Melting Arctic link to cold, snowy UK winters

Read this article this morning - an interesting take on the link to melting arctic ice and increasingly cold, snowy weather. Excerpts here - full article link at the bottom.

The progressive shrinking of Arctic sea ice is bringing colder, snowier winters to the UK and other areas of Europe, North America and China, a study shows.

There was a marked deterioration in ice cover between the summers of 2006 and 2007, which still holds the record for the lowest extent on record; and it has not recovered since.

The current winter is roughly tracking the graph of 2007, according to the US National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC).

"We don't see a predictive relationship with any of the other factors that have been proposed, such as El Nino; but for sea ice, we do see a predictive relationship."

Dr Scaife was involved with another study published last year that showed how small, natural changes in the Sun's output can also affect winter weather.

And he emphasised that the declining Arctic ice cover was just one of several factors that could increase blocking.

"You can hit a bell with anything, and you still produce the same note," he told BBC News.

"This is no bigger than the solar effect or the El Nino effect. But they vary, whereas Arctic ice is on a pretty consistent downward trend."

Source

But climate change is a myth, right? Shhhhhh.

reply to post by ns9504


That would explain our snow free winter then?

Glad it cleared that up.

Originally posted by Ixtab
reply to post by ns9504

 

That would explain our snow free winter then?

Glad it cleared that up.

Had to have a giggle ... I'm in south east england we had about 2 weeks of coldness .. It's snowed heavily once and that's it. It's now the end of february technically it's still winter and the mercury is sitting at a mild 14 degree C

Hmm

reply to post by ns9504

But climate change is a myth, right? Shhhhhh.

No, global warming is. also evident from your own link.

The Earth has changed its climate throughout its history. Before humans had machines and even before humans existed.

i believe in climate change. i believe humans sped up the process and i think the rate of change is happening at a faster and faster rate. i think we are going to have a harder and harder time adapting to the changes. i've read al the climate change hoax stuff and none of it has convinced me that it's a hoax. you can call me stupid and try to give me links and pick on me but the evidence i've read from both sides leads me to believe the scientists.

i'm trying to prepare myself and home for more extreme weather. we hardly had a winter here after having an INSANELY hot summer (two in a row). i hate to think what this summer is going to be like.

AGW is not in dispute among scientists. There are a multitude of peer reviewed papers cross spectra. Funny how the all the debunkers have no per reviewed science to back their claims up.

The melting ice caps will interfere with temperature. They affect the way water currents move by changing the denisty of water.

reply to post by pasiphae


There is no climate change hoax, there´s a global warming hoax. The climate is changing, always has. It used to be all global warming people were talking about but it gradually changed to climate change, cause global warming is not corroborated by facts, in fact facts were manipuled wich is a proven a fact..

I think the OP is talking about the theory of the Gulf stream...aka...the Atlantic conveyor belt that pulls warm water north where it cools, sinks and moves back south. That was the premise of "The day after tomorrow" movie. If it becomes to "de-salinated" my melting ice and incoming fresh water, the cycle doesn't work as the specific gravities of the water changes. IF...this were the case...the whole Latitude would be effected...not just parts of it.

I don't think this is the case.

Climate change is a natural phenomena that has occurred from the beginning of the planet..it happens. I am pretty sure it has more to do with solar cycles than anything else though mankind "might" be influencing it/accelerating it...but I doubt we are "causing" it.

I recently read some info about this solar cycle (Solar cycle 24) and that some scientist believe after this period of increased activity, we will have a serious drop off in activity...some have theorized a major decrease. If you have ever heard about "the little ice age", there are some climatologist that think it may have coincided with a severe reduction in solar activity called "The Maunder minimum" in the late 17th century and early 18th century where there was virtually no solar activity. But who knows...I am not an expert here and thanks to the "science for sale" age we live in...we might not ever know the whole story.

reply to post by Damrod

I think the OP is talking about the theory of the Gulf stream...aka...the Atlantic conveyor belt that pulls warm water north where it cools, sinks and moves back south. That was the premise of "The day after tomorrow" movie. If it becomes to "de-salinated" my melting ice and incoming fresh water, the cycle doesn't work as the specific gravities of the water changes. IF...this were the case...the whole Latitude would be effected...not just parts of it.

No you are wrong. Effects can be localised. Current systems are very complicated and difficult to understand. If the gulf stream switches if could flip us into far colder climes...

Climate change is a natural phenomena that has occurred from the beginning of the planet.

You are welcome to that opinion but it is deluded.. Show me any real science to back up your claim. You cannot its not there. You are parroting plastic science funded by the likes of the petrochemical industry...

If you have ever heard about "the little ice age", there are some climatologist that think it may have coincided with a severe reduction in solar activity called "The Maunder minimum"

Bearing in mind my had a solar hurricane about a week ago, do you still attain to that premise. It is predicted the sun will wake up next year.... Scientist cannot link climate with solar activity. The evidence is not there. The climate has changed several times with no noticeable change in solar activity...

reply to post by purplemer


That may or may not be and as I said as long as "science is for sale" we will never get a solid explanation. Perhaps I am parroting logic...I know...logic in this day and age...woot!...what a concept!

But you did not address the Maunder minimum and the direct coincidence with the little ice age and the year without a summer...please address this...I am all ears...erm....eyes.

Edit...

As far as climate change from the beginning of time...well...there have been ice ages...aka...snowball earth and there have been times through the millions of years that the poles were not capped in ice...this happens and the "logical" explanation is solar activity. Some have theorized it could be a combination of solar and geological...aka...volcanic activity putting greenhouse gases in the atmosphere...and others say the same bullet...volcanoes and ash clouds can cause cooling...pick your poison...but the fact is...the earth's climate changes and has changed from one extreme to another may times over the billions of years this rock has been around.

It sucks that you all have that much snow and cold this late in the season. You should move to sunny and warm Wisconsin, USA!!!! LOL! We have had almost no snow and are currently at a balmy 39 degrees F.

reply to post by ns9504

i have said this before and i will say it again , i live in the north west in lancashire ,
the winters of the fifties and sixties was just as cold as we are experiencing now but with a lot more snow .
the winters from the late sixties to the present time have been truely mild in comparison.
southern england has allways been warmer than the north .
the only difference that i see is that our summers in the north have been quite poor for some years now.

You are welcome to that opinion but it is deluded.. Show me any real science to back up your claim. You cannot its not there. You are parroting plastic science funded by the likes of the petrochemical industry...

reply to post by purplemer


Are you for real? You are arguiing that the earth´s climate hasn´t been changing? Wow, what about ice ages, all the fossil proof of different climates?

Tell me you are joking.

Sorry I read in another post all the fossils and dino bones are planted by a god to fool us. So it must be true

reply to post by mikellmikell


Lol, I thought of that too, this guy shares the same kind of logic with that guy.

reply to post by bastardo


No I am saying that real science supports the fact the climate is changing and that change is due to a human influence..

reply to post by Damrod

That may or may not be and as I said as long as "science is for sale" we will never get a solid explanation. Perhaps I am parroting logic...I know...logic in this day and age...woot!...what a concept! But you did not address the Maunder minimum and the direct coincidence with the little ice age and the year without a summer...please address this...I am all ears...erm....eyes.

Science that is for sale is not science. Real science is peer reviewed. Science that is for sale is not peer reviewed that is how you tell the difference.

Why is the maunder minimum of relevance. The earth went through a period of cooling and there was a fallow in the sun at the same time.. There have been several changes I could note you were there climate has changed and there is no correlation to the sun. So what is the relevance of this one affect. Its best not to look at things in isolation.

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by bastardo

 

No I am saying that real science supports the fact the climate is changing and that change is due to a human influence..

Your response to the other poster´s comment was not brought very well if that´s what you meant. And what is real science? The science you support? I don´t think there has been any proof to corroborate nor deny that. it is due to us humans, once more, there is no dispute as to wether the climate is changing or not.

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by bastardo

 

No I am saying that real science supports the fact the climate is changing and that change is due to a human influence..

They'll never prove that. Just like they couldn't prove that acid rain was human caused (since the pH of normal rainwater is 5.5 or acidic to begin with) and they couldn't prove that we caused the hole in the ozone layer.

When you take averages of nonlinear systems, you make mistakes. When you rely on models rather than real-world observational data, you make mistakes. When you use those model results--that have no basis in reality!--to set public policy, you're creating an economic and environmental disaster.