N_Cook wrote:

On 25/02/2021 16:46, N_Cook wrote:
On 25/02/2021 16:39, Norman Lynagh wrote:
Looks fine to me. Latest date plotted is 24 Feb.

24 Feb on both the click-on Arctic and Antarctic plots?

My browser shows 24 Feb for the Arctic and 19 Feb for Antarctic plots


I closed the browser and reopened, in case of a caching problem, but the same
result of Antarctic update stuck at 19 Feb, not 24 Feb

Following posted on Twitter by NSIDC today


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you’ve been following sea ice numbers, you may have noticed a gap in data
from 2/19 to 2/22. Unfortunately, these data are missing and unrecoverable due
to a problem that occurred at the ground station during planned maintenance. We
apologize for any inconvenience.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--
Norman Lynagh
Tideswell, Derbyshire
303m a.s.l.
https://peakdistrictweather.org
Twitter: @TideswellWeathr

On 25/02/2021 19:20, Norman Lynagh wrote:
N_Cook wrote:

On 25/02/2021 16:46, N_Cook wrote:
On 25/02/2021 16:39, Norman Lynagh wrote:
Looks fine to me. Latest date plotted is 24 Feb.

24 Feb on both the click-on Arctic and Antarctic plots?

My browser shows 24 Feb for the Arctic and 19 Feb for Antarctic plots


I closed the browser and reopened, in case of a caching problem, but the same
result of Antarctic update stuck at 19 Feb, not 24 Feb

Following posted on Twitter by NSIDC today


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you’ve been following sea ice numbers, you may have noticed a gap in data
from 2/19 to 2/22. Unfortunately, these data are missing and unrecoverable due
to a problem that occurred at the ground station during planned maintenance. We
apologize for any inconvenience.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Ta for that, ****ter and fleecebook are not for me.
Something else having a problem, the summer site
https://sites.google.com/site/arctischepinguin/home/sea-ice-extent-area/grf/nsidc_global_extent_byyear_b.png
latest is showing a gap , whatever that means, as it suggests they
magic'd up a recent Antarctic figure


--
Global sea level rise to 2100 from curve-fitted existing altimetry data
http://diverse.4mg.com/slr.htm

On Thursday, 25 February 2021 at 14:59:22 UTC, Julian Mayes wrote:
I'd pay him more attention if he were a qualified meteorologist or even just a scientist but as far as I can see he isn't.

Tudor Hughes.
Indeed he isn't - he appears to be a Diplomat and former senior civil servant. IMO this is entirely appropriate and effective. This background gives him clout in the corridors of power. He will know how to communicate and influence in order to get the message across.
Are you really implying, Tudor, that as the Chair of a large organisation he is not briefed by scientists incl. meteorologists and hydrologists? Of course he is. The fact that they have been able to convince someone from a different discipline is telling. The problem is the lack of scientists in political circles - eg in the Cabinet.

Maybe you are surprised at the comment about flooding in recent years. I'm not. I'll just throw in one observation - there have been several occasions in the last 2 years when I have been surprised at how high daily rainfalls have been on days when the synoptic situation did not appear to indicate anything unusual. The added warmth of warm conveyor belts (atmospheric rivers, as some like to call them) seems to be a plausible connector to global warming. No doubt academic papers are in preparation that will help us put it into perspective. I'm with Norman in this!

Julian

It's not that that I disagree that the world is a warmer place or that mankind is very largely responsible for this, it's that the warnings seem rather hysterical, so much so that members of the public will tend to dismiss them. In any case not all the disruptive effects of flooding are due to increased rainfall; we can have a considerable effect on how this excess is dealt with and maybe some practices will need to change.

Tudor Hughes

On 25/02/2021 20:08, Tudor Hughes wrote:
It's not that that I disagree that the world is a warmer place or that mankind is very largely responsible for this, it's that the warnings seem rather hysterical, so much so that members of the public will tend to dismiss them. In any case not all the disruptive effects of flooding are due to increased rainfall; we can have a considerable effect on how this excess is dealt with and maybe some practices will need to change.

I find the 'climate catastrophe' agenda rather waring. The last series
by David Attenborough, appallingly called 'Perfect Planet' a fine
example of pushing a hysterical agenda.

And I agree totally, keep up the alarmist rhetoric and in the end,
people start to ignore it.

--
Nick Gardner
Otter Valley, Devon
20 m amsl
http://www.ottervalleyweather.me.uk

N_Cook wrote:

On 25/02/2021 19:20, Norman Lynagh wrote:
N_Cook wrote:

On 25/02/2021 16:46, N_Cook wrote:
On 25/02/2021 16:39, Norman Lynagh wrote:
Looks fine to me. Latest date plotted is 24 Feb.

24 Feb on both the click-on Arctic and Antarctic plots?

My browser shows 24 Feb for the Arctic and 19 Feb for Antarctic plots


I closed the browser and reopened, in case of a caching problem, but the
same result of Antarctic update stuck at 19 Feb, not 24 Feb

Following posted on Twitter by NSIDC today


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---

If you’ve been following sea ice numbers, you may have noticed a gap in
data from 2/19 to 2/22. Unfortunately, these data are missing and
unrecoverable due to a problem that occurred at the ground station during
planned maintenance. We apologize for any inconvenience.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---


Ta for that, ****ter and fleecebook are not for me.
Something else having a problem, the summer site
https://sites.google.com/site/arctis...ent-area/grf/n
sidc_global_extent_byyear_b.png latest is showing a gap , whatever that
means, as it suggests they magic'd up a recent Antarctic figure

Twitter is excellent for 'now' stuff. I wouldn't be without it.

--
Norman Lynagh
Tideswell, Derbyshire
303m a.s.l.
https://peakdistrictweather.org
Twitter: @TideswellWeathr

Nick Gardner wrote:

On 25/02/2021 20:08, Tudor Hughes wrote:
It's not that that I disagree that the world is a warmer place or
that mankind is very largely responsible for this, it's that the warnings
seem rather hysterical, so much so that members of the public will tend to
dismiss them. In any case not all the disruptive effects of flooding are
due to increased rainfall; we can have a considerable effect on how this
excess is dealt with and maybe some practices will need to change.

I find the 'climate catastrophe' agenda rather waring. The last series by
David Attenborough, appallingly called 'Perfect Planet' a fine example of
pushing a hysterical agenda.

And I agree totally, keep up the alarmist rhetoric and in the end, people
start to ignore it.

That sounds a bit denialist to me, Nick. I am a lifetime observer of weather
and climate worldwide and what I see today suggests to me that we are on the
brink of a catastrophe. I didn't find 'Perfect Planet' in any way 'over the
top'. As I said earlier, this is something of a slow-burner but I am sure that
some tipping points will be reached within the next couple of decades (probably
have already been reached in the Arctic) that'll be real 'wake-up' calls.
Sadly, I think it's already too late to prevent any of this happening. I used
to be somewhat sceptical about the potential negative man-made effects on
climate but what I have seen in recent years has changed all that.
Unfortunately, this will all get kicked down the road by the politicians and we
(the human race) will lurch into an untenable situation without any advance
planning as to how we will deal with it. I don't expect to be around long
enough to really see whether I'm right or wrong but I see no reason for
optimism.

--
Norman Lynagh
Tideswell, Derbyshire
303m a.s.l.
https://peakdistrictweather.org
Twitter: @TideswellWeathr

It's not that that I disagree that the world is a warmer place or that mankind is very largely responsible for this, it's that the warnings seem rather hysterical, so much so that members of the public will tend to dismiss them. In any case not all the disruptive effects of flooding are due to increased rainfall; we can have a considerable effect on how this excess is dealt with and maybe some practices will need to change.

Tudor Hughes

That's a fair comment - I certainly flinch at some alarmist language and how it fuels denialism. Yes, it can be counter-productive. Of course, we don't know if the more melodramatic outcomes will actually occur, but we need to do what we can to mitigate future effects and to appreciate just how large the issues are. By 'large' let's start with the projections dealing with the North Atlantic overturning circulation - main story in The Guardian for a time y'day.....

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...say-scientists

Julian

And I agree totally, keep up the alarmist rhetoric and in the end,
people start to ignore it.

--
Nick Gardner

It all depends on 'who' the people are. Backbench MPs are falling over themselves to promote their green credentials. In this regard, policymakers matter - we may be generating a minority band of sceptics. OK, not everything can be done 'top-down' and much will depend on consumer behaviour. Sir David Attenborough has accepted the need to be realistic and positive in this sense - as he was quoted a few days ago in relation to a new series. I think we need to take all detailed research seriously, but yes to be careful with rhetoric. Some people will not understand the nuances here though and conclude that there's backtracking.

Julian

It's not that that I disagree that the world is a warmer place or that mankind is very largely responsible for this, it's that the warnings seem rather hysterical, so much so that members of the public will tend to dismiss them. In any case not all the disruptive effects of flooding are due to increased rainfall; we can have a considerable effect on how this excess is dealt with and maybe some practices will need to change.

Tudor Hughes

I'd agree with all of that. Crowlas, near Penzance, used to get regularly flooded during heavy rain. Just ploughing across the hill, as they always used to back in the '60s & '70s, instead of up and down, not only stopped the flooding but dramatically reduced soil erosion.

Network Rail have recently spent a lot of money on the St Ives line. Just as you come into St Ives the wall supporting the line, which goes right down to beach level, is in a terrible state. If they do nothing it will fall into the sea & be blamed on freak weather due to global warning. Global warming is a serious issue, but it's now becoming a convenient scapegoat for incompetence.

At the same time little is being do avert global warming many claims that action is 'green' is anything but. In Penzance as part of the Council's 'Carbon Neutral' agenda they are changing the traffic flows which not only increase the distance you need to drive in virtually all cases, but involve far more breaking & accelerating. They are also subsidising a (carbon neutral?) spaceport, despite having declared a 'climate emergency!

Graham
Penzance - where it's been a glorious day

On Friday, 26 February 2021 at 15:42:59 UTC, Julian Mayes wrote:
It's not that that I disagree that the world is a warmer place or that mankind is very largely responsible for this, it's that the warnings seem rather hysterical, so much so that members of the public will tend to dismiss them. In any case not all the disruptive effects of flooding are due to increased rainfall; we can have a considerable effect on how this excess is dealt with and maybe some practices will need to change.

Tudor Hughes
That's a fair comment - I certainly flinch at some alarmist language and how it fuels denialism. Yes, it can be counter-productive. Of course, we don't know if the more melodramatic outcomes will actually occur, but we need to do what we can to mitigate future effects and to appreciate just how large the issues are. By 'large' let's start with the projections dealing with the North Atlantic overturning circulation - main story in The Guardian for a time y'day.....

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...say-scientists

Julian

But a 30yr reconstruction of AMOC shows no decline Julian.
It depends what time scale you want to look at.
Have you read this study by our oceanography experts at Southampton?
https://os.copernicus.org/articles/17/285/2021/

Len