Are we experiencing the begin of a New Ice Age?

Sorry for the one liner but,

Winter sucks, ice age or not. I'm ready for spring.

reply to post by liejunkie01


i'll second you on that, it's so dismal everyday, I want some sun shine and the ability to just wear a t-shirt around again

reply to post by Kryties


Not a very good idea to make a claim that can be checked.
Feb 5, 2011 High 42 C Low 27 C
Feb 4. 2011 High 32 C Low 25 C
Feb 3, 2011 High 36 C Low 24 C
Feb 2, 2011 High 31 C Low 25 C
Feb 1, 2011 High 41 C Low 24 C
Jan 31, 2011 High 35 C Low 22 C
Jan 30, 2011 High 30 C Low 25 C
And at 9PM and 9:30 PM your temperature was 32 C
Sounds like your are "creating" temperatures, not reporting them. No wonder you believe in Global Warming/Global Climate Change/Whatever you want to call it this week.
www.timeanddate.com...

Here's a animation of the Northern hemisphere snow and ice coverage for the 1st of February 2001 to 2011:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/e360908648bc.gif[/atsimg]

reply to post by gringoboy


Sounds like you don't understand molecular science. Release of H2O is still H20. Ice to Water to Vapor (clouds) By the way, water vapor represents over 85% or all green house gasses. Imagine a ream of paper (500 pages) if ALL of mam made GreenHouse gasses were done away with, it would represent less than 1/4 of a single page torn off and thrown away.

reply to post by snowspirit


What part of Saskatchewan are you in?

reply to post by Essan


Sorry but you are wrong. I participated in the first Earth day, the coming ice age was the scare topic plus of course the "deadly" residue of DDT. Time magazine had cover stories on it and In Search Of... had an entire episode dedicated to it. "Leading Climate Change Experts" up to last year proclaimed that White Christmas was a thing of the past.
The Armadillos are retreating further south, One person was injured critically from falling ice in Dallas Texas. They used to grow wine grapes in Northern England and Vinland (the New England area) they don't anymore and Greenland was Green and over 50% of it was good agricultural land (not anymore)
If you believe the Earth is heating up, you will remember the hot days and ignore the cold and normal ones. If you believe the Earth is Cooling, your mind will note the opposite. If you doubt me, please try the following experiment for the next 40 days. Write on a piece of paper "Watch out for people who drive white cars, they are mentally unbalanced and are dangerous behind the wheel of any car" Place it on your dash board and read it out loud three time before you start your car" (If you drive a white car, pick another color at random) I promise that within 40 days you will be astounded at how poorly those crazy people drive.

reply to post by GJPinks

Well observed its only changed in state,however if the earth freezes over alot of oxygen becomes locked in on land mass ,not sea born,or airborn and reflectes radiance from our solar companion ,cooling more and locking more oxygen into ice,kinda cool way to wipe a species of slowly freeze,and reduce oxygen,so who does`nt know molecular science.
.The more the icecaps melt the more we can all breathe,unless it is ,as at present reconstituted through the combustion engine to c02,so a big freeze combined with current convertion of h20 to co2,pretty thin air to breathe.Then if theres no ice to melt ,then what do we have,a sudden increase in green vegetation to reconstiute the balance,don`t think so if it is truly a iceage..
Nice one.

By the way you have came on here under assumption,I don`t have a assumption ,we can only wait and see ,accelerating ice reduces the carrying capacity of airborn oxygen.
nice rouse though.

Originally posted by gringoboy
reply to post by GJPinks

 

Well observed its only changed in state,however if the earth freezes over alot of oxygen becomes locked in on land mass ,not sea born,or airborn and reflectes radiance from our solar companion ,cooling more and locking more oxygen into ice,kinda cool way to wipe a species of slowly freeze,and reduce oxygen,so who does`nt know molecular science.
.The more the icecaps melt the more we can all breathe,unless it is ,as at present reconstituted through the combustion engine to c02,so a big freeze combined with current convertion of h20 to co2,pretty thin air to breathe.Then if theres no ice to melt ,then what do we have,a sudden increase in green vegetation to reconstiute the balance,don`t think so if it is truly a iceage..
Nice one.

By the way you have came on here under assumption,I don`t have a assumption ,we can only wait and see ,accelerating ice reduces the carrying capacity of airborn oxygen.
nice rouse though.

edit on 5-2-2011 by gringoboy because: (no reason given)

Sequestration is indeed the main cause of atmospheric depletion. For example, air tends to trapped in the ice as a result of the process of packing and denisifying of snow, which is porous and can accommodate air in between layers of snowflakes. However, the amount would be so small relative to the abundance of gas within the atmosphere, that it wouldn't and doesn't have an affect on how much air we have available to breath. You would a lot of new glaciers to form for that to result in the extinction of any aerobic species.

Why would 'no ice to melt' mean we'd have a sudden influx of plants? If we go by your logic, no ice would mean more atmospheric oxygen (which is somewhat true). You do realise that trees use CO2 and release O2, not the other way around? That would only release more oxygen and is hardly reconstituting any balance - if anything, it's making things more bias. What 'balance' are you talking about?

Interestingly, the onset of the world's earliest ice age's were actually caused by large increases in atmospheric oxygen concentrations.

Rise of Oxygen Caused Earth's Earliest Ice Age

reply to post by Arken


Do a search next time. This picture is nothing new.

I've even heard that it was photoshopped.

reply to post by Kryties


try Victoria it may be hot in Sydney with record temps but i am sitting in my shed with the pot belly fired up its just wrong northern Victoria usually has temps of 30 at this time of year ok this may be the result of the tail end of the cyclone with the floods and all but is sucks

reply to post by hypervalentiodine


if the land mass accelerates in frozen tundra there is no biology to absorb co2 and reproduce o2,and resulting decades absorbtion of o2 ,via Stratification of ice layers ,accelerates even more,it is a rare occurrence and does`nt destroy all oxygen metabolising aerobic species,only the ones that use the most oxygen,the largest.I hope that clears it up.You would be suprised how quickly events can cause a global extinction,the iceage one, however is a long process and not as quick as a major volcanic eruption changing the composition of global air and temperature declination toward a iceage over a season..So imagine increased ,methane,sulphur,and all the rest choking the supply of oxygen aerobia,ergo declination of oxygen supply to demand for life.
Ergo the supply and demand gets so badly interupted a extinction event occurs.,perhaps the iceland volcano and the recent solar eclipse combined have contributed to more prominent h20 freezing,or the photon output from the sun has increased enough to alter the freezing point of water,or all of the previous but the temperature has changed rapidly out of a sleep,so something has awoken.
www.earthportals.com...

Mass Extinction and Evolution Mass extinctions, in which from 40% to 95% of all plant and animal species died out, have occurred several times in the distant past. One occurred about 225 million years ago which ushered in the age of reptiles. Another, about 65 million years ago, spelled the end of reptile dominance and led to the age of mammals. The cause of these past events is hotly debated, but the proposed explanations all have geologic (volcanoes), cosmic (asteroids), climatic (hot verses cold), and pathogenic (diseases) bases.

Originally posted by Wallachian
I haven't seen any snow since December, you know, since the last time people were yelling "ice age!!!" because it was snowing.

It's 10°C right now in northern Germany, and raining. In February.

Same here (except its not raining). Over 10c at night in Feb! That's normal July temperature. Not had any snow since before Christmas - which has never happened since I started keeping Met records.

The ice age ended here on 26th December and we're now well into a major interglacial

Originally posted by gringoboy
reply to post by hypervalentiodine

 

if the land mass accelerates in frozen tundra there is no biology to absorb co2 and reproduce o2,and resulting decades absorbtion of o2 ,via Stratification of ice layers ,accelerates even more,it is a rare occurrence and does`nt destroy all oxygen metabolising aerobic species,only the ones that use the most oxygen,the largest.I hope that clears it up.You would be suprised how quickly events can cause a global extinction,the iceage one, however is a long process and not as quick as a major volcanic eruption changing the composition of global air and temperature declination toward a iceage over a season..So imagine increased ,methane,sulphur,and all the rest choking the supply of oxygen aerobia,ergo declination of oxygen supply to demand for life.
Ergo the supply and demand gets so badly interupted a extinction event occurs.,perhaps the iceland volcano and the recent solar eclipse combined have contributed to more prominent h20 freezing,or the photon output from the sun has increased enough to alter the freezing point of water,or all of the previous but the temperature has changed rapidly out of a sleep,so something has awoken.
www.earthportals.com...

Mass Extinction and Evolution Mass extinctions, in which from 40% to 95% of all plant and animal species died out, have occurred several times in the distant past. One occurred about 225 million years ago which ushered in the age of reptiles. Another, about 65 million years ago, spelled the end of reptile dominance and led to the age of mammals. The cause of these past events is hotly debated, but the proposed explanations all have geologic (volcanoes), cosmic (asteroids), climatic (hot verses cold), and pathogenic (diseases) bases.

edit on 6-2-2011 by gringoboy because: (no reason given)

I find your comments very hard to read and decipher. So apologies if I'm not on the right track with what you're saying, I'm doing my best to interpret you.

I'm really not sure what you mean in the first sentence. Are you saying the land is already frozen tundra? There's not much in the way of plant life in the tundra to begin with, so your point is doomed from the start. Ice doesn't 'absorb' molecular oxygen. As I said in my previous post, the trapped air you see in glaciers or in ice core samples is a result of snow compaction. My point is that it doesn't cause mass oxygen depletion to the extent where aerobic organisms would begin to die off. Something that would cause a catastrophic decrease in the concentration of O2 would be if we had a sudden influx of methane into the environment.

One of the extinction events you quoted there, funnily enough, was the one I mentioned earlier. It occurred at the beginning of the Huronian ice age, which was caused by a massive increase in atmospheric oxygen, not the other way around. The actual extinction was of anaerobic (not aerobic) species and begin when organic matter and dissolved iron were saturated with oxygen, and the oceans (and atmosphere) began to accumulate with the excess O2 (produced by photosynthetic organisms). Species that were not built or that could not adapt to cope with this change in environment, died out. In fact, the Huronian ice age, while a result of the presence and accumulation of oxygen, had much of nothing to do with the extinctions that occurred during that time. Not only that, but (even despite the ice age, which was one of the longest in history) the abundant presence of oxygen heralded the beginning of mass biodiversification (mitochondria evolved after this event, for example) as well as drastic changes in the Earth's geology.

As for the other extinction event that you mention - it's highly speculative to suggest that dinosaurs became almost extinct because of that particular ice age. There are many theories as to why they became extinct, but none is proven.

You should really do more research before you start quoting things.

I came across a couple of articles. One goes over the fact that from 5 databases, the temperatures have not changed over the last 10 years.

wattsupwiththat.com...-33188

These five temperature databases I examine give the monthly temperature to thousandths of a degree which is superfluous. When rounded up to a more physically sensible 0.1 deg almost all of the differences between the years of the past decade go away, but that is another story, and not the subject of this post.

But on to his point of the post-

The subsequent warm decade has altered things somewhat. We see that even for the hottest year on record, by most global temperature datasets, half of the months of the year were unexceptional in the context of the recent (and warmest) decade. 1998 now has the top 4 of the warmest months on record, and another entry in the top ten. Curiously, in the top ten warmest months, only two are after 2002 (Jan 07 in 6th place and March 10 in 10th.)

You can read the rest at the provided link.

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
I came across a couple of articles. One goes over the fact that from 5 databases, the temperatures have not changed over the last 10 years.

wattsupwiththat.com...-33188

These five temperature databases I examine give the monthly temperature to thousandths of a degree which is superfluous. When rounded up to a more physically sensible 0.1 deg almost all of the differences between the years of the past decade go away, but that is another story, and not the subject of this post.

But on to his point of the post-

The subsequent warm decade has altered things somewhat. We see that even for the hottest year on record, by most global temperature datasets, half of the months of the year were unexceptional in the context of the recent (and warmest) decade. 1998 now has the top 4 of the warmest months on record, and another entry in the top ten. Curiously, in the top ten warmest months, only two are after 2002 (Jan 07 in 6th place and March 10 in 10th.)

You can read the rest at the provided link.

I'm afraid this has little to do with global warming/cooling. A 10 year trend is not basis to make any scientifically valid claim in terms of climate predictions. A much more sound indicator comes from observing glacial patterns, since they are some of the more sensitive landmarks to climate change. The following picture shows a compilation of measurements described by Mark Dyurgerov (2002) (later updated by Dyurgerov and Meier (2005)) and archived at the World Glacier Monitoring Service.



From the 2005 paper:

Several independent observations can be applied to confirm the reliability of global glacier volume changes.

First, the general trend in volume change and variability are close to those of previously calculated and published results (Dyurgerov and Meier, 1997a, 1997b; Warrick et al., 1996; Dyurgerov, 2002).
48

Second, very pronounced peaks in the globally averaged annual mass balance time series curve are found in connection with the strongest explosive volcanic eruptions, in particular Mount Agung in 1963, El Chichon in 1982, and Mount Pinatubo in 1991 (see Fig. 5), with cooling and positive mass balance found regionally and globally for the following 1–3 years (Abdalati and Steffen, 1997; Dyurgerov and Meier, 2000).

Third, the warmest years in the late 1980s and 1990s correspond to the most negative mass balances and acceleration of glacier volume losses (Fig. 5).

Fourth, the acceleration of glacier volume change presented here shows a consistency with other global changes in the Cryosphere, reduction of sea-ice area and thickness (Laxon et al., 2004), increasing temperature in permafrost and permafrost thawing, acceleration of movement and disintegration of polar ice caps, and outlet and tidewater glaciers in Greenland and Antarctic (Scambos et al., 2000; Zwally et al., 2002; Rau et al., 2004; Rignot et al., 2003; Thomas, 2004).

If you want to find out more about this graph and its implications, the updated 2005 paper by Dyurgerov and Meier can be downloaded for free at instaar.colorado.edu...

None of your "scientific" data will mean crap! Dont you all realize this is NOT the norm..your science means nothing.

Stop trying to analyze it..its happening...and you are living it.

Our earth is changing..fact...we all see it and are experiencing it..your data doesnt change a goddamn thing..

The only thing we can all do now is stick together and get through it..so cut it out with the bull#.

Originally posted by Yummy Freelunch
None of your "scientific" data will mean crap! Dont you all realize this is NOT the norm..your science means nothing.

Stop trying to analyze it..its happening...and you are living it.

Our earth is changing..fact...we all see it and are experiencing it..your data doesnt change a goddamn thing..

The only thing we can all do now is stick together and get through it..so cut it out with the bull#.

Was this directed at me or the OP? If it was at me, then I don't quite understand the point of this post. Are you suggesting that global warming or global cooling is 'happening'? If it's global warming, then I completely agree with you, and the data I was showing was in accord with that. Or maybe this wasn't at me? I don't know.

I came across this site yesterday when looking for weather predictions for this Spring/ Summer. The author wrote the article July '09 and he seems pretty dead on. He explains that the weather is due to solar activity and El Nino/ La Nina phases.

forums.accuweather.com...


On a side note, I like in Northeastern Pa. When I was a child, our Winters were more severe. This is a mild Winter for us here.

reply to post by hypervalentiodine


I believe your hyperventilating should be more appropriate,justfication passes with time and observation,afterall we are moving through space at 220 km a second and its weather varies in external impaction on solar magnetism affecting earths absorbtion of electromagnetic fields that will determine superconductivity and iceages regardless of earthbased records.For instance the earths magnetic core slows down and solar activity increases,would cause a ice age depending on which part of the earths orbit when it started,that is essentially why the study of ice stratosfication began and left scientists baffled by how quick those events occurred and that is because our geomagnetic source in comparison to the suns electromagnetic output ultimately determine the earths future climate travelling through a sea of fields of energy.
You would be suprised how fields of energy determine what you,me and everybody else feel as warm and cold..Please remember when we look at icecores we are looking into the past not the future and earths geomagnet does slow and has decreased over time putting the us on the edge of whatever the suns journey gives us.