Our cooling world

Walter

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 28, 2007
34,823
75
48
Over a million more square km of ice than the 35 year average. Things are really warming up in the deep south.
 

Glacier

Electoral Member
Apr 24, 2015
360
0
16
Okanagan
chuckleheads-R-Us, hey! Do you actually know the impact the pine-beetle has had on western provinces/states? Would you like graphic presentations of that damage... of the geographic range extent of that damage? As scientific projections have the beetle expanding its geographic range, moving into the boreal forest and Canada’s northern and eastern pine forests... will you be just as cavalier and dismissive as you appear to be here in your quoted posts?

I'd be interested why you think the pine beetle epidemic is related to climate change. The pine beetle epidemic has now ended naturally just as it has typically done in the past -- that is from beetles getting weak and vulnerable from overpopulation (just like rabbits and any other species in nature would do). The only other way besides a natural die-off that could kill off the beetles is extreme cold in the Fall such as we experienced in 1985. This sort of extreme cold in the Fall was just as rare before global warming as after, which is why only other Fall on record even close to 1985 in terms of cold occurred way back in 1896.

This graph is 10 years old, but shows the cyclical nature of bug infestations. Today, the pine beetles are much diminished why the spruce budworm is on the rise.

 

Zipperfish

House Member
Apr 12, 2013
3,688
0
36
Vancouver
I'd be interested why you think the pine beetle epidemic is related to climate change. The pine beetle epidemic has now ended naturally just as it has typically done in the past -- that is from beetles getting weak and vulnerable from overpopulation (just like rabbits and any other species in nature would do). The only other way besides a natural die-off that could kill off the beetles is extreme cold in the Fall such as we experienced in 1985. This sort of extreme cold in the Fall was just as rare before global warming as after, which is why only other Fall on record even close to 1985 in terms of cold occurred way back in 1896.

This graph is 10 years old, but shows the cyclical nature of bug infestations. Today, the pine beetles are much diminished why the spruce budworm is on the rise.

I got it from here...

https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/forests/insects-diseases/13381

"Climatic suitability for infestation – Milder winters and warmer summers contribute to both higher recruitment and survival rates of the MPB."
 

Glacier

Electoral Member
Apr 24, 2015
360
0
16
Okanagan
I got it from here...

https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/forests/insects-diseases/13381

"Climatic suitability for infestation – Milder winters and warmer summers contribute to both higher recruitment and survival rates of the MPB."
That is true in the general sense. There are a lot more diseases etc. in the tropics than the northern boreal forests for example. The problem is, however, people make wide sweeping claims such that they blame everything under the sun on global warming. If we say that warming of winter and summer has caused the pine beetle epidemic, then we should be able to look at the data, and see how it has progressed.

Let's have a look:


As you can see the average summer+winter temperature has risen since the 1970s, but one has to wonder why the 1950s were unscathed. Perhaps it is because global warming has meant the climate is more stable and less erratic (counter to what some say is happening). Remember that the explosion started before the 1990s, and before the temperature had climbed above what was observed in the 1930s and even 1960s. Others have pointed out that humans have made the problem a lot worst and explosive by first failing to log Tweedsmiur to stop the spread, but more importantly by trucking beetle infested logs all over the province, allowing the beetles to spread a lot quicker.

Either way, the epidemic is now over, and the forests are returning to normal, and temperature had nothing to do with it. If it did, the warmer pine forests would be hit harder than the colder locations, but that's not what happened. Instead, it was the severe drought that started in the West Chilcotin 25 years ago that caused the epidemic. This drought caused stress on the trees, and as the drought spread so did the infestation. Then came 2009, one of the hottest summers on record, but right at the end of summer a massive rain dump took a dent out of the drought. Then in the following couple of years significant rain and snow ended the drought, and thus the beetles could no longer kill the trees they attacked is huge numbers. Once the drought ended the trees started surviving the infestations.
 

Attachments

  • summerwinter.jpg
    summerwinter.jpg
    21.4 KB · Views: 29

Zipperfish

House Member
Apr 12, 2013
3,688
0
36
Vancouver
That is true in the general sense. There are a lot more diseases etc. in the tropics than the northern boreal forests for example. The problem is, however, people make wide sweeping claims such that they blame everything under the sun on global warming. If we say that warming of winter and summer has caused the pine beetle epidemic, then we should be able to look at the data, and see how it has progressed.

Let's have a look:


As you can see the average summer+winter temperature has risen since the 1970s, but one has to wonder why the 1950s were unscathed. Perhaps it is because global warming has meant the climate is more stable and less erratic (counter to what some say is happening). Remember that the explosion started before the 1990s, and before the temperature had climbed above what was observed in the 1930s and even 1960s. Others have pointed out that humans have made the problem a lot worst and explosive by first failing to log Tweedsmiur to stop the spread, but more importantly by trucking beetle infested logs all over the province, allowing the beetles to spread a lot quicker.

Either way, the epidemic is now over, and the forests are returning to normal, and temperature had nothing to do with it. If it did, the warmer pine forests would be hit harder than the colder locations, but that's not what happened. Instead, it was the severe drought that started in the West Chilcotin 25 years ago that caused the epidemic. This drought caused stress on the trees, and as the drought spread so did the infestation. Then came 2009, one of the hottest summers on record, but right at the end of summer a massive rain dump took a dent out of the drought. Then in the following couple of years significant rain and snow ended the drought, and thus the beetles could no longer kill the trees they attacked is huge numbers. Once the drought ended the trees started surviving the infestations.

Well, I certainly that there is the folks out there who blame everything on global warming. And then there is the people who deny there is global wamring. Between the two extremes they manage to muddy up the field nicely for anyone interested in finding out what is actually going on. The link between anthropogenic climate change and the pine beetle infestation is tenuous and complex, but there is evidence to support it, especially in Canada (the signal is much more attenuated in the US west).

Notably:

Tran JK, Ylioja T, Billings RF, Re´gnie`re J, Ayres MP (2007). Impact of minimum winter temperatures on the population dynamics of Dendroctonus frontalis. Ecol Appl 17: 882–899

Sambaraju KR, Carroll AL, Zhu J, Stahl K, Moore RD, Aukema BH (2012). Climate change could alter the distribution of mountain pine beetle outbreaks in western Canada. Ecography 35:211–223

It appears that the pine beetles are most affected by temperature near the poleward and altitudinal limits of their habitat.



I'd be wary of making global claims based on the results of one, or a small cluster, of sample sets around Kamloops. The jet stream, for example, seems to becoming more erratic. There is some evidence this is linked to reduced sea ice in the Arctic.
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
24,405
5,237
113
B.C.
Jury's out on the pine beetle infestation. This outbreak is the latest of many, going back eons, I'm sure. This appears to be one of the worst in several centuries, and warmer temperatures probably have something to do with that. You need a sustained cold snap, the likes of which BC hasn't seen in about 20 years. Forest practices probably contributed to making this one worse as well--suppressing "natural" wildfires led to abundant mature pine which is goiod eatin' for the beetle.
Nope no pine trees in California or Oregon is there ?

Probably? Caribou sh-t and stumps from a far higher treeline exposed in the Pemberton glacial range says it was.
Hey I never found any old poop up there .
 

waldo

House Member
Oct 19, 2009
3,042
0
36
Over a million more square km of ice than the 35 year average. Things are really warming up in the deep south.

Walter! More? More of your fixation with Antarctic sea-ice extent? Of course, you posted that exact same graphic just 2 weeks ago... in this very thread! I'll give you an attaboy for recycling! :mrgreen: As I do my own recycling bit... giving you the same reply from 2 weeks ago... as you ignore this same reply again (as you continue to do in regards Antarctic sea-ice... over and over), will you also give me another of your reddies?

it's a shame you can't do anything but post the same ole crap... yet never find the time to ever take up the pointed questions/requests/challenges put to you! Deniers gonna deny, hey Walter!

again:

more Walter? More? Yet more of your nattering fixation with Antarctic sea-ice extent? It's a shame you can't actually step-up and respond to the pointed posts you continue to ignore... that you can't address the (repeated) challenge/questions put to you, hey!

all you've done is drop yet another of your C&P gems while making a lame comment about warming causing increased sea-ice extent... oh wait, hey now Walter... is this you finally coming around? :mrgreen: Here Walter, let me run the table for you again:
- why do you continue to ignore the lengthy post responses provided to you that clearly question/detail:- why you presume to draw equivalencies between the Arctic and Antarctic

- why you presume to ignore the reasons provided to you for a couple of recent years growth in sea-ice extent... reasons that speak to, in part, a warming influence in that regard?

- why you presume to not provide any interpretation of your own as to why the Antarctic sea-ice extent has increased... while repeatedly speaking sarcastically to 'warming causing ice to form"

- why you presume to ignore the fact Antarctic sea-ice extent melts per norm, almost entirely, year-to-year.

- why you presume to ignore the fact no like Arctic concept of significant multi-year sea-ice exists within the Antarctic exists

- why you presume to ignore the significant long-term trend in decreasing Antarctic ice mass

"c'mon Walter! When are you finally going to stop this continued denier play of yours over Antarctic sea-ice extent?". Apparently, you still have... an itch... to scratch! :mrgreen: I'll keep replying in kind to highlight images that speak to:
- the normal/typical yearly melt of Antarctic sea-ice extent... almost to its entirety showcasing there is no Antarctic multi-year ice accumulation concept (as exists within Arctic sea-ice).

- the Antarctic ice mass change (decrease)
these images:








of course Walter, you're (purposely) trying to draw some type of meaning, equivalency, relationship, etc., between Arctic and Antarctic sea-ice extent (where the Arctic is dramatically decreasing over a long-term melting trend) and the Antarctic where an increase in sea-ice extent has been seen in the last couple of years... which, again (as you know) has been attributed to warming... and, again (as you know) melts to essentially its entirety every year.

Walter, do you think it actually makes sense to try to equate... draw equivalencies... between sea-ice across the earth? Care to offer your thoughts on this and presume to attempt to draw some equivalency, some relationship between the Arctic and Antarctic? I wonder what the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center would say about your attempt in his regard, hey Walter?
Question: Why don’t you publish a global sea ice extent number?

NSIDC Answer: The combined number, while easy to derive from our online posted data, is not useful as an analysis tool or indicator of climate trends. Looking at each region’s ice extent trends and its processes separately provides more insight into how and why ice extent is changing. Sea ice in the Arctic is governed by somewhat different processes than the sea ice around Antarctica, and the very different geography of the two poles plays a large role. Sea ice in the Arctic exists in a small ocean surrounded by land masses, with greater input of dust, aerosols, and soot than in the Southern Hemisphere. Sea ice in the Southern Hemisphere fringes an ice-covered continent, Antarctica, surrounded by open oceans. While both regions are affected by air, wind, and ocean, the systems and their patterns are inherently very different. Moreover, at any point in time, the two poles are in opposite seasons, and so a combined number would conflate summer and winter trends, or spring and autumn trends, for the two regions.

again, Walter... let me reinforce the key point you continue to (purposely) ignore concerning Antarctic sea-ice makeup as essentially made up of single-year ice (which, again, melts almost to its entirety each year):
Scientists suggest it's principally first year sea-ice... and deformed sea-ice. You know, the kind of ice that regularly melts in a subsequent years melting phase. And, as you know Walter, Antarctic sea-ice typically melts, almost to it's entirety, each and every year.
Assessment of Ice Type: First Year versus Multiyear Floes

All of the surveyed floes are most likely to be first year (FY) floes based on multiple lines of evidence (Table S1, Fig S1, S2). While in most cases MY ice is distinguished from thinner FY ice by the deep snow cover, thick ice and high freeboard, discrimination is more difficult in our case where the FY ice was also thick and heavily deformed and most floes had a deep snow cover. This evidence includes imagery showing lack of ice in the region at the end of the previous summer, ice morphology, ice properties, and snow cover characteristics.
now, again Walter... it keeps being stated for you, yet you continue to ignore the scientific based reasons put forward as to why the Antarctic sea-ice extent has been increasing the last few years:

1 - the warming ocean is causing slightly fresher sea surface water around the margins of the continent’s melting ice shelves; additionally rain and snowfall increases are also freshening ocean water. These changes are altering the composition of the different layers in the ocean there causing less mixing between warm and cold layers and thus less melted sea and coastal land ice:
Increasing Antarctic Sea Ice under Warming Atmospheric and Oceanic Conditions

The model shows that an increase in surface air temperature and downward longwave radiation results in an increase in the upper-ocean temperature and a decrease in sea ice growth, leading to a decrease in salt rejection from ice, in the upper-ocean salinity,and in the upper-ocean density. The reduced salt rejection and upper-ocean density and the enhanced thermohaline stratification tend to suppress convective overturning, leading to a decrease in the upward ocean heat transport and the ocean heat flux available to melt sea ice. The ice melting from ocean heat flux decreases faster than the ice growth does in the weakly stratified Southern Ocean, leading to an increase in the net ice production and hence an increase in ice mass. This mechanism is the main reason why the Antarctic sea ice has increased in spite of warming conditions both above and below during the period 1979–2004 and the extended period 1948–2004
2 - ozone levels decreasing over the Antarctic with an accompanying increase in the strength of cyclonic winds,

3 - this increasing cyclonic wind strength which, in turn, creates polynyas (open water areas) that freeze to increase sea-ice


again, c'mon Walter! When are you finally going to stop this continued denier play of yours over Antarctic sea-ice extent?
 

Walter

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 28, 2007
34,823
75
48
So much sea ice in the Antarctic. It's the most recorded since they stated using satellites to measure it.
 

Glacier

Electoral Member
Apr 24, 2015
360
0
16
Okanagan
Well, I certainly that there is the folks out there who blame everything on global warming. And then there is the people who deny there is global wamring. Between the two extremes they manage to muddy up the field nicely for anyone interested in finding out what is actually going on. The link between anthropogenic climate change and the pine beetle infestation is tenuous and complex, but there is evidence to support it, especially in Canada (the signal is much more attenuated in the US west).

Notably:

Tran JK, Ylioja T, Billings RF, Re´gnie`re J, Ayres MP (2007). Impact of minimum winter temperatures on the population dynamics of Dendroctonus frontalis. Ecol Appl 17: 882–899

Sambaraju KR, Carroll AL, Zhu J, Stahl K, Moore RD, Aukema BH (2012). Climate change could alter the distribution of mountain pine beetle outbreaks in western Canada. Ecography 35:211–223

It appears that the pine beetles are most affected by temperature near the poleward and altitudinal limits of their habitat.



I'd be wary of making global claims based on the results of one, or a small cluster, of sample sets around Kamloops. The jet stream, for example, seems to becoming more erratic. There is some evidence this is linked to reduced sea ice in the Arctic.
I picked one station because it has long data records. I have looked at other stations in BC, and they all show the same trends (with the exception of Tatlayoko Lake and Lytton where the temperature has been cooling for 70 years). The jet stream has not become more erratic, but you are right about one thing, and that is a warmer climate means that plants, animals, and pests can spread northward. In other words, global warming is responsible for the spread northward of the beetles, but is likely not responsible for the epidemic in central British Columbia.
 

waldo

House Member
Oct 19, 2009
3,042
0
36
So much sea ice in the Antarctic. It's the most recorded since they stated using satellites to measure it.

:mrgreen: way to address (as in continue to ignore) my posts challenging your continued Antarctic sea-ice extent nonsense! Walter... what's your interpretation as to what's causing the single-year's ice extent increase (that, of course, melts almost to its entirety each melting season)?

c'mon Walter... this is your denier hobby-horse subject... yet you typically never have anything to post than another C&P image showing the extent... of the extent! C'mon Walter, what's causing it?

I gave you a list of the causal attributions I'm aware of... several times now. C'mon Walter, step-up: what's your understanding as to why the Antarctic sea-ice extent has increased in recent years?
 

Nuggler

kind and gentle
Feb 27, 2006
11,596
140
63
Backwater, Ontario.
Check out "Frozen Planet on Thin Ice". Decent doc on netflix. Gives another perspective relative to the right wing oil-driven character denigration garbage on CC.

just sayin.
 

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,637
1,651
113
Northern Ontario,
Check out "Frozen Planet on Thin Ice". Decent doc on netflix. Gives another perspective relative to the right wing oil-driven character denigration garbage on CC.

just sayin.
Instead of arguing a lost cause, he should be more forthcoming with his personal pictures of Machu Picchu....
He doesn't even have to be in the picture....nobody wants to see his ugly mug anyway.......
 

waldo

House Member
Oct 19, 2009
3,042
0
36
Instead of arguing a lost cause, he should be more forthcoming with his personal pictures of Machu Picchu....
He doesn't even have to be in the picture....nobody wants to see his ugly mug anyway.......

lapdog!!! And there you go... here you are again, in another thread, 4 months past... and you're still the obsessive lapdog! You ran away from the following questions earlier today... in the last thread where you resurrected your fixation/obsession... here, simple YES or NO questions. Why are you ignoring them, hey lapper?
other than simply being the lapdog you are, are you stating, are you claiming:
- that you have provided a basis... a reason... as to why you claimed/continue to claim, that I lied? Yes or No?

- that you didn't ask why you would actually need a reason? Yes or No?

 

waldo

House Member
Oct 19, 2009
3,042
0
36

how many... is many? 4? (I guess, technically... 1/22 chairs running, or 2/16 chairs running... that still equates to "open". But hey now Walter, there's many still open across North America

hey Walter, here's the thing... many of the ski resorts don't close because of no snow... they close because people move on to other activities. You see that big time in Colorado, particularly the hills built around/in proximity to golf courses.

don't you have anything to say about Antarctic sea-ice extent? :mrgreen: