Except here dammit!
Cephus, perhaps you can see the trace of the AMO superimposed on the trend, but that signal is swamped by the magnitude of the increase in trend. The increase in trend, that would be the AGW signal.
"It is now glaringly clear from our ice core record that modern snowfall rates in Alaska are much higher than natural rates before the Industrial Revolution,"
When ice cores are analyzed for ocean content, the SMOW (Standard Mean Ocean Water) data tells the story of both seasonal and long term changes in the ocean temperature that was the source of the snow. If they tested these ice cores for this (and they really should), we might know something about the changes in the ocean water that was the source of the snow. (or we might not)If the SMOW data shows the snow came from warmer water then we might know something about the source of the snow. If the data shows it is ocean effect snow, not tropical moisture, then we might actually know something about the cause of the snow increase. The problem with so much research is simple enough. If you are only looking for one thing (global; warming signals), you won't actually be doing science.
The secular increase in Denali and Mt. Logan ice core sea salt Na+ concentrations over recent centuries has also been interpreted as an extratropical response to warming Pacific SSTs, has a dramatic increase in the Mt. Logan δ18O record at 184037
Moore et al.15 found a positive and accelerating trend in Mt. Logan annual accumulation after the middle of the nineteenth century, and interpret it as indicative of a progressively more positive PNA. This was supported by Rupper et al.38 who confirm that high accumulation years on Mt. Logan are associated with a stronger wintertime Aleutian Low. Furthermore, the composite Mt. Logan and Mt. Hunter sea-salt Na+ calibrated Aleutian Low proxy similarly supports a progressive strengthening of the Aleutian Low over recent centuries to its strongest levels of the past 1500 years36 (Fig. S5).
Some problems with all that. First, if there was a hiatus, it's over.
Second, there's no plausible natural forcing that would drive the observed warming.
We're talking about the arctic which is warming at double the global rate, so there's plenty of warming to support greater specific humidity, therefor greater snow accumulations. There's also more open ocean in the vicinity rather than sea ice, so that's going to contribute to greater specific humidity.
Quote from: MikeB on December 28, 2017, 07:43:54 PMExcept here dammit!You got your next ten years worth of precip all at one whack! Are the SoCal fires out now?
Quote from: SR-71 on December 29, 2017, 09:18:50 AMQuote from: MikeB on December 28, 2017, 07:43:54 PMExcept here dammit!You got your next ten years worth of precip all at one whack! Are the SoCal fires out now? Uh, what? We've had no rain, only 80F temperatures and static spark dry. The Thomas fire is not out, although finally there are no more structures threatened.
Arctic ocean albedo is probably increased since specular reflection from water at low solar incidence angles is greater than for irregular ice.
When you post climate science interpretations that are equivalent to "The sky is Violet" I can only point out that you are sadly misinformed.
When you post climate science interpretations that are equivalent to "The sky is Violet"
I can only point out that you are sadly misinformed.