Trashing someone's forecast before its expiry date is risky business, though. You are essentially putting yourself in the arctic ice forecasting business also.
I should point out that the ice coverage is very low at the moment--about two standard deviations below the mean.
EDIT: You said "I presume you mean Arctic sea ice here"
Umm, are you losing it Mike? Did you forget what your own question was about? Here is the title of your question, in case you forgot what you were asking about:
"Who still listens to leading experts on Arctic sea ice?"
And again, my answer (which you ignored the first time) is that YOU not only listen, you obsess about it.
Another EDIT: You said "As usual, your answers and edits are the reason for my avatar."
Well Mike, your answers and edits are why I have so little respect for you. You set up a question where you try to trash a couple of scientists, and climate scientists in general, and it doesn't really work out your way. So what do you do? Change the subject and start throwing out other things in your edits that are completely irrelevant to your question. I've seen you do this time and time again. You are not interested in science or learning, your interest is in trashing climate science and scientists. I will grant that you are smarter than your fellow deniers (John Cena/Maxx, Jeff Engr, Sagebrush, etc.), but I don't find you to be more honest or ethical, and that is the problem with everyone on the denial bandwagon--it's clear that the goal has nothing to do with seeking truth--it's all about accomplishing your political ends.
Most of your question is based on a lack of understanding of confidence limits. Using data up to 2006 gave a best guess to the more pessimistic forecasters that 2013 was the likely year for a completely free Arctic. This doesn't mean that there would NEVER be ice in the Arctic, just that there would be no significant coverage in the summer months.
As the data continues to accumulate, the window continuously narrows. So, despite what I THINK you are stating, there WILL be an end date to the predictions - and they will either be wrong or right.
Think about it. In 2006, the prediction was 7 years out. In 2012, it was 3-4 years out. In 2013, the best guess is now TWO years out. But that's a 50% estimate - i.e., 50% chance it will be sooner, 50% chance it will be later. The 95% confidence limit (i.e., 95% chance it will be sooner, and 5% chance it will be later) is 2018.
Also, the graph that you cite is VERY confusing. Better (for this argument) is a graph of Arctic Sea Ice Volume minimum since 1979. After all, we are talking about when the Arctic Sea will go ice free...
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nMQg7Pszm8g/TvEb7k6ESJI/AAAAAAAAMdk/QSUS0sKPMk0/s1600/6a0133f03a1e37970b015435379118970c.png
A scientist predicts that the Arctic will have ice free summers by 2018.
You should check your calendar. 2018 does not happen for five years. The infamous fat lady hasn't boarded her limo to the dressing room yet.
Ian
So what would make it a real science? If climatologists can't correctly predict the exact date that the Arctic is ice free then carbon dioxide doesn't absorb 4.3μm and 14μm.
http://www.wag.caltech.edu/home/jang/gen...
It is falsifiable and you know it.
1. Show that carbon dixide is not a greenhouse gas. Passed the test =/= unfalsifiable
2. Use up all the oil gas and coal. If we freeze rather than cook, then we will know that AGW is not a problem.
3. Find another explanation as to what causes the warming. Construct graphs similar to this.
The three graphs
http://www.grida.no/publications/other/i...
If the graph with the new forcing matches temperature more closely when carbon dioixde is excluded than when it is included, AGW is falsified.
Gary F
Because the evidence does not support their case. All denialists have is argumentum ad hominem.
I still listen to leading experts on Arctic sea ice, then again as a skeptic, I take the outliers with a grain of salt. Like the article stated, Peter Wadhams (who is just like all the deniers [1]) is an outliers in the scientific community. And clearly outliers are inevitable in human society, life would be quite boring otherwise. I only wish we could keep the evil ones away from any political power and possibly weapons.
Of course, (as some one who accept that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, that we have added and continue to add more of it to the atmosphere then nature can cope with and that this will result in the earth retaining more heat, you are more then welcome to make your own predictions as to which summer the arctic ocean will be ice free. Or you can criticize others who get their predictions wrong, whatever rocks your boat.
I dont believe it is possible for the Arctic ice to become summer ice free, as there is a negative feedback, less ice in the summer causes the Arctic ocean to cool faster in the fall months, causing a more rapid refreeze as shown by 2007 and 2012.
As someone once said, "predictions are notoriously difficult especially where the future is concerned"
Global Warming ended in 2012 and Ice has been accumulating on different parts of earth since 11/28/ 2012. This weather is from the 1970's before Global Warming. Mike
Woooo... the alarmists love forcasting when the Arctic is going to be ice free... but they're not very good at it because the field is so new... but you should really listen to them.
Let's see... Alarmists have said the Arctic will be ice free by
Before the end of the 20th century, 2000, 2010-2015, 2013, 2016, 2018, 2020, 2030, 2040, 2050, 2060, 2070, 2080, 2090 and 2100.
Of course you can't trash a prediction BEFORE it happens but you do have to throw billions of dollars into useless green energy because of the prediction.
Oh, and AGW is completely falsifiable although it's a secret on how to falsify it and if AGW climate predictions completely fail that doesn't prove that the AGW theory is false. Somehow failed predictions now actually increase the confidence level that man is the primary driver of climate change.
Climatology. It's a real science.
The real question is: Why are Deniers so obsessed with individuals and personalities; Why do they think science depends on anyone? There are, literally, thousands of scientists conducting thousands of research projects - and none of them take direction from or base their scientific conclusions on anything Wadhams - or Gore or Hansen or the IPCC - thinks or says.
Wadhams may be a "leading" scientist or expert or whatever - but that does not mean he "leads" arctic scientists or represents arctic science. Science is not about individual scientists (for whatever reason, Deniers think that it is about people - but that is a reflection of their total and complete ignorance of both the scientific profession and of professional scientists).
First, he is an expert at Cambridge I don't see anything about him be a worldwide authority on Arctic ice The best place to get up to date info on the Arctic is http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
I am guessing ice free 2025
Such are the hallmarks of a failed religion.
The best example is Peter Wadhams "a leading Arctic expert at Cambridge University". His latest appearance in the press has the following claim: "According to current data, he estimates “with 95% confidence” that the Arctic will have completely ice-free summers by 2018." http://www.thenation.com/article/177614/coming-instant-planetary-emergency?page=full
Let's go back in time:
17 September 2012: "This collapse, I predicted would occur in 2015-16 at which time the summer Arctic (August to September) would become ice-free." http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/sep/17/arctic-collapse-sea-ice?intcmp=122
08 November 2011: "2015 is a very serious prediction and I think I am pretty much persuaded that that's when it will happen." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/globalwarming/8877491/Arctic-sea-ice-to-melt-by-2015.html
So Wadhams went from "serious prediction in 2011 that ice free Arctic would happen by 2015 to a 2012 statement that appears to waffle between 2015-16 and now he's arrived at a 95% confidence level of 2018 being the year.
So how do you determine who is a "leading expert"?
even if there is only one square inch of ice in the Arctic in 2100, you'll claim the forecast was wrong.
I do in geosystems
I'd believe them before I believe you
They moved the goal post again and when 2018 does not happen it will be later.
Even if the ice was gone the world will not blow up .
Nothing will happen.
A scientist predicts that the Arctic will have ice free summers by 2018.
You should check your calendar. 2018 does not happen for five years. The infamous fat lady hasn't boarded her limo to the dressing room yet.
Ian
So what would make it a real science? If climatologists can't correctly predict the exact date that the Arctic is ice free then carbon dioxide doesn't absorb 4.3μm and 14μm.
http://www.wag.caltech.edu/home/jang/gen...
It is falsifiable and you know it.
1. Show that carbon dixide is not a greenhouse gas. Passed the test =/= unfalsifiable
2. Use up all the oil gas and coal. If we freeze rather than cook, then we will know that AGW is not a problem.
3. Find another explanation as to what causes the warming. Construct graphs similar to this.
The three graphs
http://www.grida.no/publications/other/i...
If the graph with the new forcing matches temperature more closely when carbon dioixde is excluded than when it is included, AGW is falsified.
Gary F
Because the evidence does not support their case. All denialists have is argumentum ad hominem.
I still listen to leading experts on Arctic sea ice, then again as a skeptic, I take the outliers with a grain of salt. Like the article stated, Peter Wadhams (who is just like all the deniers [1]) is an outliers in the scientific community. And clearly outliers are inevitable in human society, life would be quite boring otherwise. I only wish we could keep the evil ones away from any political power and possibly weapons.
Of course, (as some one who accept that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, that we have added and continue to add more of it to the atmosphere then nature can cope with and that this will result in the earth retaining more heat, you are more then welcome to make your own predictions as to which summer the arctic ocean will be ice free. Or you can criticize others who get their predictions wrong, whatever rocks your boat.
I dont believe it is possible for the Arctic ice to become summer ice free, as there is a negative feedback, less ice in the summer causes the Arctic ocean to cool faster in the fall months, causing a more rapid refreeze as shown by 2007 and 2012.
As someone once said, "predictions are notoriously difficult especially where the future is concerned"
Global Warming ended in 2012 and Ice has been accumulating on different parts of earth since 11/28/ 2012. This weather is from the 1970's before Global Warming. Mike
Woooo... the alarmists love forcasting when the Arctic is going to be ice free... but they're not very good at it because the field is so new... but you should really listen to them.
Let's see... Alarmists have said the Arctic will be ice free by
Before the end of the 20th century, 2000, 2010-2015, 2013, 2016, 2018, 2020, 2030, 2040, 2050, 2060, 2070, 2080, 2090 and 2100.
Of course you can't trash a prediction BEFORE it happens but you do have to throw billions of dollars into useless green energy because of the prediction.
Oh, and AGW is completely falsifiable although it's a secret on how to falsify it and if AGW climate predictions completely fail that doesn't prove that the AGW theory is false. Somehow failed predictions now actually increase the confidence level that man is the primary driver of climate change.
Climatology. It's a real science.
The real question is: Why are Deniers so obsessed with individuals and personalities; Why do they think science depends on anyone? There are, literally, thousands of scientists conducting thousands of research projects - and none of them take direction from or base their scientific conclusions on anything Wadhams - or Gore or Hansen or the IPCC - thinks or says.
Wadhams may be a "leading" scientist or expert or whatever - but that does not mean he "leads" arctic scientists or represents arctic science. Science is not about individual scientists (for whatever reason, Deniers think that it is about people - but that is a reflection of their total and complete ignorance of both the scientific profession and of professional scientists).
First, he is an expert at Cambridge I don't see anything about him be a worldwide authority on Arctic ice The best place to get up to date info on the Arctic is http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
I am guessing ice free 2025
Such are the hallmarks of a failed religion.
The best example is Peter Wadhams "a leading Arctic expert at Cambridge University". His latest appearance in the press has the following claim: "According to current data, he estimates “with 95% confidence” that the Arctic will have completely ice-free summers by 2018." http://www.thenation.com/article/177614/coming-instant-planetary-emergency?page=full
Let's go back in time:
17 September 2012: "This collapse, I predicted would occur in 2015-16 at which time the summer Arctic (August to September) would become ice-free." http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/sep/17/arctic-collapse-sea-ice?intcmp=122
08 November 2011: "2015 is a very serious prediction and I think I am pretty much persuaded that that's when it will happen." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/globalwarming/8877491/Arctic-sea-ice-to-melt-by-2015.html
So Wadhams went from "serious prediction in 2011 that ice free Arctic would happen by 2015 to a 2012 statement that appears to waffle between 2015-16 and now he's arrived at a 95% confidence level of 2018 being the year.
So how do you determine who is a "leading expert"?
even if there is only one square inch of ice in the Arctic in 2100, you'll claim the forecast was wrong.
I do in geosystems
I'd believe them before I believe you
They moved the goal post again and when 2018 does not happen it will be later.
Even if the ice was gone the world will not blow up .
Nothing will happen.
