Iceberg in Lake Superior in June

[xgsound]

This is an interesting and unusual event. There are icebergs in Lake Superior. It's June, 2 weeks from high summer! Personally, I only consider this weather; but it doesn't help support the years of preaching we heard from the 15 man committee that wrote the summary of 2,500 scientists in 2007, or the similar recent IPPC report.
http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2014/06/07/dnr-warden-spots-icebergs-on-lake-superior/

There were 31,000 scientists that disagreed in 1997 (personally, not in summary) with Kyoto when it feared Global Warming and have had no reason to withdraw their support. http://www.petitionproject.org/

Jim

 

[Jaskalas]

That's cold weather.
When it's warm weather they will tell us it's Climate.

US, 2012.
Moscow, 2010
Europe, 2003.

 

[Thebobo]

Yea I posted a thread over in off topic last week about this.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2385836&highlight=

 

[ivwshane]

Were these icebergs formed in Lake Superior or did they float there.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Please explain how the current weather in Michigan is indicative of the global climate. For example, does ice on Lake Superior in June predict what weather patterns will be like in Bangladesh, or Norway, or Angola? If you can't extrapolate the results, perhaps it's because local weather patterns are not indicative of global climate trends.

 

[Matt1970]

Were these icebergs formed in Lake Superior or did they float there.

Well unless they floated through the Saint Lawrence Seaway, then floated through lakes Ontario, Erie and Huron, ya, they were formed there.

 

[xgsound]

Amazing, this was last weekend but its still there, see links

http://phys.org/news/2014-06-lake-superior-coldest-surface.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...rd-ice-astonishing-scenes-from-lake-superior/

That was surface ice 2 weeks ago in Michigan. This is now near Madeline Island in Wisconsin. They are at about the same latitude in southern Lake Superior.

These are actual icebergs as the picture in the article shows. http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2014/06/07/dnr-warden-spots-icebergs-on-lake-superior/
I first posted in your old thread. I meant to put this here.

Jim

 

[dphantom]

This is a video of the ice caves that formed off Leelanau on Lake Michigan this winter. Not too far away from me.

http://mynorth.com/2014/02/video-of...f-the-coast-of-leelanau-in-northern-michigan/

 

[Jaskalas]

Please explain how the current weather in Michigan is indicative of the global climate.

Same way Katrina and Sandy were "Climate" instead of "Weather".

Weather is declared Climate ALL the time in arguments against us.

 

[railer]

This is an interesting and unusual event. There are icebergs in Lake Superior. It's June, 2 weeks from high summer! Personally, I only consider this weather; but it doesn't help support the years of preaching we heard from the 15 man committee that wrote the summary of 2,500 scientists in 2007, or the similar recent IPPC report.
http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2014/06/07/dnr-warden-spots-icebergs-on-lake-superior/

There were 31,000 scientists that disagreed in 1997 (personally, not in summary) with Kyoto when it feared Global Warming and have had no reason to withdraw their support. http://www.petitionproject.org/

Jim

I just printed out that petition! I've got a Ph.D too! Whoopee!

It's too bad people can't just link an interesting picture or event, and then shut the F up about it. Yeah, sometimes it's warm in the winter. And sometimes it's cool in the summer. Neither event proves or disproves climate change.

 

[dmcowen674]

Were these icebergs formed in Lake Superior or did they float there.

It was Aliens

 

[himkhan]

Just out of curiosity xgsound, what do you think this information proves/disproves?

 

[xgsound]

I don't think it proves anything. That is the point. I think trying to prove anything about future weather is an exercise in futility in direct proportion to the the time length that is being predicted. Up to 5 days in the future you have a good chance. A month ahead and chances become poor. When someone speaks of 100 years in the future, there is not a chance.

The "wisdom" of this claim is that we will all be dead when it is proven wrong. The predictors learned their lesson back in the 60s when they warned of an ice age due to pollution, global famine due to over population, and no oil left due to US over consumption; all in 20 years. As we now know this did not happen and it is 54 years later. Now the claimed calamity will be in 100 years.

Jim

 

[dmcowen674]

The "wisdom" of this claim is that we will all be dead when it is proven wrong.

The predictors learned their lesson back in the 60s when they warned of an ice age due to pollution, global famine due to over population, and no oil left due to US over consumption; all in 20 years.

As we now know this did not happen and it is 54 years later. Now the claimed calamity will be in 100 years.

Jim

What?

There is Global famine due to corn being used for fuel and there is no oil left.

It's also 107 degrees in Sacramento California today.

 

[MrColin]

I have ice cubes in my freezer in June and I've seen ice crystals forming on liquids in my unseasonably cold refrigerator too. This is irrefutable evidence that disproves climate change.

 

[sandorski]

I don't think it proves anything. That is the point. I think trying to prove anything about future weather is an exercise in futility in direct proportion to the the time length that is being predicted. Up to 5 days in the future you have a good chance. A month ahead and chances become poor. When someone speaks of 100 years in the future, there is not a chance.

The "wisdom" of this claim is that we will all be dead when it is proven wrong. The predictors learned their lesson back in the 60s when they warned of an ice age due to pollution, global famine due to over population, and no oil left due to US over consumption; all in 20 years. As we now know this did not happen and it is 54 years later. Now the claimed calamity will be in 100 years.

Jim

GW/GC is real, is happening, and it won't be finished for quite awhile(long after you're dead). Some of the predicted outcomes may not occur, but it is going to be very disruptive and expensive to deal with.

 

[Orignal Earl]

These are actual icebergs as the picture in the article shows. http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2014/06/07/dnr-warden-spots-icebergs-on-lake-superior/
I first posted in your old thread. I meant to put this here.

Jim

I don't think it's proper to call them icebergs.

An iceberg is a large piece of freshwater ice that has broken off a glacier or an ice shelf and is floating freely in open water.

All Canadian ice shelves are attached to Ellesmere Island and lie north of 82°N. Ice shelves that are still in existence are the Alfred Ernest Ice Shelf, Milne Ice Shelf, Ward Hunt Ice Shelf and Smith Ice Shelf. The M'Clintock Ice Shelf broke up from 1963 to 1966; the Ayles Ice Shelf broke up in 2005; and the Markham Ice Shelf broke up in 2008.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iceberg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_shelf

The ice on the lake was just extra thick this year, and there is still pieces of the breakup floating around

 

[Newell Steamer]

And to think - I sat there an listened to all these scientists!!

When all I had to do was walk into this thread and have the OP set me straight.

 

[Jaskalas]

I don't think it proves anything. That is the point. I think trying to prove anything about future weather is an exercise in futility in direct proportion to the the time length that is being predicted. Up to 5 days in the future you have a good chance. A month ahead and chances become poor. When someone speaks of 100 years in the future, there is not a chance.

The oceans go through changes in their distribution of heat content. El Nino and La Nina tell us a great deal about weather patterns months ahead of time. PDO and AMO have profound effects that are still being studied. Effects which last for decades.

Take the 1976 Pacific Climate Shift. Direct example of the impacts the PDO has on Alaska. Next time it shifts warm, we can tell you what will happen to Alaska by revising what we observed in previous cycles.

The "wisdom" of this claim is that we will all be dead when it is proven wrong.

Naw, this pause is proving it already. ~6 more years and it should all be beyond doubt, one way or another.

 

[OutHouse]

Please explain how the current weather in Michigan is indicative of the global climate. For example, does ice on Lake Superior in June predict what weather patterns will be like in Bangladesh, or Norway, or Angola? If you can't extrapolate the results, perhaps it's because local weather patterns are not indicative of global climate trends.

why did you ask this?

 

[Atomic Playboy]

why did you ask this?

Because the OP linked to an article about ice on a lake in Wisconsin and then presented the argument that this demonstrates why there is a debate about the science of global warming. In order for that argument to make sense, we have to assume that local weather patterns (ice on one specific lake) are indicative of global climate. If that assumption is correct, then the local weather patterns observed in one location should be able to predict local weather patterns anywhere else on the globe. I don't think the OP truly believes that he can look out his window and tell you what the weather will be anywhere in the world, so he must realize that local weather patterns are not a reliable predictor of global weather patterns, and yet he seems to believe that local weather patterns are a reliable indicator of global climate. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of what global climate, or global warming, refers to.

Put another way; I live in an area with frequent rainfall. I have family that live in an area that is prone to droughts. If I experience record rainfall while my family experiences record drought, we could make opposing claims (it's the wettest it's ever been; it's the driest it's ever been) and both be correct for our specific locale. But if we take the average rainfall everywhere on Earth and see, "oh, there's been less rain than average this year," than I'm merely an outlier on the global scale. Yes, it's been very wet for me personally, but my personal experience is not indicative of the entire planet. It's the exact same way with temperature; unseasonably low temperatures in one specific location are not an indication that the globe as a whole is not warming.

 

[WHAMPOM]

This is an interesting and unusual event. There are icebergs in Lake Superior. It's June, 2 weeks from high summer! Personally, I only consider this weather; but it doesn't help support the years of preaching we heard from the 15 man committee that wrote the summary of 2,500 scientists in 2007, or the similar recent IPPC report.
http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2014/06/07/dnr-warden-spots-icebergs-on-lake-superior/

There were 31,000 scientists that disagreed in 1997 (personally, not in summary) with Kyoto when it feared Global Warming and have had no reason to withdraw their support. http://www.petitionproject.org/

Jim

There's glaciers calving into Lake Superior? Give me a link, I have to see this!

 

[xgsound]

And to think - I sat there an listened to all these scientists!!

When all I had to do was walk into this thread and have the OP set me straight.

Good. Now that that is settled, we can all go do something productive.

Jim
* Never skip a chance to laugh ... you never catch up.

 

[xgsound]

I don't think it's proper to call them icebergs.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iceberg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_shelf

The ice on the lake was just extra thick this year, and there is still pieces of the breakup floating around

Now that you mention it, you are correct. I guess when the 10 ft of ice bigger than his boat appeared in front of him that is why the Officer called it an iceberg in the article. They say 9/10 of ice is underwater too!

Jim

 

[zinfamous]

This is the conservative stance on climate change:

--local weather-related incidents are singular proof that the same thing is happening everywhere on the planet! haha! do nothing!

--restricting Greenhouse gases in the USA would do nothing, because climate change is a global phenomenon! China will continue to fuck it up for everyone! So, do nothing! haha!

It's amazing. Both of these viewpoints are 100% endorsed, equally, by the Conservative Robotron Talkbot 3000, and without any sense of irony.