 2014

        For sure. The impact of global warming with have far reaching economic consequences as well as climatic and weather ones.

        However, you cannot divorce the ideology underpinning mainstream economics especially coming out of the top universities in USA with that underpinning the political right – they are the same and underpin climate change denial as well as being the bastions of laissez-faire economics, globalisation and minimising the size and role of the public sector. It is one and the same ideology.

        Reply
        • The endless growth paradigm and our concept of growth economics is certainly part of the problem. That said, blaming climate change denial on liberal college professors is a form of mental contortion that is almost beyond imagining.

        • In any case, if you’re looking for the origins and defenders of laissez faire thinking, you need to look to the right, to corporate board rooms, to the Kochs, and to schools like Hillsdale College. If there is a viable challenge to this position, it comes from liberals who have been fighting laissez faire economic thinking for generations and who are now championing broad action on climate change.

          Anyone who sees no difference between the left and right in this country is one of two things — a political operative who’s trying to demoralize those attempting effective social and economic action against the underpinning of the right wing ideological monstrosity that now holds so much in its grasp, or a leftist who has gone so extreme as to have nearly completely flipped over to the right. Of the two, the latter will push for a strange kind of ideological perfection that is so pure as to be practically impossible to attain. Typically, this brand sees no solution as they are either critics by nature or have been convinced that all action is futile.

          Both play into the hands of those who are actually pushing the laissez faire structures and the climate change denial and various other memes that protect them.

          We should not let these agitators and extremists run us up on the rocks. We have clear goals — effective climate change policy, regulation of markets, expansion of the public sector, broad based expansion of renewable energy, broad based reduction of consumption, setting aside an expanding array of public parks both on land and at sea to preserve the natural world, reducing corporate political influence, halting and reversing privatization, supporting living wages, enacting policies that restrain population growth and eventually shrink the human population, reigning in the excessive consumption of elites and so many more objectives that come from the left that will help get us out of this mess.

          But if you attack the origins of that thinking. In essence you are attacking the solutions. And if one who does this claims to be coming from the left and sees Bill McKibben and not Rupert Murdoch as the enemy. Then that person is as lost as lost can be.

          The notion of a broad based political movement is to bring as many people along as possible and to exert as much political force as possible. Liberal college professors are a part of this positive force. They are now and will continue to provide challenges to laissez faire economics. And 350 is a part of that force. And the Center for American Progress. And the environmental charities. If there is a civilization saving action it will involve the coordinated action of groups like these together with a broader societal awakening.

          But if we divide and we attack that action from within. Then we play into the hands of the economic royalists who are acting so irresponsibly to wreck this world. Then we really do have no hope.

          I am a fossil fuel abolitionist and a liberal. And I am proud to say that I am and to defend my fellows from unwarranted and ill founded attacks and to promote united and broad based political, economic and social action on the issue of climate change. And, yes, to confront laissez faire economic thinking too. I know a good many college professors who pursue the same goals. Far more, say, than corporate execs, monopolistic tycoons, or those poor fools who are addicted to Fox News.

          And if a few of those tycoons lose heart and join our movement, then all for the better. Let them be the ones to lose heart and fall prey to internal division. Not us. For we have an imperative that simply must succeed.

    • Just read it. I think a better title for this paper would be ‘how to confuse people about climate change while rendering emissions reduction goals meaningless.’ The paper is a poorly veiled apology for climate change denial wrapped in a demand for more carbon emission capitulation.

      What we should be doing is rolling back the goal to 1 C and putting that human problem solving faculty to good use in a dire attempt to achieve it.

      Reply
      • Apneaman

         /  October 2, 2014

        Why would a journal like Nature publish it? Anyone want to guess?

        Reply
        • Falling editorial standards, influence by fossil fuel based interests, or just plain insanity. I honestly don’t know.

          The paper was written by a political scientist and an astrophysicist. I wouldn’t say they’re very well qualified to suggest policy on climate change. The Nature editors should have realized this from jump.

    • Completely confuses me, to be honest..

      Even with something as straightforward as a 2 degree target, there were a range of ‘remaining carbon budgets’ left to keep to that target. Including ‘less than zero’, although at small probability. Now we have vaguely defined ‘targets’ as well as probability ranges for actions. Fertile ground for justifying inaction, indeed.

      We passed the simple warning lights on red a while back. Coming up with a new, colour coded and calibrated set of warning lights isn’t going to stop the train, cause the driver’s wearing a blindfold.

      When it comes to it, we passed the point where we could use conventional economics to fix global warming a long time ago; if we’d started in 1988 (Hansen’s speech to congress) we might have been able to use things like Carbon Taxes, Cap and Trade, etc to drive the energy sector towards decarbonisation, but that’s a multi-decade job that hasn’t really started.

      Reply
      • All the policies will certainly help now. We should enact as many of them as possible, as swiftly as possible.

        We should also understand that we will need more intense policy action than what was envisioned in 1988. I would really like to see Hansen’s version of the carbon tax swiftly fly, for example. We might also provide a negative carbon incentive.

        The government policy action is very important. We need to choose not to build coal plants and to help other countries make the same choices. We need to shut down existing infrastructure and rapidly reduce consumption. We need rapid replacement of all things fossil fuel with renewables. And we need to prepare for climate calamities that are almost certainly coming our way.

        At this point, we probably need an emergency footing by world governments. The slow creep of climate change has led them to a false sense of security for far too long.

        Reply
  8. Colorado Bob

     /  October 2, 2014

    Hadley Sea-Surface Temperature Anomaly Warmest Ever

    The Hadley Centre’s sea-surface temperature anomaly for August, +0.649°C, is the highest in their records, which start in 1850.

    The months in 2nd- and 3rd-place are June 2014 and July 2014, respectively.

    http://davidappell.blogspot.com/2014/10/hadley-sea-surface-temperature-anomaly.html

    Reply
  9. Colorado Bob

     /  October 2, 2014

    Changing Antarctic waters could trigger steep rise in sea levels, conditions 14,000 years ago suggest

    Current changes in the ocean around Antarctica are disturbingly close to conditions 14,000 years ago that new research shows may have led to the rapid melting of Antarctic ice and an abrupt 3-4 metre rise in global sea level.

    The research published in Nature Communications found that in the past, when ocean temperatures around Antarctica became more layered — with a warm layer of water below a cold surface layer — ice sheets and glaciers melted much faster than when the cool and warm layers mixed more easily.

    This defined layering of temperatures is exactly what is happening now around the Antarctic.

    “The reason for the layering is that global warming in parts of Antarctica is causing land-based ice to melt, adding massive amounts of freshwater to the ocean surface,” said ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science researcher Prof Matthew England an author of the paper.

    “At the same time as the surface is cooling, the deeper ocean is warming, which has already accelerated the decline of glaciers on Pine Island and Totten. It appears global warming is replicating conditions that, in the past, triggered significant shifts in the stability of the Antarctic ice sheet.”

    The modelling shows the last time this occurred, 14,000 years ago, the Antarctic alone contributed 3-4 metres to global sea levels in just a few centuries.

    Link

    Reply
  10. Colorado Bob

     /  October 2, 2014

    MONTPELLIER : ” déluge & Inondations ” en centre-ville ,le 29/09/2014 .HD

    Reply
  11. “This is your Arctic ice cap. This is your Arctic ice cap on carbon…”

    Reply
  12. Colorado Bob

     /  October 2, 2014

    A Cargo Ship Just Completed A Gamechanging First Trip Through The Northwest Passage

    The hazardous Northwest Passage is open for business. The MV Nunavik left Canada’s Deception Bay on September 19 and rounded Alaska’s Point Barrow on Tuesday – without an icebreaker escort.

    Owned by shipping firm Fednav and built in Japan, the Nunavik is the first cargo ship to make the trip unassisted, although technically, she is rated as a Polar Class 4 vessel, and can withstand year-round operations in first-year ice.

    The Nunavik is carrying 23,000 tonnes of nickel concentrate extracted from the Chinese-owned Nunavik Nickel Mine near Deception Bay, Fednav said. The route to the port of Bayuquan, China, is about 40 per cent shorter than through the Panama Canal.

    http://www.businessinsider.com.au/a-cargo-ship-just-completed-a-gamechanging-first-trip-through-the-northwest-passage-2014-10

    Reply
    • I wonder if Forbes will include this in their ‘how to profit from climate change that isn’t happening’ series?

      Reply
    • My guess is that in the next couple of years, a Boston Whaler motorized skiff will qualify as an ‘ice breaker’. Ah, the glory years of the Titanic… Yikes.

      Reply
  13. Colorado Bob

     /  October 2, 2014

    UK on course for driest September since records began in 1910
    This month is set to be the driest September since records began in 1910, according to Met Office figures…………………….. This September follows on from the eighth wettest August on record and comes in a generally very wet year – this January to August is the wettest such period in the records, mainly as a result of the very wet start to the year and the wettest winter on record, meaning that water levels are not a concern at this point.

    Link

    Reply
  14. Re: previous post “Massive Bering Sea microbial bloom…” Here’s the Geophysical Research Letters abstract:
    Key Points
    The Arctic phytoplankton phenology is shifting from a polar to a temperate mode
    Fall blooms coincide with delayed freezeup and increasing role of storms
    Intensity and frequency of fall storms increased over the last decade

    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/enhanced/doi/10.1002/2014GL061047/

    Reply
    • Yes. And the NE Pacific block has been funneling quite a few storms into this region lately.

      Reply
      • Yeah, I’m keying in on that high as an indicator of what’s happening, or going to happen. here in the West and PNW. – also the jet stream.

        Reply
  15. Colorado Bob

     /  October 2, 2014

    DJI Feats: Eruption at Bardabunga Volcano

    Reply
  16. I read a post today on the subject of the business/social climate surrounding ozone depletion in the late 80’s. The commenter explained how he and many others he knew had taken to specifically buying products that labeled themselves “CFC free” or “Won’t harm the ozone layer.” While his was a position that the economy would naturally have phased out CFCs due to market pressures, one that I don’t agree with, I think the “do gooder” observation is helpful.

    Similar labelings on everyday consumer goods and services with respect to gross carbon footprint that come with certifications (or better yet, that are required by government in much the way that calorie counts and/or nutrition facts are) could have a significant impact. As usual, this isn’t an idea that I’m in a good position to effect, but it’s food for thought.

    Reply
    • Carbon impact labeling. I think that’s a good idea. Anything to help the captive consumer.

      Reply
    • I don’t pretend that consumption given the current environmental impact of industry isn’t a problem, but I don’t see this measure hurting, either.

      Reply
      • Warning labels are an effective measure to reduce consumption of dangerous, health risk, or resource intensive products. Labeling of this kind would actually help to reduce consumption.

        Reply
  17. Colorado Bob

     /  October 2, 2014

    Regarding the walrus haul-out .

    It’s not that they never did this before.
    They were spotted onshore , but in a few hundreds in September .
    It’s that beginning in 2007 the entire population was forced ashore. We all know what that year was, that was the year the sea ice fell out of bed.

    Before this happened most mothers drifted north in the summer with the retreating ice edge , gave birth to their pups, and tucked the pups on the ice , while feeding on the swallow continental shelf. Remember , these waters are swallow far out to sea. But now the ice is melting out into deep water where walrus cannot dive to forge. Also the herd was spread out over the ice before 2007.

    Now the entire herd is packed on a beach like sardines living in their own waste. stripping the food just off shore. Which is a much less productive area than the off shore areas they used to feed on.

    I know this because when the first mass haul out happened 7 years ago I saw the same comments. And when read up on walrus.

    If one believes that this is normal , one is missing the point . This is the new normal and it’s 7 years old at Point Lay Alaska.

    By the way, the water temperature in the Chukchi Sea is 5F degrees above the long term average . And grey whales are no longer seen feeding in these waters.

    Francis H. Fay wrote that paper in 1982 I would love to see what the author has to say about what we are seeing today. Because as the National Geographic said :

    Scientists have photographed the largest gathering of Pacific walruses ever recorded, on a beach in northern Alaska, blaming climate change for the estimated 35,000 females and calves huddled beside the Chukchi Sea

    Call me old fashion but I’m going with the Nat Geo on this one.

    Reply
    • Colorado Bob

       /  October 2, 2014

      That picture of them at Point Lay, reminds me of the Jews standing at railroad sidinig.

      Reply
      • Colorado Bob

         /  October 2, 2014

        The USGS –

        Walruses are hauling out on land instead of ice because of climate-induced warming.

        The walruses are hauling out on land in a spectacle that has become all too common in six of the last eight years as a consequence of climate-induced warming. Summer sea ice is retreating far north of the shallow continental shelf waters of the Chukchi Sea in U.S. and Russian waters, a condition that did not occur a decade ago. To keep up with their normal resting periods between feeding bouts to the seafloor, walruses have simply hauled out onto shore.

        Link

        Reply
    • Always a good bet.

      Reply
  18. Colorado Bob

     /  October 2, 2014

    The polar bear is poster child, but the walrus is canary in the cold mine.

    Reply
  19. Colorado Bob

     /  October 2, 2014

    This subject at Thinkprogress has 175 comments.

    Reply
  20. Colorado Bob

     /  October 2, 2014

    Looks just like denier math to me.

    Black is white , up is down , left is right, 2 is 4 .

    Reply
  21. Jersey Patriot

     /  October 3, 2014

    I was skeptical about AGW when I first heard of it 10-15 years ago. The arguments, charts, and projections didn’t mean much. But when I saw pictures of Greenland’s melt pools and moulins, it clicked. More than anything else, even the plunge in Arctic sea ice, these black glaciers fill me with dread.

    Reply
  22. Colorado Bob

     /  October 3, 2014

    By the way, 90 mph wind speeds last night in Dallas . The system is gaining more power with every event.

    Reply
    • Huge trough digging in through central US to TX Gulf at the moment. West-Central-East is an upside down W shaped Rossby wave pattern.

      Reply
  23. Colorado Bob

     /  October 3, 2014

    Just so everyone understands , as a system changes . it moves to it’s extremes. Then it swings to the opposite extreme .

    The latest prime example, the UK. They when from the wettest winter on record to the driest Sept. on record. Each swing tends to get stuck . Just before the system flips.

    Reply
  24. Colorado Bob

     /  October 3, 2014

    Oncor officials say storms that left 300,000 in the dark are among worst they’ve seen

    Link

    Wind speeds reached 90 mph around Dallas.

    Reply
  1. You Know There’s Something Wrong When Vast Expanses of Greenland Look Like A Blackened Volca nic Crater | robertscribbler | Enjeux énergies et environnement
  2. What’s up in Greenland today 2014-10-04 | Shohk.com

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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: