Fortunately, the Internet has a memory. Here’s some excerpts from the story by Damian Carrington. After reading it, I can see why they disappeared it.
The planet’s last great global ice melt left a benign and balmy climate in which civilisation was cradled: the new great melting heralds a grave threat to civilisation
Our planet is waving the white flag of surrender. But as the polar flag becomes ever more tattered, with holes scorched by hotter ocean waters, humanity pumps ever more globe-warming gases into the air.
…
In 2007, a new record was set for the minimum summer sea ice cover in the Arctic had halved. This furious flag waving attracted attention. That year, the world’s scientists declared the end of any doubt that our addiction to burning fossil fuels was changing the face of the planet. Al Gore expounded his inconvenient truth and the world seemed set to act.
Today, that 2007 record is smashed and the shredded white flag is now flickering rathering than flashing. But the danger is greater than even, even if the alarm signal is frayed.
…
Decades from now, will today’s record sea ice low be seen as the moment when our Earthly paradise gave up the ghost and entered a hellish new era? I sincerely hope not, but with this global distress signal failing to attract attention, I fear the worst.
You can read the whole article archived here: http://old-news.co.uk/category/guardian/
h/t to Tom Nelson
BTW there’s still ice at the pole, see it in the WUWT sea ice page
=================================================
UPDATE: It was offline earlier. I guess now that we showed the cat was out of the bag they decided to put it back online.
– Anthony
“Will this be the first great tipping point to tumble the world into a new and hostile climate regime, as the cooling, reflective ice vanishes? Will the new, warm Arctic radically alter the temperate weather enjoyed by Europeans, for whom global warming has seemed a distant concern?”
————————————–
Reminds me of the end of a Rocky and Bullwinkle episode.
I thought Obama was supposed to be fixing this?
Believe it or not, I created a “Friday Sarcasm” post today titled “Climate Skeptics Forget the Obvious Intent of the Website SkepticalScience”:
http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2012/09/14/climate-skeptics-forget-the-obvious-intent-of-the-website-skepticalscience/
Another Carrington event – fortunately this one was gone before it could do any harm 🙂
What would we do without the Grauniad to keep us on our toes (banging our heads against the wall….
This isn`t the first time, either.
The Guardian is a joke, initiating Custer`s Last Stand by hanging their hats on Arctic ice. Was it 0.06% of the cryosphere that disappeared during this season`s melt?
The Guardian has become quite a national embarrassment. It is a left wing version of the Daily Mail but takes itself seriously.
And as the overweight burden of hyperbole sinks slowly in the west….
To any warmist out there: when (not if) the ice finally disappears and nothing disastrous happens, will you finally shut the f*ck up?
Personally, I don’t know what you lot are moaning about, that was quite a good piece – for the Guardian!
I’ve seen a few comments in the odd forums, and it seems to be propagating too, it goes along the lines of: “the ice is melting becuase of man-made gloabal warming and because the ice is melting we will have a new ice age !”
Clearly, they posted the article too soon. The sea ice is scheduled to disappear in eight days. Let’s see if they re-post it next week.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2012/sep/14/arctic-sea-ice-climate-change
REPLY: It was offline earlier. I guess now that we showed the cat was out of the bag they decided to put it back online. – Anthony
The link to the story works for me
REPLY: See the update
The article states:
“The last great global ice melt the planet witnessed came 10,000 years ago at the end of a deep ice age. As glaciers retreated, a benign and balmy climate emerged in which the human race has flourished. Our entire civilisation is built on the warm soils left as the ice sheets melted.
This new great melting heralds the polar opposite: the gravest of threats to civilisation. Removing the lid from the pole will release heat equivalent to fast-forwarding human-caused climate change by two decades, say scientists.”
To paraphrase: Ice melt and warming 10,000 years ago; very, very good. Ice melt and warming present time; very, very bad.
Can you say: non sequitur?
The Guardian is slowly crawling up it’s own backside. Eventually it will suffocate itself and die. Only ecofascists and barmy left wingers go near it.
Total sea ice < 10% less than LTM. Disaster disaster!! South Pole sea ice 0.95m sqm more. LIA, LIA!!
I had an interesting conversation with my thirty-something nephew over a few beers last weekend that was very illuminating. This is a very intelligent guy, 4.0 in college, database administrator, well-read and generally knowledgeable. So when the conversation made its way to CAGW, I pointed out its Popperian failure of being falsifiable. “There is nothing,” I said, “that would prove the hypothesis wrong to its followers.” He replied that yes there was, that if we completely quit producing CO2 (!) and the Earth’s temp didn’t fall, that would disprove it. I asked, “How about if we keep producing CO2 at current levels, but Earth’s temperature doesn’t keep rising — as it hasn’t for the past fifteen years or so.”
This got me a blank look and a repetition of his original “experiment.” I pointed out the impossibility of HIS experiment and the actually ongoing nature of MINE. Still no response.
So to me, this says that the understanding of the scientific method is not very widespread, even among the college educated — unless, of course, one was in the sciences (he was education). Perhaps schools should require a course on the scientific method around the seventh or eighth grade to help them understand science from post-normal- and pseudo- science. Or at least make them read Sagan’s “Candle in the Dark.”
Something.
Anyone notice what is happening in the Antarctic? Seems the Antarctic sea ice is considered a regional event but the Arctic sea ice is a global affair. Why?
Alas, the memory. Even Internet’s memory, once jogged by a researcher, can be sent down the memory hole. The above Guardian link is now giving me Error 404…
blackswhitewash.com says:
September 14, 2012 at 8:48 am
The Guardian is slowly crawling up it’s own backside. Eventually it will suffocate itself and die. Only ecofascists and barmy left wingers go near it.
Or those who, like me, love a good laugh.
Strange how they do not discuss the high level of Antarctic ice
Sorry, repost from another thread, but appropriate here;
With all this “melting” and “raising the white flag of surrender” going on the Wicked Witch of the West must be getting very nervous, very soon the Guardian will expect the only thing left in the Arctic will be a few “Munchkin Men” and a pair of ruby slippers.
As the data suggests as Arctic Sea Ice decreases Antarctic Sea Ice increases, isn’t there some sort of pattern to this? I dare say we’ll have Lucie Seigle (Grauniad Journo, ecosocialist) doing her little bit on the One Show magazine prog for the BBC any time soon. The Beeb News covered it a couple of days ago, ratchetting it up with all the hype & the soon be “ice free in the summer”!
“Today, that 2007 record is smashed and the shredded white flag is now flickering rathering than flashing.”
Never mind that the Arctic ICE VOLUME has essentially tripled or more since 2007. These guys live in a 2-D world. Would they be happy if the Arctic was ice covered but only 1 inch thick? THEN they would be touting ice thickness and not the area.
Ice volume is the only real measure in the Arctic as storms and winds can pile the ice up into small areas, masking the thickness below.
R Barker says:
September 14, 2012 at 9:09 am
Anyone notice what is happening in the Antarctic? Seems the Antarctic sea ice is considered a regional event but the Arctic sea ice is a global affair. Why?
————————————-
Because Antarctic ice is increasing. That was an easy one!
Okay, so the article states:
Huh? This passage is riddled with inaccuracies. First, satellites did not begin to document Arctic sea ice until 1972, not 1968 as claimed. Second, the famous Earthrise image was taken by Apollo 8 astronauts on December 24, 1968, and the Arctic is NOT visible because it was the boreal winter. Third, if the Arctic were visible in the Earthrise image, the sea ice extent would have been much greater than the 8m square kilometers claimed. It probably would have been closer to 13m square kilometers. Finally, there are only two continents visible in the image — Africa and a tiny piece of Antarctica — and neither of them is “verdant” (lush green).
Have I missed something?
Some have observed that no one much reads the Guardian. Unfortunately, the BBC take more copies of the Guardian than any other paper, and recruit virtually exclusively via that paper. ‘Nuff said!
I suppose looking at arctic sea ice alone and drawing conclusions about global warming is cherry picking. Maybe they should mention world sea ice when referring to global warming and arctic sea ice when referring to regional climate change.
Hey, give the guy a break. I’ve got a soft spot for purple prose, and Damian Carrington is darn good at it. He’s probably got a good novel written, but can’t find a publisher. So he had to get a day job.
By the way, has anyone else noticed that sections of the “ice free” parts of the Arctic Sea have some pretty big chips of ice floating about in them? For example, look off the NW coast of Alaska in the “Cryosphere Today” map. It shows no ice. It sure doesn’t show any chips where, “The ice pack measures about 30 miles by 12 miles,” and “In one point, we estimate the thickest part of the ice to be about 25 meters.” (That’s about 80 feet.)”
Ice free?
http://www.adn.com/2012/09/10/2619205/shell-halts-chukchi-sea-drilling.html
He fails to mention the short length of the measurement period in which that 2007 record appears.
Eric Dailey said on September 14, 2012 at 8:07 am:
He’s too busy finishing up his live performance in an improvised play that’s loosely an updated rendition of the Carter presidency. Here at the end, it’s a consulate instead of an embassy and some other actors forgot to take that group hostage, possibly understandable as numerous other actors have already taken and are holding American hostages. But with American savings, jobs, competitiveness, value of currency, and worldwide prestige all heading to or already in the crapper, it sure looks like it’ll stay faithful to the original’s ending.
Strange that the global temperatures from the satellites (like UAH) saw nothing unusual about this year temperature-wise. Neither the Danish Meteorological Institute temperature north of 80N, normal. Could this possibly just be ocean currents at work? Seems more that likely to me, bottom up and not top down. Ocean floor volcanic action may be the other possible explanation. Either way I see no co2 involvement from above or am I missing something?
“…our Earthly paradise…”
Hahaha! I bet he was tempted to use the word “Utopia!” What a bed-wetting idiot.
I clicked the old-news link, got fed up waiting for the rotating thingie to finish and the page to appear, so came back, read the post, and the comments, then followed the revivified Guardian link, read that and ran off a pdf of it, then came back … and the rotating thingie was still rotating on the old-news tab. Ironically, it looks like the old-news link that isn’t working, for me at anyrate. Must be all those WUWT visitors doing their server in.
Daily Mash (UK’s “Onion”) Guardian T-shirt
“The Guardian. Wrong about everything all the time”
http://www.shotdeadinthehead.com/product_view.aspx?pid=1573
A must have…
Perhaps I should send on to poor little Damian. Am still unsure as to whether his sneer in the Guardian’s mug shot of him is worse than little Leo Hickman’s.
Probably the best mechanism to explain how ice ages develop evolves little/no ice in the Arctic Ocean around end of summer and a cooling planet at the same time. Ideal conditions for snowfall in regions that are usually fairly dry and cool in summer, giving increased risk of snow failing to complelely melt the following summer.
I know most on here are sceptical, as am I. But I do find the reduction in arctic sea ice worrying. Maybe this is just a human fear of change. The evidence suggests it really is happening and not some figment of someone’s imagination.
Will it continue? Will that ice retreat and the Antarctic ice expand? What will this change mean for us?
Plenty of questions, I don’t pretend to know the answers.
So many attacks on a piece of journalistic exaggeration.
So little questioning as to why the arctic melt this year has smashed the 2007 minimum – and the melt is continuing.
Its interesting that many sceptics on this thread already appear to be discounting an ice free arctic including
anarchist hate machine
and AW
who said
“BTW there’s still ice at the pole”
That good to know then.
So why the big melt ? Large positive anomalies in sea surface temperature and air temperature.
NASA GISS for August is now published and shows a 0.56 C anomaly globally cf 1951-1980, with most of the arctic showing big anomalies (again) particularly north of Canada and Greenland.
BTW I don’t read the Grauniad.
From James Abbott on September 14, 2012 at 1:26 pm:
Actually, if you were paying attention you would have known from the start it’d be a lousy year for the ice. A lot of thin first-year ice, including that bump-up at the end of the freeze period that was guaranteed to go away quickly.
And the weather patterns have been screwed up lately. The contiguous US had an all-time record high July while the rest of the planet was running cooler. Screwy weather patterns like that lead to interesting storms, as seen in the Arctic.
So with so much thin ice and so little multi-year ice, the Arctic was pre-conditioned for a large loss this year at the start. Add the freak storm that tore up so much ice, which should well have been expected, and this year is not surprising.
BTW, why bother mentioning “…the melt is continuing” anyway? By the IARC-JAXA graph I can see about another week of melt is within historical norms. Besides, looks bottomed-out anyway.
Thanks kadaka
But you are wrong. The ice conditions are a factor, but the melt trend, and this year’s massive melt, is continuing mainly because the arctic is warming.
Your “weather patterns have been screwed up lately” is global warming. The USA has had its hottest recorded year to date and that heat has extended north over Canada and Greenland, accelerating the melt.
And if “you were paying attention” you would have seen that its not just the thin ice that has melted
Look at
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
Which says that
Between mid-March and the third week of August, the total amount of multiyear ice within the Arctic Ocean declined by 33%, and the oldest ice, ice older than five years, declined by 51%.
The excuses are running out.
Why am I reminded of the George Carlin routine about those who are so dedicated to saving the planet? He finished by saying: “The PLANET is fine … it’s the PEOPLE who are f—–!”
Even if all the Arctic ice melts, sea level will not rise one single centimeter. Ice floats, and the Arctic ice cap is essentially the world’s largest floating ice cube. Antarctica is gaining ice mass (see previous thread) and the Greenland ice cap will take 1500 years to melt, per Dr. Susan Solomon, U.S. delegate to the IPCC and AGW defender.
So, to the Guardian reporter–why the panic? The PLANET is fine, and if it warms by a few degrees C., we may be on the way to a new higher equilibrium temperature. Big deal! We humans may not like having to abandon cities like New York, Boston, New Orleans, Amsterdam, or Copenhagen, but what ever happens, we are going to have plenty of time to adapt to new realities! “Tipping points” are a Hansen-created and sponsored myth.
From James Abbott on September 14, 2012 at 2:48 pm:
Actually the PDO has flipped and we’re switching over from a La Nina to an El Nino regime, etc, thus we’re in a time of flux consistent with the variation of the natural cycles, with a blocking high over the contiguous US much like the recent Russian heat wave was due to a blocking high,
But why let real meteorological science interfere with your confirmation bias?
The Guardian has a very good free Sudoku page.
I appreciate and apologise for this not being strictly on-topic but what does Prof Viner think of this?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/sep/14/arctic-sea-ice-harsh-winter-europe
Eeek….meant ‘I appreciate that that this isn’t strictly on-topic and apologise’…………..sounds better?
Thanks kadaka
Wrong again. We are not into a full blown El Nino yet – and it may fizzle out anyway. Fact is that the USA has to date seen its hottest recorded year without an El Nino.
And can you explain why you think I have a “confirmation bias”. Why is it that sceptics so often resort to insults when challenged ?
I am happy to state that the antarctic sea ice is not following the arctic trend and that the large positive temperatures anomalies in the far north are not being mirrored (widely) in the far south. I am happy to state these things because thats what the data says.
Can you please say what the natural cycle is that is causing the arctic ice cap to melt – so fast ?
Chris R says
“Even if all the Arctic ice melts, sea level will not rise one single centimeter”
Really ? What do you think will happen to the glaciers in Greenland, Baffin Island and the rest of the arctic if the sea ice goes ? No glacial acceleration due to mechanical change (loss of coastal sea ice) ? No increase in air temperature due to loss of ice refrigeration of surface air ? No feedback effect of albedo change from light to dark surfaces ? No it looks like those glaciers will be just fine in glorious isolation surrounded by warming seas and atmosphere.
James Abbott says:
September 14, 2012 at 4:08 pm
You have been smacked about with knowledge here before and now you are back for more? You have NOT read ANYTHING posted to you and that is made obvious by your odious post here. Did you think no one would notice?
So tired of going over the same old hackneyed arguments from uninformed planet savers. Abbott, take your fingers out of your ears and READ the response to you.
Kadaka did not say we are in a full blown el nino. READ HIS DAMN POST!!! It is like you have NO reading compression.
It looks like Antarctic sea ice will be a record maximum extent for the satellite era. I look forward to hearing how GHGs can simultaneously cause a record minimum Arctic sea ice extent and a record maximum Antarctic sea ice extent.
Compression or comprehension, they both work.
Genuine question from a former full-blown AGW supporter…
That last question about the Antarctic ice cover sparked a question………When we were in the throes of the last ice-age which I understand manifested itself in the northern hemisphere in the main what was the south pole doing?
Don’t put the boot in too hard, I’m not asking a ‘leading’ question….Just interested.
Thanks for helping making my point David Ball –
Insults are the backstop when argument fails for too many sceptics – plus the usual ‘you are not welcome here’ line.
Do you think that putting text in caps with lots of !s makes it any more valid ?
So long as Anthony allows me, (and I appreciate it is his site) I will look forward to being able to make more postings in the future and will not be scared off.
Still waiting for a response to my questions though, which I will read with my eyes and not my ears….
James Abbott says:
September 14, 2012 at 4:52 pm
“Insults are the backstop when argument fails for too many sceptics – plus the usual ‘you are not welcome here’ line.”
Where did I say any of these things? Where did I insult you? Respond to what Kadaka ACTUALLY said.
James Abbott says:
September 14, 2012 at 4:08 pm
“Can you please say what the natural cycle is that is causing the arctic ice cap to melt – so fast ?”
http://drtimball.com/2012/2012-arctic-ice-melt-claims-distorted-and-inaccurate-its-the-wind-stupid/
The simplest explanation is the most likely explanation. None of your speculative (at best) explanations necessary.
You also need to show that the Arctic is doing anything that it has not done in the past. But you cannot as there is no data to support this.
“Look, look, I’m being repressed”. 8^D
James Abbott says:
September 14, 2012 at 4:52 pm
Stop whining. You get off scott free compared to the treatment I get at ANY pro-warmist site.
http://drtimball.com/2012/current-global-weather-patterns-normal-despite-government-and-media-distortions/
http://drtimball.com/2012/sensationalist-and-distorted-climate-stories-increase-as-climate-science-failures-exposed/
jones says:
September 14, 2012 at 4:51 pm
There is an interesting historic reconstruction for the Antarctic and the end of this article
http://drtimball.com/2011/they-are-still-trying-to-rewrite-climate-to-show-current-conditions-are-abnormal/
Will try to find more, but have both kids at the mo.
higley7 says:
“Never mind that the Arctic ICE VOLUME has essentially tripled or more since 2007. These guys live in a 2-D world. Would they be happy if the Arctic was ice covered but only 1 inch thick? THEN they would be touting ice thickness and not the area.”
Are there data and graphical representations of this anywhere? A large increase in Arctic ice volume since 2007 is something I haven’t seen numbers for.
I read a lot of stuff about temperatures, solar cycles, cyclone and tornado activity, etc., but I don’t remember seeing anything much about Arctic ice other than wind patterns and sea ice extent (area).
I would be fascinated to see numbers showing a trebling of Arctic ice volume. Is this actually true? If so, then the latest scare mongering by warmists could be addressed in a more easily understandable way. And we need to keep it very basic for our wide-eyed alarmist friends.
Warmist members of the public are almost exclusively very simple people with little or no understanding of science. This is how the U.N. and their political representatives in America, Europe, Australia, etc., have made such progress with their CAGW agenda, despite the complete lack of corroborating evidence.
Every man and his dog knows greenhouses keep plants warm, so the ‘greenhouse gas’ scare was an easy sell, even though the atmosphere doesn’t behave anything like a pane of glass in a greenhouse (and recent re-calculations of Earth’s planetary greenhouse effect indicate we would only be 10K cooler without it, rather than the 33K commonly touted).
The only thing the warmists have at the moment which shows any plausible positive correlation with the Global Warming theme is a cyclical decrease in Arctic sea ice extent (which was much lower 7000 years ago anyway). For this reason, papers like the Guardian and other MSM will be hammering away at it for all they’re worth – after all, they have nothing else in their armoury but failed computer models.
If we can demonstrate a large increase in Arctic sea ice volume since 2007, I think this would help to relieve their anxiety.
Then the advent of solar-mediated global cooling, expected by solar physicists to become apparent over the next two winters, will finally put CAGW to rest before it has caused too much economic damage.
To James Abbott:
Your statement:
Okay, I’ll attempt to give a response. First, you are putting words in my mouth with your ridiculous statement that “…those glaciers will be just fine in glorious isolation…”. I didn’t say that melting wasn’t occurring; merely that the rate was relatively slow. This is especially true with respect to the more hysterical statements by Hansen et al.
Your “Baffin Island” issue is a joke; the glaciers there would make a contribution to sea level that’s in the noise. Ditto “the rest of the Arctic” glaciers. As to Greenland “accelerating melt”, for whatever cause, again, so what? Right now, the estimate I have heard out of non-hysterical portions of your warmist camp is 1500 years for the entire Greenland cap to melt. In addition, there have been published papers showing that the Greenland ice sheet did not completely melt even when temperatures were 5 degrees C. greater than the present; so there is some doubt as to whether the entire Greenland ice sheet would melt.
Assume the worst–that the entire Greenland ice sheet melts. Assume there is some acceleration for whatever reason. Acceleration by a factor of 7 is still over 200 years for the sea level to go up by an estimated 7 meters. That is more than enough time to apply whatever mitigation strategy we may work out.
Thank you kindly Dr Ball.
To higley7:
Your casual assertion that Arctic ice volume has “…essentially tripled or more since 2007…” really caught me off guard. I’d like to join Interested in asking for the source for this statement.
jones says:
September 14, 2012 at 6:47 pm
Dr. Ball is my father. His website is easy to find. Dr. Tim Ball.com
Why do these people hate warmth and hope for cold and ice? I for one don’t care if every bit of the ice melts. This planet has existed in the past without ice and yet life still flourished and evolved. Why wouldn’t life flourish in the future when all the ice is gone?
Do they not find fossils in Antarctica. In fact they actually find wood. Is it better off covered with ice?
James Abbott, often the most obvious and simple explanations are by far the over riding cause of things.
It has been noted that the sun for the later half of the twentieth century was in a state of high excitement , this it would seem pumped a bit of extra heat into the oceans. It can also be noted that at this time the sun is resting.
There is a lag in a dynamic system as large as the earth and looking at the ocean heat anomalies you will see that the excess ocean heat has meandered north and impinging on the sea ice.
This is a negative feed back dumping heat, ultimately to space. This warm water in the north can lead to extra snow and bad winters in the northern hemisphere.
Conversely down south the warm waters moving poleward are mixed by the circumpolar currents and do not make a lot of difference. It can also be noted that the Antarctic reacts quickly to the state of the sun and has been cooling for quite some time.
Up north again, negative feed back mechanisms in a system so large tend to overshoot especially when the extra heat coming in the system stops coming as is the case with a quite sun.
Summers come and go and are rarely notable, winters are the enemy of mankind.
“But as the polar flag becomes ever more tattered, with holes scorched by hotter ocean waters”
Sounds like a great holiday destination – swim in the hot ocean waters or simply laze on remnant ice flows…
Really ? What do you think will happen to the glaciers in Greenland, Baffin Island and the rest of the arctic if the sea ice goes ? No glacial acceleration due to mechanical change (loss of coastal sea ice) ?
None of the Greenland glaciers reach the open ocean, so loss of sea ice will have no direct effect.
No increase in air temperature due to loss of ice refrigeration of surface air ?
This doesn’t mean anything. The main effect of loss of sea ice is increased ocean evaporation, which will cause increased snowfall over Greenland and increased ice mass.
No feedback effect of albedo change from light to dark surfaces ?
Increased snowfall will increase Greenland’s albedo. If you are referring to ocean albedo, then ocean evaporation is much larger heat flow, and sea ice loss is a negative (cooling) feedback.
The calculated warming effects of Co2 keep dropping at an unprecedented rate. Our models, for which we have to “infill the missing data”, have shown by extrapolating the trend that by 2030 there will be no effect whatsoever. Trust us they are accurate. Send money now to help stop the decline. We have to act now or there will be nothing to fear in the future. Do it for the grandchildren’s niece’s and nephews. ubersarc/off
Some might enjoy this article; http://www.fcpp.org/files/1/PS142_PBearPropaganda_SP06F1.pdf
James?…….
The Guardian has a story on September 14 written by Adam Vaughan the headline of which is “Arctic sea ice hits record low: updates and reactions” http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/sea-ice
James Abbot,
Sorry if you feel offended. However you have failed to respond to my observation, made at 10:11 on Sept 14, before you commented.
How do you explain the failure to note an area of ice 30 by 11 miles, (330 square miles,) to be noted on maps? Also, considering “new” ice is around ten feet thick at most, how do you explain some of the noted ice being 80 feet thick? Could it not be ice that was piled up by that mid-summer storm?
By next spring the ice will again be ten feet thick. Even if it is only three feet thick, that is plenty thick enough for female Ringed Seals (the main food for Polar Bears) to escavate dens in, and have pups in.
Ringed Seals are the only seals that can survive up there when the sea is totally ice-covered. They have claws that can keep air-holes open. The females dig a den at the top of the air hole, in the softer snow that exists on top of the ice.
Female Ringed Seals do not have pups now, when the ice is scattered. However environmentalists claim the lack of ice will endanger the seals. They are sueing, costing the tax-payers money and making it harder for oil companies to drill.
http://www.adn.com/2012/09/12/2621712/environmental-group-sues-to-protect.html
Considering this sort of frivolous lawsuit hurts the local economy in Alaska, you can expect some people to be grumpy. When you mess up another’s ability to earn a living, you had better expect comments that are less than polite.
Grow a thicker skin.
@James Abbot
Wow…ok I’m going to have to be a lot nicer than I would like to be with this post. I will also go very S L O W so you might be able to wrap your mind the things that I am saying.
You said I discounted an ice free arctic…I’m really baffled as to how you can draw that conclusion from my post other than extremely, and I mean mind bogglingly extremely poor reading comprehension.
I said when (not if) the ice finally disappears… let’s go over that slowly
W H E N not I F the ice disappears. Ok. Let that sink in a minute.
That means I’m *E X P E C T I N G A F U L L M E L T* am I not?
Let me know when that lightbulb goes off.
Tears of a clown?
The BBC were doing the same thing recently – having their cake and eating it.
Global Warming causes heat and drought in 2011.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16366078
Global Warming causes cold weather and floods in 2012.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-19508906
So whatever the weather, the BBC has it firmly blamed on ‘Global Warming’. Yet not a peep from the Biased Broadcasting Corporation, that Antarctic sea ice is at record levels:
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/S_timeseries.png
I am utterly disgusted with the BBC’s contempt for real science.
.
Keith
Some have observed that no one much reads the Guardian. Unfortunately, the BBC take more copies of the Guardian than any other paper, and recruit virtually exclusively via that paper.
———————————————-
The BBC takes half the Grauniad’s print run.
If it were not for the BBC, they would have been bankrupt the minute Nu Labour were kicked out of office (Labour kept the Grauniad going with millions of adverts for ‘Five-a-Day Officers’ – (don’t ask…..).
.
James Abbott says: September 14, 2012 at 1:26 pm
So little questioning as to why the arctic melt this year has smashed the 2007 minimum – and the melt is continuing.
———————————
It may not be a big Sunspot cycle, but we are nearly at its peak.
http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/bfly.gif
.
James Abbott says: September 14, 2012 at 2:48 pm
But you are wrong. The ice conditions are a factor, but the melt trend, and this year’s massive melt, is continuing mainly because the arctic is warming.
Your “weather patterns have been screwed up lately” is global warming. The USA has had its hottest recorded year to date and that heat has extended north over Canada and Greenland, accelerating the melt.
—————————————-
And NW Europe had its coldest and wettest summer ever recorded. So remind me, what does Gloabal warming cause?
Ah, yes, George Orwel told us many decades ago. Global Warming causes a great deal of hot-cold, and even more dry-wet.
.
Can someone explain what this ‘story’ is all about because all I can see here is an article written with links to a Guardian piece (which I originally read last night), which an update then says is now still on the Guardian site although it was supposedly not there before. And all the links go to the same article !
When did it disappear ? What is meant by “I can see why they disappeared it” – what can be seen ?
What is meant by “we showed the cat was out of the bag” – what cat, what bag ?
How come I can’t see the story at the oldnews.co.uk link – can someone specifically tell me where it is, please ?
When did Tom Nelson notice it had ‘disappeared’ ?
Generally, what is going on with this story ? It looks like a conspiracy to me, so some enlightenment as to the facts here would be great.
REPLY: Is was up at Guardian. Then disappeared. I verified this before posting, then it reappeared about 30-45 minutes after WUWT posted on it. -Anthony
Caleb says:
September 14, 2012 at 10:11 am
In that case, you’ll love this: Fall is approaching. The NYT has the scoop.
http://twitchy.com/2012/09/14/bombshell-new-york-times-scoop-fall-is-almost-here-news-sparks-nytscoops-hilarity/
You freakin’ homicidal idiots. Aren’t you at least going to try and say SOMETHING about the ice disappearing? Please, say something specific about the ice, rather than hint that you know something we don’t. Why is it disappearing? You say it’s not? It’s cyclical? It doesn’t matter? Or it’s not us?
Please, be as verbose and specific as possible in your delusional responses so that when, in a few years after the Hague has started calling the Denialists to account, we can diagnose specific mental disorders that may be exculpatory for you.
REPLY: See the WUWT Sea Ice Reference page – and we’ll have a report when the ice turns the corner. In the meantime I recommend Xanax. Cheers. – Anthony
thanes says:
September 15, 2012 at 2:17 pm
You freakin’ homicidal idiots. Aren’t you at least going to try and say SOMETHING about the ice disappearing? Please, say something specific about the ice, rather than hint that you know something we don’t. Why is it disappearing? You say it’s not? It’s cyclical? It doesn’t matter? Or it’s not us?
Please, be as verbose and specific as possible in your delusional responses so that when, in a few years after the Hague has started calling the Denialists to account, we can diagnose specific mental disorders that may be exculpatory for you.
==========================================================
Homicidal?? who died?
Ok thanes, try to calm your hypersenstive twitching and actually read a bit from WUWT poster “Just the Facts”
Thanes, “Can you present any evidence to support your AGW supposition? Here is all of the info collected thus far that support the influence of wind and Atmospheric Oscillations:
In this October, 1 2007 NASA article;
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/lookingatearth/quikscat-20071001.html
Son V. Nghiem of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, said that “the rapid decline in winter perennial ice the past two years was caused by unusual winds. “Unusual atmospheric conditions set up wind patterns that compressed the sea ice, loaded it into the Transpolar Drift Stream and then sped its flow out of the Arctic,” he said. When that sea ice reached lower latitudes, it rapidly melted in the warmer waters.
“The winds causing this trend in ice reduction were set up by an unusual pattern of atmospheric pressure that began at the beginning of this century,” Nghiem said.”
This 2010 Guardian article states that;
“Much of the record breaking loss of ice in the Arctic ocean in recent years is down to the region’s swirling winds and is not a direct result of global warming, a new study reveals.”:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/mar/22/wind-sea-ice-loss-arctic
This 2011 paper submitted to The Cryosphere by L. H. Smedsrud, et al. “used “geostrophic winds derived from reanalysis data to calculate the Fram Strait ice area export back to 1957, finding that the sea ice area export recently is about 25% larger than during the 1960’s.”
http://www.the-cryosphere-discuss.net/5/1311/2011/tcd-5-1311-2011-print.pdf
This 2007 paper “Rapid reduction of Arctic perennial sea ice” by Nghiem, Rigor, Perovich, Clemente-Colo, Weatherly and Neumann states that;
“Perennial-ice extent loss in March within the DM domain was noticeable after the 1960s, and the loss became more rapid in the 2000s when QSCAT observations were available to verify the model results. QSCAT data also revealed mechanisms contributing to the perennial-ice extent loss: ice compression toward the western Arctic, ice loading into the Transpolar Drift (TD) together with an acceleration of the TD carrying excessive ice out of Fram Strait, and ice export to Baffin Bay.”
http://seaice.apl.washington.edu/Papers/NghiemEtal2007_MYreduction.pdf
This 2004 paper “Variations in the Age of Arctic Sea-ice and Summer Sea-ice Extent” by Ignatius G. Rigor & John M. Wallace, states that;
“The winter AO-index explains as much as 64% of the variance in summer sea-ice extent in the Eurasian sector, but the winter and summer AO-indices combined explain less than 20% of the variance along the Alaskan coast, where the age of sea-ice explains over 50% of the year-to year variability. If this interpretation is correct, low summer sea-ice extents are likely to persist for at least a few years. However, it is conceivable that, given an extended interval of low-index AO conditions, ice thickness and summertime sea-ice extent could gradually return to the levels characteristic of the 1980′s.”
http://seaice.apl.washington.edu/
2004 Science Daily article,” Extreme changes in the Arctic Oscillation in the early 1990s — and not warmer temperatures of recent years — are largely responsible for declines in how much sea ice covers the Arctic Ocean, with near record lows having been observed during the last three years, University of Washington researchers say.”
“It may have happened more than a decade ago, but the sea ice appears to still “remember” those Arctic Oscillation conditions, according to Ignatius Rigor, a mathematician with the UW’s Applied Physics Laboratory.”
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/12/041220010410.htm
This 2010 paper, “Influence of winter and summer surface wind anomalies on summer Arctic sea ice extent” by Masayo Ogi, Koji Yamazaki and John M. Wallace, published in Geophysical Research Letters states that;
“We have shown results indicating that wind‐induced, year‐to‐year differences in the rate of flow of ice toward and through Fram Strait play an important role in modulating September SIE on a year‐to‐year basis and that a trend toward an increased wind‐induced rate of flow has contributed to the decline in the areal coverage of Arctic summer sea ice.”
http://www.jamstec.go.jp/frcgc/research/d2/masayo.ogi/2009GL042356.pdf
This 2001 paper, Fram Strait Ice Fluxes and Atmospheric Circulation: 1950–2000
by Torgny Vinje found that:
“Observations reveal a strong correlation between the ice fluxes through the Fram Strait and the cross-strait air pressure difference.”
“Although the 1950s and 1990s stand out as the two decades with maximum flux variability, significant variations seem more to be the rule than the exception over the whole period considered.”
“A noticeable fall in the winter air pressure of 7 hPa is observed in the Fram Strait and the Barents Sea during the last five decades.”
“The corresponding decadal maximum change in the Arctic Ocean ice thickness is of the order of 0.8 m. These temporal wind-induced variations may help explain observed changes in portions of the Arctic Ocean ice cover over the last decades. Due to an increasing rate in the ice drainage through the Fram Strait during the 1990s, this decade is characterized by a state of decreasing ice thickness in the Arctic Ocean.”
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/1520-0442%282001%29014%3C3508%3AFSIFAA%3E2.0.CO%3B2
“The decreases in recent decades, which are also partially due to circulation-driven ice export through the Fram Strait between Greenland and Svalbard (Vinje, 2001), have coincided with a positive trend in the NAO, with unusually high index values in the late 1980s and 1990s. During this period, the variability of ice motion and ice export through the Fram Strait was correlated strongly with the NAO; r∼ 0.86 for the ice area flux (Kwok and Rothrock, 1999) and r∼ 0.7 for the ice volume flux (Hilmer and Jung, 2000), although the relationship was insignificant (r∼ 0.1) before the mid 1970s (Hilmer and Jung, 2000). Deser et al. (2000) analysed a 40-yr gridded data set (1958–97) to determine the association between arctic sea ice, SAT and SLP, concluding that the multidecadal trends in the NAO/AO in the past three decades have been ‘imprinted upon the distribution of Arctic sea ice’, with the first principal component of sea-ice concentration significantly correlated (r∼−0.63) with the NAO index, recently cause-and-effect modelled by Hu et al. (2002). None the less, our calculations and those of Deser et al. (2000) indicate that, even in recent decades, only about one third of the variability in arctic total ice extent and MY ice area (Johannessen et al., 1999) is explained by the NAO index ”
” The decadal-scale mode associated with the Arctic Oscillation (AO) and a low-frequency oscillation (LFO) with an approximate time scale of 60-80 years, dominate. Both modes were positive in the 1990s, signifying a prolonged phase of anomalously low atmospheric sea level pressure and above normal surface air temperature in the central Arctic. Consistent with an enhanced cyclonic component, the arctic anticyclone was weakened and vorticity of winds became positive. The rapid reduction of arctic ice thickness in the 1990s may be one manifestation of the intense atmosphere and ice cyclonic circulation regime due to the synchronous actions of the AO and LFO. Our results suggest that the decadal AO and multidecadal LFO drive large amplitude natural variability in the Arctic making detection of possible long-term trends induced by greenhouse gas warming most difficult.”
Igor V. Polyakov and Mark A. Johnson, 2000
http://ruby.fgcu.edu/courses/twimberley/EnviroPhilo/Decadal.pdf
Hilmer and Jung (2000) note a secular change in the relationship between the Fram Strait ice flux and the NAO; the high correlation noted by Kwok and Rothrock (1999) from 1978 to 1996 was not found in data prior to 1978. We expect our overall results to be more robust given the strong relationship between the AO and SIM over the Arctic, as compared to the weaker relationship between the north–south flow through Fram Strait and the AO. Even if one ignored the effect of the AO on the flux of ice through Fram Strait, the divergence of ice in the eastern Arctic would be still be ;50% greater under high-index conditions than under low-index conditions, and the heat flux would be ;25% greater.”
” We have shown that sea ice provides memory for the Arctic climate system so that changes in SIM driven by the AO during winter can be felt during the ensuing seasons; that is, the AO drives dynamic thinning of the sea ice in the eastern Arctic during winter, allowing more heat to be released from the ocean through the thinner ice during spring, and resulting in lower SIC during summer and the liberation of more heat by the freezing of the ice in autumn. The correlations between the wintertime AO and SIC and SAT during the subsequent seasons offers the hope of some predictability, which may be useful for navigation along the Northern Sea route.”
http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/Response-of-Sea-Ice-to-the-Arctic-Oscillation-2002-J-Climate.pdf
Thames, I look forward to seeing the body of evidence that you’ve based your opinion on…
In the mean time some more research on my own….August 14, 2012 at 11:02 am
http://bprc.osu.edu/geo/publications/mckay_etal_CJES_08.pdf
This paper shows that there is more ice now than the average of the past 9000 years.
It is widely known that the current ice conditions are nothing special…
“Arctic Ice Loss Has Been Much Worse Historically”
“The meltdown underway in the Arctic is remarkable, but an international team of beachcombers has uncovered evidence it’s been much worse before.”
“Based on the paleoclimate record from ice and ocean cores, the last warm period in the Arctic peaked about 8,000 years ago, during the so-called Holocene Thermal Maximum. Some studies suggest that as recent as 5,500 years ago, the Arctic had less summertime sea ice than today. However, it is not clear that the Arctic was completely free of summertime sea ice during this time.”
Thanes, the following links may help you understand that today’s global temperatures are well within the parameters of the Holocene:
click1
click2
click3
As we can see, we are currently in an ideal “Goldilocks” climate. There is nothing unusual or unprecedented happening now or on the horizon. Further, routine and abrupt temperature changes have happened naturally without regard to CO2 levels, which follow ΔT.
To claim that the planet has warmed from 288K to 288.8K is due to human activity over the past century and a half is fine, so long as you understand that it is simply a conjecture, not a testable hypothesis. The same applies to the natural variability in polar ice cover, which as I’ve shown has many natural precedents on century and even decadal scales.
Anyone who looks at a chart like this, and then claims that at times during the Holocene polar ice cover was not naturally less than curent ice cover has an agenda that has nothing to do with science, and everything to do with keeping the grant gravy train rolling.
thanes says:
September 15, 2012 at 2:17 pm
And another emotional uninformed cheerleader for the “cause”. As usual, brings NOTHING to the table but spittle and vehemence. I care just as much (probably more) about the environment and have spent a good deal of my life in the wilderness. Listen to my words; It is civilization that is tenuous, not nature. If you know ANYTHING about ANYTHING, you will know this to be true.
Arctic sea ice volume is actually at a record low, just like its extent and area: http://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2012/08/record-dominoes-9-piomas-sea-ice-volume.html
As for the Antarctic sea ice trend (a) it’s a very slight trend to an increase, compared to the sharp trend to a decrease in the Arctic; (b) it isn’t nearly enough in absolute numbers to balance out the Arctic drop in sea ice, resulting in a net fall in area and extent(http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg), (c) what matters visavis albedo changes for the climate is summer sea ice extent, not winter, since there’s no sun to reflect in winter, and (d) it’s happening alongside a fall in Antarctic land ice volume.
And as for whether this year is a fluke due to weather conditions, or part of a long-term downwards trend… I’d like to put two things forward. First, the prior progression supports a downwards trend (http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20111004_Figure3.png).
Second: I think we’ll have a much better idea over the next few years than we can say at the moment. I suggest we plan on treating it as something of a natural experiment, looking at the NSIDC September monthly extent, since that shows slightly less stochastic variation than the minimum extent reached on any day in the year. Past September monthly minima have been as follows:
1978-2006: Dropping gradually from about 8 to 5.5 (eyeballing the chart)
2007: 4.30
2008: 4.67
2009: 5.36
2010: 4.90
2011: 4.61
(2007 to 2011 data from http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2011/10/)
The September 2012 average looks like it’ll be a new record, somewhere below 4m square km, unless we see an unusually rapid refreeze (I’d eyeball it at about 3.75m square km over the month so far, based on the graph here http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/). So what might the next couple of years tell us? How about: if the 2013 and 2014 Arctic summer sea ice extents go back to the 5.5 to 8m square km seen between 1978 and 2006, they’ll contraindicate a melting trend strongly; if they go back to the 2008-2011ish levels of around 4.5m to 5.5m square km, depending on where they are in that range they’ll offer either contraindication (5 to 5.5m) or ambivalence (4.5 to 5m); if they’re in the 4 to 4.5m square km range, they’ll indicate a melting trend; and if they’re below 4m square km again, expecially if they’re even lower than the 2012 record we’re seeing now, they’ll strongly indicate such a trend. Any views on this natural experiment, or bets? (I’d be very unwilling to bet, but based on what we’ve seen, I’d be surprised if 2013 and 2014 were either below 3m or above 5m; anything within that range seems possible, however).
David:
“the rapid decline in winter perennial ice the past two years was caused by unusual winds. “Unusual atmospheric conditions set up wind patterns that compressed the sea ice, loaded it into the Transpolar Drift Stream and then sped its flow out of the Arctic,”
—————————————————
Does that mean it would be much cheaper to string a net across the exits to the Arctic Ocean, than to cut down on CO2?
If it keeps the bed-wetters happy, and our taxes lower, why not do it?
.
Changed my mind on betting: I would be happy to offer the following bets. The terms of each individual bet are even-odds, promising to give US$10 to a charity of the opponent’s choice if you lose (my charity of choice being Doctors Without Borders).
1) September 2012 will set a new record low for the NSIDC monthly average extent of <4.1m square km (doubt anyone will take that, but it's your money…)
2) September 2013 will have an average of 5.5m square km
4) There will be another new record low September monthly average within the next five years.
5) The three-year average September extent for 2013-2015 will be lower than the three-year average September extent for 2010-2012.
(All bets are based on the NSIDC September monthly average, in case it isn’t clear).
Please respond within a week if you’re responding to the first bet; otherwise, any time you like before the end of the year for bets 2 to 5. I’m happy to consider other bets you may put to me as well.
Not sure what happened there, but I think some text was missed because it was encased in “less than/greater than” symbols. Please ignore bet 2. Bets 2 and 3 were meant to read:
2) September 2013 will have an average of less than 4.8m square km
3) No year between 2013 and 2017 will have an average of greater than 5.5m square km.
@Philip Bradley,
“None of the Greenland glaciers reach the open ocean.”
Incorrect, unless you’re using a very selective reading of “open ocean”, as you can see from this map: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b5/Greenland_ice_sheet_AMSL_thickness_map-en.svg
Alternatively, to give a more specific contradiction, what about the Petermann glacier: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Greenland_tmo_2003186.jpg ?
Yeah..this is mainstream media in a nutshell..They just throw out stories..merely lies.. especially about the arctic or [Antarctica] area…It’s just four or five years ago..they printed lies about the penguins in [Antarctica] was almost extinct..cause the ice was melting…Turns out there are more penguins than ever…Same story about the arctic polar bear…They thttp://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/wp-admin/edit-comments.php?comment_status=moderated#comments-formhrive..and population is growing…Media can tell lies on anything regarding the polar areas..cause..after all..how many of us are really able to go check if it’s true?