Thursday, April 11, 2019

Mysterious Zones of The Arctic - 7

Fig. 1 Arctic Sea Ice Extent 4/9/19
I. The Question

In the previous post of this series what turned out to be a sharp drop in Arctic sea ice extent was sharp enough to make we wonder if the satellite equipment was having trouble (Mysterious Zones of The Arctic - 6).

The date of that sharp turn was March 4, 2019 (ibid @ Fig. 2 in that post).

As you can see at Fig. 1 in today's post, the sharp downward turn was not an equipment failure, it was an event that is not only quite real, it is a record-setting event:
"Arctic sea ice extent appears to have reached its maximum extent on March 13, marking the beginning of the sea ice melt season. Since the maximum, sea ice extent has been tracking at record low levels. In the Bering Sea, extent increased through the middle of March after setting record lows—only to drop sharply again.
...
The Bering Sea, which had been nearly ice free at the beginning of March, saw gains in extent through the middle of the month. However, those gains were short lived as extent dropped sharply during the last week of March. The Bering Sea typically reaches its maximum ice extent in late March or early April. This year, the maximum occurred in late January and was 34.5 percent below the 1981 to 2010 average maximum. These late-March sea ice extent losses in the Bering Sea accelerated the decline of total Arctic sea ice extent. By April 1, Arctic extent was at a record low for that date."
(NSIDC, Arctic Sea Ice News, emphasis added). "What is going on up there?" is a reasonable question.

Especially since that decrease in ice (and snow) is not happening in Bob Dylan's country ("the country I come from is called The Midwest" - With God On Our Side).

In his country the ice is also falling, however, it is in the form of huge amounts of snow and hail falling from the sky which melts causing serious flooding.

Then, even more comes along:
The Midwestern United States has been experiencing major floods since mid-March 2019, primary along the Missouri River and its tributaries in Nebraska, Missouri, South Dakota, Iowa, and Kansas. The Mississippi River has also seen flooding, but to a lesser extent. From January until early March, average temperatures in the Midwest remained in the low 20 to 30 average degree Fahrenheit range, with record snowfall in many areas, including the early March blizzard, up to three feet on the ground in some areas. In Nebraska, over the course of three days (March 11 - March 13), temperatures rose to 60 degrees Fahrenheit, combined with 1.5 inches of rain. This quickly melted the snow, and the frozen ground was not able to absorb any meaningful amount, which led to unprecedented runoff into local streams and rivers. Many of the rivers were still frozen over with a thick layer of ice, which the powerful flow of water broke up and dislodged, creating massive chunks of ice that traveled downstream, acting as a "roiling plow". At least three people in Iowa and Nebraska have died.
(2019 Midwestern U.S. floods), and then it did an encore:
The March 13 storm fit that definition and caused massive flooding in the Midwest, a blizzard in Colorado and Wyoming, and produced winds between 96 mph and 110 mph.

This week's storm [early April] is expected to be similar in intensity and in snowfall, but will likely fall short of the "bomb cyclone" designation, meteorologists said. CBS News contributing meteorologist Jeff Berardelli said on CBSN that it will become a "monster storm" when it hits the Plains.

"We're talking a blockbuster blizzard," Berardelli said. He expected it to start hitting the northern Plains on Wednesday and then slowly move across the region for at least two days."
(CBS News, Second major storm in a month). Doesn't it make you wonder why the far north Arctic is losing ice but the Midwest is getting way too much of it?

II. The Answer

The answer is that when the Arctic warms some of the ice turns to water, and some of that becomes moisture in the atmosphere.

But more than that, it fractures the Polar Vortex, and pieces of it head south:
This current ultra cold snap is caused by a heat invasion into the Arctic, which once again broke up the Polar Vortex:
"It might seem counterintuitive, but the dreaded polar vortex is bringing its icy grip to parts of the U.S. thanks to a sudden blast of warm air in the Arctic.

Get used to it. The polar vortex has been wandering more often in recent years.

It all started with misplaced Moroccan heat. Last month, the normally super chilly air temperatures 20 miles above the North Pole rapidly rose by about 125 degrees (70 degrees Celsius), thanks to air flowing in from the south. It’s called 'sudden stratospheric warming.'"
(Associated Press, emphasis added; cf. Yahoo News).

Today for example, on April 7, 2018, at 10:00 AM it will be 40 deg. F at Nuuk, Greenland, at Anchorage, Alaska it will be 49 deg. F, but at Fort Worth, Texas will only be 37 deg. F.
Fig. 2 Breaking up

Nuuk, Greenland is up near the Arctic Circle which is some 4,667 km or 2,900 miles to the North (Fig. 3).

Yes, near the Arctic Circle it will be warmer than some southern parts of the United States.

This, as this series has pointed out, is because sections of the Polar Vortex are being separated by warmer air incursions into the Arctic.

This incursion is a disruption which is melting the sea ice cover of the Arctic Ice Cap, but is also breaking pieces of the vortex off.

Those separated bands of cold Arctic air go south to make unseasonably frigid temperatures in Europe and the U.S.

Fig. 3 Warmer in Greenland than in Texas
Whether Europe or America is impacted by the broken off portions of the Polar Vortex depends on where the vortex breaks up.

The spinning causes centripetal force which (when messed with) slings the sections out of the vortex like merry-go-rounds do to giggling kids at play on it; not knowing where in the circle they will end up when thrown off:
Under normal climate conditions, cold air is confined to the Arctic by the polar vortex winds, which circle counter-clockwise around the North Pole. As sea ice coverage decreases, the Arctic warms, high pressure builds, and the polar vortex weakens, sending cold air spilling southward into the mid-latitudes, bringing record cold and fierce snowstorms. At the same time, warm air will flow into the Arctic to replace the cold air spilling south, which drives more sea ice loss.
(Wunderground, emphasis added). Or, as the government climate scientists put it:
‘Polar vortex’ is the new buzzword of 2014 for the millions of Americans learning about its role in producing record cold temperatures across the country. Meteorologists have known for years that the pattern of the polar vortex determines how much cold air escapes from the Arctic and makes its way to the U.S. during the winter.
(Climate dot Gov). This knowledge helps explain that the Earth's climate is not getting colder as some have surmised by misinterpretation:
It’s happening again: In the dead of winter, warm air from the south is surging across the Arctic toward the North Pole.

Today, weather models suggest that temperatures there have indeed soared to above freezing.

Meanwhile, cold polar air has spilled south into Eurasia and western North America. It’s almost as if someone left the Arctic’s refrigerator door open, allowing its frigid air to pour out and warm air to flow in.

[A] recent study shows that they are becoming more frequent and intense. In the study, scientists looked at winter air temperatures over the Arctic Ocean from 1893 to 2017. They found that since 1980, an additional six Arctic winter warming events have been occurring each winter at the North Pole, and they’re lasting about 12 hours longer, on average.
(Discover Magazine). This has been happening for quite a few years, but in recent years there have been increasing numbers of such events.
(See ... Watching The Arctic Die, 2, 3, 4, 5).

The previous post in this series is here.

Tuesday, April 9, 2019

How To Identify The Despotic Minority - 11

Heroes Aplenty
I. Factors Aplenty

One of the "DNA" factors in the despotic minority is denial of global warming and a hatred toward nature.

In the scientific literature this is known as "a heroism that triumphs over nature, perpetuating itself through new immortality ideologies that value material acquisitions and money"  which have become a modernistic religion:
"Because there are few cultures remaining that have not been superseded by larger entities, with tribes becoming townships, cities, states, and nations, we no longer have an “integrated world conception into which we fit ourselves with pure belief and trust” (Becker 1975). Although this might open up the possibility of a utopian, egalitarian, and secular society in which the combined gifts of individuals prevail, what we have in the West is a secular inequality devoid of a shared sense of the sacred and a heroism that triumphs over nature, perpetuating itself through new immortality ideologies that value material acquisitions and money. Lacking in heroism, these immortality ideologies come up empty or even inspire guilt. The irony of Western materialism is that wealth beyond the point of basic material comfort does not make people happy (Gilbert 2005)."
...
[That "heroism" is seen as savior that saves humanity from nature, but like other religions, it morphs into a modernistic religion that fractures a society:]

"Traditionally, technology consolidates power within a society and  exacerbates inequity. What is interesting about the new information  technologies is that they do both: They consolidate power with patents, exclusive intellectual capital, and expensive tools, and they distribute power through open source technologies and open communication networks. As such, they promote material segregation  while at the same time providing a relatively open network within which  ideological communities can function. Photo galleries, forums,  listserves, Google groups, and new social networking tools like MySpace,  Facebook, and Second Life present mechanisms for growing online  communities. In this new virtual world, frequent interaction is easy to  achieve, and the topics around which free choice interaction occurs can  be very focused and specific, suggesting that large social networks function like smaller ideological communities once did in the real  world."
...
"Technocracy itself is an immortality ideology that, although it is coupled with materialism, has as part of its makeup an element of the magical and a belief that new tools and innovations provide solutions to both the small day-to-day problems of life and the larger problems of human happiness and mortality. Technology is entrancing, and, functionally, technologists become creators of magic and the wizards of today, claiming the same authority over technology that doctors claim over human health or shamans over the cursed. This has always been so, going back to ancestral peoples who learned to use fire, tools, wind, and wheels. Even in subsistence societies, technology has a greater impact on a variety of sociological variables than do supernatural or religious beliefs (Nolan and Lenski 1996).
...
Even in subsistence societies, technology has a greater impact on a variety of sociological variables than do supernatural or religious beliefs (Nolan and Lenski 1996)."
(The Machine Religion, quoting Dickinson, J. L., Ecology and Society 14, 2009 , emphasis added). Let me repeat what I said in that post: "These observations explain why a minority of participants in the (it is said) 'greatest, richest, and militarily most powerful nation' of current civilization can take control of power."

II. Despotic Factors

And that is the final essence of the despotic minority that forms and destroys the civilization through primitive and pervasive fear:
But always TCS is primarily the population segment diagnosed as a despotic minority which the once most-often-quoted historian, Toynbee, fingered as one of the members of the trinity of extinction that he found in all civilizations that were about to become very successful at becoming extinct:
That something is the dementia that produces and ends up in suicide:
"In other words, a society does not ever die 'from natural causes', but always dies from suicide or murder --- and nearly always from the former, as this chapter has shown."
(A Study of History, by Arnold J. Toynbee). There is no cure for the final symptom of that group dementia, there is only prevention by way of avoiding it altogether in the first place.

The components of that group dementia were pointed out in an encyclopedia piece concerning that historian quoted above:
"In the Study Toynbee examined the rise and fall of 26 civilizations in the course of human history, and he concluded that they rose by responding successfully to challenges under the leadership of creative minorities composed of elite leaders. Civilizations declined when their leaders stopped responding creatively, and the civilizations then sank owing to the sins of nationalism, militarism, and the tyranny of a despotic minority. Unlike Spengler in his The Decline of the West, Toynbee did not regard the death of a civilization as inevitable, for it may or may not continue to respond to successive challenges. Unlike Karl Marx, he saw history as shaped by spiritual, not economic forces" ...
(Encyclopedia Britannica, emphasis added). The show stopper, in terms of remedy, in this type of group dementia is that it is a contagious dementia.
(Etiology of Social Dementia - 18). That particular "minority" is not a racial or ethnic minority, rather, it is primarily composed of a destructive suicidal trance (Choose Your Trances Carefully, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8).
(Arrested Development: The Creep State). Our culture is composed, now, of the toxins of power that habitually destroy nations and civilizations (Hypothesis: The Cultural Amygdala - 2).
(How To Identify The Despotic Minority). The essence that finally does the deed is probably "it can't happen here."

III. Final Factors

I think that most readers will be able to identify the despotic minority (How To Identify The Despotic Minority, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10).

The previous post in this series is here.

Lyrics to Telegraph Road are here ...



Monday, April 8, 2019

Beyond Fingerprints: Sea Level DNA - 2


Once upon a time the Earth was flat (according to those who want to make flatulence great again).

They add that its oceans were also flat at their surface, like water in a bathtub (Once Upon a Time in the West - 2).

Today, in some circles the bathtub model is a persistent meme.

But, if the "Bathtub Model" (BM) was correct there would be no use for sea level change science in the sense of an oft heard engineering question: "how much of sea level change is this town going to get?"

That is because pursuant to the BM answer, every town everywhere would get the same amount of sea level change (SLC).

I still hear lame commentators say that SLC is like when you pour an additional jug of water into a bathtub, the water level rises the same amount everywhere in the bathtub.

It is terrible that this false BM hypothesis has been and is still unwittingly used by some science writers.

But, it is great that the BM is fading away, since towns around the world keep tide gauge records then send them to the Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level (PSMSL).

Some of these PSMSL records go back to the late 1700's, and one thing is absolutely for sure, the records show that sea level change is anything but uniform around the globe (The Bathtub Model Doesn't Hold Water, 2, 3, 4, 5).

This has been known by aware scientists since Woodward (1888) as pointed out in a more recent paper: "We find that there can be large errors in the usual assumption that changes in sea level are uniform over the ocean basins" (On Postglacial Sea Level, 1976).

II. A Practical Purpose For Sea Level Science?

Generally, an aware and competent engineer designing an SLC solution for a town in one country at latitude 30 deg. N. will not come up with the same exact specifications as an aware and competent engineer designing the same solution for another country at latitude -10 deg. S. (Sea-level rise: towards understanding local vulnerability).

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Why?

The SLC is not uniform from place to place (Beyond Fingerprints: Sea Level DNA).

So, it behooves sea level scientists to develop tools for assisting societies to respond to their future according to their specific location on the globe (latitude & longitude).

III. The Best Way

The best way to determine those needs is to use measurements and observations from tide gauges as close to their locations as possible (The World According To Measurements, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21; Oceans: Abstract Values vs. Measured Values, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7).

So, in the hypothesis that is being developed in this Dredd Blog series, we will use the robust measurements of the PSMSL.

IV. Implementing "The Best Way"

Using existing measurements to assist an engineering team is straight forward.

One begins with general measurements, then fine tunes them.

The first post of this series set the stage by using general measurements.

By that I mean SLC calculations generalized (averaged) from measurements based on all tide gauges in a country.

In today's post, we begin to fine tune those measurements to less-generalized and more specific values by using what the PSMSL calls "coastline codes".

For example Brest France data indicates a tide gauge station code of 1, and a coastline code of 190.

We only need to do that type of fine tuning when more than one coastline code exists in a country from which the tide gauge measurements have been taken.

Some of the countries have as many as nine coastal codes.

Anyway, as you can see from today's link table below, generalizing based on individual coastline codes produces a more fine tuned result than using all the coastline codes in a country averaged together.

V. The Link Table

Here is the table of HTML links for countries with multiple coastline codes, and those coastline code graphs displayed separately in Appendices specific to this post:

Coastline Code
Tide Gauge Info
Coastline Code
DNA Graphs
Coastline Code
SLC Graphs
Countries: A - C A - CA - C
Countries: D - G D - G D - G
Countries: H - L H - LH - L
Countries: M - O M - OM - O
Countries: P - T P - TP - T
Countries: U - Y U - YU - Y

Here is the table of HTML links for countries with one coastline code, or multiple coastline codes averaged together (from Beyond Fingerprints: Sea Level DNA):

Tide Gauge Info DNA GraphsSLC Graphs
Countries: A - C A - CA - C
Countries: D - G D - G D - G
Countries: H - L H - LH - L
Countries: M - O M - OM - O
Countries: P - T P - TP - T
Countries: U - Y U - YU - Y

VI. Some DNA Views

I modified some of the graphs by removing the SLC line in some of the "Coastline Code DNA Graphs" in section U-Y.

That is the graphs here were modified (by removing the black SLC line) to those shown in Fig. 1 - Fig. 6 above in Sections II, III, and IV (Note: the black line in Fig. 1 - Fig. 6 above is the red line on the graphs here, and the red line was the green line ... I haven't figured out how to keep the same line colors yet - in SciDavis, sorry).

Notice that the two graph lines (SLR and SLF) in Fig. 1 - Fig. 6 are described as influences on the TREND.

That really is what is happening when an ice sheet loses or gains ice mass.

It has an influence on the sea level around the globe which will be recorded at tide gauge stations.

The result will be an influence on SLF (or a slowing of SLR) at tide gauge stations "nearer" to the ice sheet, but to the contrary an influence of SLR will take place as a slowing of SLF at tide gauges "farther" from the ice sheet.

Since there are tide gauges all around the globe at many distances, the influence can be very distinct when compared to other locations (the graphs made from actual measurements around the globe clearly expose this phenomenon).

Further, since there are other influences besides the two ice sheets (Greenland and Antarctica) such as Glacier Bay, Svalbard, and Patagonia, their influence can be substantial depending on distance from a large ice deposit, and the Earth's Rotation (The Gravity of Sea Level Change, 2, 3, 4; NASA Busts The Ghost; Proof of Concept, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9).

VII. Closing Comments

The country generalizations whether country-wide or more fine tuned by coastline codes are not a perfect solution.

But they do present the picture that presidents, congress members, courts, local government officials, engineers, and the general populace must grasp.

The further perfecting of this DNA drama could be attained by parsing the coastline codes into areas having more distinction, based on trends.

For one example, the coastline codes could be modified into nnn.nn (a decimal number).

The decimal portion could signify further uniqueness and accuracy for that specific portion of the coastline.

In some cases a combination of sections of current Coastline Codes would be a further fine tuning.

While such minutia is a further improvement, the main concerns (in terms of sea level DNA) are: 1) "when will the glaciers (not in Greenland or Antarctica) be substantially gone", 2)  "when is Antarctica melting going to begin to accelerate enough to overtake Greenland", and 3) "when is Greenland going to begin to disintegrate in its northern section?"

Those three events will alter the SLC DNA substantially, and therefore present a potentially different problem to "presidents, congress members, courts, local government officials, engineers, and the general populace" which also must grasped.

Leaving fossil fuels in the ground, if it is even possible, is the key to diminishing all of the potential catastrophes, and stabilizing the DNA.

It is also the easiest to grasp, but the most difficult to accomplish, seeing as how the current civilization is addicted to fossil fuel use.

The next post in this series is here, the previous post in this series is here.

Lyrics to Time Has Come Today are here ...



A-C Appendix CC SLC

This is an Appendix to: Beyond Fingerprints: Sea Level DNA - 2

Canada, Coastline Code 822

Canada, Coastline Code 970

Chile, Coastline Code 810

Chile, Coastline Code 850

Columbia, Coastline Code 842

Columbia, Coastline Code 902

Cook Islands, Coastline Code 775

Cook Islands, Coastline Code 785

Costa Rica, Coastline Code 836

Costa Rica, Coastline Code 906

A-C Appendix

This is an Appendix to: Beyond Fingerprints: Sea Level DNA - 2


Country: CANADA, Coastal Id: 822

Station NameStn LinkYears of data
TOFINO16589
VICTORIA166109
PRINCE RUPERT16793
VANCOUVER17592
POINT ATKINSON19385
PORT ALBERNI52730
ALERT BAY55431
COMOX6304
FULFORD HARBOUR68841
QUEEN CHARLOTTE CITY82956
LANGARA POINT84011
PORT RENFREW84227
SOOKE92115
BELLA BELLA98457
PORT HARDY107154
BELLA COOLA10844
PATRICIA BAY115242
BAMFIELD124249
NEW WESTMINSTER124549
STEVESTON125529
CAMPBELL RIVER132348
TSAWWASSEN13417
WINTER HARBOUR179929
NANOOSE BAY18252

Summary:

Distance to center of:

Antarctica: 12,452.3 km
Patagonia: 11,585.9 km
Svalbard: 5,497.38 km
Greenland: 4,569.03 km
Glacier Bay: 1,165.39 km

SLC: 1st yr (1909) 7,055.75 RLR --> final yr (2017) 7,061.09 RLR {+5.34 mm}
Analysis: 1) Greenland & Glacier Bay are the SLF & ghost-water sources,
2) Antarctica & Patagonia are the SLR sources, 3) The bottom line is 5.34 mm of SLR.
Other: Ice mass loss equivalent: 1,930.79 Gt; Ghost water loss: 1.4418 mm.

Country: CANADA, Coastal Id: 970

Station NameStn LinkYears of data
POINTE-AU-PERE13872
QUEBEC (LAUZON)17385
HARRINGTON HBR17652
NEUVILLE192101
SAINT JOHN N.B.195107
PORT AUX BASQUES39258
ST. JOHN'S NFLD.39365
CHARLOTTETOWN42797
RESOLUTE86320
ST-FRANCOIS99956
TUKTOYAKTUK100037
NAIN102917
LARK HARBOUR104426
PICTOU112132
CAMBRIDGE BAY113214
POINT SAPIN113810
GRINDSTONE11435
YARMOUTH115853
STE-ANNE-DES-MONTS119928
RIVIERE-AU-RENARD121350
BAIE COMEAU121824
TADOUSSAC121923
ST-JEAN-PORT-JOLI122312
DIGBY12303
BOUTILIER POINT125911
WEST ST. MODESTE127820
SAVAGE COVE128013
CAPE PARRY12824
RIVIERE-DU-LOUP128411
NORTH SYDNEY129948
POINTE-DU-CHENE130914
ARGENTIA132147
SEPT-ILES132246
SHEDIAC BAY132615
RUSTICO133024
POINT TUPPER133221
LOWER ESCUMINAC134945
DALHOUSIE135819
PORT-ALFRED139239
RIMOUSKI159734
LITTLE CORNWALLIS ISLAND18223
ULUKHAKTOK (FORMERLY HOLMAN )193010
QIKIQTARJUAQ19359
CAP AUX MEULES203111
BELLEDUNE206919
BONAVISTA213513

Summary:

Distance to center of:

Patagonia: 10,220.9 km
Antarctica: 8,646.25 km
Svalbard: 4,432.03 km
Glacier Bay: 4,189.71 km
Greenland: 3,011.65 km

SLC: 1st yr (1896) 6,888.86 RLR --> final yr (2017) 7,196.64 RLR {+307.78 mm}
Analysis: 1) Glacier Bay & Greenland are the SLF & ghost-water sources,
2) Patagonia & Antarctica are the SLR sources, 3) The bottom line is 307.78 mm of SLR.
Other: Ice mass loss equivalent: 111,284 Gt; Ghost water loss: 83.1007 mm.

Country: CHILE, Coastal Id: 810

Station NameStn LinkYears of data
EASTER ISLAND-E127245
EASTER ISLAND-D14628

Summary:

Distance to center of:

Svalbard: 13,729.7 km
Greenland: 12,355.3 km
Glacier Bay: 9,841.05 km
Antarctica: 6,989.14 km
Patagonia: 4,072 km

SLC: 1st yr (1970) 7,049.78 RLR --> final yr (2017) 6,966.88 RLR {-82.9 mm}
Analysis: 1) Antarctica & Patagonia are the SLF & ghost-water sources,
2) Svalbard & Greenland are the SLR sources, 3) The bottom line is 82.9 mm of SLF.
Other: Ice mass loss equivalent: 29,974.2 Gt; Ghost water loss: 22.383 mm.

Country: CHILE, Coastal Id: 850

Station NameStn LinkYears of data
PUNTA ARENAS4736
VALPARAISO49968
ANTOFAGASTA 251073
ANTOFAGASTA51147
ARICA61841
CALDERA61942
CALETA PERCY9944
CORRAL10572
PUERTO WILLIAMS11226
JUAN FERNANDEZ-C164433
SAN FELIX175129
DIEGO RAMIREZ17857
IQUIQUE II226134
CORRAL II226233
PUNTA ARENAS II226328
ANCUD226419
MELINKA22656

Summary:

Distance to center of:

Svalbard: 13,964.5 km
Greenland: 12,650.1 km
Glacier Bay: 12,161.2 km
Antarctica: 5,917.35 km
Patagonia: 584.189 km

SLC: 1st yr (1944) 7,024 RLR --> final yr (2017) 6,992.5 RLR {-31.5012 mm}
Analysis: 1) Antarctica & Patagonia are the SLF & ghost-water sources,
2) Svalbard & Greenland are the SLR sources, 3) The bottom line is 31.5012 mm of SLF.
Other: Ice mass loss equivalent: 11,389.9 Gt; Ghost water loss: 8.50534 mm.

Country: COLOMBIA, Coastal Id: 842

Station NameStn LinkYears of data
BUENAVENTURA45628
TUMACO63917

Summary:

Distance to center of:

Svalbard: 9,788.39 km
Antarctica: 8,666.64 km
Greenland: 8,384 km
Glacier Bay: 7,985.69 km
Patagonia: 4,980.99 km

SLC: 1st yr (1941) 7,118.96 RLR --> final yr (1969) 7,074.88 RLR {-44.085 mm}
Analysis: 1) Glacier Bay & Patagonia are the SLF & ghost-water sources,
2) Svalbard & Antarctica are the SLR sources, 3) The bottom line is 44.085 mm of SLF.
Other: Ice mass loss equivalent: 15,939.9 Gt; Ghost water loss: 11.903 mm.

Country: COLOMBIA, Coastal Id: 902

Station NameStn LinkYears of data
CARTAGENA57244
RIOHACHA71417

Summary:

Distance to center of:

Svalbard: 8,823.12 km
Antarctica: 8,288.23 km
Greenland: 7,428.57 km
Glacier Bay: 7,400.22 km
Patagonia: 5,815.39 km

SLC: 1st yr (1949) 6,985.62 RLR --> final yr (1992) 7,221.88 RLR {+236.26 mm}
Analysis: 1) Glacier Bay & Patagonia are the SLF & ghost-water sources,
2) Svalbard & Antarctica are the SLR sources, 3) The bottom line is 236.26 mm of SLR.
Other: Ice mass loss equivalent: 85,424.8 Gt; Ghost water loss: 63.7902 mm.

Country: COOK ISLANDS, Coastal Id: 775

Station NameStn LinkYears of data
PENRHYN145040

Summary:

Distance to center of:

Svalbard: 12,294.7 km
Greenland: 11,761.7 km
Patagonia: 9,357.98 km
Antarctica: 9,005.95 km
Glacier Bay: 7,723.94 km

SLC: 1st yr (1977) 7,080 RLR --> final yr (2016) 7,191.21 RLR {+111.21 mm}
Analysis: 1) Antarctica & Glacier Bay are the SLF & ghost-water sources,
2) Svalbard & Greenland are the SLR sources, 3) The bottom line is 111.21 mm of SLR.
Other: Ice mass loss equivalent: 40,210.3 Gt; Ghost water loss: 30.0267 mm.

Country: COOK ISLANDS, Coastal Id: 785

Station NameStn LinkYears of data
RAROTONGA B184325

Summary:

Distance to center of:

Svalbard: 13,653.4 km
Greenland: 13,120.9 km
Glacier Bay: 9,088.49 km
Patagonia: 8,625.51 km
Antarctica: 7,650.55 km

SLC: 1st yr (1993) 6,876.8 RLR --> final yr (2017) 6,980.29 RLR {+103.49 mm}
Analysis: 1) Patagonia & Antarctica are the SLF & ghost-water sources,
2) Svalbard & Greenland are the SLR sources, 3) The bottom line is 103.49 mm of SLR.
Other: Ice mass loss equivalent: 37,419 Gt; Ghost water loss: 27.9423 mm.

Country: COSTA RICA, Coastal Id: 836

Station NameStn LinkYears of data
PUNTARENAS46426
QUEPOS8449
QUEPOS B21898

Summary:

Distance to center of:

Antarctica: 9,393.67 km
Svalbard: 9,198.09 km
Greenland: 7,775.18 km
Glacier Bay: 6,988.32 km
Patagonia: 5,872.38 km

SLC: 1st yr (1941) 7,058.67 RLR --> final yr (2016) 7,030 RLR {-28.67 mm}
Analysis: 1) Glacier Bay & Patagonia are the SLF & ghost-water sources,
2) Antarctica & Svalbard are the SLR sources, 3) The bottom line is 28.67 mm of SLF.
Other: Ice mass loss equivalent: 10,366.2 Gt; Ghost water loss: 7.7409 mm.

Country: COSTA RICA, Coastal Id: 906

Station NameStn LinkYears of data
PUERTO LIMON55221

Summary:

Distance to center of:

Antarctica: 9,245.76 km
Svalbard: 9,124.48 km
Greenland: 7,702.84 km
Glacier Bay: 7,019.22 km
Patagonia: 5,877.5 km

SLC: 1st yr (1948) 7,012.5 RLR --> final yr (1968) 6,983.04 RLR {-29.46 mm}
Analysis: 1) Glacier Bay & Patagonia are the SLF & ghost-water sources,
2) Antarctica & Svalbard are the SLR sources, 3) The bottom line is 29.46 mm of SLF.
Other: Ice mass loss equivalent: 10,651.9 Gt; Ghost water loss: 7.9542 mm.

A-C Appendix DNA Graphs-2

This is an Appendix to: Beyond Fingerprints: Sea Level DNA - 2

Canada, Coastline Code 822

Canada, Coastline Code 970

Chile, Coastline Code 810

Chile, Coastline Code 850

Columbia, Coastline Code 842

Columbia, Coastline Code 902

Cook Islands, Coastline Code 775

Cook Islands, Coastline Code 785

Costa Rica, Coastline Code 836

Costa Rica, Coastline Code 906

D-G Appendix CC SLC

This is an Appendix to: Beyond Fingerprints: Sea Level DNA - 2

France, Coastline Code 190

France, Coastline Code 230

France, Coastline Code 232

French Polynesia, Coastline Code 780

French Polynesia, Coastline Code 805

French Polynesia, Coastline Code 808

Germany, Coastline Code 120

Germany, Coastline Code 125
Germany, Coastline Code 140

Guatemala, Coastline Code 832

Guatemala, Coastline Code 916

D-G Appendix

This is an Appendix to: Beyond Fingerprints: Sea Level DNA - 2


Country: FRANCE, Coastal Id: 190

Station NameStn LinkYears of data
BREST1192
LE HAVRE45359
ST. MALO45426
CALAIS45550
ST. NAZAIRE45739
LE VERDON45913
LA ROCHELLE-LA PALLICE46647
CHERBOURG46744
DUNKERQUE46861
ST JEAN DE LUZ (SOCOA)46950
BOULOGNE47142
DIEPPE47455
POINTE ST. GILDAS107825
PORT TUDY124743
LE CONQUET129447
CONCARNEAU130122
ROSCOFF134745
ANTIFER13839
LES SABLES D OLONNE174731
BOUCAU180145
PORT BLOC191537
LE CROUESTY192121

Summary:

Distance to center of:

Patagonia: 11,835.6 km
Glacier Bay: 7,548.18 km
Antarctica: 5,304.62 km
Greenland: 3,528.67 km
Svalbard: 3,494.77 km

SLC: 1st yr (1807) 6,970.17 RLR --> final yr (2017) 7,059.64 RLR {+89.47 mm}
Analysis: 1) Greenland & Svalbard are the SLF & ghost-water sources,
2) Patagonia & Glacier Bay are the SLR sources, 3) The bottom line is 89.47 mm of SLR.
Other: Ice mass loss equivalent: 32,349.8 Gt; Ghost water loss: 24.1569 mm.

Country: FRANCE, Coastal Id: 230

Station NameStn LinkYears of data
MARSEILLE61132
SETE95824
TOULON98039
NICE146837
PORT VENDRES146928

Summary:

Distance to center of:

Patagonia: 11,876.3 km
Glacier Bay: 8,198.51 km
Antarctica: 4,830.83 km
Greenland: 4,158.53 km
Svalbard: 3,944.75 km

SLC: 1st yr (1885) 6,850.95 RLR --> final yr (2017) 6,976.34 RLR {+125.392 mm}
Analysis: 1) Greenland & Svalbard are the SLF & ghost-water sources,
2) Patagonia & Glacier Bay are the SLR sources, 3) The bottom line is 125.392 mm of SLR.
Other: Ice mass loss equivalent: 45,338.1 Gt; Ghost water loss: 33.8558 mm.

Country: FRANCE, Coastal Id: 232

Station NameStn LinkYears of data
AJACCIO192922

Summary:

Distance to center of:

Patagonia: 12,015.4 km
Glacier Bay: 8,430.08 km
Antarctica: 4,744.41 km
Greenland: 4,385.9 km
Svalbard: 4,070 km

SLC: 1st yr (1981) 7,014.2 RLR --> final yr (2017) 7,055.92 RLR {+41.72 mm}
Analysis: 1) Greenland & Svalbard are the SLF & ghost-water sources,
2) Patagonia & Glacier Bay are the SLR sources, 3) The bottom line is 41.72 mm of SLR.
Other: Ice mass loss equivalent: 15,084.7 Gt; Ghost water loss: 11.2644 mm.

Country: FRENCH POLYNESIA, Coastal Id: 780

Station NameStn LinkYears of data
PAPEETE-B FARE UTE POINT SOC.IS.139741

Summary:

Distance to center of:

Svalbard: 13,220 km
Greenland: 12,459.6 km
Glacier Bay: 8,525.43 km
Antarctica: 8,043.73 km
Patagonia: 8,025.56 km

SLC: 1st yr (1976) 7,078.4 RLR --> final yr (2016) 7,206.92 RLR {+128.52 mm}
Analysis: 1) Antarctica & Patagonia are the SLF & ghost-water sources,
2) Svalbard & Greenland are the SLR sources, 3) The bottom line is 128.52 mm of SLR.
Other: Ice mass loss equivalent: 46,469.1 Gt; Ghost water loss: 34.7004 mm.

Country: FRENCH POLYNESIA, Coastal Id: 805

Station NameStn LinkYears of data
NUKU HIVA155522

Summary:

Distance to center of:

Svalbard: 12,178.4 km
Greenland: 11,257.6 km
Antarctica: 9,015.29 km
Patagonia: 7,857.54 km
Glacier Bay: 7,482.03 km

SLC: 1st yr (1982) 6,958.33 RLR --> final yr (2012) 6,982.71 RLR {+24.38 mm}
Analysis: 1) Patagonia & Glacier Bay are the SLF & ghost-water sources,
2) Svalbard & Greenland are the SLR sources, 3) The bottom line is 24.38 mm of SLR.
Other: Ice mass loss equivalent: 8,815.1 Gt; Ghost water loss: 6.5826 mm.

Country: FRENCH POLYNESIA, Coastal Id: 808

Station NameStn LinkYears of data
RIKITEA125348
RANGIROA22168
TUBUAI22178

Summary:

Distance to center of:

Svalbard: 13,492.2 km
Greenland: 12,607.6 km
Glacier Bay: 8,784.02 km
Antarctica: 7,732.29 km
Patagonia: 7,387.39 km

SLC: 1st yr (1969) 6,987 RLR --> final yr (2016) 7,092.56 RLR {+105.563 mm}
Analysis: 1) Antarctica & Patagonia are the SLF & ghost-water sources,
2) Svalbard & Greenland are the SLR sources, 3) The bottom line is 105.563 mm of SLR.
Other: Ice mass loss equivalent: 38,168.6 Gt; Ghost water loss: 28.5021 mm.

Country: GERMANY, Coastal Id: 120

Station NameStn LinkYears of data
WISMAR 28170
WARNEMUNDE 211163
SASSNITZ39774
KOSEROW144838

Summary:

Distance to center of:

Patagonia: 13,063 km
Glacier Bay: 7,220.24 km
Antarctica: 6,136.69 km
Greenland: 3,224.58 km
Svalbard: 2,698.89 km

SLC: 1st yr (1848) 6,949.17 RLR --> final yr (2017) 7,134.36 RLR {+185.195 mm}
Analysis: 1) Greenland & Svalbard are the SLF & ghost-water sources,
2) Patagonia & Glacier Bay are the SLR sources, 3) The bottom line is 185.195 mm of SLR.
Other: Ice mass loss equivalent: 66,961.1 Gt; Ghost water loss: 50.0026 mm.

Country: GERMANY, Coastal Id: 125

Station NameStn LinkYears of data
TRAVEMUNDE13154
KIEL-HOLTENAU78949

Summary:

Distance to center of:

Patagonia: 12,939.3 km
Glacier Bay: 7,174.71 km
Antarctica: 6,100.51 km
Greenland: 3,161.16 km
Svalbard: 2,704.1 km

SLC: 1st yr (1856) 6,824 RLR --> final yr (2017) 7,088.54 RLR {+264.54 mm}
Analysis: 1) Greenland & Svalbard are the SLF & ghost-water sources,
2) Patagonia & Glacier Bay are the SLR sources, 3) The bottom line is 264.54 mm of SLR.
Other: Ice mass loss equivalent: 95,650 Gt; Ghost water loss: 71.4258 mm.

Country: GERMANY, Coastal Id: 140

Station NameStn LinkYears of data
CUXHAVEN 27174
AMRUM (WITTDUEN)103654
BORKUM (FISCHERBALJE)103754

Summary:

Distance to center of:

Patagonia: 12,793 km
Glacier Bay: 7,136.39 km
Antarctica: 6,051.14 km
Greenland: 3,107 km
Svalbard: 2,730.73 km

SLC: 1st yr (1843) 6,832.38 RLR --> final yr (2016) 7,091.62 RLR {+259.243 mm}
Analysis: 1) Greenland & Svalbard are the SLF & ghost-water sources,
2) Patagonia & Glacier Bay are the SLR sources, 3) The bottom line is 259.243 mm of SLR.
Other: Ice mass loss equivalent: 93,734.9 Gt; Ghost water loss: 69.9957 mm.

Country: GUATEMALA, Coastal Id: 832

Station NameStn LinkYears of data
SAN JOSE II77713
SAN JOSE97310

Summary:

Distance to center of:

Antarctica: 10,137 km
Svalbard: 8,859.86 km
Greenland: 7,444.31 km
Patagonia: 6,569.97 km
Glacier Bay: 6,208.2 km

SLC: 1st yr (1960) 7,096.71 RLR --> final yr (1975) 7,020.33 RLR {-76.38 mm}
Analysis: 1) Patagonia & Glacier Bay are the SLF & ghost-water sources,
2) Antarctica & Svalbard are the SLR sources, 3) The bottom line is 76.38 mm of SLF.
Other: Ice mass loss equivalent: 27,616.8 Gt; Ghost water loss: 20.6226 mm.

Country: GUATEMALA, Coastal Id: 916

Station NameStn LinkYears of data
SANTO TOMAS DE CASTILLA108018

Summary:

Distance to center of:

Antarctica: 9,860.65 km
Svalbard: 8,624.29 km
Greenland: 7,204.02 km
Patagonia: 6,654.13 km
Glacier Bay: 6,173.63 km

SLC: 1st yr (1964) 6,935.9 RLR --> final yr (1983) 6,934.36 RLR {-1.54 mm}
Analysis: 1) Patagonia & Glacier Bay are the SLF & ghost-water sources,
2) Antarctica & Svalbard are the SLR sources, 3) The bottom line is 1.54 mm of SLF.
Other: Ice mass loss equivalent: 556.819 Gt; Ghost water loss: 0.4158 mm.