Antarctica Has Sea Ice Rabbit Ears, a V for Victory or Maybe It’s a Peace Sign?…

Antarctic sea ice

National Snow & Ice Data Center (NSIDC) – Click the pic to view at source

Image Credit: NSIDC

WUWT Regular “Just The Facts”

As you can see from the Southern Hemisphere Sea Ice Extent With Anomaly map above, there are currently two large fingers of anomalous Sea Ice protruding out in the Weddell Sea. This is the same Weddell Sea that in 2012 it was claimed that;

“Warm ocean currents are projected to melt the Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf in the Weddell Sea area of Antarctica opening instabilities in the West Antarctic Ice sheet (WAIS) which will impact global sea level rise. Climate change is waking up the sleeping giant of Antarctica.

Significant scientific research has been published in recent weeks on the impact of global warming on changing wind patterns and southern ocean currents and the flow-on impact on Antarctic ice shelves and glaciers. The most recent studies reveal the potential instability of the Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf in the Weddell Sea area. But the real questions to be asked concern the long term stability of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) and how rapidly it could collapse raising global sea levels by up to 6 metres.” Climate Citizen

So there are no apparent signs of the “warm ocean currents” that “are projected to melt the Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf in the Weddell Sea area of Antarctica opening instabilities in the West Antarctic Ice sheet”. If fact those fingers still look reasonably concentrated;

Cryosphere Today – University of Illinois – Polar Research Group – Click the pic to view at source

and Antarctic Sea Ice Extent – 15% or Greater has remained above two Standard Deviations of the 1981 – 2010 average for the entire melt season:

National Snow & Ice Data Center (NSIDC) – Click the pic to view at source

Additionally, Southern Hemisphere Sea Ice Area Anomaly has been above the 1979 – 2008 Average for the last two years:

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

Southern Hemisphere Sea Ice Area Anomaly is in the midst of its third large spike since 2007;

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

and there is a clear trend towards larger Southern Sea Ice Area Minimums:

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

The result is Global Sea Ice Area had its highest maximum since 2006 and remained stubbornly average for the entirety of 2013:

Cryosphere Today – University of Illinois – Polar Research Group – Click the pic to view at source

However, in terms of the large fingers of Sea Ice protruding into the Weddell Sea;

Antarctic sea ice

National Snow & Ice Data Center (NSIDC) – Click the pic to view at source

I think they may be a sign from Antarctica telling us that we’ve beat global warming, or at least that the Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf in the Weddell Sea is safe from collapse for another year… What do you think?

About these ads

120 thoughts on “Antarctica Has Sea Ice Rabbit Ears, a V for Victory or Maybe It’s a Peace Sign?…

  1. Weather, not climate.
    A pause before the collapse – the ice must have flowed off the land…
    Anyone know a climate scientist who wants to take a ship down there to check?

  2. Antarctica could be sending another message aimed at Warmists. In the UK the two fingers does not mean peace or victory. It means F off. :-)

  3. Mmmm. The Peninsula doesn’t look very exciting so far. I’m sure they’ll find a rocky landing spot somewhere.

    Now, why isn’t the media screaming about Antarctic in its summer melt? Why aren’t they screaming about global sea ice? It was on the decline so where are the screams? Sheesh. It was just the weather and not the climate.

  4. Alfred Wegener Institute is the Weddell Sea now with their research ship Polarstern. Yesterday they reported (in part)
    Close pack ice 6/8 to < 7/8 concentration/Predominantly old ice/Ship in ice difficult to penetrate; conditions not changing.
    It has improved today

    http://www.awi.de/en

    Click on Where is Polarstern?

  5. What I have been wondering is how much impact this ice has on the current that circulates around Antarctica. With this much additional surface ice, the winds can not influence about a million square kilometers of ocean surface. I am curious what influence this has not only on the ocean current but also on the mixing of ocean waters that takes place there. With less wind action on the surface, do we see less upwelling of deeper cold water and a slowing down of the various branches of the global thermohaline circulation patterns? If those slow down, do we see more heat transport to the poles being done by the atmosphere with less being done by the oceans (example, if these currents slow down a little, do we see a more meridional flow of the atmospheric jets to move the heat that the ocean currents aren’t?

    One thing that has interested me for some time is a bit of research by Woods Hole that seems to suggest that during the Little Ice Age, sea surface temperatures around the Dry Tortugas increased. If during the LIA the transport of heat to the poles reduced, we might see increased temperatures in the tropics. I would also expect to see a migration away from the equator of the ITCZ if the equatorial region warms up due to reduced heat transport out of the area. But mainly the question I have always had is if we see variations in ocean termohaline heat transport and if we also see corresponding changes in jet stream patterns to compensate for that. Does the atmosphere try to pick up the heat transport slack when the ocean slacks off a bit in that respect and what might those ramifications be.

  6. The Wikipedia article on the “West Antarctic Ice Sheet” mostly talks about the significant and possibly catastrophic warming of the WAIS and how that would raise sea level. Most of this was around 2006-2007 but the article also adds:

    “In 2012, the temperature records for the ice sheet were reanalyzed with a conclusion that since 1958, the West Antarctic ice sheet had warmed by 2.4°C, almost double the previous estimate. Some scientists now fear that the WAIS could now collapse like the Larsen B Ice Shelf did in 2002.”

    The statement references a BBC article here:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20804192

    Any time I see the word “reanalysis” it usually means reanalyzing data that has been “adjusted” since the original analysis, or reanalyzing model results, with the intent of making things “worse than we thought”.

    I wonder of the Western Antarctic EVER really warmed at all, or is it all just made up like so much else in the CAGW worldview.

  7. More likely that the Drake Passage will ice over completely in coming winters, than the Filchner-Ronne ice shelf melting, methinks.

  8. Two protruding ice fingers of sea ice – they are messages for Al Gore and James Hansen – one middle finger for each from Antarctica.

  9. Well, let’s see now … outside the temps are in the mid-20s with winds in the mid-20s, resulting in wind chill temps of ~10°F.

    And it’s just a hint of the pending Polar Vortex II (don’t you just love the media hype).

    So if for some reason I want to go outside, I need to bundle up and move quickly. Drive some where? Scrape the snow & ice off the car and wait about 10-15 minutes for the car to warm up a bit.

    So, who cares about the ice … let it all melt … I’m all for a warmer world. It’s far simpler to cool off than to warm up.

    Unfortunately, it ain’t gonna happen, no matter how many times Al Gore warns of gloom and doom.

  10. To be fair, the article referenced stated “…a mechanism which will drive warm ocean water towards the coast in the later decades of this century…”

    Lots of wiggle room in their statement.

  11. From the BBC article. My comments in brackets.

    The scientists compiled data from records kept at Byrd station, established by the US in the mid-1950s and located towards the centre of the West Antarctic ice sheet (WAIS).

    Previously scientists were unable to draw any conclusions from the Byrd data as the records were incomplete. [Probably meaning the existing data did not show a warming trend. We can fix that by…]

    The new work used a computer model of the atmosphere and a numerical analysis method to fill in the missing observations. [And add the missing warming trend.]

    The results indicate an increase of 2.4C in average annual temperature between 1958 and 2010.

    “What we’re seeing is one of the strongest warming signals on Earth,” says Andrew Monaghan, a co-author and scientist at the US National Centre for Atmospheric Research. [Tada! Its worse than we thought!]

    Unfortunately the Nature article is behind a paywall. I wouldn’t mind doing a reanalysis of their reanalysis, but I don’t care to spend the $32. Perhaps the raw Byrd data is available elsewhere.

  12. But… but… haven’t our heroic climateers told us that the Eastern Antarctic peninsula is one of the fastest-warming places on Earth nowadays? Surely the blazing heat should be demolishing that pernicious Weddell ice shelf — or at least allow for setting up a manned station on the East side of the peninsula. Oh wait, they’re all still on the West side? Still too cold on the East side, it seems, for our intrepid Antarctic heroes to go there. “Where’s the heat?” could be our motto, sort of like “where’s the beef” from an earlier time.

  13. An additional fact for justthefacts: sea ice extent doesn’t have a simple direct relationship with ocean current temperatures. It is unwise to draw conclusions about the health of an ice shelf based only on the extent of sea ice around it.

    See Pine Island glacier for just one example of signs of warm ocean currents impacting the stability of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-25729750

  14. The two fingers is clearly a “two-fingered salute” to all those global warming alarmists in the world.

  15. “The new work used a computer model of the atmosphere and a numerical analysis method to fill in the missing observations. ”

    As soon as I see that kind of statement I tend to tune out the results of the study.

  16. For our American cousins, two fingers with the palm outward is a ‘V for Victory’ sign, two fingers raised with the palm inward is the precise equivalent of the American gesture known as ‘flipping the bird’ or ‘giving the finger’…

  17. The Wikipedia article on the “West Antarctic Ice Sheet” mostly talks about the significant and possibly catastrophic warming of the WAIS and how that would raise sea level. Most of this was around 2006-2007 but the article also adds:

    That’s probably written by lieing B…………d Conneley.

  18. Leo Geiger says:

    January 19, 2014 at 11:50 am
    Don’t bother showing BBC links it like turkeys showing us where the pork is.

  19. I am stunned to find how many people still do not believe me when I tell them it is globally cooling. All the major global data sets are showing that earth had its maximum heat output around 1998 and that we have made the turn down since then. To be fair, I think that I made the prediction that it had started globally cooling, naturally, even before many others had become aware of it. One of the things I mentioned in my final report on what would happen, as a result, was:
    “At the higher latitudes >[40] it will become progressively cooler and/or drier, from now onward, ultimately culminating in a big drought period similar to the Dust bowl drought 1932-1939. ”

    So how are my predictions concerning this panning out? Well I have not yet started looking at rainfall patterns. I wish I had time for that. Paradoxically, I have noted that one may even expect to see some warming in the areas where it does get drier. What I have done now is to take a sample of ten weather stations in Alaska and look at the change in the average temperature there, over time. Here are my results:

    http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2ql5zq8&s=5#.UtwyvNL8LIV

    Alaska is situated between latitudes 60 and 70 degrees. It has a number of good weather stations with reliable results. Note that 9 out of the 10 weather stations are showing a negative trend, i.e. a cooling trend. I took all the daily data from the stations indicated in the graph from 1998 until 2014, compressed to an average annual temperature. I submit that this sample of weather stations is representative for the whole of Alaska. You can also clearly see that each of the stations’ results correlate sharply with each other in term of rises and falls. I think it would be therefore be fair to take the average of the 10 slopes of the ten linear trends as representative for the whole of Alaska, and indeed, for the whole of earth’s [60-70] latitude (inland only). If we do that, I find that the temperature in Alaska and [60-70] has been dropping at an average rate of 0.55 degrees C per decade, since 1998.
    This means that since 1998, average ambient temperatures in Alaska have already dropped by 0.9 degrees C. We are not even halfway through the cooling period which I predict will last until at least 2038 or 2039 (+ 5 years).
    Anyone still interested in investing in the Arctic?

  20. Don’t bother showing BBC links it like turkeys showing us where the pork is.

    Then spend a few minutes finding papers covering the research that is the source of the article.

  21. @crosspatch who said
    “With less wind action on the surface, do we see less upwelling of deeper cold water ”
    ———————————–
    In these areas , upwellings bring warmer waters to the surface (+4°C in the deep sea, zéro or less at surface ).due to density / temperature gradient of sea water
    So you find a new tipping point : more Wind , more upwelling, more melt of sea ice , more efficiency of Wind , more upwelling etc ….
    Don’t tell that to warmistas

  22. “Anyone still interested in investing in the Arctic?”

    Lots of natural resources in the Arctic, well worth investing in.

    If I knew AGW was a crock, I’d lay claim to the Arctic before anyone else by building the biggest, baddest nuclear icebreaker the world has seen, capable of breaking through the ice year round.

  23. Ok, believe it or not, I’m privy to some of those top secret NSA files that Snowden skipped town with; most of which concern the various sex … er, security breeches of the administration’s political opponents. I mean, the U.S.’s opponents.

    Anyway, the most globally cataclysmic file was an NSA intercept from … ready? … Extraterrestrials. No, it wasn’t the file leaked out of Iran (you didn’t know Snowden had been there did you?) that claimed the U.S. had collaborated with Hitler and extraterrestrials way back in the days. I, alone, know that one is made up; designed to make Snowden look like an idiot at a less than circumstantial and very opportune time for Iran.

    Anyway, I’m getting sidetracked (as if you didn’t notice). Anyway, the major, and most important file concerns the utter destruction of the entire planet Earth, its ecosystem, biosphere, atmosphere, everything, from … yes, Global Warming! Now, Obama did not fail to mention Climate Change on the campaign trail nor initiate work on it till after the 2012 elections for mere political purposes. No, I mean, the guy would face such a threat immediately; he just didn’t know about the seriousness till that NSA intercept came afterwards. And then, voila, Snowden skips out with that most important file in the history of humanity. So, the extraterrestrials are trying to communicate directly to all of us and our climate scientists. They were the ones that made that ‘V’ in the Weddell Sea in Antarctica. It is a clear warning to Trenberth and, well, all of us that there still is heat and it’s hiding. What better place to plant that symbol than the growing ice of Antarctica? Think about that. And what does the ‘V’ tell us, you ask? It tells us where the heat is hiding. No, the heat didn’t do something stupid like breast stroke to the bottom of the ocean. Who’d believe that nonsense? No, the ‘V’ stands for Venus. Get it? The heat is hiding on the planet Venus. The extraterrestrials know this.

    Phew, glad I got that off my chest. Now to relax and listen to some Ben Santer school videos.

  24. Leo Geiger says: January 19, 2014 at 11:50 am

    An additional fact for justthefacts: sea ice extent doesn’t have a simple direct relationship with ocean current temperatures. It is unwise to draw conclusions about the health of an ice shelf based only on the extent of sea ice around it.

    See Pine Island glacier for just one example of signs of warm ocean currents impacting the stability of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-25729750

    That’s not an additional “fact” that’s “using three state-of-the-art ice-flow models” to “show that Pine Island Glacier’s grounding line is probably engaged in an unstable 40 km retreat”, whatever that means:

    http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2094.html#access

    Facts don’t come from “state-of-the-art ice-flow models”, they come from the observational evidence, e.g.:

    Southern Sea Surface Temperature as been below average for the last 6 years:

    Bob Tisdale – Click the pic to view at source

    and Southern Polar Lower Troposphere Temperature Anomaly has had a negative trend and is average;

    Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) – Microwave Sounding Units (MSU) – Click the pic to view at source

    Show us the “signs of warm ocean currents” you claim.

  25. How many tons of extra sea ice are there in 1.2m sq km of Antarctic sea ice? The oceans contain about 74 trillion tons of CO2 that can be released either by freezing or evaporation. http://www.xylenepower.com/Carbon%20Dioxide.htm

    The CO2 is not distributed evenly – it is more concentrated in the cold Southern Ocean than, for example, in the tropics. Ignoring that quibble, if the ice is on average 1/2 a metre thick then it has expelled at least

    1.2 x 10^12 sq m x 0.5m x 55g per cu m /1000 = 3.3 x 10^10 kg of CO2 = 33m tons

    When the oceans evaporated to create the 25m cubic km of ice on Antarctica the mass of CO2 expelled from the oceans was 1.375 x 10^15 kg which is 5/8ths of all the CO2 presently airborne.

    I believe the EPA has judged CO2 to be a danger to public health. If the above-the-long-term-mean Antarctic Ocean ice persists, can I get carbon credits for initiating measures that will melt it again?

    If I manage to melt Antarctica, at $5 per ton of CO2 absorbed, I would, with you as co-investors, be able to collect $6,875,000,000,000 in offsets. I would be willing to throw in melting the Greenland ice sheet for free under a ‘collateral benefit’ clause.

  26. Chad Wozniak says:
    January 19, 2014 at 11:30 am

    More likely that the Drake Passage will ice over completely in coming winters,….
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    And if that happens does the water get pushed up the coast of South America and we get more La Ninas?

    It certainly looks like South American winters are getting worse or at least not getting milder. From the Weather is not Climate Department:

    Winter weather (and volcanoes) for Chile from Ice Age Now

    Argentina: Ice Age Now

    Bolivia: Ice Age Now

    Peru Ice Age Now

    Brazil Ice Age Now

    What was that about Children not knowing what snow was?

  27. Leo Geiger says: @ January 19, 2014 at 12:22 pm

    ..Then spend a few minutes finding papers covering the research that is the source of the article.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    You brought it up YOU waste your time.

  28. Leo Geiger says:
    January 19, 2014 at 12:22 pm
    Then spend a few minutes finding papers covering the research that is the source of the article.
    ======
    Does your planet have an atmosphere?

  29. Hey, can we drag those two ice ears up to California and let them use the water when the ice melts in the southern California sun? Heck, there may be enough ice there so we can go back to “ice boxes” rather than refrigerators and save on electricity!

    Please send money so I can study this matter.

  30. Does somebody know the etymology of Pine Island Antarctica ? Did pine trees grow on its beach before the glacier eroded it ?

  31. HenryP says:
    January 19, 2014 at 12:19 pm

    HenryP, about a year ago I noticed that Alaska is cooling. This is the very same place they used to call the canary on the coalmine of global warming. I don’t hear that very much nowadays.

    PDO and Alaska cooling

    http://www.livescience.com/25907-alaska-climate-pdo.html

    http://climate.gi.alaska.edu/ClimTrends/Change/TempChange.html

    http://climate.gi.alaska.edu/

    Next former canary – the Arctic??? Let’s wait and see.

  32. That’s not an additional “fact”…

    Keep is simple then. Is the grounding line of Pine Island glacier retreating? No computer models needed to answer that. Is it retreating while Antarctic sea ice extent has grown?

    Perhaps, then, there isn’t a simple relationship between sea ice extent and what an ice shelf does.

    I would be interested in knowing the source you are using to declare that sea ice extent tracks deeper ocean temperatures (not surface temperatures) along the margins of Antarctica.

  33. In the UK, two fingers with the back of the hand is the same as ‘giving the finger’ in US.

    I don’t see a thumb or other fingers in the Weddel sea area, so I conclude the message is ‘up yours’.

    In view of the British nature of the gesture it’s probably aimed at Guardian’s Antarctic Live “no milkshake’ brigade or failed ex-climate modeller Connelley who failed to model ocean currents in that area.

  34. I’ve predicted (during the voyage of the Ship of Fools) that the cooler ocean and 1.2Mkm^2 extra ice will bring on more rapid freeze up. We won’t have to wait until Feb 22nd for this; how about 3 weeks from now?

  35. It seems Leo Geiger has volunteered to join Prof Turney’s next voyage down south to do “climate science”.
    I bet he’s really looking forward to taking measurements of sea temperature to confirm his quoted model.
    That will shut up those who just want to observe facts.

  36. Maybe that was keeping it too simple…

    Mass loss from ice shelves is primarily driven by basal melting from warm (relatively speaking) water, and to a lesser extent calving. That means basal melt rates (derived from changes in surface elevation) and calving rates would be better things to use to draw conclusions about the temperature of the deeper water (which is hard to measure directly) and the health of ice shelves.

    http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/earth20130613.html

    http://www.sciencemag.org/content/341/6143/266

    But apparently you believe simply looking at sea ice extent is all you need to do to declare “there are no apparent signs of the “warm ocean currents” “.

    I don’t think that simple assertion has much factual support.

  37. Chris Turney’s AAE “volunteer” spokesman, Alvin Stone, has a new story:

    19 Jan: Eureka Alert Media Release from ALVIN STONE: Get used to heat waves: Extreme El Nino events to double
    An international team of scientists from organisations including the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science (CoECSS), the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and CSIRO, published their findings in the journal Nature Climate Change.
    “We currently experience an unusually strong El Niño event every 20 years. Our research shows this will double to one event every 10 years,” said co-author, Dr Agus Santoso of CoECSS. ..
    “The question of how global warming will change the frequency of extreme El Niño events has challenged scientists for more than 20 years,” said co-author Dr Mike McPhaden of US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
    “This research is the first comprehensive examination of the issue to produce robust and convincing results,” said Dr McPhaden…
    “During an extreme El Niño event countries in the western Pacific, such as Australia and Indonesia, experienced devastating droughts and wild fires, while catastrophic floods occurred in the eastern equatorial region of Ecuador and northern Peru,” said lead author, CSIRO’s Dr Wenju Cai…
    “For Australia, this could mean summer heat waves, like that recently experienced in the south-east of the country, could get an additional boost if they coincide with extreme El Ninos,” said co-author, Professor Matthew England from CoECSS. …

    http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2014-01/uons-gut011714.php

    20 Jan: SMH: Tom Arup: Major El Nino events likely to double in next century
    The researchers used 20 climate models to project the impact on extreme El Nino frequency of global greenhouse emissions continuing at current high rates…

    http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/major-el-nino-events-likely-to-double-in-next-century-20140119-312sy.html

  38. Latitude says:
    January 19, 2014 at 11:21 am
    map of northern ice

    The chart does not show the interior lakes of North America – the U.S. Navy isn’t going there, I suppose. Still, Lake Erie is mostly covered in ice and the other lakes catching up. It is going to be cold in the entire area for the next few days.

    http://www.natice.noaa.gov/products/great_lakes.html

  39. Leo Geiger says:
    January 19, 2014 at 1:47 pm

    Let it go Leo, for your own good – W. Ant and Pine Island are old news. If you haven’t been following, this has been a horrible year for the climate disaster consensus and you have unadvisedly wandered in here alone with stuff your folks would have told you to shut up about had you inquired. The last several years of record ice in the Antarctic, the voyage of the Ship of Fools who didn’t know this, IPCC going for lower climate sensitivity, the most resistant (Trenberth et al) finally embracing natural variability, Met Office predicting years of cooling… – another fact not widely trumpeted is Turney is a dendrochronologist, for goodness sake – whatever could be the sense of him leading a research expedition to Antarctica (unless he believed all the warming of the continent jazz had allowed a forest to grow). No one else amongst you guys is allowed to even mention the West Antarctic warming, Pine Island glacier and the like. They all hate Turney for even directing attention to Antarctica. You won’t be thanked by your mentors.

  40. Leo Geiger’s NASA link says that a computer model and a change of baseline (from the new understanding of the ice depth) shows that more ice doesn’t disprove “warm ocean currents”
    .
    Some models can prove or disprove anything – they sow doubt, you see.
    The links says:

    Ice shelves grow through a combination of land ice flowing to the sea and snow accumulating on their surface. To determine how much ice and snowfall enters a specific ice shelf and how much makes it to an iceberg, where it may split off, the research team used a regional climate model for snow accumulation and combined the results with ice velocity data from satellites, ice shelf thickness measurements from NASA’s Operation IceBridge – a continuing aerial survey of Earth’s poles – and a new map of Antarctica’s bedrock.

    So I guess he wants to go to Antarctica and actually measure the water temperature?

  41. Leo Geiger says:
    January 19, 2014 at 11:50 am

    An additional fact for justthefacts: sea ice extent doesn’t have a simple direct relationship with ocean current temperatures. It is unwise to draw conclusions about the health of an ice shelf based only on the extent of sea ice around it…….

    It is also “unwise to draw conclusions about the health of an ice shelf based only on” models. Well, that’s what the BBC article you linked to says:

    Antarctica’s mighty Pine Island Glacier (PIG) is now very probably in a headlong, self-sustaining retreat.

    This is the conclusion of three teams that have modelled its behaviour.

    Even if the region were to experience much colder conditions, the retreat would continue, the teams tell the journal Nature Climate Change………………

    Dr Gudmundsson cautions that computer models are simulations that carry uncertainties, and must be constrained and improved by the further infusion of real-world data.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-25729750

    Now ask yourself this: What did the climate models used by the IPCC project for Antarctica’s sea ice extent? That’s right, a decline. Observations are important and should not be ignored when evaluating the usefulness of the IPCC.

    Abstract 2013
    Recent snowfall anomalies in Dronning Maud Land, East Antarctica, in a historical and future climate perspective
    [1] Enhanced snowfall on the East Antarctic ice sheet is projected to significantly mitigate 21st century global sea level rise. In recent years (2009 and 2011), regionally extreme snowfall anomalies in Dronning Maud Land, in the Atlantic sector of East Antarctica, have been observed…….

    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/grl.50559/abstract

    DOI: 10.1002/grl.50559

    [This last article later mentions models which I am not interested in, just the observations.]

  42. Leo Geiger:

    At January 19, 2014 at 2:15 pm you write saying in total

    Maybe that was keeping it too simple…

    Mass loss from ice shelves is primarily driven by basal melting from warm (relatively speaking) water, and to a lesser extent calving. That means basal melt rates (derived from changes in surface elevation) and calving rates would be better things to use to draw conclusions about the temperature of the deeper water (which is hard to measure directly) and the health of ice shelves.

    http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/earth20130613.html

    http://www.sciencemag.org/content/341/6143/266

    But apparently you believe simply looking at sea ice extent is all you need to do to declare “there are no apparent signs of the “warm ocean currents” “.

    I don’t think that simple assertion has much factual support.

    Oh, but you have provided cogent evidence for “that assertion” with your links.

    The first says

    Ocean waters melting the undersides of Antarctic ice shelves are responsible for most of the continent’s ice shelf mass loss, a new study by NASA and university researchers has found.

    and the second says

    We compare the volume flux divergence of Antarctic ice shelves in 2007 and 2008 with 1979 to 2010 surface accumulation and 2003 to 2008 thinning to determine their rates of melting and mass balance. Basal melt of 1325 ± 235 gigatons per year (Gt/year) exceeds a calving flux of 1089 ± 139 Gt/year, making ice-shelf melting the largest ablation process in Antarctica. The giant cold-cavity Ross, Filchner, and Ronne ice shelves covering two-thirds of the total ice-shelf area account for only 15% of net melting. Half of the meltwater comes from 10 small, warm-cavity Southeast Pacific ice shelves occupying 8% of the area. A similar high melt/area ratio is found for six East Antarctic ice shelves, implying undocumented strong ocean thermal forcing on their deep grounding lines.

    The ice shelves are growing, and your links each says that warm ocean currents under the ice are the major cause of “ice shelf mass loss”.

    Thanks for providing such clear evidence that your assertions are rubbish.

    Richard

  43. Leo Geiger says: January 19, 2014 at 1:47 pm

    Keep is simple then. Is the grounding line of Pine Island glacier retreating? No computer models needed to answer that. Is it retreating while Antarctic sea ice extent has grown?

    Yes and yes.

    Perhaps, then, there isn’t a simple relationship between sea ice extent and what an ice shelf does.

    Correct, however if there were “signs of warm ocean currents”, then one would expect those to also affect sea ice extent.

    I would be interested in knowing the source you are using to declare that sea ice extent tracks deeper ocean temperatures (not surface temperatures) along the margins of Antarctica.

    So would I, as I have no recollection of declaring “that sea ice extent tracks deeper ocean temperatures (not surface temperatures) along the margins of Antarctica.” Can you please highlight where I made such a declaration?

  44. Leo Geiger says:
    January 19, 2014 at 1:47 pm

    That’s not an additional “fact”…

    Keep is simple then. Is the grounding line of Pine Island glacier retreating? No computer models needed to answer that. Is it retreating while Antarctic sea ice extent has grown?…..

    Leo, you might be interested in the following. Furthermore check out 2,200 year ago volcanic explosion spreading ash, got buried and is today causing much slip and slide.

    http://dx.doi.org/10.1038%2Fngeo106

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/06/21/new-research-sheds-light-on-antarcticas-melting-pine-island-glacier/

    It must be global warming, hot, bubbling magma just cannot melt a damned thing.

    http://www.livescience.com/2242-buried-volcano-discovered-antarctica.html

  45. Leo. Ice mass in Antarctica has been increasing over the last 30 years based on record levels of sea ice extent ie above average over this time.

  46. Do these “fingers of ice” break off and later melt or do they melt without breaking off? Would not a long ice sheet undergo stress (is that the correct word?) from tides and shoaling waves?

  47. Clay Marley says:
    January 19, 2014 at 11:40 am

    From the BBC article. My comments in brackets.

    The scientists compiled data from records kept at Byrd station, established by the US in the mid-1950s and located towards the centre of the West Antarctic ice sheet (WAIS).

    Previously scientists were unable to draw any conclusions from the Byrd data as the records were incomplete. [Probably meaning the existing data did not show a warming trend. We can fix that by…]

    The new work used a computer model of the atmosphere and a numerical analysis method to fill in the missing observations. [And add the missing warming trend.]

    The results indicate an increase of 2.4C in average annual temperature between 1958 and 2010.

    “What we’re seeing is one of the strongest warming signals on Earth,” says Andrew Monaghan, a co-author and scientist at the US National Centre for Atmospheric Research. [Tada! Its worse than we thought!]

    Unfortunately the Nature article is behind a paywall. I wouldn’t mind doing a reanalysis of their reanalysis, but I don’t care to spend the $32. Perhaps the raw Byrd data is available elsewhere.

    I believe there was a WUWT thread rebutting that study a few years ago. I searched but couldn’t find it. If anyone remembers it, please post a link.

  48. Is the Antarctic rabbit going to eat all the grass from South America?

    “Keep is simple then. Is the grounding line of Pine Island glacier retreating? No computer models needed to answer that. Is it retreating while Antarctic sea ice extent has grown?…..”

    http://data.giss.nasa.gov/tmp/gistemp/STATIONS/tmp_700891250008_14_0/station.txt

    This is one of the nearest stations based there, do you think it will melt at between -10 c and -15 c during the warmest month January?

  49. Leo, check this out. In February 2013 a paper finds Antarctica has been gaining surface ice mass over past 150 years. You see, we can all find papers to back our positions. Just lean back and think about Antarctica. It’s not really doing what you want, so leave it alone. It’s a very thick slab of ice with growing extent and more snow is likely there in a warming world.

    http://www.the-cryosphere.net/7/303/2013/tc-7-303-2013.html

    http://joannenova.com.au/2013/04/antarctica-gaining-ice-mass-and-is-not-extraordinary-compared-to-800-years-of-data/

  50. Leo Geiger says: January 19, 2014 at 2:15 pm

    Maybe that was keeping it too simple…

    Mass loss from ice shelves is primarily driven by basal melting from warm (relatively speaking) water, and to a lesser extent calving. That means basal melt rates (derived from changes in surface elevation) and calving rates would be better things to use to draw conclusions about the temperature of the deeper water (which is hard to measure directly) and the health of ice shelves.

    http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/earth20130613.html

    http://www.sciencemag.org/content/341/6143/266

    Per the NASA artical:
    “To determine how much ice and snowfall enters a specific ice shelf and how much makes it to an iceberg, where it may split off, the research team used a regional climate model for snow accumulation and combined the results with ice velocity data from satellites, ice shelf thickness measurements from NASA’s Operation IceBridge – a continuing aerial survey of Earth’s poles – and a new map of Antarctica’s bedrock. Using this information, Rignot and colleagues were able to deduce whether the ice shelf was losing mass through basal melting or gaining it through the basal freezing of seawater.” http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/earth20130613.html

    So another complex model and some deduction, how about you present some observational evidence to support your assertion that there are ““signs of warm ocean currents”.

    Furthermore, please explain how “basal melt rates (derived from changes in surface elevation) and calving rates would be better things to use to draw conclusions about the temperature of the deeper water.” Why would surface ice measurements help “draw conclusions about the temperature of the deeper water.”?

    But apparently you believe simply looking at sea ice extent is all you need to do to declare “there are no apparent signs of the “warm ocean currents”.

    I don’t think that simple assertion has much factual support.

    I presented evidence that Southern Sea Surface Temperature as been below average for the last 6 years, I take it that you cannot refute this?

    How about this:
    “Strong Sensitivity of Pine Island Ice-Shelf Melting to Climatic Variability” “Observations and numerical modeling reveal large fluctuations in the ocean heat available in the adjacent bay and enhanced sensitivity of ice-shelf melting to water temperatures at intermediate depth, as a seabed ridge blocks the deepest and warmest waters from reaching the thickest ice. Oceanic melting decreased by 50% between January 2010 and 2012, with ocean conditions in 2012 partly attributable to atmospheric forcing associated with a strong La Niña event. Both atmospheric variability and local ice shelf and seabed geometry play fundamental roles in determining the response of the Antarctic Ice Sheet to climate.”

    http://www.sciencemag.org/content/343/6167/174.abstract

    So “Oceanic melting decreased by 50% between January 2010 and 2012″ and “ocean conditions in 2012″ are “partly attributable to atmospheric forcing associated with a strong La Niña event”. Show us some observation evidence to support your claims of “warm ocean currents” and the conclusions you’ve drawn “about the temperature of the deeper water.”

  51. So would I, as I have no recollection of declaring “that sea ice extent tracks deeper ocean temperatures (not surface temperatures) along the margins of Antarctica.” Can you please highlight where I made such a declaration?

    You said this,

    As you can see from the Southern Hemisphere Sea Ice Extent With Anomaly map above, there are currently two large fingers of anomalous Sea Ice protruding out in the Weddell Sea…
    So there are no apparent signs of the “warm ocean currents” that “are projected to melt the Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf in the Weddell Sea area of Antarctica opening instabilities in the West Antarctic Ice sheet”.

    How do you get from “A” to “B” if you aren’t using sea ice extent to draw conclusions about ocean currents and basal ice shelf ocean temperatures? I gather this is the logic:

    …if there were “signs of warm ocean currents”, then one would expect those to also affect sea ice extent.

    It’s that simple, eh? But, at the same time, somehow not so simple that one would expect those warm ocean currents to impact observations of calving rates or basal melt (ice shelf elevations)…

  52. FWIW the Larsen B Ice Shelf appears to have regrown since it famously broke up in 2002. Of course the entire area is encased in fast ice, but there does appear to be a clear ridge where the shelf boundary is. A good image date is Dec 19, 2012.

  53. “What we’re seeing is one of the strongest warming signals on Earth,” says Andrew Monaghan, a co-author and scientist at the US National Centre for Atmospheric Research.”

    And that ‘warming signal’ is from a computer model that was used to “infill missing data”. It seems to me in the real world the infilling is being done by ice.

  54. Leo Geiger says:
    January 19, 2014 at 3:01 pm

    …It’s that simple, eh? But, at the same time, somehow not so simple that one would expect those warm ocean currents to impact observations of calving rates or basal melt (ice shelf elevations)…
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    WHAT warm ocean currents?
    I think you are mixing up the Arctic that has warm water from the Gulf Stream head in its direction vs the Antarctic with its Antarctic Circumpolar Current or ‘West Wind Drift’ that completely isolates the Continent form waters from the equator.

    The opening of Drake Passage at the tip of South America (Cape Horne) allowed this current that completely circles the continent to form plus the closing of the Isthmus of Panama is thought to be the geologic events that sent the earth into the present ice age.

    From some of my recent searches:
    The Cape Horn Current: “…The Cape Horn Current is a cold water current that flows west-to-east around Cape Horn. This current is caused by the intensification of the West Wind Drift as it rounds the cape….” WIKI

    The Antarctic Circumpolar Current (ACC) is the most important current in the Southern Ocean, and the only current that flows completely around the globe. The ACC, as it encircles the Antarctic continent, flows eastward through the southern portions of the Atlantic, Indian, and Pacific Oceans…. The Antarctic Circumpolar Current’s eastward flow is driven by strong westerly winds. The average wind speed between 40°S and 60°S is 15 to 24 knots with strongest winds typically between 45°S and 55°S. Historically, the ACC has been referred to as the ‘West Wind Drift’

    http://oceancurrents.rsmas.miami.edu/southern/antarctic-cp.html

    From another source that I trust a heck of a lot more, Maritime Safety Information CHAPTER 31 OCEAN CURRENTS: TYPES AND CAUSES OF CURRENTS I start at the beginning of the passage which talks of the southern Atlantic. The chapter also has a map that shows that some of the cold water heads up along the west coast of South America. And it show the West Wind Drift as COLD water going round and round the continent of Antarctica.

    …That branch of the South Equatorial Current which curves toward the south off the east coast of South America, follows the coast as the warm, highly-saline Brazil Current, which in some respects resembles a weak Gulf Stream. Off Uruguay it encounters the colder, less-salty Falkland or Malvinas Current forming a sharp meandering front in which eddies may form. The two currents curve toward the east to form the broad, slow-moving, South Atlantic Current in the general vicinity of the prevailing westerlies and the front dissipates somewhat. This current flows eastward to a point west of the Cape of Good Hope, where it curves northward to follow the west coast of Africa as the strong Benguela Current, augmented somewhat by part of the Agulhas Current flowing around the southern part of Africa from the Indian Ocean. As it continues northward, the current gradually widens and slows. At a point east of St. Helena Island it curves westward to continue as part of the South Equatorial Current, thus completing the counterclockwise circulation of the South Atlantic. The Benguela Current is also augmented somewhat by the West Wind Drift, a current which flows easterly around Antarctica. As the West Wind Drift flows past Cape Horn, that part in the immediate vicinity of the cape is called the Cape Horn Current. This current rounds the cape and flows in a northerly and northeasterly direction along the coast of South America as the Falkland or Malvinas Current….

    During the northern hemisphere summer, a weak northern branch of the South Equatorial Current, known as the New Guinea Coastal Current, continues on toward the west and northwest along both the southern and northeastern coasts of New Guinea. The southern part flows through Torres Strait, between New Guinea and Australia, into the Arafura Sea. Here, it gradually loses its identity, part of it flowing on toward the west as part of the South Equatorial Current of the Indian Ocean, and part of it following the coast of Australia and finally joining the easterly flowing West Wind Drift. The northern part of New Guinea Coastal Current both curves in a clockwise direction to help form the Pacific Equatorial Countercurrent and off Mindanao turns southward to form a southward flowing boundary current called the Mindanao Current. During the northern hemisphere winter, the New Guinea Coastal Current may reverse direction for a few months….

  55. The two finger salute is used in Australia as well, so this could be Antarctica’s message to Chris Turney.

  56. Leo Geiger says: January 19, 2014 at 3:01 pm

    So would I, as I have no recollection of declaring “that sea ice extent tracks deeper ocean temperatures (not surface temperatures) along the margins of Antarctica.” Can you please highlight where I made such a declaration?

    You said this,

    As you can see from the Southern Hemisphere Sea Ice Extent With Anomaly map above, there are currently two large fingers of anomalous Sea Ice protruding out in the Weddell Sea…
    So there are no apparent signs of the “warm ocean currents” that “are projected to melt the Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf in the Weddell Sea area of Antarctica opening instabilities in the West Antarctic Ice sheet”.

    How do you get from “A” to “B” if you aren’t using sea ice extent to draw conclusions about ocean currents and basal ice shelf ocean temperatures? I gather this is the logic:

    …if there were “signs of warm ocean currents”, then one would expect those to also affect sea ice extent.

    So what you are saying is that I made an inference rather than a declaration, and that the inference I made had nothing to do with “deeper ocean temperatures”?

    It’s that simple, eh? But, at the same time, somehow not so simple that one would expect those warm ocean currents to impact observations of calving rates or basal melt (ice shelf elevations)…

    You are going in circles. Let’s try again. Can you show us observational evidence of the “signs of warm ocean currents” you claim?

  57. Chad Wozniak says:
    January 19, 2014 at 11:30 am (Edit)

    More likely that the Drake Passage will ice over completely in coming winters, than the Filchner-Ronne ice shelf melting, methinks.

    At today’s rate of Antarctic sea ice extents increase, and that positive rate of Antarctic Sea Ice extent has been positive since May 2011 so it crosses now nine seasons of sea ice melting (November, December, January), sea ice minimums (February-March), Sea ice freezing (April, May, June, August) and sea ice maximums (September-October) each year …..

    if this trend continues, the Drake Passage, Straits of Magellan, and Cape Horn (56-58 south latitude) could be closed to ship traffic for weeks at a time due to excessive Antarctic Sea Ice in as few as 8-12 years.

    Unlike others, I do not believe that even a solid cover of ice across Cape Horn for two months will stop currents from flowing under the ice. The depths at mid-strait are simply too deep, and the inertia of the remaining part of the sea is enough the keep currents circling. Maybe.

    Now, will today’s trends continue?

    We don’t know. But – unlike the Arctic where “only” 3.5 million square km’s of sea could melt (2012 record low was being declared a disaster!) – there is an absolute minimum of 0.0 of sea ice left in September – there is no possible maximum to antarctic sea ice extents.

    But it is worse than you think!

    At today’s levels of Arctic sea ice, the Arctic sea ice is restricted to a small “cap” almost – but not exactly -centered around the pole between latitudes 82 north and 85 north.

    At that latitude, at the time of minimum sea ice extent in the Arctic when even the maximum solar elevation angles cannot get over 8-10 degrees above the horizon, thermodynamics, heat absorption calcs, and heat transfer calculations show that more energy is lost from the open ocean from increased evaporation losses, increased convection and conduction losses, and increased long wave radiation losses from the open ocean that can be gained by the small change in albedo between open ocean and dirty sea ice.

    So, in today’s world, increased Arctic sea ice loss cools the planet.

    But it is even worse than you think!

    In today’s world, the Antarctic land ice covers some 14.0 Mkm^2 of ice.
    The Antarctic Ice Shelves add an additional 3.5 Mkm^2 of ice.
    The Antarctic Sea ice surrounds both of these with an extra 19.0 – 20.0 Mkm^2 of additional reflective surfaces.

    The total (14.0 + 3.5 + 20.0 = 37.5 mkm^2 of reflective ice surface) is greater than ALL other land areas combined in the southern hemisphere. It represents a single solid area from the pole up to latitude 60 south. And between latitude 60 south (Antarctic sea ice maximum) and latitude 70 south (Antarctic sea ice minimum) ALL of the changing sea ice surface is exposed to sunlight at 20 to 40 degrees EVERY daylight hour of every day of daylight through the year. Air mass is reduced, losses are reduced, albedo of the ocean is reduced, and the sea ice is “cleaner” and more reflective.

    Under those conditions, every square kilometer of “extra” Antarctic sea ice reflects MORE energy from the planet …. And increases global cooling.

    Simply comparing a “minus” Arctic anomaly to a “plus” Antarctic anomaly is wrong.
    Adding the two together for a “net ice anomaly” is wrong.
    Under today’s conditions of sea ice and day-of-year minimums and maximums, BOTH anomalies cool the planet.

  58. Gary Pearse says:
    January 19, 2014 at 2:06 pm

    I’ve predicted (during the voyage of the Ship of Fools) that the cooler ocean and 1.2Mkm^2 extra ice will bring on more rapid freeze up. We won’t have to wait until Feb 22nd for this; how about 3 weeks from now?

    Yes, reflective (Arctic amplification) theory says that every extra sq km of sea ice will cool the planet more than “normal” during every day that we find an Antarctic “positive” anomaly. But nobody can assure you of whether or not that will actually happen on a month-month basis.
    But … We have seen continuous positive Antarctic sea anomaly rates for more than 2-1/2 years now ….

  59. RACookPE1978 says: @ January 19, 2014 at 4:20 pm

    I will agree that the current will continue under the ice if Drake Passage freezes. However the current is wind driven and with the ice you have more of a constriction. Will this push more cold water up along the coast of South America and causing more La Ninas?

    As I already pointed out today. South America has been getting some pretty nasty winter weather in recent years. Could this be from additional cold water during the winter?

    Brazil: Ice Age Now

    Peru: Ice Age Now

    Bolivia: Ice Age Now

    Argentina: Ice Age Now

    Chile: Ice Age Now

  60. A comment from Jinlum Zhang at Harris-Mann Climatology

    ….On Saturday, September 28, the icepack reached 19.51 million square kilometers, according to data posted on the National Snow and Ice Data Center website. That figure topped the 19.48 million square kilometers set on September 23, 2012. Records on Antarctic sea ice began in October of 1978.

    According to a new study in the Journal of Climate by a University of Washington scientist, Jinlum Zhang, “strengthening and converging winds around the South Pole can explain 80 percent of the puzzling increase in Antarctic sea ice.”

    Zhang adds, “the polar vortex that swirls around the South Pole is not just stronger than it was when satellite observations were begun in the late 1970s, but it likewise has more ‘convergence,’ meaning it shoves the sea icepacks together causing ridging. This creates thicker, longer-lasting ice while exposing surrounding open waters and thin ice to blisteringly cold winds that result in additional ice growth.”

    ….scientists have likewise witnessed a similar growth of the continental land ice, particularly in the eastern half of Antarctica.

    Antarctic cold fronts have been pushing much farther north than usual during the winter months, sometimes actually reaching areas of South America north of the Equator.

    This past winter across much of South America was one of the coldest and snowiest winter seasons on record dating back, in some cases, more than 200 years. Parts of northern Argentina, Paraguay and southeastern Brazil saw their first measurable snowfalls in at least a century. A hard freeze last month in central Argentina killed at least 22 percent of the 2013 winter wheat crop.

    Australia and New Zealand likewise had colder than normal winter temperatures as did parts of South Africa, where ‘rare’ snowfalls fell in Johannesburg. Some glaciers in extreme southern Argentina and Chile, as well as in New Zealand, are showing “definite signs” of advancing after an extended period of retreat….

    The actual paper: Modeling the Impact of Wind Intensification on Antarctic Sea Ice Volume

  61. justthefactswuwt says:

    Why would surface ice measurements help “draw conclusions about the temperature of the deeper water.”?

    Ice shelves float. 9/10 below water, 1/10 above water. If the surface elevations are observed to decrease with time, it means the ice shelf is getting thinner below, and vice versa. Ice shelf surface measurements tell you if the bottom is melting or growing, and at what rate, which indicates basal temperature.

    It is more complicated than that, but that is the general idea. Pine Island has been thinning continuously for decades. Does that count as observational evidence of warm currents?

    But the real point here is that it *is* complicated. Enough so that drawing conclusions about ice shelves based on sea ice extent is a very bad idea. Consider the paper you quoted:

    The thermocline in the sea adjacent to the glacier calving front (where ice is discharged) lowered by 250 meters in the austral summer of 2012. This change exposed the bottom of the ice shelf to colder surface waters rather than to the warmer, deeper layer, thereby reducing heat transfer from the ocean to the overlying ice and decreasing basal melting of the ice by more than 50% compared to 2010.

    Here is the press release:

    http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/press/press_releases/press_release.php?id=2452

    “It is not so much the ocean variability, which is modest by comparison with many parts of the ocean, but the extreme sensitivity of the ice shelf to such modest changes in ocean properties that took us by surprise…”

    Consider that. On top of the decadal thinning because of the Circumpolar Deep Water (CDW), a change in the depth of the thermocline, in two short years, lowered the temperature enough to decrease the basal melting rate by 50%. Would your plot of sea ice extent have told you either of those things?

    The reason there are “no apparent signs” is because you are looking at sea ice extent. It’s the wrong tool for the job.

    I’m sorry if the Pine Island glacier example is too far removed from Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf in the Weddell Sea, but it is the area I’m most familiar with.

  62. “Antarctica Has Sea Ice Rabbit Ears, a V for Victory or Maybe It’s a Peace Sign?…”

    Maybe it’s a message in Australian to the warmists.

  63. richardscourtney says:

    The ice shelves are growing, and your links each says that warm ocean currents under the ice are the major cause of “ice shelf mass loss”. Thanks for providing such clear evidence that your assertions are rubbish.

    The ice shelves are growing? You wouldn’t by chance be confusing sea ice and ice shelves, would you? Not the same thing.

  64. David L. Hagen says:
    January 19, 2014 at 5:44 pm
    Will this form the largest iceberg in the satellite era?

    ***************************************************************************************************************************Quick – break on of the ears off and tow it to California….

  65. “….A hard freeze last month in central Argentina killed at least 22 percent of the 2013 winter wheat crop…”

    Good maybe wheat in Kansas City will stay above $7.00/bushel.

  66. Leo Geiger says: @ January 19, 2014 at 5:58 pm

    ….It is more complicated than that, but that is the general idea. Pine Island has been thinning continuously for decades. Does that count as observational evidence of warm currents?….
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Yes it is more complicated. It is called a VOLCANO!

    Scientists have discovered a layer of volcanic ash and glass shards in Antarctica, evidence of an old eruption by a still active volcano that researchers believe may be contributing to the thinning of Antarctic glacial ice.

    Hugh F.J. Corr and David G. Vaughan, two scientists with the British Antarctic Survey, recently published their discovery of the volcanic layer in the journal Nature Geoscience. The discovery is unique according to Dr. Vaughan. He said “This is the first time we have seen a volcano beneath the ice sheet punch a hole through the ice sheet.”

    The volcano’s heat could possibly be melting and thinning the ice and raising the speed of the Pine Island Glacier in West Antarctica….
    link

    First evidence of under-ice volcanic eruption in Antarctica: …“This eruption occurred close to Pine Island Glacier on the West Antarctic Ice Sheet.

    2011: Giant Undersea Volcanoes Found Off Antarctica: …All told a dozen previously unknown peaks were discovered …Also important is the fact that the still active volcanoes have hydrothermal vents Well I guess there is your warm sea water.

  67. Fritz: I like to delve into etymology occasionally. It seems us colonist have a poor understanding of the history of our words (if I had the energy I would write a book entitled, “Where’s the Corn in my Corned Beef”?).

    I looked into the naming of Pine Island Bay/Glacier. They are named after the USS Pine Island, which I presume was used for research down there. Alas, not only are there no pines, there is no island, either.

  68. Leo Geiger says: January 19, 2014 at 5:58 pm

    Pine Island has been thinning continuously for decades. Does that count as observational evidence of warm currents?

    No, as you said, it’s complicated and there are numerous variables, including “atmospheric variability and local ice shelf and seabed geometry” which “play fundamental roles in determining the response of the Antarctic Ice Sheet to climate.”

    http://www.sciencemag.org/content/343/6167/174.abstract

    Pine Island is a proxy, observational evidence comes from measurement of the occurrence in question. Observational evidence of “signs of warm ocean currents” would come from measurement of “warm ocean currents”. Perhaps you can find some Argo buoys to support your assertion?

    But the real point here is that it *is* complicated. Enough so that drawing conclusions about ice shelves based on sea ice extent is a very bad idea.

    Unusually high Sea Ice Extent and Area is reasonably good indication that there aren’t nearby “warm ocean currents”, and thus if “warm ocean currents” are what is supposedly going to cause the collapse of the Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf, I am comfortable concluding that collapse isn’t imminent.

    Consider that. On top of the decadal thinning because of the Circumpolar Deep Water (CDW), a change in the depth of the thermocline, in two short years, lowered the temperature enough to decrease the basal melting rate by 50%. Would your plot of sea ice extent have told you either of those things?

    No, but according to this;

    “Here, we use satellite interferometric synthetic-aperture radar observations from 1992 to 2006 covering 85% of Antarctica’s coastline to estimate the total mass flux into the ocean. We compare the mass fluxes from large drainage basin units with interior snow accumulation calculated from a regional atmospheric climate model for 1980 to 2004. In East Antarctica, small glacier losses in Wilkes Land and glacier gains at the mouths of the Filchner and Ross ice shelves combine to a near-zero loss of 4±61 Gt yr−1.”

    http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v1/n2/abs/ngeo102.html

    and this;
    “Oceanic melting decreased by 50% between January 2010 and 2012, with ocean conditions in 2012 partly attributable to atmospheric forcing associated with a strong La Niña event.”

    http://www.sciencemag.org/content/343/6167/174.abstract

    there doesn’t seem to be much loss from the Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf in the last 30 years and there might actually be a gain.

    The reason there are “no apparent signs” is because you are looking at sea ice extent. It’s the wrong tool for the job.

    To clarify here, would you expect to see large positive Sea Ice Extent and Area anomalies around ice shelves that were being rapidly melted from below by “warm ocean currents”?

    I’m sorry if the Pine Island glacier example is too far removed from Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf in the Weddell Sea, but it is the area I’m most familiar with.

    I understand, if one is trying to prove that Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming is upon us, one must focus one energy on the glaciers that are shrinking versus those that are growing…

  69. fenbeagleblog says:
    January 19, 2014 at 2:09 pm
    It’s a white Rabbit. Now do a white Elephant. There looks like there’s ‘room’.

    fenbeagleblog,
    Ya got me – big belly laugh!
    Mac

  70. I have noticed an odd and persistent cold anomaly that has been situated near the South Pole during for a couple of months now, during their warm weather/Summer season.

    http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/map/images/ens/t850anom_sh_alltimes.html

    Interestingly, the Arctic, during it’s warm weather season was also consistently cold like this during 2013′s Summer.

    I watch the weather in Brazil and Argentina this time of year because they grow a big crop of corn and soybeans and prices for those commodities are influenced by their growing season. I don’t usually pay close attention to the extremely high latitudes so I’m not sure how significant this is.

    What is wild speculation, with no data to back it up is the possibility that something is having an effect to suppress temperatures at very high latitudes during Summers.

    Maybe it’s a coincidence and/or I just happened to notice it. However, if it continues to be a pattern that repeats and only in the Summers, when solar radiation is maximized, then something related to the sun might be causing it.

    In these regions, we go from no sun in the Winters to sun all day in the Summer. The contrast might result in a response that is more obvious than at lower latitudes.

    Any thoughts?

  71. Ya know, I really dont like that change.

    One must understand what makes such. Do we?

    So,,,,,,,, in the end what impact does the increasing ice have on sea level?

    What happens to all that salt removed?

    Heavy brine deep water currents, if you will….

    Something below sea level made the ice growth possible.

    How does that work in a complex system as we have with understanding climate…..

    One good storm and “ice loss in antarctica” is in the news.

  72. Warning: mindless irrelevant long anecdote from a peeved observer.

    For the past 3 weeks we’ve had a constant and silly stream of melodrama imagery of fairly prosaic heat waves and the very commonplace (and rather minor) rash of the annual bushfires in Southern inland Australia. And very much, of this very little, has been made in the shock-drama media usual suspects.

    In light of the ‘unexpected’ summer ice south of Australia and South America etc., just want to add a little much needed perspective.

    As a kid I may have experienced a cooler Spring and Summer, especially January, in north eastern Australia. That is possible for I would not notice if any of those summers as a youngster were unusually cool, if I were not acclimated to normal variability.

    I’m in my early 50s and has closely watched the tropical weather closely all my adult life due to several very close encounters with death during a large and slow-moving Cat-4 tropical cyclone called ‘Sheila-Sophie’, 925 millibars (measured) on 15th Feb 1971, in Roebourne WA. That was the equal second-lowest central pressure measured within Australia up to that date, since systematic records began in the late 1850s. Incidentally, the other 925 millibar central pressure was a cyclone that struck just south of Innisfail, in 1918. However, Cyclone Larry also hit Innisfail, in 2006, @ 925 hectopascals (millibars)! Al Gore visited Australia right after that storm and directly blamed TC Larry on AGW, but what about the 1918 cyclone Al? Was that one AGW too? It must have been … right mate? … dats jus logikal!

    ___
    i.e.
    “This is not a political issue, it’s a moral one – it’s deeply unethical,” he said. Now, Mr Gore has brought the message to Australia, where he says the stakes are extremely high. “In many ways, Australia has more at risk than any other country,” he said. “I would hope that Australia would put more pressure on the US by adopting this global agreement and then the US would feel enormous pressure to change.” He says events like cyclone Larry and other severe storms are a direct result of climate change. “You are the driest of the inhabited continents,” he said. “Your grain growing areas are at risk. “Ocean storms become stronger – you’ve had series of category 5 cyclones. “All of these effects have been predicted and all of them will get worse and worse until we turn the thermostat down.” Mr Gore joined politicians and community leaders at the Australian premiere of the film in Sydney.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2006-09-10/global-warming-poses-major-threat-to-aust-gore/1260282

    ___

    Anyway I took a keen interest in weather after that, and I can say without reservation that this summer is undoubtedly the coolest and most pleasant and surprising summer I’ve ever experienced, in North Queensland.

    Despite the routine daily forecasts all this month for max-temps around 33 or 34 degrees, the day temps have hovered around 31 (airport ATIS records verify this) and the humidity has been unusually low for most of the past two months. Regardless of the truth, every night I see a daily ‘recorded’ temps in the media that claim we are having temps of 33 to 34 degree.

    This is untrue, the figures being claimed in the media are clearly not accurate, and are being over-reported by as much +3 degrees above what we are actually experiencing. This is the Emperor’s new cloths effect, in effect. If you care about this stuff, take note that the media in Australia are doing this. If you see this occurring where you are, keep data and keep records and notes of it. The time will come when various people will need to explain what they’ve been doing, and having systematic records showing this routine biasing of temp ‘data’ and reporting will be required.

    So during the absurdity of these ‘horror’ heat-waves and bushfires amped within the media the Coral sea has remained cool and the air over it and Queensland dry as well (until now), because large highs keep blowing stiff and cooler than normal dry SE trade-winds on to the eastern coastline.

    The oddly cooler winds have then been blowing inland across North Queensland, and Northern Territory, then turning south over inland Western Australia, heating up through the resulting large heat trough, and then entering South Australia from the west and back into western Victoria as the ‘Heat Waves’ (the back half of these large Bass Strait to Tasman sea Highs).

    It’s all been due to that cyclic flow set up by the large persistent cooler than usual highs in the Tasman that has triggered the heat-wave, which is a normal mechanism for them to develop, it’s just that North Queensland’s coast has been noticeably cooler than normal due to them this year. That flow is also why the lows and cyclones so far have struck northern WA and the western NT.

    The steady stream of strong back-building Highs that set up this pattern, which has so far completely blocked the monsoon flow over half of northern Australia, is pulling up cooler and drier air than normal. However, these Highs don’t seem to be sourcing their air from any further south than normal. Which suggest there must be more cooler air and cooler water at lower latitudes, i.e. the antarctic summer must be quite cold, given it is thus slowing or preventing the usual warming of the coral sea and is drying out north Queensland, plus blocking the monsoon’s high humidity flows into QLD near Papua’s southern coastline (thus far).

    It will be interesting to see how much longer this pattern lasts, and if the coral sea monsoon remains blocked. So far the cyclones have been central south pacific this year, not even any tropical storm build-ups in the coral sea so far. The BOM’s current 4-day forecast chart shows the sustained pattern I’m talking about, and it is predicted to continue for most of the next week as well (but looks like it could break down soon if the next high weakens and allows a deep layer of humid air to flow in).

    http://www.bom.gov.au/australia/charts/4day_col.shtml

    So that’s what’s driving the heatwaves, an unusual southern ocean coolness has sustained larger highs for longer into summer than normal, which paradoxically produces central Australian heating by blocking the monsoon’s cooling clouds and rain.

    But no one wants to tell you the larger picture, as the money and ratings are all in amping the melodramatic and heaping-up spin.

    This January will go down in my memory as the coolest I’ve experienced in at least 40 years. I noticed something like this last summer, as well, but it was not as pronounced. Last summer was shorter and cooler, and less humid than normal, and there were zero coral sea cyclones last summer as well, which was very unusual. And despite a warm 2013 winter, the summer cool-down effect on the eastern coast has been much more pronounced, effectively the normal summer has not arrived. And nor has the usual 4 to 6 week build up to the rain. We’re experiencing what are protracted late spring-like conditions but we are now moving toward the final week of January (so can probably expect a sharpish drought to follow).

    I’m not complaining though, it’s been great, I saved $$$ as I’ve not used my air-conditioner, which is a first. So I’m not contributing to the subsidising of the massive global reduction of evil carbon-dioxide. Isn’t it marvellous, you pay a tax and the CO2 decreases … it’s so clever!

    But what I am getting quite cranky about is the persistent and radical lack of objectivity I see within the BOM’s heat-wave map forecasting. Hey BOM why don’t you tell the whole story within your heat-wave forecast mapping fetish? Why don’t you index and depict the anomalous coolness and associated anomalous low-humidity flow as well? Or would that render the narrative less spun a caricature of AGW-ishness? Come on BOM pull yer socks up! Would it kill you to be objective about forecasting and observations presentation? You used to be able to do that. Maybe you’ve too many supercomputers and modellers and not nearly enough basic honesty these days? Hey, it can happen.

    Hope you get well soon.

    And ABC, what is it with you, … you … Bodgies!? Congets, you’re actually worse than CNN’s overdosed-melodrama and spin-ism circus. Yes, you can keep mutually patting yourself on the back, but keep in mind, nonsense and BS won’t fool those who actually experience the divergence between melodrama and actual weather conditions. The more you indulge in that, the more peripheral and irrelevant you are. If you think this endears you to the public, assists them, or secures your role and your future and jobs, good luck with that.

    doubt it.

    Anyway, I dearly wish our summers were this cool, and “feels-like” as pleasant as now, every year … it can happen.

  73. In these areas , upwellings bring warmer waters to the surface (+4°C in the deep sea, zéro or less at surface ).due to density / temperature gradient of sea water

    Well, what I meant was the deep water flow from the Arctic that travels along the bottom of the Atlantic to Antarctica, then wells up and mixes before dispersal into other currents. Not all of it makes it to the surface, some of it comes up to an intermediate current. It will be interesting to see what impact this has.

  74. Tom J 1:01pm

    You need to move to a liberal state and get into their politics — even the presidency is not beyond you. Raygun control could be your wedge issue.

    You obviously had a lot of fun writing it and I had a lot of fun reading it. What more can you ask?

    Eugene WR Gallun

  75. Pat 2:16pm

    An international team of scientists says:

    “The question of how global warming will change the frequency of extreme El Nino events has challenged scientists for more than 20 year.”

    Bullshit comes easy. PLAUSIBLE BULLSHIT is much harder to produce. The struggle in all warmists circles is to produce plausible bullshit. Considering the talent level of the people involved, that it took climate scientists 20 years to develop some plausible bullshit about extreme El Nino events is not unexpected or exceptional.

    Eugene WR Gallun

  76. “People think computers will keep them from making mistakes. They’re wrong. With computers you make mistakes faster.” – Adam Osborne

  77. Leo Geiger:

    Your post at January 19, 2014 at 6:02 pm is a keeper!

    As troll BS it is eye-wateringly funny.

    You provided links which you say supported your arguments about sea ice.
    Your links ONLY discussed “ice shelves” and I quoted them back to you.
    This is my post which you are answering

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/19/antarctica-has-sea-ice-rabbit-ears-a-v-for-victory-or-maybe-its-a-peace-sign/#comment-1541594

    Your reply says in total

    richardscourtney says:

    The ice shelves are growing, and your links each says that warm ocean currents under the ice are the major cause of “ice shelf mass loss”. Thanks for providing such clear evidence that your assertions are rubbish.

    The ice shelves are growing? You wouldn’t by chance be confusing sea ice and ice shelves, would you? Not the same thing.

    I “CONFUSED” NOTHING. YOU DID!
    And you did it in attempt to pretend that you had evidence to support your untrue assertions. I only copied and quoted from your links which show you don’t have anything except untrue assertions.

    Richard

  78. Richard — try to keep it civil. In the full text of the paper it says:

    Surveyed ice-shelf mass loss of 287 ± 89 Gt/year in 2003–2008 (∂H/∂t) is 28 ± 9% higher than that required to maintain the ice shelves in steady state for 2003–2008.

    so perhaps you can help me out and explain where you are getting “The ice shelves are growing” from.

  79. Leo Geiger:

    I pointed out YOUR egregious behaviour in my post at January 20, 2014 at 3:30 am

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/19/antarctica-has-sea-ice-rabbit-ears-a-v-for-victory-or-maybe-its-a-peace-sign/#comment-1542111

    and you have replied at January 20, 2014 at 5:24 am saying

    Richard — try to keep it civil.

    Your gall is astonishing.

    But you continue to demonstrate your gall in that post and the remainder of it says

    In the full text of the paper it says:

    Surveyed ice-shelf mass loss of 287 ± 89 Gt/year in 2003–2008 (∂H/∂t) is 28 ± 9% higher than that required to maintain the ice shelves in steady state for 2003–2008.

    so perhaps you can help me out and explain where you are getting “The ice shelves are growing” from.

    Please don’t obfuscate by pretending to be an idiot.

    The above article says

    This is the same Weddell Sea that in 2012 it was claimed that;

    “Warm ocean currents are projected to melt the Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf in the Weddell Sea area of Antarctica opening instabilities in the West Antarctic Ice sheet (WAIS) which will impact global sea level rise. Climate change is waking up the sleeping giant of Antarctica. …

    and the article provides evidence of sea-ice growth in the area then says

    So there are no apparent signs of the “warm ocean currents” that “are projected to melt the Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf in the Weddell Sea area of Antarctica opening instabilities in the West Antarctic Ice sheet”.

    That is what the discussion is about.
    That is what you claimed to dispute.

    So,
    1.
    The above article reports recent sea-ice growth which refutes existence of the claimed effect of asserted “warm ocean currents”.
    2.
    You disputed that and cited your links.
    3.
    I pointed out that your linked items each says the ice is reduced by “warm ocean currents”.
    4.
    You now claim the ice was reported to be reducing prior to 2008 according to model studies.
    5.
    It is now 2014 and we see the ice has increased.
    6.
    Models are evidence of the views of their constructors, but the measurements of increased sea-ice are evidence that the ice is increasing. And that increase refutes existence of the claimed effect of asserted “warm ocean currents”.

    Richard

  80. To clarify here, would you expect to see large positive Sea Ice Extent and Area anomalies around ice shelves that were being rapidly melted from below by “warm ocean currents”?

    I would expect to see *no simple relationship* between sea ice extent and melting ice shelves. Surface conditions could make a good year for sea ice while subsurface changes could weaken ice shelves in the same area, or the other way around too. Sea ice extent is a lousy proxy for ice shelf dynamics.

    You have an interesting approach to deciding what papers are using valid methods:

    No, but according to this…there doesn’t seem to be much loss from the Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf

    “This” is a paper that used a climate model. In fact, it is the same author using the same general approach that in an earlier comment on a similar paper you dismissively referred to it as “another complex model and some deduction” when I used it.

    At this point it sounds like you will reject any information derived from direct ice shelf measurements if it implies mass loss (but not if it doesn’t!), and won’t even accept there is such thing as warmer Circumpolar Deep Water (CDW) unless I start providing links, so I’m not sure what else I can say.

  81. Sorry for the bad formatting above. Everything after ‘”This” is a paper’ was supposed to be outside of blockquotes.

  82. Richard

    I pointed out that your linked items each says the ice is reduced by “warm ocean currents”.

    Ice shelves reduced by warm ocean currents. Not sea ice. The whole idea here is that what happens on the surface (sea ice) is a poor proxy for what happens at the basal melt zone of an ice shelf. I gather you think “ice is ice” so ice shelves must growing since sea ice is growing, and what happens at the ocean surface is a good proxy for everything beneath. In a world that simple, I guess you are absolutely right.

  83. Just for the record (as we’re about post 100), I called it with the very first post:
    M Courtney says at January 19, 2014 at 10:57 am

    Weather, not climate.
    A pause before the collapse – the ice must have flowed off the land…
    Anyone know a climate scientist who wants to take a ship down there to check?

    Yep, the argument is that the ice must have flowed off the land. How else does ice form on water?
    And I also called that no-one would want to actually go and take a measurement
    After all the models can be consistent with warm ocean currents.
    Models can be
    consistent with anything.
    Apparently, that is the point of climate models.

  84. Leo Geiger:

    This is getting really, really silly. I can only suppose the silliness results from your desperation.

    In your post at January 20, 2014 at 6:30 am you say

    Ice shelves reduced by warm ocean currents. Not sea ice. The whole idea here is that what happens on the surface (sea ice) is a poor proxy for what happens at the basal melt zone of an ice shelf. I gather you think “ice is ice” so ice shelves must growing since sea ice is growing, and what happens at the ocean surface is a good proxy for everything beneath. In a world that simple, I guess you are absolutely right.

    This derives from my quoting from THE LINKS YOU PROVIDED in my post at January 19, 2014 at 2:35 pm

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/19/antarctica-has-sea-ice-rabbit-ears-a-v-for-victory-or-maybe-its-a-peace-sign/#comment-1541594

    The first of those quotations says

    Ocean waters melting the undersides of Antarctic ice shelves are responsible for most of the continent’s ice shelf mass loss, a new study by NASA and university researchers has found.

    But you are claiming the quotation does not indicate that the same “ocean waters” would melt sea ice.
    So, please explain
    1.
    How do “ocean waters” get “beneath” “Antarctic ice shelves” to cause “melting the undersides” of them?
    2.
    What physical and or chemical effects prevent the same effect occurring to sea ice that “ocean waters” are “beneath” when the sea ice is floating on those “warm ocean waters”?

    Or is this yet another unexplained mystery of faith which has to be accepted as a doctrine of climastrology?

    The second quotation I provided is from your other link and says

    We compare the volume flux divergence of Antarctic ice shelves in 2007 and 2008 with 1979 to 2010 surface accumulation and 2003 to 2008 thinning to determine their rates of melting and mass balance. Basal melt of 1325 ± 235 gigatons per year (Gt/year) exceeds a calving flux of 1089 ± 139 Gt/year, making ice-shelf melting the largest ablation process in Antarctica. The giant cold-cavity Ross, Filchner, and Ronne ice shelves covering two-thirds of the total ice-shelf area account for only 15% of net melting. Half of the meltwater comes from 10 small, warm-cavity Southeast Pacific ice shelves occupying 8% of the area. A similar high melt/area ratio is found for six East Antarctic ice shelves, implying undocumented strong ocean thermal forcing on their deep grounding lines.

    Oh! So,
    “Half of the meltwater comes from 10 small, warm-cavity Southeast Pacific ice shelves occupying 8% of the area. A similar high melt/area ratio is found for six East Antarctic ice shelves, implying undocumented strong ocean thermal forcing on their deep grounding lines.”

    In other words, this accelerated melt is also claimed to be “undocumented strong ocean thermal forcing on their deep grounding lines” so the same two questions arise as I posed concerning the other quote.

    Leo, surely you can see the logical difficulty with your claim that “warm ocean waters” melt the bottom of land-based ice shelves but do not melt the ice floating on the “warm ocean waters”?

    Richard

  85. ossqss says: @ January 19, 2014 at 8:56 pm

    …One good storm and “ice loss in antarctica” is in the news.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    You are thinking Arctic where storms can move ice away from the pole through the straits and into the warm sea.

    The Antarctic is configured differently. It is a large land mass with a current that goes round and round it isolating it from warmer waters. Increased wind just piles the ice up so it does not melt in the ‘summer’
    Read my post above: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/19/antarctica-has-sea-ice-rabbit-ears-a-v-for-victory-or-maybe-its-a-peace-sign/#comment-1541655

    I link to a chapter in a Naval Marine Safety Manual with a very good map of ocean currents.

  86. Unmentionable says: @ January 19, 2014 at 11:37 pm

    “People think computers will keep them from making mistakes. They’re wrong. With computers you make mistakes faster.” – Adam Osborne
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    To err is human, it take a computer to really foul things up.

    NOTE:Comment cleaned-up for a family viewing audience

  87. richardscourtney,

    Note Leo Geiger keeps droning on about

    Ice shelves reduced by warm ocean currents. Not sea ice. The whole idea here is that what happens on the surface (sea ice) is a poor proxy for what happens at the basal melt zone of an ice shelf.

    And completely ignores all the facts I have brought up that refutes his nonsense.
    comment 1
    comment 2
    and
    comment 3

    Perhaps Mr Geiger should try swiming in the ‘Warm’ Antarctic Circumpolar Current or maybe he just does not understand that the word Circumpolar.

    Again from WIKI:

    The Antarctic Circumpolar Current (ACC) is an ocean current that flows clockwise from west to east around Antarctica. An alternative name for the ACC is the West Wind Drift. The ACC is the dominant circulation feature of the Southern Ocean and, at approximately 125 Sverdrups, the largest ocean current.

    Does that make it clear? THERE IS NO WARM WATER! This is NOT the ARCTIC. There is NO GULF STREAM bring warm equatorial water to the south pole.

    (please excuse spelling, I can not see right now due to flashes from a migraine)

  88. Jimbo says

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/19/antarctica-has-sea-ice-rabbit-ears-a-v-for-victory-or-maybe-its-a-peace-sign/#comment-1541537

    Henry says
    sorry for the late reply
    clearly the results for Alaska apply to all 60-70 [latitude], inland (no streams to warm up)

    Even Nasa admits that Antarctica is cooling down, e.g.

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/10/22/nasa-announces-new-record-growth-of-antarctic-sea-ice-extent/#more-96133

    so, as expected, global cooling

    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1987/to:2014/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:2002/to:2014/trend/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1987/to:2014/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:2002/to:2014/trend/plot/rss/from:1987/to:2014/plot/rss/from:2002/to:2014/trend/plot/hadsst2gl/from:1987/to:2014/plot/hadsst2gl/from:2002/to:2014/trend/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1987/to:2002/trend/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1987/to:2002/trend/plot/hadsst2gl/from:1987/to:2002/trend/plot/rss/from:1987/to:2002/trend

    starts from the top down, increasing the temp. differential between the equator and the poles.

    The arctic still profits from the warmer gulf stream, from the previous warming period, but it is only a matter of time.

    so, what we have happening is exactly as I predicted

    http://blogs.24.com/henryp/2013/04/29/the-climate-is-changing/

    I saw some were joking about it, (my comment, at,

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/19/antarctica-has-sea-ice-rabbit-ears-a-v-for-victory-or-maybe-its-a-peace-sign/#comment-1541466),

    which is not such a good idea.
    Climate change due to natural reasons is real and worrying. The current droughts in California and Australia only prove my point.

    WHAT MUST WE DO?

    We urgently need to develop and encourage more agriculture at lower latitudes, like in Africa and/or South America. This is where we can expect to find warmth and more rain during a global cooling period.
    We need to warn the farmers living at the higher latitudes (>40) who already suffered poor crops due to the cold and/ or due to the droughts that things are not going to get better there for the next few decades. It will only get worse as time goes by.
    We also have to provide more protection against more precipitation at certain places of lower latitudes (FLOODS!), <[30] latitude, especially around the equator.
    (Brazil, Indonesia, Philipines, Kenya, etc)

  89. Ocean temperatures around Antarctica are below average.

    This suggest the waters are too cool for glacier ice melt near the surface and therefore conditions for greater sea ice are ideal.

    “Ocean waters melting the undersides of Antarctic ice shelves are responsible for most of the continent’s ice shelf mass loss, a new study by NASA and university researchers has found.”

    This is a natural scenario that happens all the time and there is nothing distinguishable between natural and unnatural. Ice shelves are always moving towards warmer water relative so they melt and this is caused by glacier mass increasing and forcing the ice towards warmer oceans. if the glaciers were retreating the glacier would just collapse and fall with no advancement towards the coasts. We know surface temperatures are too cold here so that is ruled out. (-10 c to -15 c peak summer)

    If so called warmer currents are melting the ice with no observations around Antarctica suggesting this, then why have they been apparently retreating for decades? This shows that is has nothing to do with temperature changes in the area and backs up that advancing glacier ice moving to the coasts and relative warmer oceans is natural process that always occurs and cant be distinguished from abnormal. The claim that its melting the bottom of the glacier ice any different from usual makes no sense when the surface is colder than usual. With this logic I can claim the glacier will slow down melting when the temperatures near the surface are above normal.

  90. I will repeat part of my previous post. See this link. It’s just an 850 temp anomoly map, from the GFS Ensembles going out 2 weeks of the Southern Hemisphere. Scroll down to see the forecast that goes out in 24 hour increments.

    http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/map/images/ens/t850anom_sh_alltimes.html

    I present this particlular model forecast only because its one that I use daily and can comment on the unusual fact that a big blue blob of cold anomolies has been in the vicinity of the South Pole/Arctic consistently for quite awhile/months.

    A persistent cold anomoly, possibly similar was situated in the vicinty of the North Pole and caused a cold Summer there in 2013, Note the big rebound in sea ice.

    I have only recently been watching the weather at high latitudes at both ends of the earth closely, so can’t say how strange this is……..however, it must be fairly odd as evidenced by the complete reversal of temps at the Arctic from recent warmth to near record cold last Summer. of 2013

    This has only been during the most recent Summer’s when solar radiation is maximized and shines around the clock at the highest latitudes.
    It is either unrelated to solar forcing and being caused by something else entirely that just happened to occur at the same time that regional solar forcing was maximized(which happens a great deal with our weather) or there is a solar connection.

    Would appreciate any thoughts/comments

  91. South Pole/Arctic

    That should be Antarctic. If you can, please fix it. Thanks

    [But where, which word in which sentence? Mod]

  92. Gail Combs:

    At January 20, 2014 at 9:09 am you ask me to note that

    Leo Geiger … completely ignores all the facts I have brought up that refutes his nonsense

    I do note it, and it is important. But onlookers may not share your knowledge so may fail to see how stupid his assertions are.

    I hope my contributions have exposed – for all to see – his lack of logic and his silly arguments together with the ridiculous nature of the papers he cites.

    Richard

  93. HenryP says: @ January 20, 2014 at 9:25 am
    China, who does not believe the CAGW B. S. is doing exactly as you suggest. They are aggressively developing agriculture in Africa and South America …the case since the Mao era, self-sufficiency in staple foods is a primary objective of the Chinese Communist Party. China’s National Medium-Term Priority Framework promotes 95 percent self-sufficiency in grain (corn, wheat, and rice, specifically) in the coming decade.

    Mean while idiots like Clinton and Al Gore continue to pursue their dreams of Global Governance and INTERDEPENDENCE completely blind to the fact the Chinese are laughing up their sleeves and pursuing INDEPENDENCE using the technology Clinton gave them on a gold platter.

    https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/copeland.htm

    http://www.artistmarket.com/writers/piraino/clintonchina.htm

  94. richardscourtney says: @ January 20, 2014 at 10:21 am

    …I hope my contributions have exposed – for all to see…
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    You are a bit more blunt than I am. But then I like to play with the trolls, sort of like a cat with a mouse.

  95. I present this particlular model forecast only because its one that I use daily and can comment on the unusual fact that a big blue blob of cold anomolies has been in the vicinity of the South Pole/Arctic consistently for quite awhile/months.

    I apologize for not being more clear: South Pole/Arctic should be South Pole/”Antarctic”.
    I also see “particular” misspelled and “anomalies” misspelled in just that sentence.

    Unfortunately, these sort of things are too common in my posts and I should have probably just let it go. The real problem is that I have severe double vision from an autoimmune disorder. Maybe a surgery can correct this. The prisms in both lenses and a Fresnel prism on my left lens work great for distance and on a computer screen viewing weather maps and such.

    However, my eyes/brain are not completely in sync looking at words on the computer screen as I type.. This causes me to not actually see much of what I type as I type it. I’ll just try to do a better job looking everything over closely before sending it……………………..thanks!
    Mike

  96. Mike Maguire says:

    “I present this particlular model forecast only because its one that I use daily and can comment on the unusual fact that a big blue blob of cold anomolies has been in the vicinity of the South Pole/Arctic consistently for quite awhile/months.”

    GISS, ECM, UKMO and JMA for example are very poor for picking even trends 2 weeks away. This is for regions where data is easy to get hold of. Areas where there is considerably less data like around the poles, the success is even worse. Although the Arctic is far more variable than Antarctica so would be little more assuring, The bottom line is any trends 1 to 2 weeks maybe credible, but 2 weeks or more take with a pinch of salt.

  97. We are living in a crazy time indeed.

    Monday – 20 January 2014
    New paper says climate models ‘robustly’ predicted Antarctic sea ice to decrease, but Antarctic sea ice now near record highs
    A paper published today in the Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society notes that climate models “robustly” predicted that Antarctic sea ice would decrease in response to increased greenhouse gases and the ozone hole, but that the exact opposite has occurred with current Antarctic sea ice at near historical highs.

    http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2014/01/new-paper-says-climate-models-robustly.html

    Warmists are obsessed with the not-melting Antarctica. It’s as if they are willing it with every fibre of their being to melt catastrophically. Why can’t they just give up until something really out of the ordinary shows up – like record extents…….ah, forget that last bit. ;-)

  98. So let me get this straight. Some guy named Leo commented that anthropogenically warmed ocean currents will eventually melt away the ice bridges and fast-ice around Antarctica. My only conclusion I can think of is that he must think Antarctica and its regular circumpolar current is somehow similar to the Arctic Circle and its many curly cued in and out, warm and cold currents? Is there no bottom limit to watermelon brains?

    ROTFLMAO!!!!!!

  99. Pamela Gray says: @ January 20, 2014 at 5:05 pm

    So let me get this straight….
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    You’ve got it correct Pam. He was completely impervious to any and all data. It was quite amazing.

    I wonder if he is a graduate of Al Gore’s Climate Reality brainwashing training.

  100. Matt G says:
    January 20, 2014 at 2:46 pm
    Mike Maguire says:
    GISS, ECM, UKMO and JMA for example are very poor for picking even trends 2 weeks away. // The bottom line is any trends 1 to 2 weeks maybe credible, but 2 weeks or more take with a pinch of salt.
    ___

    If I follow him, he’s not projecting a trend forward, but asking for comment RE the observed anomalous coolness in the 850 mb linked over the recent two months this summer, and last.

  101. Homo-Misanthropithecus-Robustus
    A lower intellectual branch of Homo Sapiens Sapiens that disappeared up a blind-alley when they missed the forest for the trees. This most withered of a branches is believed to still persist in the wild due to numerous recordings of their distinctive characteristic vocalisations which are considered to verge on incomprehensible gibberish. Although once extraordinarily abundant and widely-ranging, on all continents, except Antarctica, where they were unable to secure a foothold, they’re now formally listed as endangered, and great efforts have been undertaken to provide copious UN protection programs. Send money! Help save and protect our precious global heritage.

  102. Leo Geiger says: January 20, 2014 at 6:20 am

    I would expect to see *no simple relationship* between sea ice extent and melting ice shelves. Surface conditions could make a good year for sea ice while subsurface changes could weaken ice shelves in the same area, or the other way around too. Sea ice extent is a lousy proxy for ice shelf dynamics.

    Ok, then so show us direct measurements of the “warm ocean currents” you claim…

    You have an interesting approach to deciding what papers are using valid methods:

    Who said they were using valid methods? I was using your own ammunition against you. My point of view is that our understanding of Earth’s climate system is rudimentary at best, and our historical record is laughable brief, thus any projections about Earth’s climate system are educated guesses at best.

    At this point it sounds like you will reject any information derived from direct ice shelf measurements if it implies mass loss (but not if it doesn’t!), and won’t even accept there is such thing as warmer Circumpolar Deep Water (CDW) unless I start providing links, so I’m not sure what else I can say.

    What you could say is, I have limited understanding about Earth’s climate system and am not sure what the future will bring. I am however learning as much as I can, and at some point in the future hopefully we will have some predictive capacity. Until then, I will simply report on what we find and make no blind assumptions about what the future may hold. Is that too much to ask?

  103. Unmentionable,
    You are correct. I am only looking at a model that goes out 2 weeks. For the last 2 months, every day, it has been showing an anomalously cold blob in the Antarctic.

    During a similar time frame seasonally for the Arctic, (just subtract 6 months) and you had close to the equivalent solar position for the Northern Hemisphere.

    The Arctic had one of its coldest Summer’s ever and had a significant ice rebound.
    We know that was unusual as the Arctic had been losing ice and having mild/warm anomalies.

    This could just be coincidence but I have more to it. Last July/August, the Southern Hemisphere had some extreme cold hitting Argentina and Brazil. Coldest temperatures in tropical coffee growing areas since 1994. In Southern Brazil and Argentina record snows and cold on several occasions in July and August.

    The pattern that caused it was similar to what we are seeing now in the mid latitudes of the US right now, with tremendous cold air delivery and meridional flow………only 6 months earlier, during their Winter when the sun was in a similar position.

    So we had extreme cold in the highest latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere 6 months ago during its Summer, while in the Southern Hemisphere it was extreme cold delivery to lower latitude during its Winter.

    Then, exactly 6 months later, you can say the exact same thing, with the same extreme weather, only flipped…….with the South Pole doing exactly what the North Pole did(persistent extreme cold)
    and the Northern Hemisphere doing the exactly same thing that happened in the Southern Hemisphere(extreme cold delivery from high latitudes to lower latitudes).

    I have been an operational meteorologist for 32 years, the last 21 forecasting weather patterns world wide for crops and energies. Much of this weather stuff was not available to me until less than 15 years ago, so my comment is only that I have never noticed anything like this since then.

    Pattern recognition is one of my specialties, which is exactly why I have picked up on similar and extreme patterns flipping to the opposite sides of the planet 6 months later.

    Coincidence? Maybe.

    Let me look at more historical weather patterns. I recently looked at our bitter cold Winter of 1976/77 in the Northern Hemisphere and see similarities to this one.
    Brazil coffee had one of the most devastating freezes in history in July of 1975. Coffee was grown at a slightly higher latitude back then but it suggests one of the coldest outbreaks reaching low latitudes in history during the Winter of that year in the Southern Hemisphere.

  104. Unmentionable says:
    January 20, 2014 at 7:35 pm

    Thanks,

    Mike Maguire says:
    January 21, 2014 at 1:21 pm

    Sorry for the misinterpretation.

    That observation is indeed very interesting and no wonder it explains why sea ice is so high in the SH and the ocean temperatures surrounding the land mass so cold.The Arctic summer last year was the coldest in DMI history I believe, so would be very interesting to see Antarctica follow suit with one of its coldest. Don’t think people would be able to deny the link with a much quieter solar cycle if this trend continues.

Comments are closed.