Guest post by Steven Goddard
In past years, NSIDC has referred to “declining multi-year ice” as the problem which the Arctic faces. Mark Serreze at NSIDC forecast a possible “Ice Free North Pole” in 2008, based on the fact that it had only first year ice. This year, multi-year ice has increased and NSIDC is now referring to declining “2+ year old” ice as the problem. Note the missing age group (2 year old ice) in the paragraph below from their latest press release .
First-year ice in particular is thinner and more prone to melting away than thicker, older, multi-year ice. This year, ice older than two years accounted for less than 10% of the ice cover at the end of February. From 1981 through 2000, such older ice made up an average of 30% of the total sea ice cover at this time of the year.
Due to the record minimum in 2007, it goes without saying that there isn’t a lot of three year old ice in 2009. Maybe next year they can raise the bar to 3+ year old ice, as the multi-year ice ages one more year?
Multi-year ice has increased from 2008, up to nearly 25%. Compare multi-year ice vs. last year’s map below – upper right corner.
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2008/040708.html
The press has picked up on the 10% figure, based on the new higher standard NSIDC has set.
Ice older than two years once accounted for some 30 to 40 percent of the Arctic’s wintertime cover and made up 25 percent as recently as 2007.
But last year it represented only 14 percent of the maximum. This year the figure fell to 10 percent.
Note too that ice extent is nearly back to normal and has not declined significantly from the winter maximum.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I’ve seen a global ice plot (the sum of Arctic and Antarctic) from time to time on this site. I have tried to find a source for this graph but have been unsuccessful. Can anyone point me to the source of this graph? Thanks!
Polar bears must be frightened. Sea extent almost normal, but its age, it age!
This I have found on CA: relation between AMO and ice extent. http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/8510/nhse72anomamo.png
vodoo: http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg
On the Guardian’s comment section one of the most prominent defenders of alarmism said scientists know how much Arctic ice there was over the last 8000 years because of Arctic ice-core records going back that far (he means the polar cap, not Greenland or anywhere else in the Arctic circle).
Anyone who is registered there, please give that person the biggest cyberslapdown on the history of the internet for that major blooper.
voodoo (13:19:48) :
“I’ve seen a global ice plot (the sum of Arctic and Antarctic) from time to time on this site. I have tried to find a source for this graph but have been unsuccessful. Can anyone point me to the source of this graph? Thanks!”
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg
It’s on Cryosphere Today. Note that the global extent is slightly above the 30 year average. It should move higher over the next few months as Antarctic ice freezes faster that Arctic melts. It also speaks to how unexcited we should be about polar ice totals.
I just posted this to the Catlin thread, but it’s more appropriate here
The reports that there’s only 10% old ice in the arctic ice strikes me as very odd mathematically. Even with higher melt the last 2 seasons, ice area was around 30% of it’s peak winter area. Unless your melting “old” ice at least as fast as the new ice rate, how do you get down to 10% old ice? Theoretically, if you did, you could get to about 10%, but that would go against the AGW supposition.
I’d be curious about the methodology of the study that defines what is new and old ice. If anyone has a link to the NASA report and/or data, I’d be interested. Comments from anyone who has looked into this would be appreciated. I’ll do some research and report if I find anything.
Don’t you love those molten hot colors used to designate ice?
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/
UK Itv news ran this thin ice rubbish last night, with a comment from the Catlin Crew stating the majority of their ice drilling showed a thickness of 2 mtrs.
Conveniently enough: no blues or light blues but oranges, reds and maroons. Well prepared for laymen eyes.
Nothing is more imaginary than the claim that CO2 is causing global warming
C02 Global Warming’s IPCC-created Hobglobin
By Dr. Tim Ball Monday, April 6, 2009
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/9971
The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is responsible for providing the hobgoblin of global warming. They claim CO2 is almost the sole cause of warming while effectively ignoring the sun. Their claim that the sun is of little consequence is unbelievable and only a measure of their deception and lousy science. They only looked at one part of solar influence on weather and climate and didn’t do that accurately. Instead they used it to support their claim the temperature changes are not caused by the sun and therefore must be due to CO2. They only considered irradiance (heat and light) and concluded, incorrectly, it was of little consequence. They assume, because the variation is approximately 0.1% over approximately a 30-year period, it is of little consequence.
It’s also interesting that the ice extent increased for a time in March and hasn’t declined much in April. I’m below 30 degrees latitude near Houston and I’m going to need my heat again tonight April… At least the gulf is staying cooler longer which should help during hurricane season.
voodoo, I believe this is what you want:
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg
Voodoo:
You’ve probably scene the “Cryosphere Today” site graphs. They have excellent graphs on 365-day data and a “Global Sea Ice Area” graph that, incidentally, is showing well above the 1979-2000 trend at the moment.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/
Also, check out the above normal Southern Hemisphere sea ice chart…
If only NSIDC would raise the bar on their science, instead of being so busy banging the alarmist drum.
@voodoo
This one?
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg
it is at cryosphere today
Interesting data, although I hardly listen to their useless predictions in any case.
Speaking of predictions, Hathaway et al have updated their Solar prediction graph (judging from the quick look I had, not much has changed).
Also of note, a minor cycle 23 plague appeared about 2 days ago, just below the equator but has since vanished,,, making SC 23 about 12yrs, 11 months old now.
Voodoo, the graphic you looking for is on this page: http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/
The secret to a good scare campaign is to take something that is common and to make it seem unusual.
If there was ever permanent ice at the north pole ( that is all year, not just in winter) would not the ice get thicker and thicker? Is there any way of telling how thick the ice at the pole was say 500 years ago? If it wasn’t hundreds of metres thick we could conclude that it was frequently “ice free” in summer. Which means the fluctuations of the extent of summer ice that are happenning are not unusual.
It appears the Cryosphere guys did a major change to their sea ice graphic for the Arctic, it wasn’t too long ago the graphic was showing very close to 100 percent ice from Canada to Russia and I think that was the April 3rd graphic, apparently they went back a day and ‘corrected’ the data.
I wonder what they will do about the Antarctic ice though, its area is going up at a pretty good clip right now.
If you’re looking at temperatures UAH shows a 2 month trend of temperatures spiking up and falling in the lowest levels, a small declining 2 month trend in the middle levels, and at 56 and 68 thousand feet a very significant 2 month warming trend, and they got rid of the near surface layer data (the lowest is now 3000 feet)
The NSIDC also fails to mention that the Antarctic sea ice is 16% above the 1979-2000 mean. http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/s_plot_hires.png
I don’t know if any of you has watched CNN today.
There was an extensive report about the collapse of the ice bridge followed by Hillary Clinton stating the effects of Global Warming in the Antarctic region were so obvious now that we had to act immediately.
NSIDC feeding from the same trough keeps the hoax about the melting arctic alive.
This is all part of the latest offensive to get us all in “Green Shackles”.
Therefore, give them hell if you can.
Who wants to be represented by a Government of liars, frauds and cheats.
Well over the past ten years for the most recent 12-month period, we are now seeing a temperature trend of -7.5 degrees per century (-0.75 degrees per decade). We are now very near the “average” for the 20th Century (1901 to 2000).
At this rate it will be snowing in Havana in another 10 years.
REPLY: bad link there crosspatch, it is not a permalink, better to show the params or to do a screencap and post to photobucket o the like – Anthony
OOps, bad link, meant this one.
REPLY: That’s a temporary file too, so I saved it here:
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/files/2009/04/graph_10year_temperature_trend.gif
– Anthony
Considering the -40C temps the arctic survey team has been experiencing it’s not surprising that there hasn’t been much of a decline from the winter maximum!