“Multiple flights northwards from various stations showed an ice thickness between 2.5 (two years old ice in the vicinity of the North Pole) and 4 metres (perennial ice in Canadian offshore regions). All in all, the ice was somewhat thicker than during the last years in the same regions, which leads to the conclusion that Arctic ice cover recovers temporarily.”

Nothing in the press release suggests that the scientists found anything particularly surprising or unexpected, nor is it ever suggested that the results contradict AGW theory. Those claims were made in the Radio Bremen article, not by the Institute itself. The Institute seems to be rather neutral about the Polar 5 results, noting that it will take weeks to analyze the data.

Several of the comments above made reference to an interview in German in which one of the scientists said his colleagues were “surprised.” However, it seems very unclear from Google and other web translators what exactly they were surprised about. I studied German for two semesters in college and couldn’t make sense out of the scientist’s comment.

I think the message here is “stay tuned.”

With posts like that, this site could simultaneously win the best Comedy blog as well as the best Science blog next year.

I think I’ll see if that story “breaks the ice at parties” (courtesy of Monty Python) at my next social event in Berkeley.

I think you are quite correct about the true test being this summer. Time will tell.

I myself find I’m drawn to look at the ice extent graph on a daily basis, despite the fact I have concluded it is largely irrelivant, and have concluded much of the discussion about the “ice extent” is balderdash.

Rather than “ice-melt” I have concluded we should be talking about “ice-flush.” If winds are perfect, a large amount of arctic ice flushes out and down the right shoulder of Greenland. On the other hand, if winds cause polar constipation, there is a plugged toilet and no flushing occurs. Topics such as “ice extent,” “first-year-ice,” “first-and-second-year-ice,” and even the most-high subject of “albedo” are all determined by how well the arctic toilet flushed in the past few years. In conclusion, Ice-extent seems to have more to do with winds than warming.

I have wasted a lot of time, and annoyed my wife, (who thinks I could make better use of my time,) looking into things such as the driftwood on the shores of the Arctic Ocean, (which, after radio-carbon dating, suggests the Arctic Ocean was reletively ice-free during summers in the reletively recent past, especially when wood from Siberia winds up on the north coast of E. Island.) This has persuaded me that the Arctic Sea goes through “slushy” spells, where it is reletively easy for the correct winds to flush the stuff over and down the right shoulder of Greenland. I assume there are also “rigid” spells, where it is less easy to flush the stuff. (I would use terms such as “constipated” and “laxitive,” but I fear I’ve stretched that particular analogy past the limit of Political Correctness.)

I used to bring up this topic at cocktail parties in in a most casual manner, stating, “I have a friend who heard someone he knew once met a fellow who studied driftwood up on the shores of the Arctic Ocean…” Everyone frowned at me. The entire room seemed to lean inwards in a most menacing manner. Therefore I decided it was unwise to bring up such topics, even casually, in a Politically Correct setting.

If you want to “get along,” ( like good old Rodney King,) it is best to avoid disillusioning people who are firmly convinced that ice at the North Pole used to be 75 feet thick, and only recently has become thinner.

When some fool disturbs such people at a cocktail party, by stating WUWT recently produced photos of submarines surfacing at the North Pole in 1959, you can become amazingly popular and have lots of pretty gals smile at you if you frown at the fellow and state the following:

Those pictures were forged. Just as Saddam Hussian once convinced the world he had all sorts of terrible weapons, (when in fact he had three pea-shooters and a trained attack-duck,) in 1959 the United States attempted to scare the old Soviet Union by claiming it had submarines surfacing at the North Pole.

Actually the forged photos were meant more as a taunt than an actual scare-tactic. The United States was convinced the Soviet Union would see through the scam. They were shocked when intellegence indicated the Russians had attempted to surface a sub through 75 feet of ice, crushed the conning tower, and had wound up sinking to the oozy bottom of the Arctic Sea.

When the sub didn’t return, the Russians assumed it had been sunk by Americans, and sent a fleet of seventeen submarines north. Due to a failure in logistics, all seventeen attempted to surface through 75 feet of ice, and now there are eightteen subs that lie at the bottom of the Arctic Ocean.

It is the melt-down of the nuclear power-plants within those eighteen nuclear submarines which has led to the thinning of arctic ice. In the near future this thinning will lead to reduced albedo, and run-away Global Warming. The military is trying to hush this up, because they are very ashamed about being untruthful to the Russians in 1959. Being dishonest always lands you in trouble. Just ask Saddam Hussian.

At this point it is wise to pause and just silently shake your head, at the cocktail party. Look about the room, and gauge how many are swallowing your utter balderdash. A few will be leaning backwards with skeptical expressions, but an amazing number will still be leaning forward, with wide and innocent eyes, and open mouths, lapping it all up.

Then it is time for your punchline. Writhe, in exaggerated agoney, and ask how God could ALLOW such things to happen! Then raise an index finger and say, with a chuckle, that God knew best. God had to find SOME way to stop the next Ice Age, even if it involved eighteen soviet subs and the downfalls of both Russia and the United States. And so it has happened, you should conclude, but then you should raise a finger again, to add to your PS.

Say, “I’m sure you will want a link to a site on the internet where what I say is verified by some peer-reviewed document, but the link I shall give you is to a PEERLESS commentator!” (What this means is that you are making everything up, but never admit it.) Then give them the website;

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/28/inconvenient-eisdicken/

And tell them to scroll down to the comment by “Caleb” towards the end of the May 1st comments.

Few will bother to do so. Instead a crowd of rather pretty women will surround you and treat you like a hero, as the men at the cocktail party hate your guts.

So you see, being popular in modern society has nothing to do with plastic surgery or dying your hair or squeezing into designer jeans. All you need to do is suggest the ice at the North Pole was 75 feet thick in 1959, and you’ve got it made!

Until next summer, that is. When the ice doesn’t flush away, and is in fact thicker, there are going to be some problems at the cocktail parties.

However we-who-know-how-to-handle-such-situations will surely invent a new breath-taking story to tell.

(Sarc Off.)

What is under discussion here is multiyear ice. There has been an increase in ice area/extent for the month of April, but that has to be mainly due to the formation of more first year ice. The 2008 minimum ice area and extent were way below the 1979-2000 average and the second lowest on record. The variation in year to year April ice extent is very small. The true test of recovery is in the summer. The area is of importance because of the effect of albedo.

REPLY: “If” the sea ice extent was declining or static, your opinion might be valid. But Arctic Sea Ice extent is near normal now, and that is not just compaction.

The press release clearly states the 2yr old ice was 2m thick and the aged ice 4m, the quote used from the unamed official has clearly been used out of context.
Nowhere in the press release do the researchers say that results are not as expected.
No Measurements where taken at the north pole, indeed the thicker ice measurements where all coastal (around Greenland and the isles) and not taken at the north pole. Seems like a simple case of older ice being melted out of position and drifting according to the prevailing currents to me.

Google translation:

“”When the first results was a surprise for my colleagues, that they come from the satellite measurements have noticed that the further expansion of sea ice has declined. On the other hand, they have but there, in regions where they are in the past have ever measured, whereas thicker ice measured. In the extreme case, they have up to 15 meter thick sea ice measured. ”

What this means is not yet clear. One possibility is that the volume of sea ice still has not increased. The scientists could accidentally when measuring pushed to posts, where the ice by currents, wind drift or is together. Because it’s from the past, relatively few comparative data exist, is difficult to interpret. This allows the geophysicist Steinhage do not rhyme to make the first results.

“So, I think that this trend exists. But in my view, more interesting question is whether the short-term fluctuation or a long-term. It may well be that the amount of sea ice is constant and that the decreasing surface area by an increase in thickness is compensated. And I have no explanation, what physical process behind it that this is so. “”

I have already explained it above. The Arctic Sea is dynamic place and the its “frozenness” can not be judged by a single parameter alone. Ice extent, ice volume, wind, currents, albedo must be taken into consideration.

Creationists and Alarmists seems to share this anti-evidence-routine.

Both also share the same degree of unwarranted conviction, as if shutting your ears to contrary evidence will make it go away. As Voltaire said: “Doubt is uncomfortable, but certainty is ridiculous.”

It looks like they did. This from the Catlin site: “Their spirits were lifted briefly today when they heard the distant engines of a DC3 aircraft overhead. They thought their minds were playing tricks on them, but sure enough a DC3 did indeed fly within 13 miles of their camp”

The item does not report that they were also measuring the ice thickness… :-)

“The plane is owned by Kenn Borek Air Ltd., a Calgary-based charter service specializing in Arctic and Antarctic flights.

Verhoef said plans to complete the aerogravity survey last year were postponed after the DC-3 sustained damage to its landing gear on a flight to Antarctica.

This spring’s High Arctic flights are expected to be completed by the beginning of May, Verhoef said, adding that late March and April usually offer ideal visibility for researchers and the aircrew.

“This is the period of the year when it’s clearest,” he said. “If you do it later, flying at low altitude, you might get ice fog, and you might have difficulty flying or landing and taking off.”

http://www.canada.com/Danish+Canadian+scientists+Arctic+Ocean/1398916/story.html

The ice is thicker than expected, but they don’t understand why.
They have not enough data.

The interview ist in german.

http://www.dradio.de/dlf/sendungen/forschak/958476/

“Chocks away chaps!”. quoth Captain Flasheart. ” I treat my plane like I treat my women. I climb up into the cockpit and take them to heaven five times a day!”. http://www.baslerturbo.com/