Climate and Weather

The line labeled 2011-2012 is to show a year of heavy melting. Each line on that graph are one year of snow falling and melting - most years there is a net accumulation (the right end of the line is above 0). The weight of that accumulating snow is why the ice spreads out to the margins where the icebergs calve off, resulting in the 200 Gt/year net mass loss.

All of those facts are included on that page. Also on that page is a copyright date of 2014, which is not 5 years ago.
I understand 2011-12 was a year of heavy melting. This is why I pointed it out.
This year is a year of rapid ice growth, again, something I pointed out.
The "200 gt/year net loss" has been on the site as long as Ive been looking at it, and has never been edited in that time. (at least five years)
 
Where is '15 16 ?
The site I posted is always up to date. (except the text I pointed out)

I don't know no time to check in more detail at moment. Your data is just surface mass which is probably an ongoing satellite feed from my understanding. I don't know when they combine with total mass calculations and run the anomaly. Should be on DMI site.
 
I don't know no time to check in more detail at moment. Your data is just surface mass which is probably an ongoing satellite feed from my understanding. I don't know when they combine with total mass calculations and run the anomaly. Should be on DMI site.
When you find out that the ice has indeed grown unusually fast this year, you will of course, let us know.
 
Oh and I was going to add check out the comparative magnitude of the y-axis on the total mass budget graph I posted versus surface mass ∆/yearly cycle graphs you linked. You can see the yearly weather oscillation superimposed on the larger scale net change.
 
Oh and I was going to add check out the comparative magnitude of the y-axis on the total mass budget graph I posted versus surface mass ∆/yearly cycle graphs you linked. You can see the yearly weather oscillation superimposed on the larger scale net change.
Get right on it, and let us know if the earth will make it another year before she burns up.
 
I understand 2011-12 was a year of heavy melting. This is why I pointed it out.
This year is a year of rapid ice growth, again, something I pointed out.
The "200 gt/year net loss" has been on the site as long as Ive been looking at it, and has never been edited in that time. (at least five years)

It's a hear of heavy snowfall for the first 4 months. Whether or not that results in "rapid ice growth" remains to be seen.
 
Get right on it, and let us know if the earth will make it another year before she burns up.

I'm at a playground for Christ's sake. I posted a graph. If that punches your ACC into ding-a-ling mode that's your problem. Feed your own head. If you are so skeptical of all this stuff why do you bother looking at it anyway?
 
When you find out that the ice has indeed grown unusually fast this year, you will of course, let us know.

I believe you brought this up in November. The resulting conversation was pretty much the same. Could we just hurry up to the point where you stomp off muttering "...my opinion..."?
 
I'm at a playground for Christ's sake. I posted a graph. If that punches your ACC into ding-a-ling mode that's your problem. Feed your own head. If you are so skeptical of all this stuff why do you bother looking at it anyway?
Why are you posting from the playground?
Take care of the important business.
There's always time for this nonsense....
 
Back
Top