Sea Ice News Volume 4 #2 – The 2013 Sea Ice Forecast Contest

The race to forecast the minimum is on again. Will it be another Serreze death spiral media opportunity? Or will it be ho-hum- nothing to see here, move along?

Once again I’m inviting readers to submit their best guess, best SWAG, or best dartboard result to the poll for the SEARCH Sea Ice Outlook. Deadline, according to the recent announcement I posted on WUWT from ARCUS is close of business Friday June 7th.

Of recent interest has been the recent tendency for the current data to hang between the 1990’s and the 2000 normal line.

Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) – International Arctic Research Center (IARC) – Click the pic to view at source

We are in that time of year when all of the years converge into a tighter grouping. This makes judging where the current year is going to be a tough challenge at this stage.

I’m going to give WUWT readers an opportunity to make a forecast for the ARCUS SEARCH sea ice contest submission, based on voting. See the poll at the end.

I’ll run this poll each month in the week before the deadline, and we’ll see how we do as the minimum approaches. The value used by ARCUS  for judging the contest is the NSIDC value in square kilometers. The object is to guess what the September minimum will be.

I suggest that you should not be using the JAXA graph to forecast minimums, though it it useful for determining short term trends as it is more responsive than the NSDIC graph below, which is averaged.

http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png

Here is what the June 2012 forecast submission reports looked like:

Figure 3a. Distributions of Outlook estimates for September 2012 arctic sea ice

The archive of the 2012 contest is available here: http://www.arcus.org/search/seaiceoutlook/2012/summary

For a complete overview of Arctic and Antarctic Sea Ice, see the WUWT Sea Ice Reference page: http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/sea-ice-page/

Here is the forecast poll, deadline is Friday June 7th. Bear in mind that traditionally, forecasts in June have been too high. Last year’s minimum was 3.41 million square kilometers (1.32 million square miles) at its lowest point on 16 September, and in June, WUWT readers forecast 4.9 million sq kilometers.

Note: The mean is the monthly average in sq km2 for September, which is what the contest is looking for. It is not really as interesting as the minimum, but that’s the number ARCUS is looking for. Given that many of the June forecasts are too high anyway, shooting for the minimum rather than the mean might be just as good.

Note: The POLL HAS CLOSED, and I’ll be submitting the forecast to ARCUS – Anthony

128 thoughts on “Sea Ice News Volume 4 #2 – The 2013 Sea Ice Forecast Contest

  1. 5.931415929

    i needed to incorporate ( approximate ) the number Pi in my prediction somehow – other that that the base ( 5.9 ) is simply ( i think it was a critical constant + or – 90 % ) ) from a model i have developed and revised, predicated upon an earlier algorithm that solves level 37 in candy crush saga, using a minimum number of moves.

  2. 5.931415929

    I needed to incorporate ( approximate ) the number Pi in my prediction somehow…

    Yes, but pi ≈ 3.1415926… Hence your otherwise solid model’s prediction is likely too high by ~3000 m2. Roughly 2 NHL Hockey rinks.

  3. Licked finger. Stuck finger in the air. Plumped for 4.8-4.9. At this stage of the game it’s as good as anything else.

  4. Wanting to one-up the geekiness of Steve’s post: 5.85987448204884, π+ℯ…

    *wanders off, humming the Irrational Number song… three, two, seven, nine, five oh two eight eight four one, nine, seven, one… six, nine, three nine nine three seven five one oh, fight, eight two, oh nine seven four nine four four, five nine, two three oh seven eight one six four, oh six, two eight six, two oh eight nine nine*

  5. Am seeking a spot of guidance if anyone can help? I’m looking for those images that compares an up to date satellite shot of the Arctic with the same views from 20 and 30 years ago.The ones where there’s a pair side by side for easy comparison. (I saw something along these lines recently but can’t find it, not sure if it was on WUWT or Steve Goddard’s site) I’ve also been on the cryosphere today site but for my sins, find it incredibly confusing. Thanks in advance.

  6. But don’t vote too low either, or it will look like WUWT is acknowledging that the climate in the Arctic is changing due to global warming. Which is nonsense, of course, and if it isn’t, it’s a natural cycle.

    REPLY: Pay no attention to the butt cheek. This is just another fake comment from “Günther Kirschbaum” aka Neven, in Graz Austria, who can’t handle different views on sea ice, so must revert to childish personas with fake email addresses. – Anthony

  7. Tez says:
    June 6, 2013 at 2:23 am

    4.6 to 4.8 as it has the biggest spread of all

    That’s a typo in the ballot that should be corrected to read: “4.6 to 4.7 …”

  8. Tez: I would think greater than 6 million is the largest spread if you want to change your vote :)

    James

  9. Judging from the lack of polar bear deaths I’m going for record sea ice. It’s what the polar bear models predict, and the polar bear models accurately account for their numbers in the past, so we can be confident they will be accurate in the future, despite some polar bears deaths currently hiding in the deep north.

  10. You can show me all your graphs & stuff, Mr Watts.

    I’m going with the “settled science” and the 97%.
    Dana Nuccitelli says, “The last time CO 2 exceeded 400 ppm, some 3 million years ago, sea levels were 50 feet higher and humans did not exist.”

    Obviously all the ice will melt in the next four months and we are all gonna die from rising sea levels as co2 is now 400 ppm.

    The amount of ice is zero.

    I can’t vote for zero!

    http://www.sacbee.com/2013/06/05/5471547/climate-debate-is-settled-carbon.html

    .
    I’ll be collecting my winnings after the apocalypse.

  11. Guesses are all over the ballpark. Interesting.

    I went with 4.1-4.2 and was worried about that being too high. Astonished to see if anything I’m one of the lowest. Expecting ice to recover from last year, but not by a lot. Ice is still thin and it will be stormy up there again. Expect global temperatures to continue to fall and ice levels to continue to consequently rise and eventually get back to 20th century norms. But ice always lags. I’m not expecting to see a dramatic rise for another three or four years.

    Anthony – you might like to consider presenting the poll options in the reverse order from coldest to hottest next year, with the previous year’s minimum marked. That might make it clearer to some of the extreme ice optimists just how massive a jump they are predicting.

  12. Steve and Max are wrong.
    After detailed mathematical analysis, I determined that it will be much simpler – just 2 x e = 5.43656365691809

  13. My first guess was 5, but taking to heart the warning that June guesses have been high, I averaged that with last years’ low, coming up with 4.2 to 4.3.

  14. Lot of real revenue under that sea ice. I remember start of freeze last year causing projects to be abandoned. Wouldn’t be surprised if the ice breakers make an appearance soon. If that happens all bets will be off.

  15. WUWT readers were pretty far off the mark last year but personally I reckon on this being the turn around year. Arctic sea ice, I believe will start slowly but erratically recovering from 2013 for at least another 20-30 years, eventually getting back to something close to the 1979-2000 average. My estimate for this year then will be consistent with what was predicted last year – 4.9 million. My reasoning for this is that already this Spring there has been a relative cooling of the Arctic and moderately good N. Hemisphere snow cover. I personally suspect that we will not see the melt line graph continue to plummet nearly as late into the season as we did in 2012. As for death spiral – not a chance! Recovery impetus yes – albeit fairly moderate this year.

    Barents Sea, in particular needs to catch up winter ice growth. This has been the one area contributing most to lack of ice over the past few years. My real objection tho’ is to the farce of the summer minimum. Really the year’s average mean should be the question. Also, NW passage may not open up this year – another good yard stick, as is the NE passage. Areas of extensive open sea where ice is just one winter thick will be more vulnereble – as ever. We shall see!

  16. “After detailed mathematical analysis…”
    I would have said
    ice=299792458*2.71828 i = 814920391 i
    m/sec? Ah well, it’s only imaginary.

  17. Richard111 says:
    June 6, 2013 at 4:05 am
    Lot of real revenue under that sea ice. I remember start of freeze last year causing projects to be abandoned. Wouldn’t be surprised if the ice breakers make an appearance soon. If that happens all bets will be off.

    Well the Yamal is already on its way to evacuate the Russian polar research station because of breakup of the ice that it’s on.

  18. handjive says:
    June 6, 2013 at 3:54 am

    You are obviously having a laugh aren’t you?

    “The amount of ice is zero.”

    Yeah, right!

  19. Hello Anthony

    I suggest a change in our poll calculation methodology this year. Historically we have submitted the bracket that receives the most votes, i.e. 2011:

    “Rationale: Composite of projections by readers, projection bracket with the highest response is the one submitted.”

    “15.64% chose 5.5 million km2 or greater, with 13.09% choosing 5.0 to 5.1 million sq km2 as the second highest vote.”

    “Extent Projection: 5.5 million square kilometers”

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/05/31/sea-ice-news-arcus-forecast-from-readers-submitted/

    This year, I suggest that we change the methodology to take the midpoint of each temperature bracket, weight each bracket by the number of votes it receives and then calculate a weighted average across all brackets that receive at least 1 vote. I believe that this methodology will be a more accurate reflectection of the WUWT community’s opinion at large, versus the previous methodology which simply reflects the most frequently selected bracket.

    JTF

  20. I’m basing my predictions totally on two plots:

    1) The plot for Yearly Minimum Sea Ice Extent from your sea ice page: NORSEX SMMR/SSM1 which gives averages for Yearly Maximum, Yearly Mean, Yearly Minimum as well as Change per Decade for each.

    It seems to me that the later data in the Yearly Minimum extent curve would be fit better by an exponential than a linear trend – which is why I looked at ice volume next.

    2) A plot of PIOMAS Yearly Minimum Arctic Ice Volume which includes an exponential curve fit which gives an estimate of when volume reaches 0. See:

    Another version of this plot indicated the 95% confidence interval on the curve is roughly +/- 1 year.

    So:
    PIOMAS volume curve fit says 0 ice volume in 2015 so I extended the Ice Extent plot based on this. Didn’t look that unreasonable as curve is taking sharp turn down. alsUsing a sophisticated graphing technique of tracing on paper over computer screen I get:

    2.7 for minimum for 2013.

    As a bonus, this technique also lets me give estimates now of 1.2 for 2014 – and of course 0 for 2015.

    Really makes the 97% bunch look bad if this comes true. They were predicting 2050 to 2100 for this to happen. Talk about blowing a prediction. Reality can really suck.

  21. I expect a recovery similar to the one we saw in 2008 from 2007 levels, i.e. around 600,000 km2 more than last year, or 4 million km2. But I went conservative with an estimate of 3.8-3.9.

  22. I’m staying with original prediction made at begining of year NH ice will stay within normal SD (although I don’t even trust the way mean ice was calculated. NH wsa ICE free in the 1900’s see Goddards site BTW

    Unfortunately, even if Arctic ice stays within SD, we probably will not be allowed to see it. From past experience (and records have been kept.),,.you really cannot trust warmist site arctic ice data such as CT and others because I don’t know how many times they have “adjusted” always “down” They fiddle the borders of each section of ice in the NH.to suit the AGW agenda They cannot do that with Antarctica (one block) and as you can see totally different scenario there

  23. Agree with JTF. If you just select the most common bracket WUWT will be way off the mark. Best to hide that.

  24. If 2012 was an outlier, and if the cold NH temperatures continue, and considering that the Russians just drove 2 trucks over the North Pole to Canada, I’m guessing that the ice will return to 2011 levels. So 4.5 -4.6

  25. People should keep in mind that the storm last year had a couple of effects. It piled up ice on top of itself making it thicker in some places. I also broke off big chunks that floated around but were not counted in the numbers. Hence, there really was more ice than was claimed. This will have a positive influence on the amount of ice this year.

    With that said, it will all get down to wind patterns over the next 2-3 months. If the circumpolar winds continue like they have this past winter I expect something around 5.0. If they start blowing the ice out into the AMO warmed North Atlantic, then the number will likely be closer to 4.0.

  26. I’m with Brooks Bridges here – less than 3m sq km – but for totally different reasons. I am extrapolating the 2011-12 trend in the sea ice extent graph above, on a wild presumption that the reason that global ‘temperatures’ have recently been flat could be because the rate of excess heat accumulating in the system has not abated, but is being taken up instead as latent heat of fusion used in melting that additional arctic (and other) ice. Nothing like nailing your colours to the mast and getting yourself shot to pieces!

    It is interesting to see how many people are betting high, on an Arctic ice minimum-area recovery. Presumably they consider the flattening of global temperature to signify an abatement of excess heat (or of heat retention), which of course it might be..

    I have a sister living at Port Carlisle on the Solway Firth in the north of England, who just rang me here in Australia to complain that their first day of summer had only reached 9*C. She was feeling rather jaded, having been promised a future of barbecue summers luxuriating on the Costa Del Blackpool. I suggested that it could be all that Arctic melt water, dribbling down the North Atlantic and getting in the way of the Gulf Stream. But then spoiled it by telling her how terrible it was down here in Perth, where we’d just endured the chill of a blue-skyed, 22*C sunny winter’s day.

    The Solway Firth has always been appallingly cold though. In 1881 the Solway Viaduct, carrying the railway across from Bowness in England to Annan in Scotland, was unceremoniously demolished by six-foot thick ice floes, heading out to sea on the falling tide. Not that anybody has even bothered to replace it.

  27. I always find that sea ice extent isn’t really a useful measurement. Because it doesn’t show whether the ice is 1/4 inch thick or 14 feet thick. It simply counts coverage. This was as good as we could get up to a few years ago since satellites were taking the data without an ability to get accurate sea-ice height data. Since the new satellite cryostat-2 can now get this information and get an accurate measurement of sea ice volume, this is a much more reliable measurement for what is really going on up there.

  28. I’ve been desperately trying not to say “highest in years at this time” because the pattern from the last few years suggests the bottom is about to drop out. I’ll take a new record low, shortly followed by waves of alarmism for $1000, Alex.

  29. I predict the warmers will weep & wring their hands come September. Whales & others feeding in those open seas, not so much.

  30. Re: JTF and Ryan.
    A weighted average, 1st moment mean, will “hide” data. It is quite possible that a bi-modal distribution will result in a mean value no one chose.

    What is to stop WUWT from submitting a First mode, Second mode and third mode as separate values?

    BTW, mine is 4.15. from 2007 to 2008, the low point recovered less than 0.5 million.

  31. Several years ago, during debate on this topic amongst knowledgeable people, a person argued for a low minimum with the statement “the buoys are streaming out” the Fram Straight.
    This year, the buoys are not streaming out – the relevant figure on the WUWT SEA ICE PAGE is the Arctic Sea Ice Speed & Drift. Also relevant are storminess, as mentioned in a previous post, and the SEA ICE PAGE “Arctic Temperatures Daily Mean Temperatures North of 80 degree North” from the DMI.
    Naturally, these conditions could change in the blink of an eye; they provide little predictive value.
    My question, of those who have watched these things closely, is: how much longer do those pro-ice factors need to persist in order to essentially rule out a new record minimum? A week? A month?
    Thanks in advance!

  32. 4.5-4.6.

    Both 2007 & 2012 lows resulted from unusual August storms, although the deniers are now trying to deny this fact.

  33. I haven’t noticed before today a 30-day (and 365-day) animation GIF set for the NRL charts.

    I bring to your attention the 30-day animation of Ice Thickness. Check out the location 80N 140W where it goes from a relatively think 4 m to 1.5 m thanks to a few days of easterly winds.

    (which I knew the URL to the dated archive file)

  34. Poll results so far look suspicious. I hope nobody’s trying to make fun of it.

    “Of recent interest has been the recent tendency for the current data to hang between the 1990′s and the 2000 normal line.”

    Happens regularly sine 2007 but doesn’t seem to affect summer minima.

  35. “But don’t vote too low either, or it will look like WUWT is acknowledging that the climate in the Arctic is changing due to global warming. Which is nonsense, of course, and if it isn’t, it’s a natural cycle.”

    by all means use politics to decide your estimates

    REPLY: Mosh, FYI that’s a troll comment from “Gunther Kirschbaum” aka “Neven Acropolis” out of Graz, Austria, who thinks his opinion is so important that he has to create fake names and fake email addresses to get it across. Pay no attention to him. – Anthony

  36. If these polls are easy to set up, maybe consider setting some up for antarctic maximum ice and global total estimates.

  37. ‘My question, of those who have watched these things closely, is: how much longer do those pro-ice factors need to persist in order to essentially rule out a new record minimum? A week? A month?
    Thanks in advance!”

    Hmm. looking at the record it is rare to see 4 years in a row with a falling minimum, so some folks are estimating no new record this year. On the flip side the mechanical integrity of the ice has suffered considerably in the early part of the season with big cracking events and a persistent cyclone over the area, so there is an outside chance of a complete wipeout of the record. That’s another way of saying that the ice in its current state is much more susceptible to weather than it has been in the past and consequently less predictable.

  38. Last year the average for sept was

    “The average arctic sea ice monthly extent for September 2012 was the lowest observed in the satellite era at 3.6 million square kilometers, based on National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) estimates—50 % lower than the 1979-2000 average of 7.0 million square kilometers.”

    based on no particular data I’m down for 3.6 again this year. 5% chance of a huge blowout.

  39. I wanted a nice memorable number out to the number of digits that various sources always report their data on the ice. I had a hard time deciding between 2.8571428, 4.2857142, or 5.7142857. I’ve used the middle value in the past versions of this so i decided to stick with it. I will leave it to the audience to determine the highly scientific methodology I used to smoothly extract these values from my anal orifice.

  40. Please could someone explain to me why we are worrying about how much ice there is on an uninhabited part of the world for two months of the year?

    Oh sorry I forgot the eskimos…

  41. I’m thinking that North Atlantic water temperatures will have a lot to do with this

    Sea temperatures dropping to the south of the bearing straight may have influence

  42. 5.17 sq. km. Here’s to a big recovery from last year! That’s my guess and am sticking to it!

  43. Tim says:
    June 6, 2013 at 10:19 am
    Please could someone explain to me why we are worrying about how much ice there is on an uninhabited part of the world for two months of the year?

    Simple.

    The changes in ice may be driving the changes in jet stream which could explain some of the weirdness seen recently.

    once you get past the garbage in the first 30 seconds, you’ll see an interesting explanation

  44. Number of comments referred to the last summer Arctic storm, however Richard M’s comment appears to be very relevant:
    People should keep in mind that the storm last year had a couple of effects. It piled up ice on top of itself making it thicker in some places.

    After look at data for North Atlantic currents, I am also inclined to think that the summer storm’s effect was neutral, and Richard has provided good explanation.

    http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/ArcticSeaIce.htm

    As it can be seen the last September’s ice extent was predetermined by the N. Atlantic currents some 4-5 years earlier.

  45. Year over year the ice is getting thinner. Arctic cyclones which used to have no effect on thick ice are now having a field day kicking the butt of thinner ice.

    This should be a very interesting year.

  46. With 491 votes in the can, and a (1,2,1)/4 triangular filter, I see 6 modes.
    The top four are:
    Above 6.0 (31) (1,2)/3 filter
    5.0-5.1 (29)
    4.7-4.8 (25.75)
    4.0-4.1 (20)
    and a broad 5th mode between 5.2-5.5 (12.75)

    Mean is greater than 4.78 (minimum centroid for “above 6.0″
    and at least 4.69 ignoring “above 6.0″

  47. These people voting for 6+ have to be people trying to sabotage the voting. I’m going with 4.3 and I think I might be high.

    I made a graph of the low point of extent over the years and common sense tells one that a rebound of 5.0 is probably the best that could happen.

  48. Some guidance on Arctic sea current temperatures for both this time last year and current temperatures would be appreciated, since I think that warm water melts Arctic ice faster than co2.

    4.1 was my vote.

  49. Tim says:
    June 6, 2013 at 10:19 am
    Please could someone explain to me why we are worrying about how much ice there is on an uninhabited part of the world for two months of the year?

    Simple.
    Actually we aren’t worried, but the Climatists are, as they need to have Arctic ice melt to point to and say “See”? “The Arctic ice is disappearing which spells climate disaster, as predicted by our sacred models”. But sadly for them, as with all things climate, reality doesn’t seem to be playing along with their most ardent wishes.

  50. Dave Wendt: 2.8571428, 4.2857142, 5.7142857 are 20/7, 30/7, 40/7. I’m good at spotting sevenths.

    Rich.

  51. Just The Facts: yes, I agree with you, some sort of mean should be used this year, rather than the biggest mode. But I think it is wise to use what is called a “censored” mean, where say 10% of the votes are removed from either end. This is so that (possible) cranks do not affect the result – but the sane majority do!

    Steven Mosher: do you really fall for this low-sea-ice-affects-the-jet-stream BS? You really fall for what the warmists spout at you with AFAICT no scientific justification. In fact southerly jet streams have been prominent since solar Cycle 23 went low and 24 never came up high.

    Rich.

  52. Stephen Rasey says:
    June 6, 2013 at 8:40 am

    I haven’t noticed before today a 30-day (and 365-day) animation GIF set for the NRL charts.

    I bring to your attention the 30-day animation of Ice Thickness. Check out the location 80N 140W where it goes from a relatively think 4 m to 1.5 m thanks to a few days of easterly winds.

    (which I knew the URL to the dated archive file)

    Might be worth looking again in a couple of days. The last seven days of the animation are a forecast, and the ‘hole’ isn’t thereat the moment (i.e. up to June 5th).

    4.7 to 4.8 by the way. Looking like a decent recovery if the Transpolar Drift remains fairly becalmed. Plenty of thin ice subject to the whims of the weather though…

  53. I think we might see a similar number to last year, but that is not cause for alarm but celebration since it means freer trade up north and it might even mean a bonanza for some people. It has happened in the past so why are we worried about it now?

  54. Since the neutron monitor first caught my eye, I see that it is now showing a steady decline. This should mean a drop in sst, if it follows the past pattern. The monitor should read close to 40 by mid September. Taking into account the current sea ice conditions I voted 5.3-5.4. This year should be similar to 2009.

  55. @Keith 2:44pm last seven days of the animation are a forecast,
    Ouch! I didn’t catch that. GIF’s roll by so fast it is hard to catch the details. Thanks for the head’s up.

    To all:
    What is the easiest way to view frame-by-frame an Animated GIF in Windows 7? Movie Maker, Media Center, Photo View all seem unable to see the frames.

  56. “Steven Mosher: do you really fall for this low-sea-ice-affects-the-jet-stream BS? You really fall for what the warmists spout at you with AFAICT no scientific justification. In fact southerly jet streams have been prominent since solar Cycle 23 went low and 24 never came up high.

    ##############

    well, it’s nothing quite remarkable. One need only look at the actual data. The issue is not southernly jet streams. The issue, as even Judith Curry has remarked, is that when the arctic warms you see a change in the N-S gradiant. This leads to a slower jet stream and hence a jet stream with larger amplitudes. That’s measureable. So, it’s not “warmists” it’s the facts. Sorry.

  57. Anthony

    since Judith Curry and others have talked about the same phenomena I really dont need to consider the “sources” and go on attacking people. If I want to see people attacked I’ll go to sKs. Instead I Just look at the data. It has no alliances

  58. hmm wave amplitude. Its just data. the curious would look first and then come to a conclusion.
    Of course, I dont like her voice so she must be wrong.

  59. dbstealey says:
    June 6, 2013 at 11:06 am
    “Year over year the ice is getting thinner“??

    Really?

    ##############

    yup. this should be an interesting year. Frankly I hope it all holds together as a big loss in september can lead to all sorts of weird weather.

    I wonder of we will have big open water north of 85?

  60. From the comments thread I see we’ve been suckered by the hockey team. Arctic sea ice extent and volume is the only surviving metric supporting warming. The AGW proponents are hoping to embarrass skeptics by conning us into nailing our colors to the mast of sea ice extent. Because I’m a lukewarm kind of skeptic who believes that a warm planet is a happy planet, it doesn’t really mean a lot to me if the ice goes right down to zero. Sorry…

  61. Let’s see if I understand this correctly. Mosher absolutely believes that changes in the Arctic temps can influence the jet stream whereas changes in Pacific temps (PDO) cannot. Groupthink in action?

  62. 4.5 just because I said so.

    But seriously, is anyone planning on “rowing to the pole” this year? I just love those things!

  63. Richard,

    Huh?

    1. I dont have a any absolute beliefs
    2. Its interestng data that one should consider. Judith Curry thinks its interesting, are you going to attack her ?
    3. Who said PDO cannot? certainly not me. In fact It would surely play a role.

    I dont know why people are so resistent to actually looking at data and seeing for themselves. Its far easier to say “I dont like them, therefore they must be wrong” I know that attitude bugs skeptics, so why do they also do it?

    Weird.

  64. Steven Mosher says: June 6, 2013 at 6:59 pm
    “I wonder of we will have big open water north of 85?”

    Here is a SST animation showing a trace of something similar in just the last few days. It’s early relative to other years.

  65. Steven Mosher says: June 6, 2013 at 6:44 pm

    One need only look at the actual data. The issue is not southernly jet streams. The issue, as even Judith Curry has remarked, is that when the arctic warms you see a change in the N-S gradiant. This leads to a slower jet stream and hence a jet stream with larger amplitudes. That’s measureable. So, it’s not “warmists” it’s the facts. Sorry.

    But recently Northern Polar Lower Troposphere Temperatures have been the coolest they’ve been in several years, and right around average:

    Note:(RSS uses a 1979-1998 base period) – Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) – Microwave Sounding Units (MSU) – Click the pic to view at source

    Of what relevance are “changes” “when the arctic warms” when Arctic temperatures have been average recently?

  66. From Stephen Rasey on June 6, 2013 at 4:02 pm:

    To all:
    What is the easiest way to view frame-by-frame an Animated GIF in Windows 7? Movie Maker, Media Center, Photo View all seem unable to see the frames.

    GIMP. On Downloads page select “show other downloads” for the “GIMP for Windows” installer, good for Win XP SP3 and later.

    Load the image, the frames and background show up in the “Layers” dialog box (Ctrl-L). Leave the background visible, make the layers non-visible, then make the layer (frame) visible that you want to see.

    GIMP is a full-fledged graphics package, hope it’s not too hard for you to figure out for such a simple task. I’m no illustrator, don’t know how to use even a tenth of its capability, and I’ve made simple animated GIF’s with it before.

    And given its price, it doesn’t hurt to try it.

  67. “But recently Northern Polar Lower Troposphere Temperatures have been the coolest they’ve been in several years, and right around average:”

    Not talking about those temperatures. You’ll need to look at the fall air temps. Of course you can cherry pick anything you like, but if somebody explains that the effect derives from open water in the fall, then you don’t start by looking at annual data. You start by looking at what people are actually talking about. Again, there are many ways to fool yourself.

  68. Nick Stokes says:
    June 6, 2013 at 7:47 pm
    Steven Mosher says: June 6, 2013 at 6:59 pm
    “I wonder of we will have big open water north of 85?”

    Here is a SST animation showing a trace of something similar in just the last few days. It’s early relative to other years.

    #####################################

    Yes, there has been a cyclone persisting over the fragile ice for some time. Watching it on MODIS

    The potential for a big blowout is there, but I wouldnt bet on it just yet.

  69. Nick,

    while this is a forecast it’s interesting

    MYI looks to take a pounding. If we get a lot of cyclones all bets are off.

  70. As for the high amplitude jet stream, Joe D’Aleo has shown that the positive (warm) AMO phase is a large contributing factor to low sea ice AND the negative phase of the NAO. It happened in the last warm AMO in the 40s and 50s and it is happening now.

  71. This is very perplexing. We can’t all be right! But some of us seem very certain..

    I actually haven’t a clue. Nor am I easily persuaded. But very grateful for the opportunity to join in. Thanks Anthony.

    (Which applies to the broader controversy as well)

  72. 3.3 to 3.4 — for the record (in case there’s a prize) #[:)]

    Just a guess by eyeballing the trend and making a HUGE assumption.

  73. Steven Mosher says: June 6, 2013 at 8:31 pm

    Not talking about those temperatures. You’ll need to look at the fall air temps.

    It wasn’t particularly warm last fall either compared to the last decade.

    Of course you can cherry pick anything you like

    How exactly is showing a complete data record and using the word “recently” a “cherry pick” in your mind?

    but if somebody explains that the effect derives from open water in the fall, then you don’t start by looking at annual data.

    Do you like monthly data better?:

    climate4you.com – Ole Humlum – Professor, University of Oslo Department of Geosciences – Click the pic to view at source

    You start by looking at what people are actually talking about.

    Yes, and then you look at the data and research to see if what they are talking about makes any sense. In the graph above it looks like 2007 and 2012, the years with the largest Sea Ice Area Anomalies, actually had less warming:

    Cryosphere Today – Arctic Climate Research at the University of Illinois – Click the pic to view at source

    Furthermore it appears that the Arctic Temperature pattern set in in 2004, 3 years prior to the 2007 drop in Arctic Sea Ice Area.

    Again, there are many ways to fool yourself.

    Yes, you’ve certainly figured that out…

  74. The best prediction right now is 0/0. At least that answer is certainly correct at this time.

  75. Steven Mosher,

    What kind of “weird weather” are you referring to? Things look pretty normal here.

    And would you care to discuss ice — icluding the Antarctic? That is part of the planet’s ice cover, too. Including the Antarctic gives us a global metric. Over all, global ice is right at its long term average [the red line]. So why the wild-eyed arm waving over one specific region — a region that is also returning to it’s long term average?

    Trying to fit a region like the Arctic to a global model run causes credibility problems, as we see here. It means that the model was wrong.

  76. On one side, the spring has been colder than average, and the northern atlantic and northern pacific sea surface anomalies would let us think that the outlook should be quite positive this season.

    But on the other side, last year has seen a record low sea ice area since satelite records began, and the reformed ice is rather thin in many places, despite the area is somewhat normal now. Furthemore, there are already melted pools of sea water within the ice shelf next to siberian coast, and in many places next to north pole the ice has shown already weaknesses. As a result i’m rather pessimistic (despite i’m a climate sceptic, yes) for the outlook this year.

    3.7 – 3.8 km square is my vote.

  77. What about the Antarctic ice? I was told that it was all heating up down there, but the sea ice page charts appear to show increasing sea ice. Odd that.

  78. Like I predicted in the other thread, I feel the thin nature of the ice from last summer’s melt and then refreeze will allow for rapid meting this July/August for a Sept minimum of 3.55. I do think the next few years will see slightly increasing minimums bsck to the 2007 -09 period

  79. Anthony,

    I put this in Tips & Notes already, but I’ll repeat it here. On your Sea Ice Page would you consider changing the side-by-side Cryosphere Today images so that 2012 is on the left instead of 2007, since 2012 set a record low? That was the original purpose of the comparison in the first place, I assume, i.e., seeing how today’s extent compares with the record low year, so the change seems appropriate.

  80. Based on the prediction of a cool Northern summer, I’m WAGing it will be around the 1990’s average–well above the 6.0 highest choice. So I went with that, but I think it will be much higher.

  81. Well, I was wrong. Looks like some warmers aren’t waiting until September to weep — already starting in June.

  82. Steven Mosher says:
    June 6, 2013 at 7:43 pm
    Richard,
    Huh?
    1. I dont have a any absolute beliefs

    Of course not. Now, if you could really look objectively at the data you would realize just how wrong your statement is.

    2. Its interesting (sic) data that one should consider. Judith Curry thinks its interesting, are you going to attack her ?

    I don’ t care what she said, I was referencing what you have said. And, I said nothing about whether or not this data is interesting. Ask yourself why you are so defensive.

    3. Who said PDO cannot? certainly not me. In fact It would surely play a role.

    In the PDO thread you stated you didn’t think it could be a factor since it was just temperatures (which is wrong). You were happy to throw out any possible influence for the PDO on global changes in temperatures. Check your own words.

    I dont know why people are so resistant (sic) to actually looking at data and seeing for themselves. Its far easier to say “I don’t (sic) like them, therefore they must be wrong” I know that attitude bugs skeptics, so why do they also do it?

    Weird.

    All I did is point out you happily accepted a conjecture about jet streams in one context while ignoring them in another. It demonstrates that you are looking for reasons to support preconceived beliefs. You may think you are open minded but your words tell a different story.

  83. I will make my prediction based upon the same sampling techniques used by Hansen and GISS in the Arctic:

    There will less ice than when there was a lot, the average of three data points.

  84. The poll is now closed. Thanks to everyone who voted, and especially thanks to all those trolls (and we both know who you are) who tried to skew the poll by voting for “6.0 or greater”, which happens every time. Got you covered though, since I anticipate such actions.

  85. I don’t think that all the ice will have gone by mid September but the amount left will be much smaller than what has accumulated at the south pole by mid September.The arctic sea ice minimum depends on many things such as oil drilling,icebreakers and even temperature it is much to hard to predict.

  86. As the votes were skewed, I went through the thread here and listed all the serious estimates, taking the lower estimate if there were two with 0.1 m/sq/km between them, or the average if the spread was greater for an individual estimate.

    Number of estimates: 35

    Spread: 2.7 – 5.9

    Average: 4.4

    Last year: 3.61

    As the September extent has recovered by 800 000 sq/km (+) only twice in the record, and considering the state of the ice, the average result is an unlikely proposition. The largest year to year recovery was 1.75 m/sq/km (1995 – 1996); the 2nd largest was 1 m/sq/km. Estimates above 5 m/sq/km (there were 7 of those) may be possible, but highly unlikey.

    My guess is 3.9

  87. “All I did is point out you happily accepted a conjecture about jet streams in one context while ignoring them in another.”

    really? Personally I would say that the jury is still out. But when people ask the question as they did, “who cares about the arctic?” it would seem quite reasonable to point folks to some of the theories actively being persued. But of course anytime anybody points to anything that suggest the arctic may be important, people attack the reserchers rather than simply saying
    ” hmm, that’s interesting, I’ll have a look”

    So. I accept no conjecture. Sorry no cookie for you.

  88. Rod Everson says:June 7, 2013 at 6:53 am

    Anthony,

    I put this in Tips & Notes already, but I’ll repeat it here. On your Sea Ice Page would you consider changing the side-by-side Cryosphere Today images so that 2012 is on the left instead of 2007, since 2012 set a record low

    I’m not speaking for Anthony, but I believe the arrangement of the side-by-side charts is done that way at Cryosphere Today. You can click on the image and change the dates at CT.

  89. Just the facts,

    You are still missing the point.

    1. You need to compare august sept oct air temps ( you also have to look at mositure which is what they explicitily mention )

    2. AVOID hadcrut. I’ve explained this over an over again. Its broken dont use it.

    3. For this area and the variables you need to look at Reanalysis is the best source.

    4. To test a claim somebody makes you have to actually test the claim.

    A) When there is more open water in the melt season ( pick this data )
    B) the air is warmer and moister than it would be otherwise ( like duh)
    C) that can lead to higher amplitude jet stream.

    So, to date you havent even some close to touching the analytical problem

    When you do that you will be unfooled.

  90. Steven Mosher says:June 8, 2013 at 7:37 am

    Looks like the day the competetion closed we lost 400K km of ice.

    Care to share which planet you are referring to?

  91. It is odd.
    5.4-5.5 gets 33 votes
    5.5-5.6 gets 0
    5.6-5.7 gets 24 votes.
    Less than 2.0 is the only other zero.

    A mean of 4.68 (throwing out the above 6)
    A mean of at least 4.797 using a 6.05 centroid for the above 6.
    P90 at 3.71 or 3.79 (second value includes the “Greater than 6″)
    P75 at 4.19 or 4.24
    P50 at 4.73 or 4.8
    P25 at 5.21 or 5.45
    P10 at 5.61 or 5.95

  92. I just took a look at Cryospehere. Wow! Sadly, I’m guessing that we see another record low this summer, and this summers low will easily (and by a large margin) shatter last seasons low.

  93. @Stephen Rasey June 8, 2013 at 9:51am
    There was a good reason that the choice for 5.5-5.6 received zero votes.
    There was no choice for 5.5-5.6.

  94. Steven Mosher says: June 8, 2013 at 7:52 am

    It took you a day to come up with that answer?

    1. You need to compare august sept oct air temps

    This is the best I’ve got for you;

    Danish Meteorological Institute – Climate Sanity – Click the pic to view at source

    what is it that we should be looking for?

    ( you also have to look at mositure which is what they explicitily mention )

    Explicitly explain the mechanism by which low Arctic Sea Ice Area in September is a primary driver of jet stream activity in late winter/Spring.

    2. AVOID hadcrut. I’ve explained this over an over again. Its broken dont use it.

    Then present alternative observational data that falsifies the HadCRUT4 Arctic 70 – 90 N data.

    3. For this area and the variables you need to look at Reanalysis is the best source.

    Then present some of that…

    4. To test a claim somebody makes you have to actually test the claim.

    A) When there is more open water in the melt season ( pick this data )
    B) the air is warmer and moister than it would be otherwise ( like duh)
    C) that can lead to higher amplitude jet stream.

    And how long do you think that effect lasts against the influences of the Atmospheric Circulation;

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_circulation

    and Polar Vorticity?

    http://climatewiki.org.uk/Polar_Vorticity

    So, to date you havent even some close to touching the analytical problem

    You haven’t presented any observational evidence in support of your conjectures, thus I have nothing to to touch and analyze.

    When you do that you will be unfooled.

    You are clearly very knowledgeable on the subject, you even have your own lexicon for it…

Comments are closed.