WUWT Arctic Sea Ice News #7

Its not nice to mock the afflicted….
Judging from the coastline floods that are being experienced world-wide (aren’t they?) the continuing melt is wreaking havoc with civilization.
Perhaps some kindly physicist will calculate the time it would take for all the sea-ice to melt if the temperature within the arctic circle made it to 25C and stayed there indefinitely. Might be an interesting exercise….

Man-made global warming is melting in a sea of facts & evidence proving AGW is a hoax.
Arctic sea ice extent is exhibit # 1

From the looks of the Cyrosphere Today Global Sea Ice Area Mean and this one:
http://www.robertb.darkhorizons.org/seaice.anomaly.Ant_arctic.jpg
the overlay of the Southern & Northern Sea Ice Anomalies…
The current trend is for the two to converge once again… at zero anomaly in the year 2023.
By 2036, they will be freaking out over the loss of the Antarctic Sea Ice leading up to the melting of Antarctica.
I’m roughly estimating a period of 26 years for the cycle to repeat itself, from existing data.

Is that blue line in the ocean on the equator west of South America a La Niña?
http://climateinsiders.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/sst_anom.gif?w=510&h=382
If so that is bad news for the global warming crowd. La Niña will make the cold anomaly by Alaska remain and melt there will be slower than usual.
I don’t see this below 2007 extent staying much longer. Especially since the drop below the 2007 extent line is not from melt.

Anomalies only to be found in AGWrs. minds

I am not sure why Anthony and Steve are labouring this.
It is a wait until September job.
I know the ice is poster child for the thermogedon loons along with the growing polar bear population and baby penguins, ( seal and killer whale food as I call them ), unless you are trying to bait the whole raft of the thermogedonists out of the woodwork, why bother?
If the intention is to bait them then, “as you were”, their knickers are knotted up and then some.

Richard M
Dr. Hansen also believed in 2004 that soot was a primary factor in Arctic warming.
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2004/2004_Hansen_Nazarenko.pdf

Explanation from Joe Bastardi for his Arctic ice forecast:
6:01 video
http://www.accuweather.com/video/89017432001/colder-pdo-thickening-ice.asp?channel=vblog_bastardi

Peter Foster says:
May 31, 2010 at 10:34 am
Given the little error of using metres instead of feet it is obviously time for America to ditch the imperial – feet, Farenheit and month/day/year etc and go with the rest of the world in metric – metres, celsius and day/month/year (a logical sequence).
Sorry could not resist a little dig.
Don’t you know that the internationalizing of the metric system, followed by the ISO (International Standards Organization) it is part of the Global Governance Agenda?
BTW, the english system it is not abstract but natural?. Can you imagine a circle of 400 degrees? That is the international circle, it does not correspond with observable reality. It was invented by the French Revolution in its effort to de-sacralize reality, it was part of a wider secularizing project, to deny human ethics and moral principles. The STATE should replace GOD.

Question (OT) : Perhaps I’ve been misreading the colors on the anomoly chart , but the sea surface temps off the Southeastern coast don’t appear to be unusually warm , but I have heard repeatedly on the Weather Channel that these waters are experiencing record warmth . Can anyone tell me what gives ?

Peter Foster,
You forgot metric time – a year of 100 days, with 100 hours in each day. Of course, the start and end of each day would rarely coincide with the rising and setting of the sun, but not much in metric corresponds to anything in nature anyway, so why not.

Although air temperature in the Arctic basin is below freezing, the Sun’s radiation heats and melts ice. It’s up 24/7 you know, except when cloudy.

joshuahedlund says:
May 31, 2010 at 11:26 am
It is all just fine because of this, this and this. Why? Because nobody ever proved it wasn’t.
It’s called the Null Hypothesis.
If your assertion that this site or topic is biased were true, we would be blasting that everything is all messed up and headed towards Global Freezing. And that is equally unproven. AGW is going the same route as The Coming Ice Age, which wasn’t.
Null & Void.

Given that Arctic temperature continues to rise (quite substantially in recent decades), and that this rise can only reasonably be attributed to anthropogenic influences, can anyone honestly expect the current long-term decline of Arctic sea ice to slow down, stop or reverse?

Well, There’s one thing that was forgotten in the calculation for the temperature projection for Colorado. We’re at altitude so water boils at about 206 not 212, so it would be Christmas Eve not Christmas Day. LOL! Getting back to the point of the article, the variances I saw were within the error limits for the data. Which by definition variances are.

Steven mosher: May 31, 2010 at 10:49 am
The focus on arctic ice is a debate mistake of the first order. Since it’s a secondary line of evidence for AGW, there is nothing much to be gained in questioning it and being right, and everything to lose in questioning it and being wrong.

There is truth in your contention, but I would submit that it only applies to those who take an actively objective look at these matters, and who spend time trying to understand the issues. One of the reasons so many people believe in CAGW is precisely that they have been inundated with a non-stop barrage of ‘cherry picks’. People in general don’t read much beyond the headlines (if they read at all), and as you know, erroneous attributions are rarely retracted, and seldom with as much fanfare as their promulgation. Cherry-picked truth, in sufficient quantity and variety, will have, and already is having, a salutary counter-effect.
Not one person in (some large number) really has a clue about the details of ClimateGate, and they don’t really want to put much effort into finding out. They just know that a bunch of people were caught cheating, and that a lot of other people have been making a big deal about it, and lots of enquiries have been initiated, and so on. The result, in only six months, has been a remarkable decrease in belief in the warmologists’ dogma. Not nearly as many people are scared witless any more.
I have my own mailing list of about 400 people (friends, colleagues, and acquaintances) to whom I regularly distribute selected ‘cherry picks’. I make them short, topical, and punchy, and often in the form of images and short videos that require little effort to assimilate. But I never lie. They are always factual, and they are having an effect. Many of the more devoted ‘believers’ undoubtedly just delete the messages, but they still see the titles, or click on the attached images, and after enough time they can’t help but feel that things might not really be ‘as advertised’. All of them know that I believe that the CO2 and CAGW issues are utter bull[snip], but they also know, for other reasons, that I am not a raving idiot, and thus it has an effect, if for no other reason than that they are reminded.
/dr.bill

BiilyBob says:
May 31, 2010 at 12:40 pm
Soot. In the MWP. Could the wildfires that produced the soot come from drought? As in … 1930′s style dustbowl drought or worse?
Note that Lee Kington says:
May 31, 2010 at 9:43 am
“The soot, scientists speculate, came from giant wildfires that likely occurred in Australia and South America.”
Just at first glance… if that was the case, these giant wildlifes were probably caused by aboriginal burning, as usual, but perhaps with drier conditions making them more widespread once lit. But I must emphasize that I do not know if it was drier in South America during the MWP… or if conditions then would have increased those human pops.
But I do know that fire was the primary land management tool of those people, and prior to European contact the Amazon – like the rest of South America – was home to many people. The use of fire in Australia is well documented, and the true state of the Pre-contact Amazon is just being uncovered.
The reason wildfires are now so severe in Australia, and California, is that with aboriginal people/burning regimes removed too much fuel now builds up.
Lots of info on this topic here: http://westinstenv.org/news/

What is the scale for superimposed Volume data curve?

dr.bill says:
May 31, 2010 at 12:55 pm
There is truth in your contention, but I would submit that it only applies to those who take an actively objective look at these matters, and who spend time trying to understand the issues. One of the reasons so many people believe in CAGW is precisely that they have been inundated with a non-stop barrage of ‘cherry picks’. People in general don’t read much beyond the headlines (if they read at all), and as you know, erroneous attributions are rarely retracted, and seldom with as much fanfare as their promulgation. Cherry-picked truth, in sufficient quantity and variety, will have, and already is having, a salutary counter-effect.
I would say only a fraction of people want to know the science, and the rest are either just emotionally manipulated into the “polar bears are cute” mindset, or view it as a “belonging” – something they can do to get approval without having to think too much. A bit like wearing a Che Guevara T-shirt.
Take a look at this http://comixed.com/2010/01/04/the-science-is-settled/ The comments are interesting in places.

Vincent says:
May 31, 2010 at 11:37 am
‘… but not much in metric corresponds to anything in nature anyway, so why not.’
A metre is about 1/10,000,000th of the distance from the equator to the pole and a newton is about the weight of an apple!

[snip]
Permanent arctic sea ice is melting. The remaining ice is thinner and moving more freely sooner in the season. If you have a pond three quarters covered with ice, you have 75% ice extent. If you break that ice into tiny fragments spread over the entire pond, you have 100% extent of ice cover. The degree of that cover, fairly obviously, is still 75%. The area of actual ice is still 75% of the pond area. Extent and area are not the same thing.
The fact that the arctic has broken up sooner than normal is not good.
It’s not a hard thing to grasp. The arctic will be essentially ice free during the summer. Not sure if it when it will happen, but the trend is clear enough for all to consider.
How should we define an ice free arctic:
Less than 100,000 km^2 ice in the entire basin?
Open water (>7,000,000 km^2) with less than 5% ice?
No multi-year ice?
Will iceburgs count?

“How is five metre thick ice supposed to “just melt away quite suddenly?”
Well, looking at the 2010 situation you might notice that the 5-meter zones close to Greenland and North Canada (theonly ones surviving by the end of September) almost vanished. We’ll talk this over in 5 years or so.
What is the official WUWT prediction for this Sep minimum? 500k more than 2009?

Peter Foster says:
May 31, 2010 at 10:34 am

Given the little error of using metres instead of feet it is obviously time for America to ditch the imperial – feet, Farenheit and month/day/year etc and go with the rest of the world in metric – metres, celsius and day/month/year (a logical sequence).
Sorry could not resist a little dig.

Ah, but metric is so nineteenth century. We’re in the digital age, now. Imperial volume measures were based on halves and doubling—in other words, computer friendly powers of two.

2⁰            1oz       ounce
2¹            2         ?
2²            4         gill
2³            8         cup
2⁴           16         pint
2⁵           32         quart
2⁶           64         bote (bottle)
2⁷          128         gallon
2⁸          256         firkin
2⁹          512         ? (quarter-keg, 4gal, 3⅞gal contents)
2¹⁰        1024         ? (half-keg or pony, 8gal, 7¾gal contents)
2¹¹        2048        keg (16gal, 15½gal contents)
2¹²        4048        barrel (32gal, 31gal contents)
2¹²+2¹¹    6144        hogshead (48gal, 1bbl plus 1keg)
2¹⁴       16384        pipe or butt (128gal)
2¹⁵       32768        tun/ton (256gal, 2048lbs water-weight)  

The same halving and doubling exists for dry measures, e.g. bushels pecks, and quarts.
I didn’t remember all the name values, but what I did should look familiar. 🙂
cheers,
gary

rbateman says:
May 31, 2010 at 11:09 am
How much warming can soot cause when it’s buried under another meter of fresh ice?
— —
You are touching something that has been in the back of my mind for quite a while. The answer is not much if any at all. And if the next year is similar with more snow, not much again.
But when a warmer period comes along the top layers melt which concentrates the soot at lower levels. Many years of this would cause all the multi-year soot to now be concentrated at the bottom thin layer. Presto, complete melt.
In other words, is that mechanism partially at fault in the 2007 melt? Was it temperature driven at all?

It’s always amazing how polar bears can make a diving board out of most anything!
I remember watching some polar bears at the zoo, really playful, they would climb up this stack of bolders to get a great high enterance into the pool below, splash a huge amount of water out as they dived in. Looks like the one pictured above has found a good one. Look closely, that bear is thanking Al and WWF for his new playset!

Andrew Xnn
There is no such thing as permanent Arctic sea ice. After a few years it always gets flushed out in the North Atlantic.

wayne says:
May 31, 2010 at 2:39 pm
In other words, is that mechanism partially at fault in the 2007 melt? Was it temperature driven at all?
According to the DMI temp >80N graph for 2007, no.
I’m not even sure that the angle of insolation at those latitudes is sufficient to make a difference.
The wind explanation still wins, and NASA’s wind model results for Mars Arctic Cap looks like a winner too.

rbateman says:
May 31, 2010 at 3:40 pm
According to the DMI temp >80N graph for 2007, no.
I’m not even sure that the angle of insolation at those latitudes is sufficient to make a difference.
The wind explanation still wins, and NASA’s wind model results for Mars Arctic Cap looks like a winner too.
The winds, ah the winds, I would agree they have at least a magnitudes larger effect.
Good point. I just keep that “soot” effect in my mind having watched what a very thin sprinkling of fireplace ash does to my driveway in the winter. I never shovel. And if that layering up and down over the decades is there, I can see how that would, at some time, after years of accumulation, cause a total melt to flush the soot back to the sea, starting a new decadal cycle. That was my comment, a smaller seconary effect.

Lee Kington says:
May 31, 2010 at 9:43 am
Anthony…. Ice news , of a different nature, from the other end of the globe…….
” The first samples already reveal intriguing evidence of climate complexity. In ice layers attributed to the Middle Ages, when Europe was unusually warm, the team found surprisingly high levels of carbon black particles, or soot. Levels were found to be twice as high as during the more heavily populated and industrialized 20th century, says geochemist Ross Edwards at the Desert Research Institute in Reno, Nev.
Overlooked in climate projections until recently, carbon black is a powerful warming agent. The soot, scientists speculate, came from giant wildfires that likely occurred in Australia and South America. So much soot could have raised temperatures.
Preliminary tests also showed that soot levels dropped during the cooler centuries after the Middle Ages, a period known as the Little Ice Age. “
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704655004575114010457906340.html?mod=wsj_india_main
___________________________________________________________________________
Note how the Klimate Psychientists are working hard to blame anything but the sun for climate changes.
Earlier research reported by NASA
The Sun’s Chilly Impact on Earth
“The paper, “Solar forcing of regional climate change during the Maunder Minimum,” by authors Drew Shindell, Gavin Schmidt, and David Rind, from NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies and co-authors Michael Mann and Anne Waple, from the Universities of Virginia and Massachusetts respectively, appears in the Dec. 7 issue of Science
text

Expat in France says:
May 31, 2010 at 9:50 am
This is all brilliant stuff.
The big problem being that WE can see the nonsense propagated about polar ice by those who, for their own reasons, dishonestly tell only half the true story.
Of greater importance, however, is how this message may be forcefully propagated to government, and the mainstream media so that Joe Public gets the truth of the full picture, …
Surely there is a duty somewhere, to make this stuff headline news?
__________________________________________________________________________
Those that OWN the presses CONTROL the news. I am sure the owners of the presses or in the case of the BBC the managers of the pension fund have placed big money in the carbon trade business.
Gaining control of the news presses to advance public policies favorable to the shearers of the sheep and not the sheeple being sheared is nothing new. J.P. Morgan Interests Buy 25 of America’s Leading Newspapers and Insert Editors: U.S. Congressional Record February 9, 1917, page 2947
“Mr. CALLAWAY: Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to insert in the Record a statement that I have of how the newspapers of this country have been handled by the munitions manufacturers…..
“In March, 1915, the J.P. Morgan interests, the steel, ship building and powder interests and their subsidiary organizations, got together 12 men high up in the newspaper world and employed them to select the most influential newspapers in the United States and sufficient number of them to control generally the policy of the daily press in the United States.
“These 12 men worked the problems out by selecting 179 newspapers, and then began, by an elimination process, to retain only those necessary for the purpose of controlling the general policy of the daily press throughout the country. They found it was only necessary to purchase the control of 25 of the greatest papers. The 25 papers were agreed upon; emissaries were sent to purchase the policy, national and international, of these papers; an agreement was reached; the policy of the papers was bought, to be paid for by the month; an editor was furnished for each paper to properly supervise and edit information regarding the questions of preparedness, militarism, financial policies and other things of national and international nature considered vital to the interests of the purchasers.
“This contract is in existence at the present time, and it accounts for the news columns of the daily press of the country being filled with all sorts of preparedness arguments and misrepresentations as to the present condition of the United States Army and Navy, and the possibility and probability of the United States being attacked by foreign foes.
“This policy also included the suppression of everything in opposition to the wishes of the interests served. The effectiveness of this scheme has been conclusively demonstrated by the character of the stuff carried in the daily press throughout the country since March, 1915. They have resorted to anything necessary to commercialize public sentiment and sandbag the National Congress into making extravagant and wasteful appropriations for the Army and Navy under false pretense that it was necessary. Their stock argument is that it is ‘patriotism.’ They are playing on every prejudice and passion of the American people.”

Alan Simpson says:
May 31, 2010 at 10:13 am
I am not sure why Anthony and Steve are labouring this.
_____________________________________________________________________
Because the US Congress wants to pass a Cap and Trade law NOW and not in September. We need ammo to use against the scare mongers with their professional propaganda machine.

Icarus says:
May 31, 2010 at 12:34 pm
“Given that Arctic temperature continues to rise (quite substantially in recent decades), and that this rise can only reasonably be attributed to anthropogenic influences, can anyone honestly expect the current long-term decline of Arctic sea ice to slow down, stop or reverse?”
__________________________________________________________________________
Yes, anyone who is honest can. If climate ran in a linear trend mode then over the long term the earth would be a block of ice by now. Instead the climate runs in cyclical long term trends. The math is real simple. If the time period is short enough the slope of the curve is approximated by a line.
That is why the CAGW propaganda machine changed its tune from “Global Warming” to “Climate Change” recently and are in such a rush to get their carbon trading con in place. They need time to pick our pockets clean before we figure out it is just a con-game and reverse the damage. Unfortunately they will have skimmed the wealth from many nations leaving wreckage behind as they move on to implement the next con.
Would you please do a bit of research on the people and groups behind this con-game starting with the World Bank/IMF. You do remember the leaked Denmark text do you not??? It blew Copenhagen out of the water. The draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank A brand new article as of today shows the text was clearly advantageous to the US and the west, would have steamrollered the developing countries, and was presented to a few countries a week before the meeting officially started.
Here are a few articles you really should read whether you believe in AGW or not. Capitalist or liberal, most will agree the bankers are our real enemies once they are educated.
IMF/World Bank Structural Adjustment Programs
Today I resigned from the staff of the International Monetary Fund….
Confessions of an Economic Hit Man:
The Bankers Manifesto of 1892: History repeats itself in regular cycles.
Evidence of Mr. Graham Towers: Governor of the Bank of Canada, appearing in 1939, before the COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND COMMERCE:
1913 OUR MONEY SYSTEM: The Biggest Swindle in History!
US Banks Operating Without Reserve Requirements
1989: LEVERAGED BUYOUTS: AMERICANS PAYS THE PRICE

Your composite graph …
http://climateinsiders.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/2010volumevsextent.jpg
… does not make sense to me as it is since you haven’t placed a parallel km^3 scale on the vertical axis. Also you don’t have a normal curve for volume. Could you clarify?

wayne says:
May 31, 2010 at 2:16 pm
Seems by that map even the Atlantic as a whole has cooled compared to the last few months. What’s up with that? Think the excess heat from the 80′s, 90′s and early 00′s is finally running bit low?
________________________________________________________________________
Ocean temperature runs in cycles. Here are a couple of articles that will help explain.
The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation – not quite cool yet: July 14, 2009
Spencer: Global Average Sea Surface Temperatures Poised for a Plunge: May 20, 2010
text
New geologic evidence of past periods of oscillating, abrupt warming, and cooling: …Isotope data from Greenland ice cores and show a consistent pattern of fluctuating warm and cool periods over the past 500 years . The average period of warming/cooling oscillations over the past 500 years is 27 years, remarkably similar to the period of alternation between warm and cool Pacific Decadal Oscillation…
Ocean heat content and Earth’s radiation imbalance: A strong connection between Earth’s radiative imbalance and the heat content of the oceans has been known for some time…

Ron: I found this:
Dr Serreze added: “I think Wieslaw is probably a little aggressive in his projections, simply because the luck of the draw means natural variability can kick in to give you a few years in which the ice loss is a little less than you’ve had in previous years. But Wieslaw is a smart guy and it would not surprise me if his projections came out.” http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7139797.stm
Scientific debate is not as heated as blog debates. Interestingly Wieslaw Maslowski criticized Al Gore for over stating the case.
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/12/palin-vs-gore-climate-showdown/
You also have to be careful about just what “ice free” means. To researchers this does not mean zero ice, but media reports do not often make this clear.

Steve,
I always find your characterization of the Arctic interesting. Most amusing is your graph of sea ice volume superimposed on the sea ice extent…wow, with the extent being the lowest in the past 8 years, based on IJIS/JAXA data, http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm
And the volume you’ve projected not showing such similar decline, that means the ice that is there must be incredibly thick…off the charts thick…needless to say, I think you are highly mistaken, and if you’re still using the PIPS 2.0 data for your estimates, I am sure you are mistaken. It surprizes me that you would use this data when myself and others have gone to such lengths to show you why this data is suspect at best.
Oh well, another of your famous Sea Ice updates has come and gone, and now the 2010 melt season is really going to get started in earnest with the extent starting at the lowest in 8 years, we’ll see how your incredibly (and I say erroneously) high volume holds up as we head through the heart of the summer and head to the September low…

R. Gates
And BTW, if the PIPS 3 maps exist, they will show exactly the same thing.

stevengoddard says:
May 31, 2010 at 9:21 pm
“Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013′ …. Former US Vice President Al Gore cited Professor Maslowski’s analysis on Monday in his acceptance speech at the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony in Oslo.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7139797.stm
But, as I recall, the Professor later stated that he never said that.
As you know, Gore makes stuff up.

It’s amazing how you’ve superimposed the ice volume line onto the ice extent graph as if to suggest that it’s way, way, WAY above statistical average, whereas in actual fact Arctic sea ice volume has been declining steadily over the past years, and is currently at its lowest level ever.
I wonder what you’re going to do to persuade yourself it’s still business as usual when all that summer ice is gone.

I don’t care what conspiracy of “global governance” there was behind the metric system — that fact is, metric is so much easier to work with than imperial measurements. How anyone can possibly defend the use of the imperial system, especially if they’re a scientist, is absolutely beyond me. At what temperature does water freeze on the Celsius scale? Why, zero! At what temperature does it boil? Why, 100! (assuming STP of course). It is contradictory for any first-world developed country to continue to use imperial in this day and age and yet call themselves modern.

Steve, it appears from this posting that you are deliberately trying to hide the ice extent decline. Many sources are now showing the ice extent right now to be the lowest observed during the satellite data record at this time of year, yet you continue to try to find other distractions so as not to mention this fact.
It is very misleading to show an ice volume (with no units) on top of sea ice extent, and to show volume for 1 year without putting it into context of several years. Nor is it scientifically correct to pick two years (i.e. cherry picking) to try to make a point. It is long-term trends that are of importance, not individual years. Even so, stating that the ice is the same as it was 10 years ago simply is not true, there is no data supporting this claim.
It is also incorrect to state that melt is not occuring in the Arctic. Solar radiation penetrates just below the surface of snow, causing melt to happen in the snow pack even if surface air temperatures have not yet reached 0 deg celsius. When melt is active in summer, the energy from the sun is used to melt the ice, keeping near surface air temperatures near 0 deg celsius. In addition, the southern reaches of the Arctic already observe air temperatures of 0 deg celsius, which is the normal progression (melt happens first in the souther latitudes, moving further northward as summer progresses). Thus, surface melt has already started in the Arctic. You can look the MODIS imagery yourself to see surface melt occuring.
There is only 1 scientist stating ice-free summers by 2014, and that’s who Gore has relied on for his statements. It is unfortunate that Gore does that, he obviously likes drama, but that’s politics and media, not science.
I think you lose credibility by not focusing on good data analysis and instead resorting to cherry-picking, false display of data and erroneous statements. There are some valid points to debate, but you seem to miss those.

barry says:
May 31, 2010 at 10:08 pm
As much authority was vested in the US Navy’s sea ice data in the last post on the subject, it might be worth posting an actual study from that institution.
http://soa.arcus.org/sites/soa.arcus.org/files/sessions/1-1-advances-understanding-arctic-system-components/pdf/1-1-7-maslowski-wieslaw.pdf
(5.6 MB download)
Their projection is a possible ice-free Arctic in fall by 2016. Strangely, they looked at a range of data sets over a long period, rather than picking out a couple of data points, but perhaps the Navy doesn’t know what it’s doing.
_______________
Thanks for that link Barry. Excellent post, and excellent counterpoint to Steve’s insistance that sea ice volume has increased 25%. And BTW, some of the charts used in that report come from the PIPS 3.0 data.

http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh?fm=05&fd=31&fy=2010&sm=05&sd=31&sy=1979
Extent is less, but concentration is higher. Depending on how much is blown out of the arctic, I think the melt will not set a record this summer.

We need to stop making the argument that sea ice cannot melt if air temps are below zero (C). It can – provided there is water under the ice. A gradient of ice temperature exists between the ice-water interface (always around 0) decreasing toward the top surface air interface. The colder the air, the colder and thicker the ice.
But its still going to recover in September 🙂

Freaks.

BO says:
June 1, 2010 at 9:14 pm
Problem with BO? I find that Dove for men roll-on is a good solution, neutral pH, doesn’t pinch the hairs like some roll-ons, lasts longer than a stick.

JJB
You claimed that everything in this post is inaccurate, and failed to cite a single example. Pretty lame.

NSIDC sea ice images still show some ice left in the Riga Bay and in the Finnish Bay.
There remains no ice and hasn´t been any for several weeks. Something is clearly wrong with the images.

The North-West Passage is not about to be opened for business!

The North-West Passage is not about to be re-opened for business!