Oh, what a difference a year makes in Greenland melting

ARCTIC SUMMER SNOWSTORM

By Joseph D’Aleo CCM

Remember a year ago when few days of July ‘warmth’ with strong blocking over Greenland had the media abuzz over some melting?

Last July a brief spell of temperatures in the mid 30s had caused some surface slush formation on top of the 1 to 1.5 mile thick Greenland ice. The NASA sensors merely color-coded the phase of the water – ice (white), mixed water and ice (rose) and none (land grey). Rose meant some surface liquid. For Greenland, business as usual, because 150 years ago, there were no satellites to record the event.

It quickly refroze in a few days even before the flurry of news stories hyping it stopped.

clip_image002

clip_image004

The July 2012 melt event was a couple of short blips above freezing.

clip_image005

You can see the ice at the summit was very much still in evidence.

clip_image006

Well, a year later, we have an interesting opposite scenario with a deep arctic low bringing snow to the arctic and Greenland in late July.

clip_image008

clip_image010 clip_image012 clip_image014 clip_image016 clip_image018

What about the arctic ice?

According to the DMI plot it is running higher than 2012 and 2007. WE still have more than a month to go and storms and winds can compact the ice and push it out of the arctic so no promises can be made.  The oceans play a role in temperatures in the US and arctic and explain the recent demise and suggest the ice will recover in the not too distant future.

clip_image019

Arctic Sea ice extent 30% or greater (DMI)

###

Related:

Remember that ‘unprecedented’ Greenland ice sheet surface melt that was allegedly caused by global warming? Never mind

About these ads
This entry was posted in Arctic, Greenland ice sheet and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

73 Responses to Oh, what a difference a year makes in Greenland melting

  1. Joe says:

    I know this is only weather, but wouldn’t a recovery in Arctic ice over the next few years be nice for public perceptions right now?

    Wishful thinking, but what the hey :D

  2. Jon says:

    Do you ever talk to the people who live in the Arctic? Guess what … it’s getting friggin warmer … ever since the mid 90’s! The cause … who knows!

  3. Jon says:

    ‘The people who live in the Arctic’? There are four million of them, according to http://www.athropolis.com/arctic-facts/fact-arctic-pop.htm. Where do you suggest we start?

  4. A.D. Everard says:

    Do you think the MSM will fall over themselves reporting this? No, me neither.

  5. Jimbo says:

    The late July snow will be blamed on man-made climate change.

  6. albertalad says:

    Jon,
    I live at 56.7266° N, 111.3797° W and this is the coldest summer in a long while. In fact my entire province is suffering from a cold a wet summer – but what would you know? I live up here, you don’t!

  7. cynical_scientist says:

    Having less ice up there in summer seems a good thing to me. Has anyone pointed out any harmful effects?What advatnages are there to having it colder and more frozen up there in summer. Why pull harder on the trigger (ice lingering from one season to the next) that will one day put us into the next ice age.

  8. rtj1211 says:

    I wonder how many MSM titles will run this story with ‘freak July snowfall covers over half of Greenland’ as the headline.

    None??

    You don’t say.

    You’ll tell me next that MSM journalists are interested in truth, educating the public and are open to both points of view when evaluating their judgements.

    I think most here would agree that they are now paid whores, pandering to readers’ prejudices, writing sensationalist rubbish to get web hits for advertisers and that people who still read the MSM for any other reason than the defensive one of needing to know what the majority are reading and, hence, thinking are living in a fools’ paradise.

  9. Verity Jones says:

    As Jon says, there are plenty of people in the Arctic to talk to. It seems some of them believe the warming is cyclical – like these weather station operators – the real experts http://diggingintheclay.wordpress.com/2010/06/26/they-believe-it-is-cyclical/

  10. Louis says:

    Al Gore was probably speaking in the Greenland area…

  11. blackadderthe4th says:

    AGU report on Greenland melt.

  12. Ric Werme says:

    Last year it was “more than 90 percent of the ice-sheet surface melted.” Perhaps the MSM can spin this year with “only about 50% of the ice sheet covered!”

  13. Follow the Money says:

    The PR folks aren’t pushing stories of mountain glaciers in general “retreating” in the last few years…so I am assuming the info out there shows them growing now…

    It might be fruitful to take a new look at that.

  14. Latitude says:

    Jon says:
    July 25, 2013 at 2:31 pm
    Do you ever talk to the people who live in the Arctic? Guess what … it’s getting friggin warmer
    =========
    July 15, 2013
    The temperature in Tuk is -1C and there’s a strong Northeasterly wind blowing in the morning. Locals tell us it should be 15-20C at this time of year. “The bugs should be bouncing off your head” explained Eilleen who came down to the beach to visit with us.

    http://mainstreamlastfirst.com/our-arrival-in-tuktoyaktuk-to-our-departure-is-less-than-24-hours/

  15. Luther Wu says:

    Jimbo says:
    July 25, 2013 at 2:42 pm

    The late July snow will be blamed on man-made climate change.
    ________________________
    Of course. You know- air warmed by global warming holds more moisture, so it snows more.
    Suppose Gav’ll let me in over at “Real” Climate, now?
    / <– sarc tag

  16. The Arctic Ice decline is a result of natural forces it has nothing to do with CO2 and global warming. Once the cold PDO/AMO become more established the Arctic Ice will rebound.

    What is being forgotton is the near record level of Antarctic Sea Ice. If CO2 were responsible for the Arctic Sea Ice deficit, how does one reconcile the Antarctica Sea Ice Surplus.

    Answer is you can’t because CO2 has nothing to do with it.

    CO2 absorbs infrared radiation which is only able to penetrate the ocean to a depth of 1 millimeter, which means it has nothing to do with the heating up the oceans,and hence Sea Ice. More BS from the AGW crowd.,

  17. Caleb says:

    RE: Latitude says:
    July 25, 2013 at 3:18 pm

    Interesting link. Temperatures nearly twenty degrees below normal, and the fellow sees evidence of warming in the beavers “coming north.” The only problem is, beavers are also coming south to the suburbs of Boston, where they haven’t been seen in nearly 400 years. Their furs were once very valuable, and it is likely they are not coming north due to Global Warming, or coming south due to Global Cooling, but rather repopulating their former range.

    I suppose it is like the lyrics from the Simon and Garfunkel song “The Boxer.” “But a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest.”

  18. Jimbo says:

    Luther Wu,
    Thanks. And we also know that global warming was supposed to mean less snow too. :-) They want to have cake and eat. By the way, Antarctica got some extreme snowfall between 2009 and 2011 caused by…………..global warming. :-)

  19. Caleb says:

    By the way, Camera One at the pole shows a vast stretch of snow, while camera two shows a neat and large melt water pool, with pressure ridges in the distance. You can pick the view to support your view.

    Or you can just enjoy the view: http://sunriseswansong.wordpress.com/2013/07/24/north-pole-ice-melt-watching-the-summer-thaw/

  20. Latitude says:

    Caleb, they are a hoot….well, all of them are actually
    Who in there right mind would think 50, even a 100 years ago……was normal…

  21. tchannon says:

    It will he greater. Reason: there is a slight 5 to 6 year undulation where 2007 . . . . .2012

    I do not trust the data anyway.

  22. Steven Mosher says:

    ‘The oceans play a role in temperatures in the US and arctic and explain the recent demise and suggest the ice will recover in the not too distant future.”

    jeez I dont know which is worse, CAGW guys talking about death spiral or this?

    At least the death spiral guys put some numbers on their guess.

  23. richard telford says:

    “You can see the ice at the summit was very much still in evidence.”

    Well what would you expect? 3km of ice to melt?

    “suggest the ice will recover in the not too distant future.”

    this is wishful thinking not a prediction.

  24. Jon says:

    If the aim is to stop global climate change then how the hell are we going to get.the Earth out of the ice ages we have had the last 2-3 million years? How do we stop the ice age we have been slipping into again since Holocene optimum, 5-6000 years ago?
    It’s much easier to fight the glaciers now than to wait until they again cover most of Scandinavia?

  25. Blade says:

    Arctic Sea ice extent 30% or greater (DMI)

    I thought that NSIDC was using 15% as the threshold for Ice versus Ice-free. Has this been changed also?

    If so, that would be quite a favorable adjustment for the alarmists. Can anyone clarify?

  26. chris y says:

    I think this was the BEST expert statement from last year’s meltageddon-

    “It is scary to note the limitation in our understanding of the impact of current 0.8 per cent mean global temperature increase with the sudden disappearance of the Greenland’s ice sheet in four days in July this year-“

    Farrukh Khan, Pakistan UN Climate negotiator, 11/29/12, The Express Tribune

  27. geran says:

    Steven Mosher says:
    July 25, 2013 at 3:45 pm
    ‘The oceans play a role in temperatures in the US and arctic and explain the recent demise and suggest the ice will recover in the not too distant future.”

    jeez I dont know which is worse, CAGW guys talking about death spiral or this?

    At least the death spiral guys put some numbers on their guess.
    >>>>>>>

    I don’t know which is worse, “fence-straddlers”, or “intellectual-wannabes”.

  28. BLACK PEARL says:

    It was all supposed to have melted completely by this summer ?
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7139797.stm

  29. Reblogged this on Public Secrets and commented:
    And another global warming “Run Around With Hair On Fire” scare-mongering moment falls flat. See especially the link to the 150-year cycle of Greenland’s ice melts.

  30. James Strom says:

    BLACK PEARL says:
    July 25, 2013 at 4:09 pm
    It was all supposed to have melted completely by this summer ?
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7139797.stm

    ******
    Kudos, Mr. Memory!

  31. cotwome says:

    Meanwhile Live Science is telling it’s readers “North Pole Now a Lake”
    http://www.livescience.com/38347-north-pole-ice-melt-lake.html

    …Of course they are showing a drifting buoy hundreds of miles away from the North Pole!
    http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/index.html

  32. William Astley says:

    In reply to:
    blackadderthe4th says:
    July 25, 2013 at 2:52 pm
    AGU report on Greenland melt.

    William:
    You can rejoice.

    The warming of the last 70 years is anomalously and rapidly reversing. The planet will significantly unequivocally cool. If you are interested I can explain in detail the physics and mechanisms to support that assertion. What will happen next is truly remarkable.

    Your rejoicing is twofold. There is a missing mechanism that causes the CO2 warming mechanism to saturate in higher regions of the troposphere. The missing mechanism is the reason why there is no tropical tropospheric hot spot. The explanation as to why there is no tropospheric hot explains why the CO2 mechanism saturates. There is absolutely no problem with warming due to the increase in atmospheric CO2. Future increases in CO2 will have almost no effect on planetary temperature, regardless of the planet`s sensitivity to forcing changes in general which is negative not positive.

    Comment:
    There are piles, sets of anomalous observations in each field. As each specialists concern is very, very, narrow they have no knowledge of the anomalies outside of their specialty. The anomalies indicate the theory is incorrect and help to solve how to correct the theory. The correct solution makes all of the anomalies disappear as there is a physical explanation for what has happened and will happen. If the base model, in a specialty, is fundamentally incorrect, the people in the field work irrationally trying to adapt and manipulate their model to explain away the anomalies.

    This adapting and manipulating of incorrect models becomes ingrained, systematical, within each specialty. The longer it goes on the more difficult it becomes for new people entering a mature specialty to even suggest that the base theory is absolutely incorrect.

    Unfortunately the climate change problem is cooling. I have no solution to global cooling, however, that will be an interesting discussion.

  33. Jimbo says:

    Steven Mosher and richard telford,
    Here is a death spiral coupled with Arctic amplification. Did it get back? See 1979 extent.

    Abstract
    The Early Twentieth-Century Warming in the Arctic—A Possible Mechanism
    The huge warming of the Arctic that started in the early 1920s and lasted for almost two decades is one of the most spectacular climate events of the twentieth century. During the peak period 1930–40, the annually averaged temperature anomaly for the area 60°–90°N amounted to some 1.7°C…..
    dx.doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(2004)017%3C4045:TETWIT%3E2.0.CO;2
    Abstract
    The regime shift of the 1920s and 1930s in the North Atlantic
    During the 1920s and 1930s, there was a dramatic warming of the northern North Atlantic Ocean. Warmer-than-normal sea temperatures, reduced sea ice conditions and enhanced Atlantic inflow in northern regions …..
    dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2006.02.011

    The amplification failed.

    Abstract
    Igor V. Polyakov et. al.
    Observationally based assessment of polar amplification of global warming

    …..over the 125-year record we identify periods when arctic SAT trends were smaller or of opposite sign than northern-hemispheric trends. Arctic and northern-hemispheric air-temperature trends during the 20th century (when multi-decadal variablity had little net effect on computed trends) are similar, and do not support the predicted polar amplification of global warming. The possible moderating role of sea ice cannot be conclusively identified with existing data. If long-term trends are accepted as a valid measure of climate change, then the SAT and ice data do not support the proposed polar amplification of global warming.
    DOI: 10.1029/2001GL011111

    Brrrrrr. It’s been a record cold summer in the “Daily mean temperatures for the Arctic area north of the 80th northern parallel, plotted with daily climate values calculated from the period 1958-2002.”
    ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php

  34. Angela says:

    What do we make of this analysis of the motivation behind the promotion of AGW?
    http://memoryholeblog.com/2013/07/12/the-forces-behind-carbon-centric-environmentalism/

  35. Scott says:

    Global Warming is causing the ice to increase, unless it is unchanged then its Global Warming pausing, and if its reducing and then Global Warming is accelerating at an unprecdented rate.

  36. Bill Illis says:

    Temps at Eureka Canada at 80N over the last 90 days. This high-quality research station is staffed by several climate scientists so the readings should be good. About 1.0C below normal this summer. Still had snow on the ground on July 1.

    http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/global_monitoring/temperature/tn71917_90.gif

  37. Richard M says:

    Mosher, you can look up the AMO values online. I predict the sea ice in the Arctic will follow the AMO value with a reasonable lag (~3-5 years). Naturally, there will be year-year variation based on winds.

  38. Bill Illis says:

    Arctic sea ice melt rates.

    In the first five months of 2013, there was mostly average melt rates in the Arctic sea ice. (Last year there had already been 2 rapid melting events in the first 5 months of the year while 2013 had none). The winter extent was about 600,000 km^2 (5.0%) below normal, so this still resulted in below average sea ice in the first 5 months of the year (still 5.0% below normal but what’s a 5.0% anyway).

    In June and early July, however, the melt rate jumped to close to double normal amounts. Melt rates have now gone back to normal or even slightly less than normal.

    There is still 50 days until the typical sea ice minimum occurs on September 12th.

    http://s2.postimg.org/uz3h5kmzd/NH_SIE_Daily_Change_July24_2013.png

  39. CodeTech says:

    LOL – Jon… from your posts I’m not exactly sure where you stand, but “talking” to the people who live in an area is about as fruitful as giving a mass-murderer a stern warning.

    Where I live we had a pretty bad flood this year, the last time the combination of heavy rain and spring melting from the mountains was this high was in the late 20s and early 30s. And yet, almost everyone here believes it was “unprecedented”, “worst ever”, etc. People who lived in New Orleans no doubt believe Katrina was the worst hurricane ever. Apparently those in the path of Sandy somehow think nothing like that has ever happened either.

    That’s the thing about the known cycles… the strongest cyclical signal approximately matches a human lifetime, and yet the signal is recorded back several centuries. It gets warmer, it gets cooler, but from the perspective of any individual human it’s all outside of their personal memory.

    From what I can see, alarmists in both directions (Warming, Ice Age) take advantage of this and prey on the gullible. I don’t want to be one of the gullible. I don’t believe there’s any reason for alarmist rhetoric in either direction, and I think people who build on a flood plain are either stupid (if they knew they were on a flood plain), or criminally liable (if they were developers that developed on a flood plain).

    Climate changes – I won’t panic or even worry unless there is shown to be an unusual or harmful change. Neither has been shown in any sort of credible way.

    Arctic ice extent, as I always say whether it’s high or low, is a meaningless metric, although often interesting to watch.

  40. JimF says:

    My NOAA “Weather Story” (Ironwood, MI) today reads: “…Low pressure will be influencing our weather through the upcoming weekend, with unsettled and Fall-like weather ahead….” We had one warm spell, and one really lovely spell, in what has been more like Eternal Spring in the Northe or else, the Summer That Never Came. That CO2 really works some incredible tricks.

    On another note, Steven Mosher says:
    July 25, 2013 at 3:45 pm
    and
    richard telford says:
    July 25, 2013 at 3:50 pm
    are two rude idiots. Do you see what I did there, children? I actually spent one-tenth of a second copying the comment header that I wanted to illuminate or reply to. If I actually wanted to reply to one of your asinine comments, I would have copied and pasted it, with quotes, so that others reading my post could quickly understand what I was talking about, and go find the original comment if the wanted to do so. But I doubt you two pricks can comprehend that.

  41. Gary Hladik says:

    From the OP: “Well, a year later, we have an interesting opposite scenario with a deep arctic low bringing snow to the arctic and Greenland in late July.”

    Snow? That’s even worse!!! All the extra weight will cause Greenland to sink, raisingsealevelsowe’reallDOOOOMEDDOOOMEDItellyou!!! :-)

  42. Gary Hladik says:

    richard telford says (July 25, 2013 at 3:50 pm): “Well what would you expect? 3km of ice to melt?”

    Most readers here wouldn’t, but as chris y reports (July 25, 2013 at 4:04 pm), at least one person did:

    “It is scary to note the limitation in our understanding of the impact of current 0.8 per cent mean global temperature increase with the sudden disappearance of the Greenland’s ice sheet in four days in July this year”–Farrukh Khan, Pakistan UN Climate negotiator, 11/29/12, The Express Tribune

    BTW, here’s a link. Note the usual blah blah about disappearing islands, cyclones, drought, flood, famine, dogs & cats living together, etc. :-)

  43. TomRude says:

    Anthony you have to see that one!!!

    The day the North Pole turned into a Lake or how the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation ignoramus Andy Macdonald is propaganding the usual seasonal surface melt and ponds over the sea ice as if the North Pole was open water…
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity/2013/07/north-pole-turned-into-lake-from-global-warming-3.html

  44. Jeff L says:

    Possibly related – 550 Dm thicknesses over N. Minnesota shown in latest NAM :

    http://weather.unisys.com/nam/nam.php?plot=pres&inv=0&t=24

    Brrrrrr …… that’s cold for summer !

  45. Village Idiot says:

    Forecast for North Pole – wet, wet, wet.
    http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/climate-weather/stories/north-pole-melts-forms-lake-at-top-of-the-world

    Time to get out those old submarine snaps again, methinks:
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/26/ice-at-the-north-pole-in-1958-not-so-thick/

    “the Skate found open water both in the summer and following winter..wind and tides causes open water as the ice breaks up.. into large polynyas (areas of open water)..We had sonar equipment that would find these open or thin areas to come up through..We came up through a very large opening in 1958 that was 1/2 mile long and 200 yards wide. The wind came up and closed the opening within 2 hours”

    Yep, proof that the North Pole has been ice free in the recent past

  46. Cho_cacao says:

    Mmmm..

    About the artcic sea ice graph, why show only the one that shows this year’s extent to be the farthest from the previous records? Other indicators (see the sea ice page) indicate that it is quite close to 2007 and 2012.

    Also, I remember, Mr D’Aleo, that you predicted a “quick recovery” a few years ago, just before the arctic sea ice broke records again. Is there any sign of substantiating evidences for this?

  47. Stephen Richards says:

    Joe says:

    July 25, 2013 at 2:31 pm

    Joe, you are not learning fast enough. Even if the ice at pole stretched al the way to NYC they would still find a way of saying it will disappear next year. You are dealing with conmen and politicians. Deceit and lies are their tools of the trade.

  48. fred houpt says:

  49. Joe says:

    Stephen Richards says:
    July 26, 2013 at 1:21 am

    Joe, you are not learning fast enough. Even if the ice at pole stretched al the way to NYC they would still find a way of saying it will disappear next year.
    ——————————————————————————————————–

    True enough, Stephen, but a “proper” recovery of the Arctic would be much harder for them to swing in the popular consciousness.

    Currently they can tell people across the world that their personal experience of no warming is a local effect and is made up for in (often unspecified) orther parts of the globe. Because the vast majority of people aren’t that interested in actually looking up the figures they accept that, even if everyone elsewhere was being told exactly the same thing at the same time.

    But the Arctic has been a poster child for AGW since the beginning, and has been offered consistently as “look at the ice disappearing, this is what AGW does”. It’s about the only AGW prediction I can think of which hasn’t changed significantly since the start. There’s also only one North Pole, so all those people who aren’t experiencing warming in their area see the same ice cap.

    If they have to start inventing reasons that the ice is recovering “while warming continues” an awful lot of people will start getting suspicious. It’d be a bit like the Pope announcing that “Jesus never really lived, but that doesn’t matter because….”. Some people would always accept the “because” but an awful lot wouldn’t!

    Like I say, wishful thinking but I, for one, wouldn’t mind if Santa was snowed in over the next few years!

  50. fred houpt says:

    Also this has hit the internet and world news. Fake has been uncovered. Snow, in that country? Not ever likely. http://rp2.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/regions/07/25/13/snow-philippines-fake-says-expert

  51. johnmarshall says:

    Planetary ice levels are cyclic but the cycle length varies. AGWers cannot understand that. CO2 has no input into climate/temperature apart from helping to remove the heat like water vapour, though that is mainly through latent heat increasing heat transfer to the upper troposphere where it can radiate to space.

  52. Caleb says:

    I’m not surprised that the “Mother Nature Network” should take the image from Camera Two at the Pole and not Camera One. Compare the two:

    Camera Two
    http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/NPEO2013/WEBCAM2/ARCHIVE/npeo_cam2_20130726072121.jpg

    Camera One
    http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/NPEO2013/WEBCAM1/ARCHIVE/npeo_cam1_20130726081158.jpg

    Both pictures are taken at the same time from the same place. If you only show one you don’t get the whole picture.

    I’ve been watching the pictures from the pole for years, and I’ve seen a wonderful variety of views. This is one of the largest melt-water pools I’ve seen, however I’ve seen deeper pools that seemed to even penetrate the ice, as the camera drifted down towards Fram Strait. That is actually ordinary, during summer thaws, which are also ordinary and yearly.

    As soon as the melt finds a weakness in the ice, all the melt-water drains from the surface. Sometimes, as it does so, it makes a rather beautiful spider web of channels to the point of drainage, (seen in pictures from airplanes, and not from the North Pole Camera.) It is actually unusual for the ice to be so thick the water doesn’t drain off the surface.

  53. Village Idiot says:

    Cho_cacao July 26, 2013 at 12:44 am:
    “why show only the one that shows this year’s extent to be the farthest from the previous records?”

    Probably the same reason that graphs with only temp observations vs IPCC model runs are shown, and Lindzen (and others) predictions are swept under the carpet:
    http://www.skepticalscience.com/contary-to-contrarians-ipcc-temp-projections-accurate.html
    (classed on this website as unreliable)

    Just as William Astley’s prediction above (July 25, 2013 at 4:37 pm) will also crash and burn

  54. michael hart says:

    What about the arctic ice?

    According to the DMI plot it is running higher than 2012 and 2007. WE still have more than a month to go and storms and winds can compact the ice and push it out of the arctic so no promises can be made.

    I think a word of caution is also advisable on use of language. I neither need nor want any “promises” about Arctic sea-ice.* While the political use of the Arctic ice is obviously widespread by IPCC alarmists, they have yet to show me any good reason for why I should care.

    *If I want to see lots of ice in the Arctic ocean, I know what time of the year to visit!

  55. Keith says:

    Amusing how UN negotiators actually though that the ice cap itself melted in a handful of days. Shows the calibre of discerning, inquiring minds that are telling the world to repent of their carbon sins…

    Interesting how the NRL are forecasting this system to wrench the sea ice around the Canadian archipelago.Will it refreeze, or persist like the area the other side of the Pole that was pulled around by a storm towards the end of May?
    Expect a big drop in extent/area in a few days, but we’ll see whether that presages a continued drop or a levelling-off.

  56. Keith says:

    Slightly off-topic, but has anyone else noticed how CT’s Antarctic chart of two-year Antarctic sea ice area vs anomaly assumes a negative anomaly? The ‘trend’ area has its value tagged above the graph marker, while the ‘current’ area’s value is tagged below the graph marker. As a result, it hasn’t been possible to read the current value properly all year

    http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.recent.antarctic.png

  57. beng says:

    Maybe that polar storm explains the current cold air over the NE US. Low this morning almost got into the 40s (50F) here in the mid-Appalachians. Bit of a shock…

  58. Phil. says:

    Keith says:
    July 26, 2013 at 5:56 am
    Slightly off-topic, but has anyone else noticed how CT’s Antarctic chart of two-year Antarctic sea ice area vs anomaly assumes a negative anomaly? The ‘trend’ area has its value tagged above the graph marker, while the ‘current’ area’s value is tagged below the graph marker. As a result, it hasn’t been possible to read the current value properly all year

    You could always go to the datafile at:
    http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/timeseries.south.anom.1979-2008

  59. Ole Heinrich says:

    “In just one week in July last year, the ice and snow virtually disappeared from the surface of Greenland’s barren interior.” Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/greenland-melting

    §.-)

  60. mpainter says:

    Steven Mosher says:

    July 25, 2013 at 3:45 pm

    ‘The oceans play a role in temperatures in the US and arctic and explain the recent demise and suggest the ice will recover in the not too distant future.”

    jeez I dont know which is worse, CAGW guys talking about death spiral or this?

    At least the death spiral guys put some numbers on their guess.
    <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Please allow me to tell you which is worse. The CAGW is worse, as clearly alarmist. The other merely proffers the possibility of cooling (look closely, see the word “suggest”?)

  61. Jpatrick says:

    The fate of the World War II squadron, which ditched in Greenland in 1942 says a thing or two about the Greenland ice coverage. When one P-38 was recovered 50 years later, it was beneath 262 feet of ice.

    I wonder how deep the rest of the squadron is now.

  62. u.k.(us) says:

    fred houpt says:

    July 26, 2013 at 2:31 am
    ===
    Give us a bit of narrative, then maybe we’ll watch your movie :)

  63. William Astley says:

    In reply to:
    Ole Heinrich says:
    July 26, 2013 at 7:49 am
    “In just one week in July last year, the ice and snow virtually disappeared from the surface of Greenland’s barren interior.” Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/greenland-melting §.-)

    William:
    Somewhat fitting it appears we are going to experience the cooling phase of a Dansgaard-Oeschger cycle and then it appears we are going to experience what causes a Heinrich event, named after the marine geologist Hartmut Heinrich. Observations rather than climate war discussions and climategate type papers will validate or invalidate the following assertions. If and when there are more observations to confirm and support the below assertions I can and will provide a more complete explanation.

    There are cycles of warming and cooling captured in the paleo record. The regions of the planet that warmed in the last 70 years are the same regions that warmed in the past during the Dansgaard-Oeschger cycles. Roughly every 8000 years to 10,000 years the D-O warming cycle is followed by a Heinrich event.

    It is known that solar magnetic cycle changes and geomagnetic field changes (relatively abrupt geomagnetic field orientation changes of 10 to 15 degrees which are called archeomagnetic jerks) both correlate with the D-O cycles. Solar magnetic cycle changes and geomagnetic excursions also correlate with the Heinrich events. The last Heinrich event was the Younger Dryas abrupt cooling event that occurred 12,800 years ago.

    The solar magnetic cycle changes warm and cool the planet, by modulating the amount of low level clouds (also modulates the optical properties of low level clouds) and high level cirrus clouds. The solar magnetic cycle modulation of cloud cover explains why there is regional warming as opposed to global warming in the past and in the last 70 years and explains the phenomenon that is called the ‘polar see-saw’. The polar see-saw is the fact that when the Greenland Ice sheet warms the Antarctic ice sheet cools slightly (high latitude regions of the Southern hemisphere warm not cool so the term polar see-saw is confusing as it implies the polar regional temperatures change in opposition rather than only the temperature of the two major ice sheets.) The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheet see-saw is due to the albedo of the Antarctic ice sheet being slightly greater than low clouds and the fact that the Antarctic ice sheet is isolated by the polar vortex from the surrounding ocean. So a decrease in low level cloud cover over the Antarctic ice sheet causes slight cooling on the Antarctic ice sheet. The following is a link to a paper by Svensmark that explains the see-saw.

    Comment:
    The above and below is a Coles notes abbreviation and does not address all nuisances in the observations for example the physical reason why planetary cover did track GCR starting in 1998, same reason why the North polar drift velocity increased by a factor of 5 starting roughly 1998 and so on. Everything has a physical explanation.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0612145v1
    The Antarctic climate anomaly and galactic cosmic rays
    Borehole temperatures in the ice sheets spanning the past 6000 years show Antarctica repeatedly warming when Greenland cooled, and vice versa (Fig. 1) [13, 14]. North-south oscillations of greater amplitude associated with Dansgaard-Oeschger events are evident in oxygenisotope data from the Wurm-Wisconsin glaciation[15]. The phenomenon has been called the polar see-saw[15, 16], but that implies a north-south symmetry that is absent. Greenland is better coupled to global temperatures than Antarctica is, and the fulcrum of the temperature swings is near the Antarctic Circle. A more apt term for the effect is the Antarctic climate anomaly.

    In the last decade or so geomagnetic specialists discovered that the geomagnetic field has changed cyclically and abruptly. As there is no physical explanation as to how internal core changes can cause cyclic changes to the geomagnetic field (the changes are extraordinarily rapid) it took roughly a decade for researchers to confirm that the changes are real and have happened cyclically. … …..There is a physical explanation for everything that has and will happen. Based on the current model of what causes the solar magnetic cycle, solar magnetic cycle changes cannot cause geomagnetic field changes of the type observed. As there is now unequivocal observation evidence that the geomagnetic field changes have occurred and based on the geomagnetic field model it is also physically impossible for the current geomagnetic model to explain what has happened cyclically in the past, one of the two models (geomagnetic field model or the solar model) is incorrect.

    The solution to the puzzle is the solar model is incorrect. I make the assertion with confidence as there is an astonishing set of mature structured anomalies in astrophysics concerning the anomalous evolution and structure of spiral galaxies, the anomalous evolution and structure of quasars and their connection with spiral galaxy evolution and structure, the anomalous increase in expansion rate of galaxies, the anomalous rotational profile of spiral galaxies, the anomalous hot intergalactic gas, the anomalous clustering of quasars, and so on that are explained by the stellar model change (related to what physically happens when very large objects collapse, quasars are just a more massive example of the phenomena). In addition to structured astronomical anomalies there is the anomalous structure and orientation of the magnetic field of Uranus and Neptune that is explained by the change to the solar model. (i.e. The significant solar magnetic change affects the other planets in the solar system.) The anomalies and observations fit together as pieces in a physical puzzle. To use an analogue to a crime scene investigation the observations point to what caused the events. There is a single correct explanation. Sets of structure anomalies indicate that one or more fundamental theories are incorrect. It is impossible and irrational to try to manipulate incorrect theories or add new mechanisms to attempt to save an incorrect theory or model to explain what has happened. There are sociological and practical reasons why people working in specialty fields do not even imply something could be fundamentally incorrect with base theories and mechanisms. It becomes truly inconceivable to those working in field that a fundamental theory is incorrect, hence the anomalies are either ignored or a work around is attempted. The trick or methodology to solving the problem is to look at the observations and anomalies from separate specialties as a set and look for a solution that eliminates the anomalies (provides a physical explanation for what has happened.)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dansgaard%E2%80%93Oeschger_event
    Dansgaard–Oeschger event
    Dansgaard–Oeschger events (often abbreviated D–O events) are rapid climate fluctuations that occurred 25 times during the last glacial period. Some scientists (see below) claim that the events occur quasi-periodically with a recurrence time being a multiple of 1,470 years, but this is debated. The comparable climate cyclicity during the Holocene is referred to as Bond events.
    In the Northern Hemisphere, they take the form of rapid warming episodes, typically in a matter of decades, each followed by gradual cooling over a longer period. For example, about 11,500 years ago, averaged annual temperatures on the Greenland ice sheet warmed by around 8 °C over 40 years, in three steps of five years (see,[2] Stewart, chapter 13), where a 5 °C change over 30–40 years is more common. … ….Heinrich events only occur in the cold spells immediately preceding D-O warmings, leading some to suggest that D-O cycles may cause the events, or at least constrain their timing.[3]

    The course of a D-O event sees a rapid warming of temperature, followed by a cool period lasting a few hundred years.[4] This cold period sees an expansion of the polar front, with ice floating further south across the North Atlantic ocean.[4]

    http://pages-dataportal.unibe.ch/products/specialissues/QSR2000/leuschner.pdf
    One of the most important recent “findings in environmental research has been the discovery of high-frequency climate oscillations with 1000-, 1450-, and 3000-year cyclicities in Greenland ice cores, the so-called Dansgaard-Oeschger cycles (Johnsen et al., 1992; Dansgaard et al., 1993; Grootes et al., 1993). Associated with these cycles are `Heinrich Events, i.e. events of sudden iceberg discharge into the North Atlantic (Heinrich, 1988; Bond et al., 1993).

    Is the geodynamo process intrinsically unstable?
    http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/416/

    http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/view.php?id=24476
    Glacial Records Depict Ice Age Climate in Synch Worldwide
    “Because the Earth is oriented in space in such a way that the hemispheres are out of phase in terms of the amount of solar radiation they receive, it is surprising to find that the climate in the Southern Hemisphere cooled off repeatedly during a period when it received its largest dose of solar radiation,” says Singer. “Moreover, this rapid synchronization of atmospheric temperature between the polar hemispheres appears to have occurred during both of the last major ice ages that gripped the Earth.”

    http://sciences.blogs.liberation.fr/home/files/Courtillot07EPSL.pdf
    Are there connections between the Earth’s magnetic field and climate?

    What Caused Recent Acceleration of the North Magnetic Pole Drift?
    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2010EO510001/pdf
    The north magnetic pole (NMP) is the point at the Earth’s surface where the geomagnetic field is directed vertically downward. It drifts in time as a result of core convection, which sustains the Earth’s main magnetic field through the geodynamo process. During the 1990s the NMP drift speed suddenly increased from 15 kilometers per year at the start of the decade to 55 kilometers per year by the decade’s end. This acceleration was all the more surprising given that the NMP drift speed had remained less than 15 kilometers per year over the previous 150 years of observation. Why did NMP drift accelerate in the 1990s? Answering this question may require revising a long-held assumption about processes in the core at the origin of fluctuations in the intensity and direction of the Earth’s magnetic field on decadal to secular time scales, and hints at the existence of a hidden plume rising within the core under the Arctic.

  64. taobabe says:

    TomRude says:
    July 25, 2013 at 10:48 pm
    Anthony you have to see that one!!!

    The day the North Pole turned into a Lake or how the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation ignoramus Andy Macdonald is propaganding the usual seasonal surface melt and ponds over the sea ice as if the North Pole was open water…
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity/2013/07/north-pole-turned-into-lake-from-global-warming-3.html

    ________

    Hi Tom
    The article that talks about the lake on top of the world is a bit on the alarmist side. Is there evidence that this is the usual seasonal surface melt? Where can I go to find more information on this? I looked at the two links that show the melt water and the solid frost, but it doesn’t show where the image was taken and it doesn’t give any kind of date. I even looked at the 2013 Buoy Drift Map, but I don’t understand that either. Does the black line wandering all over mean that the whole place is a slush pond?

  65. Caleb says:

    RE: taobabe says:
    July 26, 2013 at 9:35 pm
    “…I even looked at the 2013 Buoy Drift Map, but I don’t understand that either. Does the black line wandering all over mean that the whole place is a slush pond?”

    Scroll down the right side of this page (or up) until you find Anthony’s wonderful “Sea Ice Page.” Click it, and then scrowl down that page until you get to the Naval Research Laboratory “Ice Speed and Drift Map.” http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticicespddrfnowcast.gif

    Animate the map, either for the past 30 days or the past year. It gives you an amazing view of how mobile the ice is. Even when it is very solid in the depth of winter, it is moving about. Rather than seeing it as a “slush pond” think of it as a sort of continental drift. Big plates of ice are moving about, sometimes splitting and forming “leads,” which can expose open water even when it is forty below zero, and sometimes crushing the plates together, forming the mini-mountain-ranges called “pressure ridges,” even when temperatures are above freezing.

    In the warmest time of year, (now,) there can indeed be parts of the Arctic Sea where vast areas are floating icebergs, (and a sort of “slush pond,”) and other maps on Anthony’s “Sea Ice Page” show you where such areas are, describing them as 80%, 60%, 40%, 20% and 0% “Ice concentration.” However these areas can contain some big bergs, and when the winds are right, an area that is relatively “ice free” can have bergs moving in and crunching together. Areas with 20% concentration can become areas of 80% concentration.

    The commentor “Phil” has has alerted me, from time to time, to people voyaging up there in the summer, and it is very interesting to reference their blogs, and to see how wary they are of wind-pushed masses of ice. They don’t want to get trapped and crunched. Also last year an exploratory oil rig shut down for the season due to a large area of ice approaching, even though the map showed 0% ice in that area.

    In conclusion, the ice up there is not a stable surface. It is always on the go.

  66. Caleb says:

    This is slightly off topic, but demonstrates the reach of Watts Up With That, and also people’s interest in Arctic sea ice.

    I have my own obscure, back-water blog where I can pontificate, rave and bloviate to my heart’s content. If I get more than ten to twenty views a day, it often seems due to the fact I used some word such as “flesh” in my title, and attracted strangers via search engines. In fact I played with this idea with an April Fool’s joke last spring: http://sunriseswansong.wordpress.com/2013/04/01/mayan-calender-predicts-100000-dolphins-defeat-egyptian-militant-terrorist-ufos-with-erupting-volcano/

    However when I commented on the arctic sea ice above, (July 25, 2013 at 3:39 pm,) and left a link to pictures on my site, an amazing flood of visitors from all over the world can to my site. WordPress allows me to see what route they took, and nearly all came via Watts Up With That. I could see no influence from Facebook or Twitter, and as far as I can tell they all came from this particular post. I’m talking 146 views on Thursday, 221 yesterday, and 26 so far this morning. This shattered all records for my site.

    I can only suppose the lesson is that, if you are the sort of person who craves attention, you can skip wearing a lampshade and tap dancing on tables at parties. Just hang out here and talk about icebergs.

  67. Caleb says:

    Referring back to Joseph D’Aleo’s original points, I think the the most annoying aspect of the media’s coverage of the brief thaw over Greenland is the false impression they generated.

    If I spend a day at the beach without sunscreen, and say “I wound up 90% burned,” people know I am only talking about my skin. If I was talking about my entirety, I’d be cremated and wouldn’t be talking.

    In the same way, the 90% of Greenland that thawed was only the outermost of outermost skin. If it had been the entirety, a tsunami would have effected the entire Atlantic. However the way the media covered it created the false impression they were talking about all the ice on Greenland.

    I’m not sure whether this demonstrated the media was devious, or whether it demonstrated that they are such bozos and bimbos that they actually believed 90% of the ice in Greenland melted in two days.

  68. chris y says:

    Caleb says-
    “I’m not sure whether this demonstrated the media was devious, or whether it demonstrated that they are such bozos and bimbos that they actually believed 90% of the ice in Greenland melted in two days.”

    The answer is yes.

  69. Dave Wendt says:

    taobabe says:
    July 26, 2013 at 9:35 pm

    ” I even looked at the 2013 Buoy Drift Map, but I don’t understand that either. Does the black line wandering all over mean that the whole place is a slush pond?”

    The reference Caleb gave above is good, but this vid shows more of a long term picture

    .http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Co68_tod0dQ&feature=player_embedded#!

  70. Caleb says:

    RE: Dave Wendt says:
    July 27, 2013 at 10:47 am

    Thanks, Dave. I had forgotten about that video. It really does show a lot, and, while Revkin may have intended it to show how “old” ice was vanishing, by covering the period 1979 to 2009 he actually covers exactly half of a “sixty-year-cycle.” (If I can only manage to survive another thirty years, I’ll get to see the second half of the movie,) (providing the world stays in one piece and we still have satellites.) In any case, it is a totally cool video.

    Watch how the warm PDO’s Pacific influx through the Bering Strait takes bites out of the white, “old” ice. In some ways more “old” ice melts due to that than warmth than due to being flushed out through the Fram Strait.

    Another interesting thing is the ice moving away, at times, from the north coast of Greenland. I thought that coast was pretty much locked in. I haven’t heard of anyone making the passage over the top of Greenland. Perhaps that is all “new” ice, or ice discharged from glaciers doesn’t count as “old.” Anyone else know?

    There are some pretty big bergs floating around, even in areas described as “ice free.” Last summer the blogger “Phil” and I were discussing whether they were formed by pressure ridges or by glaciers, and Phil supplied a link to a local Alaskan newspaper describing a big berg seen by local fishermen that had rocks in it. As I recall some scientists rushed off to look at it, but couldn’t locate it.

    One of Joseph D’Aleo’s maps shows up to four inches of snow falling on the sea ice. I wonder what that does to the rate of ice melt?

  71. Caleb says:

    After all the fuss Alarmists made about “Lake North Pole,” (A large melt-water pool that appeared in front of North Pole Camera 2,) the entire pool drained down through a crack in the ice, and now the camera shows only ice. Oh well.

    http://sunriseswansong.wordpress.com/2013/07/28/lake-north-pole-vanishes/

  72. Ole Heinrich says:

    RE Caleb says:
    July 27, 2013 at 2:39 pm

    “Another interesting thing is the ice moving away, at times, from the north coast of Greenland. I thought that coast was pretty much locked in. I haven’t heard of anyone making the passage over the top of Greenland. Perhaps that is all “new” ice, or ice discharged from glaciers doesn’t count as “old.” Anyone else know?”

    According to Eigil Knuth “An outline of the archaelogy of Peary Land” http://arctic.synergiesprairies.ca/arctic/index.php/arctic/article/view/3897 Inuit where travelling north of Greenland for 250-350 years ago.

    P22: “This umiak…..probably made a journey no white man has yet completed – the voyage round the north coast of Greenland”

  73. taobabe says:

    Caleb, thanks so much for the very interesting information about the arctic ice. I didn’t know that the Arctic glacier wasn’t a single solid surface. That animated map is amazing. Very illuminating. Thank you for your information.

    Dave Wendt, I thought the video was very interesting. The ice looks as if it’s pulsing, like blood gushing from an open aorta, and the Earth is the heart beating in a very rhythmic fashion. Thanks so much for locating it for me.

    Question: the video says that the ‘old ice’ goes away and is replace by ‘new ice’. Is this a normal situation? Why is it then possible for scientists to get long long ice cores to study the different layers from prehistoric times, if the old ice is constantly recycled in this pulsating pumping action?

Comments are closed.