This is interesting. While there’s much noise from alarmists that we are on an “Arctic death spiral” the team for this paper’s press release today found evidence that ice levels were about 50% lower 5,000 years ago. The paper references changes to wind systems which can slow down the rate of melting (something we’ve seen on the short term, even NASA points this out for recent historic ice retreats). They also suggest that a tipping point under current scenarios is unlikely saying that even with a reduction to less than 50% of the current amount of sea ice the ice will not reach a point of no return (i.e. a tipping point). From the University of Copenhagen:
Large variations in Arctic sea ice
For the last 10,000 years, summer sea ice in the Arctic Ocean has been far from constant. For several thousand years, there was much less sea ice in The Arctic Ocean – probably less than half of current amounts. This is indicated by new findings by the Danish National Research Foundation for Geogenetics at the University of Copenhagen. The results of the study will be published in the journal Science.
Sea ice comes and goes without leaving a record. For this reason, our knowledge about its variations and extent was limited before we had satellite surveillance or observations from airplanes and ships. But now researchers at the Danish National Research Foundation for Geogenetics at the Natural History Museum of Denmark (University of Copenhagen) have developed a method by which it is possible to measure the variations in the ice several millennia back in time.
The results are based on material gathered along the coast of northern Greenland, which scientists expect will be the final place summer ice will survive, if global temperatures continue to rise.
This means that the results from northern Greenland also indicate what the conditions are like in the ocean.
Less ice than today
Team leader Svend Funder, and two other team members and co-authors of the Science article, Eske Willerslev and Kurt Kjær, are all associated with the Danish Research Foundation at the University of Copenhagen.
Regarding the research results, Funder says, “Our studies show that there have been large fluctuations in the amount of summer sea ice during the last 10,000 years. During the so-called Holocene Climate Optimum, from approximately 8000 to 5000 years ago, when the temperatures were somewhat warmer than today, there was significantly less sea ice in the Arctic Ocean, probably less than 50% of the summer 2007 coverage, which was absolutely lowest on record. Our studies also show that when the ice disappears in one area, it may accumulate in another. We have discovered this by comparing our results with observations from northern Canada. While the amount of sea ice decreased in northern Greenland, it increased in Canada. This is probably due to changes in the prevailing wind systems. This factor has not been sufficiently taken into account when forecasting the imminent disappearance of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean.”
Driftwood unlocks mystery
In order to reach their surprising conclusions, Funder and the rest of the team organised several expeditions to Peary Land in northern Greenland. Named after American Polar explorer Robert E. Peary, the region is an inhospitable and rarely visited area, where summer blizzards are not uncommon.
” Our key to the mystery of the extent of sea ice during earlier epochs lies in the driftwood we found along the coast. One might think that it had floated across sea, but such a journey takes several years, and driftwood would not be able to stay afloat for that long. The driftwood is from the outset embedded in sea ice, and reaches the north Greenland coast along with it. The amount of driftwood therefore indicates how much multiyear sea ice there was in the ocean back then. And this is precisely the type of ice that is in danger of disappearing today,” Funder says.
After the expeditions had been completed, the team needed to study the wood they had collected: wood types had to be determined and it had to be carbon-14 dated. The driftwood originated near the great rivers of present-day North America and Siberia. The wood types were almost entirely spruce, which is widespread in the Boreal forest of North America, and larch, which is dominates the Siberian taiga. The different wood types therefore are evidence of changing travel routes and altered current and wind conditions in the ocean.
Beach ridges and wave breaking
The team also examined the beach ridges along the coast. Today, perennial ice prevents any sort of beach from forming along the coasts of northern Greenland. But this had not always been the case. Behind the present shore long rows of beach ridges show that at one time waves could break onto the beach unhindered by sea ice. The beach ridges were mapped for 500 kilometres along the coast, and carbon-14 dating has shown that during the warm period from about 8000 until 4000 years ago, there was more open water and less coastal ice than today.
Point of no return
“Our studies show that there are great natural variations in the amount of Arctic sea ice. The bad news is that there is a clear connection between temperature and the amount of sea ice. And there is no doubt that continued global warming will lead to a reduction in the amount of summer sea ice in the Arctic Ocean. The good news is that even with a reduction to less than 50% of the current amount of sea ice the ice will not reach a point of no return: a level where the ice no longer can regenerate itself even if the climate was to return to cooler temperatures. Finally, our studies show that the changes to a large degree are caused by the effect that temperature has on the prevailing wind systems. This has not been sufficiently taken into account when forecasting the imminent disappearance of the ice, as often portrayed in the media,” Funder says.
Research could also benefit polar bears
In addition to giving us a better understanding of what the climate in northern Greenland was like thousands of years ago, it could also reveal how polar bears fared in warmer climate. The team plans to use DNA in fossil polar bear bones to study polar bear population levels during the Holocene Climate Optimum.
The team’s findings are to be published in the journal Science.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Wow, there’s that term “Holocene Climate Optimum” again. 🙂
Amazing how all the experts are finally catching up to some common sense. Maybe some of the warmers can now admit there was a warmer time and yet it got cold, then warm, then colder, then warmer, then….
New paper finds Arctic sea ice strongly linked to varying storm activity
Warmists often claim changes in Arctic sea ice are a consequence of allegedly-anthropogenic global warming. However, a paper published today in the Journal of Geophysical Research finds that “dramatic interannual changes” in Arctic sea ice extent are due to varying storm activity in the months of May-July, which impacts “cloud cover and ice motion, and consequently sea ice melt.” The authors find fewer cyclones in the Arctic Ocean “appear to favor a low sea ice area at the end of the melt season.”
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2011/08/new-paper-finds-arctic-sea-ice-strongly.html
The warmists will claim that the 50% less ice from long ago was good solid ice where the ice we have today, even if it is twice as much is rotten ice.
So this may constitute one of the “tipping points” toward the collapse of AGW doctrine.
Ah, the obligatory mention of global warming and polar bears. Must need a reserach grant.
Nice science. It displaces and discards a sh**-load of hand-waving that has been “informing” the AGW alarms and alarums.
The thing that is in a “death spiral” is business as usual and this will automatically reduce all types of emissions.
For the last 10,000 years, summer sea ice in the Arctic Ocean has been far from constant. For several thousand years, there was much less sea ice in The Arctic Ocean – probably less than half of current amounts.
====================================
Come in Mr R Gates are you there?
The bad news is that there is a clear connection between temperature and the amount of sea ice. And there is no doubt that continued global warming will lead to a reduction in the amount of summer sea ice in the Arctic Ocean.
===============================
Holding on to every last vestige of myth.
All in all, though, this is a smoking gun….and a DAMNING study.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
We’ve seen the Watts effect on solar activity; now there’s the Watts effect on Arctic sea ice. After covering the sudden slowing of the sea ice shrinkage the other day, today’s numbers are back down by a significant amount (approx 80k km²). Knew it was too good to last.
This is consistent with extensive studies that have been done in the past showing the Arctic has been much warmer in the past without killing of the Polar Bears or ruining the livelihood of the Inuit (despite present whining). Figure it out: they survived, they are still here aren’t they? And what’s more, all that warmth in the Arctic didn’t cause Greenland to slide into the ocean. So much for catastrophic sudden sea level rise…
Well done Svend Funder, team members and co-authors Eske Willerslev and Kurt Kjær, and the the Danish Research Foundation at the University of Copenhagen.
This study shows there are honest and reputable scientist who release the truth no matter where it leads, or the coming condemnation from the brought and sold huskers, masquerading as so called scientist.
There is a cascading mountain of evidence already and coming forward daily to show that climate is driven by natural variability and not CO2 or models.
This Arctic ice paper and others research paper are proof positive that the AGW hoax is all but dead. The warmist have been pounding the nails into the their own coffin to the point that most people walking around don’t believe them in spite of all the evidence readers of WUWT and other skeptical sites have known and tried to convey for years.
The whole CAGW industry is based on manipulation of data, models, projections, all for with predetermined outcomes. 30 pieces of silver, bribes and dishonesty has never been more prevalent or readily taken.
Instead this Arctic ice study is obviously based on real hands on scientific evidence and integrity!
So we know why sea ice might have been lower during the Holocene optimum…it was pretty much the forcing caused by Milankovitch cycles…bit to what would skeptics attribute the current down trend? You see, climate, unlike weather isn’t a random walk, and big changes in things like sea ice extents being smaller for thousands of years require some kind of forcing mechanism. We know what caused the Holocene optimum…so what about our current downtrend? Skeptics have no answers, but global climate models do.
Gates, you’re babbling.
Smokey says:
August 4, 2011 at 9:07 pm
Gates, you’re babbling.
====================
Yes…a total failure of logic and reason. Lets let him/her talk himself/her out.
No need to waste too much more time, though.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
R. Gates says:
August 4, 2011 at 9:04 pm
Skeptics have no answers, but global climate models do.
=====================================
A closed mouth….gathers no FOOT! (Proverbs)
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
Smokey, you have been asking for scientific hypotheses, but when some are offered, you call it “babbling”?
R Gates hypothesized (paraphrasing): sea ice was lower during the Holocene optimum due to forcing caused by Milankovitch cycles”
That seems a perfectly reasonable hypothesis. A quick check around the internet seems to confirm that the energy to the northern hemisphere was indeed larger 9000 years ago than now. I don’t know all the details or answers, but I don’t see any “babbling” here. Do you have a better hypothesis? Can you provide evidence against this hypothesis or for your hypothesis?
R Gates hypothesized (paraphrasing): big, long-term changes in sea ice extents require some kind of forcing mechanism.
That is pretty hard to argue against. Do you have a hypothesis for how large changes happen without some sort of forcing?
R Gates hypothesized (paraphrasing): Skeptics have no answers as to why the sea ice is declining.
I don’t know about that. What do the climate-change-skeptics say is the cause? What evidence backs up their hypotheses? I suppose there is the answer that it is “natural variation”, but that would require clear evidence that recent sea ice ( in the last few hundred or even few thousand years) did indeed vary to current or lower levels. (And no, the Holocene optimum doesn’t count, unless you also refute that hypothesis above that changes in insolation caused the earlier reductions).
Guys, I hate to say that you are all wrong; but I will point to you why. On the polar caps, the amount of ice doesn’t depend on temperature, but on the amount of raw material in the air to renew itself every winter. Water freezes on zero degrees C. On the polar caps average temp is -25C to -35C.
2] Most of the water from the Russian rivers drains into the Arctic. That freshwater spreads on the top of the heavier salty water and protects the ice from the salt. More of that water is used for irigation and industry = less of it for protection of the ice.
3] Sahara’s dry heat increases = more evaporation in the Mediteranian – not many tributaries to compensate. The deficit is; increasing the speed of the Gulf Stream. I.e. more water is siphoned from the Mexican Gulf – mexican siphons more water from Arctic – Arctic increases intake extra warm /salty water from north Pacific via Bering sea. Think what that does to the ice from below.
4] Sahara dry heat increases; with speening of the planet eastward = that dry heat goes west into Atlantic and destroys the raw material that belongs to Arctic to replace its ice. Less raw material = less ice. Ice on the polar caps is not created by snow or rain; but by dry-freezing the moisture from the air. Less moisture in the air = less ice. Same as your old freezer needed defrosting – lots of ice, with zero snowfall and rainfall in your kitchen. More humidity in the kitchen =more ice to defrost
5] the biggest new evil: those nuclear ice crusher ships cost lots of rubles and dollars to build and maintenece. They are not made to make 100m coridor only. When lots of coridors are made by them, to take the shonky climatologist / bias media and other spectators further north… Ice is britle as glass – the ruff water brakes million times more – that ice flaws south and melts in warmer waters. But that is good… they think that ice is white, less ice to reflect the sunlight = hopefuly a smal GLOBAL warming? They are wrong and back to front on that one also. Because they forget that is 6 months of darckness, very cold darckness. White ice is full of air as insulator – less ice to insulate the water from the tremendous winter coldness = water absorbs much more coldness – as on a convayer belt is taking it south. If you want to learn the real truth http://www.stefanmitich.com.au To understand why Europe / USA is getting much colder winters, why those ice crusher ships are trigering midi ice age and much more – get on my website. If you are a good boy, I will send you a coppy of my book. STOP BARCKING UP THE WRONG TREE, ALL OF YOU !!! Keep this article as a record. I, and the laws of physics, we are never wrong.
Yes Leon, Watts said to take no notice of the JAXA graph because it wasn’t averaged, but when it suits out it comes – and enlarged too. If the 2007 record is challenged they’re all ready to laugh it off.
R. Gates says:
August 4, 2011 at 9:04 pm
“..so what about our current downtrend? Skeptics have no answers…”
It’s natural variability, get used to it.
“R. Gates says:
August 4, 2011 at 9:04 pm
So we know why sea ice might have been lower during the Holocene optimum…it was pretty much the forcing caused by Milankovitch cycles…bit to what would skeptics attribute the current down trend? You see, climate, unlike weather isn’t a random walk, and big changes in things like sea ice extents being smaller for thousands of years require some kind of forcing mechanism. We know what caused the Holocene optimum…so what about our current downtrend? Skeptics have no answers, but global climate models do.”
Er, whats up with that Doc?
The Milankovitch/natural cycles caused a GREATER loss of polar sea ice during the Holocene optimum and yet the supposed CAGW effect causes a SMALLER loss and natural cycles have nothing to do with it? Some kind of forcing mechanism like NATURAL cycles maybe? I dont know if you have spotted the inconsistency yet but the models you are so fond of are false, they do not represent reality. Work on the assumption that the models are false and you see other factors at work, you see that the faith in modelled reality does not represent observed reality. How many times have the models been ‘corrected’ in the attempt to make them fit actual reality?
The only thing that climate models have achieved is to present a false version of reality, they do not work because they do not include the real drivers of natural cyclic climate variation(NCCV). If the Milankovitch cycle a primary factor in the Holocene optimum then could the same cycle be responsible for the now past mild warming?
They mention Larch and Spruce driftwood while showing a photo of a man with a rifle.
Looking at the sea ice during the Holocene optimum is interesting, but probably more accurate to compare the direction the arctic is headed to the last time CO2 levels were this high, which was probably during the Pliocene, several million years ago. This study does just that, and makes a very interesting read:
http://micropress.org/stratigraphy/papers/Stratigraphy_6_4_265-275.pdf
I’ll look into this study in depth soon, as it is interesting, but at least one dubious assertion jumped out at me because of my own odd expertise. I wonder what their proof is that driftwood cannot stay afloat for two years? In the flotsamist community there is overwhelming anecdotal information that it can. For over nine months I have been doing a buoyancy experiment on small pieces of driftwood that were non-buoyant sinksam (flotsam and jetsam’s benthic sibling) when collected, then were dried out for six months before being put back into sea water. Though most resank fairly quickly, a handful lasted six months, and I’m looking right now at a two inch disk in the test chamber, merrily floating high enough in the water to last a good while longer. The fact that these pieces originally sank at some point after entering the ocean, then were highly rounded by their journey along our coast, driven along the bottom by the longshore current, before being ejected onto a small beach by a phenomena known locally as “Neptune’s Vomitorium, may have made their surfaces more resistant to subsequent waterlogging. However, logs heavily bedecked by gooseneck barnacles and other marine hitchhikers, being slowly rotated around the Pacific for years in the North Pacific Sub-tropical Gyre are wellknown.