Significant Arctic Sea Ice Story a Possibility This Year

Joe Bastardi writes on the Patriot Post:

There is a huge event being forecasted this year by the CFSV2, and I don’t know if anyone else is mentioning this. For the first time in over a decade, the Arctic sea ice anomaly in the summer is forecast to be near or above normal for a time! While it has approached the normals at the end of the winter season a couple of times because of new ice growth, this signals something completely different – that multiyear growth means business – and it shows the theory on the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) is likely to be on target.

Once it flips, this red herring of climate panic will be gone. Global and Southern Hemisphere anomalies are already unmentionable since the former is well above normal and the latter is routinely busting daily records.

The biggest minimum anomalies are in the summer since this flipped, and the only peaks came very close to the height of winters once this melting was underway.

Now look at what the CFSV2 forecasted for 2012.

The brief positive anomaly hit early, but for the summer it’s well below normal. In 2013, it’s the same, though not as far.

But this year it’s forecast to be around normal in August!

This is only with a yearly AMO back off. I don’t think this is the real deal of the flip yet. But it makes the point that one can correlate the ice in the Arctic with the Atlantic cycle.

It should be obvious as to who is the boss here, and with the warm AMO in its waning years, the Arctic sea ice hysteria will wind up where so many agenda driven items do – on the ash heap of history.

This, if correct, is going to be a huge story. It would be the first summer where Arctic sea ice returned to near normal, indicative of the increase in multiyear ice and what a turn to the colder AMO in the future means! Let’s see if anyone else picks up on it.

Read his full story here: http://patriotpost.us/opinion/25340

==========================================================

More on CFSv2 here: http://origin.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/people/wwang/cfsv2fcst/

 

About these ads
This entry was posted in Arctic, Sea ice. Bookmark the permalink.

121 Responses to Significant Arctic Sea Ice Story a Possibility This Year

  1. TRM says:

    So PDO is negative, AMO is negative and the sun is quiet. I’m insulating more this summer. I get the bad feeling that Dr Libby was right (and Dr Easterbrook and others).

    Now which way does the wind blow? That seems crucial as well for artic ice. Is there any correlation between negative AMO and wind direction?

  2. MattN says:

    There was a 50% increase in ice volume at then end of summer last year according to Cryosat. For some reason, hardly anyone mentioned this.

  3. Mike T says:

    “Being forecasted”? how about plain old “being forecast”. “Forecast” is an irregular verb and doesn’t take the -ed for past or any other tense.

  4. SAMURAI says:

    Because of the rare Arctic Vortex phenomenon experienced over North America this year (imagine a freezer door open for weeks on end ) bitter cold Arctic air escaped the Arctic and spilled down to as far as Florida.

    Accordingly, this was the WARMEST Arctic winter since the DMI started records in 1958, with Arctic temps as much as 15C warmer than the 1958~2002 mean temperature for months on end.

    http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php

    Because this was the warmest Arctic winter on record, it seems logical that less/thinner ice would have formed in the Arctic, so it seems logical that during the warm summer months, Arctic ice will disappear very quickly this year and come close to the 2007 or even the 2012 record lows.

    I’d hate to see this happen as the Obama administration and the warmunists will hammer this point incessantly this summer at the same time warm global temperatures from the El Nino event will be occurring….

    Of course if there IS a low Arctic Minimum, the warmunists will conveniently “forget” to mention this was a result of the Arctic Vortex/record cold North American winter, and the hot summer temperatures will be a direct result of the the El Nino cycle; not CO2 warming…

    And so it goes…..until reason and freedom are restored…

  5. 4 eyes says:

    And the Antarctic ice anomaly plot looks sort of like a….er. … hockey stick.

  6. Ed Mertin says:

    This coming winter weather will seem harsher in many ways because the south will get whacked as the El Niño gets set in? More moisture to frozen precipitation too…

  7. James at 48 says:

    Big pile ups of ice along Greenland’s Arctic shore and the Canadian Archipelago successive years “obducted” pack over adjacent pack, doubling or tripling the thickness. Thank the wind patterns and currents for that. Slowly the multiyear built up. And now, with a favorable oscillation set, things may get interesting.

  8. Pamela Gray says:

    Anyone with a lick of sense can see that the ice loss that happened primarily in the Barents and Greenland Sea ice has been driven by a warm incoming current there http://www.aquatic.uoguelph.ca/oceans/ArticOceanWeb/Currents/inflow.htm. That warm current would most certainly be affected by the AMO. File this one under “duh”.

    The climate house of cards continues to tumble. Too bad we don’t have the stomach in our elected officials to make heads tumble.

    What keeps us from solving this problem is that most politicians have a wide variety of skeletons in their closets. So if one were to lop off the head of ones climate change opponent, you can bet his or her buddies will be taking a sneak peek into the lopper’s closet.

  9. Pamela Gray says:

    Samurai, you might want to read up on how Arctic sea ice forms and how it is moved around in and out of the Arctic. I would say that you have several misconceptions in your comment.

  10. An Inquirer says:

    Definitely a meteorology amateur here, but I think it is very unlikely that both poles will have positive ice anomaly. Hot and Cold conditions often occur because of blockage and/or abnormal flows. Therefore, when the weather is unusually warm in one spot on the globe, it is unusually cold in another spot.
    That being said, I do recognize the Antarctic is quite meteorologically isolated from the rest of the world. So if the ice stays high in the Antarctic, and if air masses / jet stream keep the Arctic cold in the Arctic, and IF the ocean currents relent on bring warm water into the Arctic, and if Chinese soot is not much of an issue in the Arctic, then yes, I can Joe having a chance at positive anomalies in both poles.

  11. Rob Ricket says:

    This is welcome news. Myself and few others have mentioned the fact that ice distribution graphic depictions (Cryosphere Today) have indicated much stronger (dark purple shading) coverage than most equivalent dates for the past 33 years. It is quite obvious that the sea ice in the Arctic ocean is thickening in coverage and multi-year growth; while sea ice at the edge of the circle continues to recede. Until this trend reverses, it will be impossible to approach record levels established for the the winter months, because the area under expansion is confined to the Arctic Ocean, while areas outside the treeline (that melt in the Summer anyway) continue to recess.

    On balance, methinks the the aggregate Arctic sea ice mass is much greater than the alarmist’s will admit. This includes NSIDC who no doubt, know where their bread is buttered.

  12. Mike McMillan says:

    So if the polar bears can hang on for another year, they may avoid extinction? That’s bad news for the seals.

  13. HAL-9000 says:

    It frankly does not matter what the earth does, the Church of Carbontology will adjust models as needed same way more antique priests did with entrails. When you’ve got the President’s ‘science’ advisor blaming snowstorms in Atlanta on a dog whistle phrase like ‘climate change,’ the ideological dye is cast.

    You hear anecdotes about these kinds of people – literally same ones in some cases – being worried about global cooling back in the seventies; but frankly there is no comparison to the modern Carbontology movement in its staying power and increasingly absolutist sheen. Go skim Skeptical Science – the buffoons barely talk about natural sciences, when they do its always about a videogame model – instead they’re currently wallowing in another ‘psychoanalysis’ shtick with another hoped-for catchy label: ‘The Quantum Theory of Climate Denial.’

    They don’t care what the ice does one year or another, they care about their movement.

  14. dp says:

    Might this indicate a mechanism whereby heat in the deep ocean is driven to the surface and which expresses itself as El Niño?

    Couple noodles about Arctic sea ice. The environment at the poles has in varying degrees, a capacity to freeze or thaw, depending on the season. Another characteristic is a duration of opportunity for freezing or thawing. What we see year on year is the capacity to freeze or thaw appears rather fixed as indicated by the rate of ice gain or loss. What has changed over time is the duration, or more clearly, the length of the seasons for freezing or thawing.

    A quick look at the IRAC-JAXA Arctic sea ice charts shows the duration of the freeze cycle is much shorter in recent years even as the capacity to freeze as seen by the rate of growth in sea ice volume over the season is nearly unchanged year on year.

    It has nothing at all to do with CO2. Anyone care to proffer an explanation or convince me I’m misunderstanding what I see?

  15. Henry Clark says:

    While the AMO index is merely a temperature index itself (following a pattern of two peaks in the past century a lot like an unfudged version of global temperature history and solar-CRF forcing), growth in arctic ice extent should continue later this decade. I say continue because, in annual averages rather than common cherry picking of single months, a little known fact is that it has been rising over the past half decade since 2007, as seen within one of the plots in my usual http://tinyurl.com/nbnh7hq

  16. Anna Keppa says:

    “For the first time in over a decade, the Arctic sea ice anomaly in the summer is forecast to be near or above normal for a time! ”

    Can someone help me out here? I looked on wikipedia, and “anomaly” has many meanings in different contexts, but virtually all involve something odd, unusual, abnormal, strange.

    So…how can an anomaly be said to be near or above normal….for a time? How is this term used in measuring/discussing sea ice? Anomalous to what??? How can an anomaly be normal?

  17. Jbird says:

    The process may have already started. On April 15 I flew over the Greenland ice cap from Kulusuk to Nuuk, across the lower Baffin Bay and Davis Strait and on across Hudson Bay – more than 2500 miles of Arctic. The Baffin Bay and Davis Strait were completely choked with ice, so was Hudson Bay. Lake Winnipeg was completely frozen solid rim to rim.

    The Canadian coast guard has warned all marine traffic wanting to use the Davis Strait and lower Baffin Bay that it may be a long time before ships can safely travel there this year. It is more ice than they have seen in 30 years time.

    The ice pack off of the east coast of Greenland extended 150 miles (minimum) into the Strait of Denmark. The Greenland ice cap was a vast expanse of white as far as the eye could see. All taken together the conditions seemed more like February or early March than April..

    Just sayin’

  18. HenryP says:

    Ja
    We are cooling from the tops dow
    Is what I said

  19. Eric Simpson says:

    Mike McMillan says at 8:29 pm: So if the polar bears can hang on for another year, they may avoid extinction? That’s bad news for the seals.
    ——– ——————- ——————– —————
    Or for the humans that aren’t in cages:

  20. evanmjones says:

    So…how can an anomaly be said to be near or above normal

    He’ll be meaning for the average of the 1981 – 2010 time period. “Zero anomaly” would be the average.

  21. Alan Robertson says:

    SAMURAI says:
    May 5, 2014 at 7:46 pm

    “… as the Obama administration…”
    ___________________________
    I’ve also been making that mistake, calling this “the Obama administration”. While publicly flaunting seized and egregious power devoid of any constitutional authority and outside the scope of common law, this has become the Obama dictatorship.

  22. Mike Jonas says:

    Anna Keppa – “Anomaly” in this context is the amount by which a value differs from a given baseline. The baseline is typically an average from an arbitrarily-chosen period, typically a recent 3-decade period, but it could be any period (and should be documented alongside the anomaly measurements). So a “temperature anomaly” of minus 1 degree, say, means a temperature that is 1 degree below the baseline (ie. the chosen average). In the case that you cite, “normal” means an anomaly of zero. One example of the use of anomalies would be for comparing monthly temperatures free of seasonal differences. In this case, all Januaries would be averaged over the chosen period, all Februaries, etc. A January “temperature anomaly” would then be the difference between that January’s temperature and the January average. Ditto, Feb, etc. Comparing, say, the Feb anomaly with the Jan anomaly then indicates the underlying (non-seasonal) temperature change in Feb. If that doesn’t make sense then hopefully someone else will provide a better explanation…

  23. RACookPE1978 says:

    Anna Keppa says:
    May 5, 2014 at 9:03 pm

    (commenting on this from the original article.)

    “For the first time in over a decade, the Arctic sea ice anomaly in the summer is forecast to be near or above normal for a time! ”

    So…how can an anomaly be said to be near or above normal….for a time? How is this term used in measuring/discussing sea ice? Anomalous to what??? How can an anomaly be normal?

    Well, over the years the “official” agencies in charge of being “official” have claimed to calculate a running average of what area of sea ice is expected each day-of-year. Thus, if what sea ice is actually present on some given day-of-year is NOT what is expected to be that “average” then it must be different from that average, or “anomalous” ..

    Plot the trend of that “difference from average” and you get the daily anomaly of arctic ice. So, over time, the anomaly may be below average, right at average (zero) or above average for that day-of-year.

    Speaking of which, today’s Antarctic sea ice extents anomaly – that “little bit of “excess” antarctic sea ice that the dictatorship and all government-funded academics are ignoring?

    Today’s Antarctic sea ice extents “excess” is 1.58 Mkm^2 … or right at 93% of the size of Greenland’s ice cap. That’s right.

    The excess Antarctic sea ice extents is 93% the size of the entire Greenland ice cap.

    Worse, the Antarctic sea ice anomaly has been steadily increasing, and has been positive continuously since May 2010 – four years now. So, when will it close the Cape Horn to shipping? 8 years? 10 years? 12 years?

  24. Nick Stokes says:

    The CSFv2 minimum forecast (in May) for 2012 was about 5.3 million sq km. In June, WUWT submitted 4.9. Ended up at 3.41.

    This year the CSFv2 minimum forecast is about 6 million sq km. It’s a chancy business.

    The JAXA number is now lower than any May 5 since 2006.

  25. Steven Mosher says:

    Does anybody check?

    “CAUTION: Seasonal climate anomalies shown here are not the official NCEP seasonal forecast outlooks. The NCEP seasonal forecast outlooks can be found at CPC website. Model based seasonal climate anomalies are one factor based on which NCEP seasonal forecast outlook is issued. ”

    This particular model looks to have been in operation since 2011 ( version 2)

    Its always good to check the validation of the model..

    http://cfs.ncep.noaa.gov/cfsv2/docs.html

    read the AMS paper.

  26. John says:

    As always, I let reality and not models tell me what is happening. When temps hadn’t risen by only, say, 10 years, it mattered to me. If this reversal occurs, it will matter to many of us. And if it doesn’t happen, that is again listening to reality and not models.

    Yet a reversal of sea ice extent, one that lasts for several years to a couple of decades or more, that would be amazing to the chattering classes.

    In terms of actual warming, it wouldn’t be amazing as no increase in temperatures for 16 years and running.

    But in terms of confirmation of the dominance of natural variability, there wouldn’t be anything more shocking that to see Arctic sea ice once again start to expand for a while. Since there wouldn’t be any way to explain it away, such an event would probably be ignored as much as possible by MSM, with every weather event continually hogging the headlines.

  27. Richard M says:

    As has been the case for several years now the summer minimum will be determined by the winds over the next 4 months. If the winds blow the ice out into the North Atlantic then there will be a low minimum. If the winds tend to push the ice towards land areas then the minimum will be higher. Interestingly, when the winds do blow the ice out to be melted it also keeps the anomaly value lower for awhile making it look like there is more ice.

  28. CRS, DrPH says:

    I’m amazed at how persistent the Lake Superior ice pack has been!
    Lake Superior ice causes shipping delays
    The Associated Press
    April 26, 2014 

    DULUTH, MINN. — Thick ice on Lake Superior is causing shipping delays, with about 60 ships waiting to enter the area, according to the Coast Guard.

    http://www.fortmilltimes.com/2014/04/26/3440671/lake-superior-ice-causes-shipping.html

  29. bert says:

    Having lost all hope of getting it right, the warmistas are now concentrating on a tiny area down in the Antarctic by carrying out detailed field studies, I mean computer simulations, telling us that we shall all drown if the ice in east Antarctica were to melt.
    Read this and laugh:
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/05/140505104435.htm

  30. pat says:

    being picked up by the MSM. Alister puts all the scary stuff first….and finally mentions it would take thousands of years to happen!

    5 May: Reuters: Alister Doyle: East Antarctica more at risk than thought to long-term thaw: study
    Part of East Antarctica is more vulnerable than expected to a thaw that could trigger an unstoppable slide of ice into the ocean and raise world sea levels for thousands of years, a study showed on Sunday.
    The Wilkes Basin in East Antarctica, stretching more than 1,000 km (600 miles) inland, has enough ice to raise sea levels by 3 to 4 meters (10-13 feet) if it were to melt as an effect of global warming, the report said…
    East Antarctica’s Wilkes Basin is like a bottle on a slant. Once uncorked, it empties out,” Matthias Mengel of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, lead author of the study in the journal Nature Climate Change, said in a statement.
    Co-author Anders Levermann, also at Potsdam in Germany, told Reuters the main finding was that the ice flow would be irreversible, if set in motion. He said there was still time to limit warming to levels to keep the ice plug in place…
    Worries about rising seas that could swamp low-lying areas from Shanghai to Florida focus most on ice in Greenland and West Antarctica, as well as far smaller amounts of ice in mountain ranges from the Himalayas to the Andes.
    Sunday’s study is among the first to gauge risks in East Antarctica, the biggest wedge of the continent and usually considered stable. “I would not be surprised if this (basin) is more vulnerable than West Antarctica,” Levermann said…
    The study indicated that it could take 200 years or more to melt the ice plug if ocean temperatures rise. Once removed, it could take between 5,000 and 10,000 years for ice in the Wilkes Basin to empty as gravity pulled the ice seawards.
    “It sounds plausible,” Tony Payne, a professor of glaciology at Bristol University who was not involved in the study, said of the findings. The region is not an immediate threat, he said, but “could contribute meters to sea level rise over thousands of years.”…
    Click here to see the study…
    http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/05/05/us-climatechange-antarctica-idINKBN0DK0HM20140505

  31. Greg Goodman says:

    My adaptive anomaly helps to see what is happening behind the large recent variability that makes it hard to visualise what is going on since 2007
    http://climategrog.wordpress.com/2013/09/16/on-identifying-inter-decadal-variation-in-nh-sea-ice/

    There’s a pretty string up tick at the end and it looks like we’re about half way through bounce back from the 2012 minimum, similar to what happened after 2007. That rebound is about at its peak , I would expect a slight drop in 2016,2017. The latter will be the next minimum but not as low as 2012.

    I expect the linear trend from 2012-2017 to be a recovery equal and opposite to the 2007-2012 downward slope.

  32. norah4you says:

    Some schoolars needs to learn about vulcanos in the Ocean, Archimedes principle as well as that it’s never ever in accordance of Theory of Science to “correct” measured figures – as I wrote in 2010: http://norah4you.wordpress.com/aktuell-debatt/klimathotet/when-the-fox-counts-the-chickens/

  33. angech says:

    hope this comes true

  34. Greg Goodman says:

    It will need a fair few years for the pattern to be confirmed but I think the underlying inter-decadal variation is roughly 135+/-10y folded sine: abs(sin(2.pi.(y-2011)/135)) , the inflection point of which was probably 2011.

    It is already clear that the down parabolic curve of “run-away” melting is a failed model and I think the there are indications that the recovery will happen just as quickly as the 2000-2011 drop, not a smooth bottoming out over 30 years.

  35. Joe says:

    If this does happen, don’t expect any great public awakening for a few years. In my personal experience with people who “believe but don’t really think about it”, those poor polar bears are still one of the most powerful arguments out there.

    Most of them will accept that the “really bad weather wasn’t really that unusual” when you prod their memories about past storms / snow / heatwaves / whatever within their lifetime. But few of them have ever actually experienced arctic ice so, if they’re told it’s all disappearing, they have nothing to compare with and no reason to disbelieve.

    So, if a “recovery” does happen, expect the Club to simply stop talking about it – then it’ll be back to the old story of expending lots of energy on reminding people about all the doom predictions before even starting on “and it hasn’t happened”.

  36. Kasuha says:

    Soon we may find ourselves saving polar bears from certain extinction due to too much sea ice. Caused – of course – by man-made CO2 emissions.

  37. Greg Goodman says:

    Nick Stokes: “The JAXA number is now lower than any May 5 since 2006.”

    JAXA is now meaningless as a long term record, since they moved the goal posts just before last years minimum. We now have TWO Jaxa records: pre-2013 JAXA and JAXA2013-on.

    The new JAXA record may be of use in another 20 years when it has sufficient length to be of interest. Yet more pathetic attempts to adjust the data instead of correcting climate science.

    If the ice won’t melt , we’d better change the way we measure it !

    If there was an irrefutable reason to change the method of calculation it should have been released with a new name as a new series not as continuation of the same thing . This is misleading and you were misled.

  38. ConTrari says:

    Na..more than average ice this summer will just be brushed away as “natural variaton”, nothing to see, move on please…it will take a number of years of increasing summer ice and a clear cooling trend to remove this red herring.

  39. Greg Goodman says:

    There’s more to this than AMO, though the long term rate of change in ice roughly matches the long term movements in N. Atlantic SST:
    http://climategrog.wordpress.com/?attachment_id=160

  40. Dermot O'Logical says:

    Hang on a minute here. We’re making news out of predictions coming out of a model?

    I thought we didn’t like it when others do that.

  41. Arfur Bryant says:

    I wonder if this guy ever got his PhD?

    http://www.sierraclub.ca/en/AdultDiscussionPlease

    He seems to have the same grasp of reality as any other ‘consensus scientist’.

  42. Bob Tisdale says:

    TRM says: “So PDO is negative, AMO is negative and the sun is quiet….”

    Except the PDO has been positive for the first three months this year.

  43. mwhite says:

    “Once it flips, this red herring of climate panic will be gone.”

    But hopefully not forgotten.

    Those who have profited from and perpetuated this histeria should not be let off.

  44. Euan Mearns says:

    With the global sea ice anomaly sitting around +1 million sq kms here’s hoping the Arctic does something interesting this summer to kick the crutch from under the pedlars of non-science.

  45. Mr Green Genes says:

    dp says:
    May 5, 2014 at 8:53 pm

    A quick look at the IRAC-JAXA Arctic sea ice charts shows the duration of the freeze cycle is much shorter in recent years even as the capacity to freeze as seen by the rate of growth in sea ice volume over the season is nearly unchanged year on year.

    It has nothing at all to do with CO2. Anyone care to proffer an explanation or convince me I’m misunderstanding what I see?
    ===============================================
    You’re not really misunderstanding what you see but you are overstating it. I have all the data going back to 1979 (courtesy of JAXA/TOKAI UNIVERSITY) and that shows the following.

    Average refreeze time in days (i.e. the time between recorded minima and maxima) for each season:-

    1981-1990 : 180 days
    1991-2000 : 178 days
    2001-2010 : 176 days
    2011-2014 : 176 days.

    So, by my maths, that is a decrease in the average refreeze ‘season’ of 2.22% since records began. Interestingly, the refreeze time in 1981 was 183 days and in 2014 was 189 days.

  46. ColdinOz says:

    Mike T says: “Being forecasted”? how about plain old “being forecast”. “Forecast” is an irregular verb and doesn’t take the -ed for past or any other tense.

    Yeah I hate that too Mike but I think it’s American English, so I don’t really care because I love Joe’s stuff. He’s usually right on the money.

    Just wait and watch the Arctic sea ice increase and the Antarctic sea ice start to decrease. There’s a sixty something year cycle here ( Willis will hate me for that, and I don’t really care), with the Arctic and Antarctic almost but not quiet antiphase.

    Interested to see if Joe has any comment on this.

  47. Jimbo says:

    Here is the acclaimed Arctic climate scientist Professor Peter Wadhams of Cambridge University. He may or may not turn out to be right but he has said that the IPCC is too conservative with its Arctic ice free projection. We will have to wait and see.

    Daily Telegraph – 8 November 2011
    Arctic sea ice ‘to melt by 2015′
    Prof Wadhams said: “His [model] is the most extreme but he is also the best modeller around.

    “It is really showing the fall-off in ice volume is so fast that it is going to bring us to zero very quickly. 2015 is a very serious prediction and I think I am pretty much persuaded that that’s when it will happen.”
    ——-

    Guardian – 17 September 2012
    Arctic expert predicts final collapse of sea ice within four years
    “This collapse, I predicted would occur in 2015-16 at which time the summer Arctic (August to September) would become ice-free. The final collapse towards that state is now happening and will probably be complete by those dates”.
    ——-

    Financial Times Magazine – 2 August 2013
    “It could even be this year or next year but not later than 2015 there won’t be any ice in the Arctic in the summer,”
    ——-

    The Scotsman – 12 September 2013
    Arctic sea ice will vanish within three years, says expert
    “The entire ice cover is now on the point of collapse.

    “The extra open water already created by the retreating ice allows bigger waves to be generated by storms, which are sweeping away the surviving ice. It is truly the case that it will be all gone by 2015. The consequences are enormous and represent a huge boost to global warming.”
    ——-

    Guardian – 17 September 2012
    This collapse, I predicted would occur in 2015-16 at which time the summer Arctic (August to September) would become ice-free. The final collapse towards that state is now happening and will probably be complete by those dates“.
    ——-

    Arctic News – June 27, 2012
    My own view of what will happen is: 1. Summer sea ice disappears, except perhaps for small multiyear remnant north of Greenland and Ellesmere Island, by 2015-16. 2. By 2020 the ice free season lasts at least a month and by 2030 has extended to 3 months…..

  48. Jimbo says:

    Then we have this other chap following closely ahead and behind Wadhams. He is the acclaimed climate scientist Arctic ice modeller Professor Wieslaw Maslowski.

    Earlier

    BBC News – 12 December 2007
    Our projection of 2013 for the removal of ice in summer is not accounting for the last two minima, in 2005 and 2007,”…….”So given that fact, you can argue that may be our projection of 2013 is already too conservative.”

    Later

    BBC News8 April 2011
    New warning on Arctic sea ice melt
    Scientists who predicted a few years ago that Arctic summers could be ice-free by 2013 now say summer sea ice will probably be gone in this decade……

    “In the past… we were just extrapolating into the future assuming that trends might persist as we’ve seen in recent times,” said Dr Maslowski, who works at Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California…..

    “We can run a fully coupled model for the past and present and see what our model will predict for the future in terms of the sea ice and the Arctic climate.”

    And one of the projections it comes out with is that the summer melt could lead to ice-free Arctic seas by 2016 – “plus or minus three years”.

  49. KRJ Pietersen says:

    Regarding the noticeable upward trend in Antarctic sea ice cover over recent years:

    I’m sure I read somewhere that the atmosphere above sea ice can cool by up to 30°C due to the lack of heat exchange and the increased albedo or reflectivity. Could a feedback thus develop to accelerate ice formation?
    Can or will the noticeable upward trend in Antarctic sea ice cover over recent years have any impact on global temperatures?

    I’d be grateful if somebody with more knowledge than me could give me some more information on this.

  50. R. de Haan says:

    Hey Joe Bastardi, did you already get a call from the President?
    http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/205195-obama-to-talk-climate-with-meteorologists

  51. Jim Cripwell says:

    I quote
    @@@@@
    Dermot O’Logical says:

    May 6, 2014 at 12:31 am

    Hang on a minute here. We’re making news out of predictions coming out of a model?

    I thought we didn’t like it when others do that.
    @@@@@

    All predictions are based on some sort of model. There is a difference between making predictions that can be readily tested, so as to check the model, which this is; and predictions which are made and claimed to be true without validating the model, which the warmists do.

  52. jones says:

    Jimbo,

    You are very cruel with your punctilious attention to history.

    Have you no conscience with respect to the sensitivity of our superiors?

    They’re just trying to get by in a cut-throat world.

    Jones.

  53. son of mulder says:

    “Steven Mosher says: May 5, 2014 at 10:15 pm
    …..Its always good to check the validation of the model.”

    What. like the IPPC does on all the models that have failed to predict a flat 17 yrs 8 months of global average temperature?

  54. philjourdan says:

    After adjustment, we find that the government believes ice grows in 40 degree heat. Maybe Obama can build some runways in the arctic.

  55. richard says:

    The Russians are building the biggest ice breaker ever for use all year round – not cheap. What ever any scientist says this is a strong indication that Arctic ice is not going away anytime soon.

    In fact the Russians probably used the info from their own experts before committing to this project.

  56. richard says:

    If the ice was going to disappear in the next ten years why would you build this?

    Russia already has a huge fleet of both diesel-powered and even nuclear icebreakers, but it recently penned an order for something the world has never seen before: a massive new 558-foot long, dual-reactor nuclear icebreaker that will be 46 feet longer and at least a dozen feet wider than any other icebreaker in its fleet. Powered by two 60-megawatt compact pressurized water reactors, it will be the world’s largest “universal” nuclear icebreaker.

  57. Kenny says:

    I think this is huge! Y’all know that all eyes are going to be on the ice at the North Pole this summer. This has always been their “go to” data. “See everyone…..the sea ice is melting….global warming is real”!
    Time will tell…..But after melt season, if it is around “normal”….what will they do?

  58. Phil. says:

    This is only with a yearly AMO back off. I don’t think this is the real deal of the flip yet. But it makes the point that one can correlate the ice in the Arctic with the Atlantic cycle.
    If it actually happens! If instead we get a more normal -1 anomaly presumably that would suggest that you can’t make that correlation?

  59. jones says:

    Kenny

    “.But after melt season, if it is around “normal”….what will they do?”

    .
    They’ll just tell us it’s “consistent” with AGW/CC/CAGW etc…..Then say “Give us your cash”…..

  60. Phil. says:

    richard says:
    May 6, 2014 at 4:45 am
    If the ice was going to disappear in the next ten years why would you build this?

    Russia already has a huge fleet of both diesel-powered and even nuclear icebreakers, but it recently penned an order for something the world has never seen before: a massive new 558-foot long, dual-reactor nuclear icebreaker that will be 46 feet longer and at least a dozen feet wider than any other icebreaker in its fleet. Powered by two 60-megawatt compact pressurized water reactors, it will be the world’s largest “universal” nuclear icebreaker.

    Some of their existing fleet are nearing the end of their design life and need to be replaced. Also because of the reduction in sea ice the Northern sea route has been more heavily used by commercial traffic between asia and europe so the need for escort vessels has increased.

  61. Steve from Rockwood says:

    If you believe in CAGW there is no such thing as ice extent returning to “normal” ever again. That ice would have to battle against a world on fire such that ice extent reaching its historical “normal” summer levels would in fact be truly unprecedented.

  62. richard says:

    Phil. says:
    May 6, 2014 at 5:02 am
    Also because of the reduction in sea ice the Northern sea route has been more heavily used by commercial traffic between asia and europe so the need for escort vessels has increased.

    —————————–

    The russians have been using it commercially since the 1930s, the fact it is used more now is down to the end of the USSR so trade with the west opened up. Even when the SS MAnhatten did the NW route in 1969 it was quite controversial in international relations as sovereignty of these waters was claimed by Canada and this claim had been disputed by the United States.

    They are using ice breakers in the Summer as well.

  63. Pat says:

    FWIW… please people… stop blaming Obama for this crap!
    Don’t you get it??? Are you all so indoctrinated by stupid talk show hosts that you are blind to the truth!? IT DOEN’T MATTER WHO is president!

    Your president is like the rabbit skin at a greyhound race… and you guys stupidly just chase the rabbit time after time.

  64. richard says:

    and

    http://www.cnrs-scrn.org/northern_mariner/vol03/tnm_3_2_1-17.pdf

    “Over the past eight decades the ice-infested sea route along the Russian Arctic coast has been
    steadily developed. Massive resources, including nuclear-powered icebreakers, have now enabled
    regular navigation”

  65. richard says:

    well done Russians,

    “With the current icebreaker fleet, regular through
    passages are possible between July and October, and have been made in November. For more
    than a decade, the western portion has been kept open year-round as far as the Yenisey River”

  66. Francisco Fernandez says:

    “Once it flips, this red herring of climate panic will be gone”…. if only it was this easy

  67. steven says:

    Heat transport to the N Atlantic was trending down for the last decade and heat content has been dropping since 2007. I wouldn’t bet money on any individual year since one major storm could change everything but I would bet money that if the heat transport doesn’t pick back up the Arctic will be gaining ice.

  68. Tim OBrien says:

    Don’t worry, the White House will be sure to crank on more directives and taxes before the flip toward the coming icy years is obvious to the sheeple…

  69. Makes me wonder if part of this prediction is based on ice thickness of Hudson Bay, which never seems to get reported.

    Hudson Bay always gets almost completely covered with ice but this year it may be especially thick and resistant to melt, like the ice on the Great Lakes have been.

    If there is a very late breakup of Hudson Bay, that could certainly help push the anomaly into positive.

    Recall that in 2009, polar bears didn’t leave the ice until the first week of August, with official ‘breakup’ almost mid-July.

    In 1992, another very cold year (when seals definitely suffered), breakup on Hudson Bay was July 30. Will be interesting to see what happens this year…

    Susan

  70. Caleb says:

    I used to visit the “Sea Ice Page” here every two weeks or so, but it has gradually become an obsession. Besides becoming an addict of pictures from the North Pole Camera at http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/index.html I’ve discovered other sites, including pictures from the Barrow bank camera of the Arctic Sea, and the O-buoy cameras. Lately I have been a regular visitor to the Explorersweb site to check out on the doings of crazy adventurers skiing about the Arctic Sea.

    You have to stomach a fair amount of balderdash about Climate Change (as they need funding for their exploits) but their pictures and descriptions tell a truth beyond politics. They have all been amazed by the jumble of ice “unlike what we’ve seen before” piled up north of Canada. Yasu Ogita used up so much food getting through that jumble he didn’t have enough to get the rest of the way to the Pole and had to aborted his adventure, and was relaxing and awaiting an airplane out when Ryan Waters and Eric Larsen came skiing up, said “Hi”, and skied on. Those two are now 19 miles from the Pole, but midst ice that is fractured and crisscrossed by open water. Their last voice dispatch was brave, but I thought I detected exhaustion and discouragement.

    The one thing I have learned is that the “icecap” is by no means a fixed and stable thing. When the flow is “zonal” around the Pole it is most stable, but when it is what Dr. Tim Ball calls “meridianal” (with a loopy jet-stream and cross-polar-flows) the ice is being hugely stressed by winds over 50 mph, and even when it is forty-below leads many miles wide can form in the ice. Then these gaps can crunch together like the jaws of a bear-trap and form pressure-ridges twenty feet high (and likely much farther downwards, as 9/10th of an iceberg is under water.) The situation is in constant flux, and any guess at the September minimum is a gamble, for history has examples of times huge amounts of ice have flushed down into the Atlantic quite abruptly.

    I’d gamble that Mr. Bastardi is right, because we see so much more thick ice north of Canada and even Alaska. However four storms have moved up over the Pole during the past 30 days, and the ice is tortured, as Ryan and Waters are discovering. They likely could use our prayers, (if one is so inclined,) as they have skied into an area where the ice is disintegrating into broken floes.

    My highly disorganized system of jotting observations can be seen at http://sunriseswansong.wordpress.com/2014/04/29/arctic-sea-ice-melt-light-on-the-subject/

  71. Robert Brown says:

    The really interesting thing about the first curve is the (unremarked) change in the variance of the sea ice curve in the range of the 21st century where it appears to have flattened out and maybe even be bottoming. The range of natural oscillation goes from roughly 1 million km-sq to 3 million km-sq! One can actually understand the concern that this was a “tipping point” — this is precisely the kind of thing that is observed in the vicinity of a critical point for a second order phase transition — critical slowing down, a divergence in the scale of fluctuations, and eventually a critical fluctuation that pushes the entire system from one bistable or multistable attractor to another.

    However, the system is also clearly still stabilized by strong negative feedbacks towards a collectively stable “locally mean” behavior as the width of fluctuations isn’t changing much. Once it hits extremes, it rapidly regresses towards that mean. We still do not understand the motion of the mean — it seems unlikely to be CO_2 driven or driven by the global anomaly, as it has lousy correlation with the latter and a meaningless correlation with the former (generally monotonic functions can always be correlated, but if their pattern of variation and fluctuations don’t correspond it is difficult to even argue that there is a direct causal link between the two).

    I personally am curious as to whether or not even these SHORT term predictions for things like ENSO, the AMO, and the arctic sea ice cycle are borne out. I do think that the decadal oscillations are a major factor in climate evolution, but since the decadal oscillations themselves are chaotic and at best quasi-periodic and of highly variable strength and duration, one can see their large effect on climate after the fact easily enough, but predicting that large effect beforehand requires being able to predict them and we can’t. It would be an absolute hoot if — after all of the bated-breath hype concerning a strong ENSO this year (without which the warmist argument collapses under its own weight within a couple more years as the solar cycle starts the long road downhill to a probable extended minimum and a possible very low following cycle, which seems likely to have at least SOME cooling effect) turns out to just be wrong, with the ENSO more or less fizzling out and/or being replaced by a strong La Nina. Perhaps it is “unlikely”, but I still think that our ability to predict large scale things until they are basically already happening is almost nonexistent. In this case, they are “already happening” (or starting to happen) but there are still many, many nonlinear factors that we cannot compute involved, so that we’re basically saying “most of the time when something starts out this way, the following happens” without having any really good understanding of why.

    rgb

  72. angech says:

    cryosphere today 1.50 _ .64 = 0.86 but says 0.787???

  73. Phil. says:

    richard says:
    May 6, 2014 at 6:15 am
    Phil. says:
    May 6, 2014 at 5:02 am
    Also because of the reduction in sea ice the Northern sea route has been more heavily used by commercial traffic between asia and europe so the need for escort vessels has increased.

    —————————–

    The russians have been using it commercially since the 1930s, the fact it is used more now is down to the end of the USSR so trade with the west opened up.

    And significantly to the reduction in sea ice. For example:
    ” The climate warming turns navigable those areas that only recently were filled with ice pack five meters thick.

    Today the ice has either disappeared from there or became only a meter and a half thick. In such situation transportation companies from Europe and Asia have a profitable alternative to traditional oceanic routes, says Anatoly Kuznetsov, editor-in-chief of the Sea News of Russia publication:
    Read more: http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2014_04_29/Russia-s-national-artery-Northern-Sea-Route-2234/

    http://voiceofrussia.com/2014_03_01/Russia-prioritizes-Northern-Sea-Route-as-fastest-safest-way-from-Europe-to-Asia-7911/

    http://routemag.com/2013/03/02/russia-draws-up-business-plan-to-revive-the-northern-sea-route/

  74. 2014 would the year for global temperatures to start falling:
    Habibullo Abdussamatov, in his “Bicentennial Decrease of the Total Solar Irradiance Leads to Unbalanced Thermal Budget of the Earth and the Little Ice Age” (Dr. Habibullo Abdussamatov, 2012, Applied Physics Research), at http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/apr/article/view/14754

  75. Phil. says:

    angech says:
    May 6, 2014 at 7:23 am
    cryosphere today 1.50 _ .64 = 0.86 but says 0.787???

    My guess is that 0.787 is yesterday’s value:
    1.50-0.7136= 0.787
    Today’s antarctic value probably not reported yet (12 hr difference in measuring time)

  76. richard says:

    Phil. says:
    May 6, 2014 at 7:43 am

    ————————

    “The Future
    Annual cargo traffic between northern Europe and the Far East is currently about thirty million
    tonnes. Just over one million is carried on the Trans-Siberian Railway, and 216,000 on the
    Northern Sea Route. Optimistic forecasts predict that the volume of world trade will double
    over the next two decades. Visionaries are thinking of increasing the use of the Arctic route
    between Europe and Asia and capturing new traffic between Europe and North America. They
    are also looking at the potential offered by new ship designs (possibly submersibles) and
    improved icebreaker technology. Another long-term consideration is how global warming will
    affect ice conditions”

    Improved! that ice going nowhere fast.

    Mind you

    Even thin skinned liberty ships did the arctic convoys back in the 1940′s.

  77. richard says:

    Phil. says:
    May 6, 2014 at 7:43 am

    —————–

    Even in 1987 the route was all year round for western section.

    Year Cargo in Thousands of Tons Length of Season
    1935 246 93 days
    1940 289 93 days
    1950 503 122 days
    1960 1013 128 days
    1970 2400 140-150 days
    1980 4951 year round for western section
    1987 6579 year round for western section

  78. Dave says:

    I havent seen a post on the Nenana Ice Classic this year. I think that the flag toppled over quite early, certainly compared to last year.

    The Ice Situation is quite amusing. I often wonder how anyone can expect the ice to disappear in the Arctic circle. Six months of no/very low sun, all you can expect is variation around a norm. Did anyone really expect it to melt completely during the summer?

  79. richard says:

    cont…

    “The first offer to open the Northern Sea Route to international shipping was made
    early in 1967, when it was argued that it could save thirteen days between Hamburg and
    Yokohama as opposed to the conventional link via Suez. Soviet cargo carriers made three
    demonstration voyages from north European ports and Japan. Unforeseen events then
    intervened. The Suez Canal was closed later in 1967 by war and the invitation for international
    shipping on the sea route was quietly withdrawn. The Soviets apparently did not wish to offend
    friendly Arab governments by offering an alternative to the Suez Canal. The Canal was to
    remain blocked for eight years and international shipping adjusted smoothly to using the Cape
    route”

  80. Latitude says:

    “normal”?…….I am sick and tired of people throwing that word out there

    When we have no clue what :”normal” is………..you know they’ve fudged the numbers
    ….and you know it wasn’t “normal” when they started

  81. Phil. says:

    richard says:
    May 6, 2014 at 8:08 am
    Phil. says:
    May 6, 2014 at 7:43 am

    ————————

    “The Future
    Annual cargo traffic between northern Europe and the Far East is currently about thirty million
    tonnes. Just over one million is carried on the Trans-Siberian Railway, and 216,000 on the
    Northern Sea Route.

    That must be an old report the NSR carried over one million tonnes in 2012.

    Optimistic forecasts predict that the volume of world trade will double
    over the next two decades. Visionaries are thinking of increasing the use of the Arctic route
    between Europe and Asia and capturing new traffic between Europe and North America. They
    are also looking at the potential offered by new ship designs (possibly submersibles) and
    improved icebreaker technology. Another long-term consideration is how global warming will
    affect ice conditions”

    Improved! that ice going nowhere fast.

    Well clearly it did according to more recent reports by the Russians!

    Mind you

    Even thin skinned liberty ships did the arctic convoys back in the 1940′s.

    Yes but they only went as far as Murmansk.

  82. Steven Mosher says:

    “son of mulder says:
    May 6, 2014 at 4:29 am
    “Steven Mosher says: May 5, 2014 at 10:15 pm
    …..Its always good to check the validation of the model.”

    What. like the IPPC does on all the models that have failed to predict a flat 17 yrs 8 months of global average temperature?”

    if the IPCC does something stupid like failing to validate does that mean you have to do something stupid like failing to check the validation for this weather model ( which are typically validated)

    set your standards based on what you know works, rather than repeating the flaws of those you criticize.

  83. Steven Mosher says:

    “All predictions are based on some sort of model. There is a difference between making predictions that can be readily tested, so as to check the model, which this is; and predictions which are made and claimed to be true without validating the model, which the warmists do.”

    Actually not true.

    The model in question here has pages and pages of validation. Its a weather model.

    As for IPCC models, they are also validated. In some areas they do ok. in other areas not so good.

    In general the GCM is better than any other tool in predicting long range changes.

  84. SAMURAI says:

    Pamela Gray says:
    May 5, 2014 at 8:00 pm
    Samurai, you might want to read up on how Arctic sea ice forms and how it is moved around in and out of the Arctic. I would say that you have several misconceptions in your comment.
    =========================

    I realize there are many factors involved in Arctic ice formation/dissipation, but, ceretis paribus, the 56-year record warm Arctic temperatures this winter should have had a negative impact on ice formation in the Arctic region this winter, just as, conversely, the record low temperatures in North America lead to record ice formation of the Great Lakes this winter.

    I also think the above average Northern Pacific and Northern Atlantic SSTs will speed up the melting process of Arctic sea ice in the summer months.

    It also seems logical that the current 30-yr AMO warm cycle, which started in 1994, has contributed to Arctic ice loss in the Northern Atlanic region, although there is still some scientific uncertainty and debate that such a causal relationship exists…

    It is interesting to note that since the PDO entered its 30-year cool cycle, Arctic sea ice extents in the Bering Sea region has returned to more normal levels.

  85. TRM says:

    ” Bob Tisdale says: May 6, 2014 at 12:48 am
    > TRM says: “So PDO is negative, AMO is negative and the sun is quiet….
    Except the PDO has been positive for the first three months this year.”

    My bad. Not keeping up with the Tisdales ;)
    I’m several months out of date. I’ve got to check the status more often. I’m not as hard core as you. Thanks for the correction. Cheers.

  86. Phil. says:

    Dave says:
    May 6, 2014 at 8:14 am
    I havent seen a post on the Nenana Ice Classic this year. I think that the flag toppled over quite early, certainly compared to last year.

    25th April

  87. richard says:

    Phil. says:
    May 6, 2014 at 8:30 am

    you will note that the route became all year round, 1980, three years after nuclear powered ice breakers came into operation.

    Still I never knew the route was offered up in 1967.

  88. richard says:

    Phil. says:
    May 6, 2014 at 8:30 am

    ——————————

    stop quoting the radio, newspapers or tv otherwise you will fall for this!!

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/27/us-shipping-coal-arctic-idUSBRE98Q0K720130927
    “Big freighter traverses Northwest Passage for 1st time”

    The SS Manhattan did it in 1969.

  89. rgbatduke says:

    In general the GCM is better than any other tool in predicting long range changes.

    Hmm, last week was “agree with Stephen and Nick week”, but today I have to take issue with this. Again, see figures 9.8a and 9.8b of AR5. EMIC’s (Earth System Models of Intermediate Complexity) do substantially better than GCMs in predicting long range changes (up to 2005, where the figure inexplicably ends). Both EMICs and GCMs suck — and I mean really, really suck — at hindcasting the climate. Both of them (unsurprisingly) do decently during the so-called reference period, a.k.a. The training data to those of us who do predictive modeling but this is utterly irrelevant to ability to actually predict. And even in the reference period, EMICs outperform GCMs.

    In the post-reference period, EMICs do better BECAUSE they actually made the turn into the current flat temperature regime, where GCMs continue rocketing up. A cynic would conclude that their predictions wasn’t continued or plotted up to e.g. 2011 or 2012 because they do not predict a large climate sensitivity; perhaps they actually worked across the flattening where GCMs fail but then lead to non-alarming rises by 2100, I do not know.

    But unless you have actual data that proves your assertion to counter the actual data in AR5 that contradicts it, I think this is incorrect.

    rgb

  90. goldminor says:

    @ polarbearscience…also note that deep cold spot off of the Atlantic coast. The center of it shifted from -5 to -5.5 since the 4th. That cold spot sits on a line from Lake Michigan through Hudson Bay and out into the Atlantic. It has been developing there for the last 5 weeks. I would think that it is going to be a strong influence on Europe,s temps for this summer.

  91. JP says:

    @Samurai,
    “I realize there are many factors involved in Arctic ice formation/dissipation, but, ceretis paribus, the 56-year record warm Arctic temperatures this winter should have had a negative impact on ice formation in the Arctic region this winter, just as, conversely, the record low temperatures in North America lead to record ice formation of the Great Lakes this winter.”

    It is not unusual during severe winters that the polar (arctic) source regions “warm”. I can still remember when I was a weather forecaster during the winter of 1983/84 to see “warm fronts” coming out of north-central Canada! For a period of 6 weeks the upper level jetstream forced the forming polar air masses to advect southward one right after another. Needless to say there appeared to be an arctic “hot spot”, when in reality the surface temps over the arctic and other polar regions didn’t exactly “warm”. At least not in the sense the laymen believed. During other synoptic patterns, the polar and deep arctic air masses remain bottled up in the high latitudes. And during other situations warm waters advected from the tropical regions do in fact melt arctic ice. During the final stretches of the 1983-84 cold shot, it wasn’t unusual to see surface temperatures in the Dakotas and High Plains to be colder than the reporting stations in extreme Northern Canada. And I still remember one of those wicked cold fronts being so strong as to drive into Central Mexico.

  92. Frank K. says:

    @rgbatduke

    You are spot on with your assessment of ECIMs/GCMs. Unfortunately, those who believe in their ability to predict future climate really don’t want to talk about the differential equations, numerical methods or initial/boundary conditions which comprise these codes. That’s where the real problems are…

  93. JP says:

    @Bob Tisdale,
    TRM says: “So PDO is negative, AMO is negative and the sun is quiet….”

    Except the PDO has been positive for the first three months this year.

    I checked NOAA’s PDO index for the last 30 years and I’ve noticed there were stretches when the PDO was positive that the indicies went negative for a short period of time (3-6 months) and vice versa.

    Here’s the link I used:
    http://jisao.washington.edu/pdo/

    There’s been so much blather about the PDO that I remain agnostic to it all. Maybe I should buy one of your e-books!

  94. Frank K. says:

    And for those who want to see a typical government-funded GCM, here you go…

    http://www.giss.nasa.gov/tools/modelE/

    I urge everyone who has experience with scientific computing to download the source code and check it out. Let me know if anyone can determine what equations it’s solving – they aren’t listed anywhere…

  95. philjourdan says:

    @Pat – no other president has pulled this crap – http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/05/06/administration-issues-dire-climate-change-warnings-amid-regulatory-push/

    Not Jimmah Cawtaw, or Cigar bill. Or any of the republicans.

  96. Duster says:

    evanmjones says:
    May 5, 2014 at 9:31 pm

    So…how can an anomaly be said to be near or above normal

    He’ll be meaning for the average of the 1981 – 2010 time period. “Zero anomaly” would be the average.

    I would rather see the anomaly plotted with standard deviation on the Y axis. Statistically it would say more. A great many of the “scary” plots used to show how some metric is behaving relative some arbitrarily chosen “average” period use exaggerated vertical axes to make the behaviour “clear .” The problem is that such exaggeration can also mislead you into thinking the apparent changes are significant. I would like to see an excursion of at least three SD before I started even wondering about “significance” and even that is a fairly high chance of a Type I error (~1:500). That may seem like a small number, but a bit of consideration will lead to the realization that vastly more unlikely events are part of everyday life. If you play some game like Poker, Yahtsee or Risk, you have almost certainly seen far more unlikely events. If you haven’t, then you would be a statistical anomaly yourself

  97. Arfur Bryant says:

    Steven Mosher says:
    May 6, 2014 at 8:34 am

    ["In general the GCM is better than any other tool in predicting long range changes."]

    Well, if there is one thing for sure, the AGW camp has more than its fair share of making predictions…

  98. Arfur Bryant says:

    Actually, that should have read “… the AGW camp has more than its fair share of tools making predictions…

    But the moment has gone now!

  99. Janne says:

    “The SS Manhattan did it in 1969.”

    Accompanied by four ice breakers apparently. Nordic Orion did it by itself.

    “The SS Manhattan, undertaken to test the viability of shipping oil from Alaska to the Gulf of Mexico, was repeatedly trapped by ice and the U.S. turned away from the idea and instead built a pipeline.” – http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/international-business/european-business/bulk-carrier-capitalizes-on-arctic-shortcut/article14405743/

    Like it or not the passage is becoming a viable option for shipping.

  100. richard says:

    Janne says:
    May 6, 2014 at 11:00 am
    “The SS Manhattan did it in 1969.”

    Accompanied by four ice breakers apparently. Nordic Orion did it by itself

    ——————–

    although the Nordic Orion was accompanied by the Louis S. St. Laurent, a Coast Guard icebreaker.

    I am sure satellite navigation helps compared to 1969.

    The ship MV Nordic Orion weighs 13,000 tons, of which about 3,000 tonnes are pure ice strengthening. The engine has 18,500 horsepower at an ordinary ship in the class 11,000 to 12,000 horsepower. All this has meant that the vessel has ice class 1A, which is the highest commercial grade of ice-strengthened ships.

    Still good news for the ice breaking industry,in the 2010-2011 seas they rescued over 10,000 ships.

    http://www.arctic-info.com/ExpertOpinion/Page/-the-need-for-icebreakers-will-increase-after-the-year-2016-

    “For this reason, especially in the summer, there has been an increase in the need for icebreakers on the Northern Sea Route”

  101. richard says:

    2010-2011 season

  102. richard says:

    Janne says:
    May 6, 2014 at 11:00 am

    Like it or not the passage is becoming a viable option for shipping.

    ——————-

    nothing new.

    The russians offered the route up for shipping in 1967.

  103. Latitude says:

    Steven Mosher says:
    May 6, 2014 at 8:34 am
    In general the GCM is better than any other tool in predicting long range changes.
    ======
    LOL……oh well

  104. richard says:

    Janne says:
    May 6, 2014 at 11:00 am
    “The SS Manhattan did it in 1969.”

    ——————————

    “The most important satellite we use is equipped with an active radar instrument that sends out a signal obliquely to the Earth’s surface and measures the signal reflected back to the satellite. If the signal meets a calm sea surface, little is reflected, but when the satellite passes over ice, the surface is normally more uneven, and the reflected signal is stronger. In this way we obtain valuable knowledge of where and when it is safe for ships in the area to travel,” says Dinessen.

  105. vukcevic says:

    Professing ignorance of many of the Arctic ice issues, I compared periodicity of Earth’s magnetic filed to numerous temperature records and indices.
    Only the Arctic temperature came up with its two major components near equal in periods and intensity with the EMF’s major two.
    http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/ATvsGMF.htm
    Two ‘contributing’ factors; magnetic pole of course, and the crack in the Earth’s crust, peppered with submarine vents and volcanoes, all the way from Iceland to the other side of the Beaufort Sea.
    Coincidence is likely, but need to know of another climate data periodiogram matching the above before I write it off. Anyone?

  106. rgbatduke says:

    You are spot on with your assessment of ECIMs/GCMs. Unfortunately, those who believe in their ability to predict future climate really don’t want to talk about the differential equations, numerical methods or initial/boundary conditions which comprise these codes. That’s where the real problems are…

    Well, let’s be careful how you state this. Those who believe in their ability to predict future climate who aren’t in the business don’t want to talk about all of this, and those who aren’t expert in predictive modeling and statistics in general in the business would prefer in many cases not to have a detailed discussion of the difficulty of properly validating a predictive model — a process which basically never ends as new data comes in.

    However, most of the GCMs and ECIMs are well, and reasonably publicly, documented. It’s just that unless you have a Ph.D. in (say) physics, a knowledge of general mathematics and statistics and computer science and numerical computing that would suffice to earn you at least masters degree in each of those subjects if acquired in the context of an academic program, plus substantial subspecialization knowledge in the general fields of computational fluid dynamics and climate science, you don’t know enough to intelligently comment on the code itself. You can only comment on it as a black box, or comment on one tiny fragment of the code, or physics, or initialization, or methods, or the ode solvers, or the dynamical engines, or the averaging, or the spatiotemporal resolution, or…

    Look, I actually have a Ph.D in theoretical physics. I’ve completed something like six graduate level math classes (mostly as an undergraduate, but a couple as a physics grad student). I’ve taught (and written a textbook on) graduate level electrodynamics, which is basically a thinly disguised course in elliptical and hyperbolic PDEs. I’ve written a book on large scale cluster computing that people still use when setting up compute clusters, and have several gigabytes worth of code in my personal subversion tree and cannot keep count of how many languages I either know well or have written at least one program in dating back to code written on paper tape. I’ve co-founded two companies on advanced predictive modelling on the basis of code I’ve written and a process for doing indirect Bayesian inference across privacy or other data boundaries that was for a long time patent pending before trying to defend a method patent grew too expensive and cumbersome to continue; the second company is still extant and making substantial progress towards perhaps one day making me rich. I’ve did advanced importance-sampling Monte Carlo simulation as my primary research for around 15 years before quitting that as well. I’ve learned a fair bit of climate science. I basically lack a detailed knowledge and experience of only computational fluid dynamics in the list above (and understand the concepts there pretty well, but that isn’t the same thing as direct experience) and I still have a hard time working through e.g. the CAM 3.1 documentation, and an even harder time working through the open source code, partly because the code is terribly organized and poorly internally documented to the point where just getting it to build correctly requires dedication and a week or two of effort.

    Oh, and did I mention that I’m also an experienced systems/network programmer and administrator? So I actually understand the underlying tools REQUIRED for it to build pretty well…

    If I have a hard time getting to where I can — for example — simply build an openly published code base and run it on a personal multicore system to watch the whole thing actually run through to a conclusion, let alone start to reorganize the code, replace underlying components such as its absurd lat/long gridding on the surface of a sphere with rescalable symmetric tesselations to make the code adaptive, isolate the various contributing physics subsystems so that they can be easily modified or replaced without affecting other parts of the computation, and so on, you can bet that there aren’t but a handful of people worldwide who are going to be able to do this and willing to do this without a paycheck and substantial support. How does one get the paycheck, the support, the access to supercomputing-scale resources to enable the process? By writing grants (and having enough time to do the work, in an environment capable of providing the required support in exchange for indirect cost money at fixed rates, with the implicit support of the department you work for) and getting grant money to do so.

    And who controls who, of the tiny handful of people broadly enough competent in the list above to have a good chance of being able to manage the whole project on the basis of their own directly implemented knowledge and skills AND who has the time and indirect support etc, gets funded? Who reviews the grants?

    Why, the very people you would be competing with, who all have a number of vested interests in there being an emergency, because without an emergency the US government might fund two or even three distinct efforts to write a functioning climate model, but they’d never fund forty or fifty such efforts. It is in nobody’s best interests in this group to admit outsiders — all of those groups have grad students they need to place, jobs they need to have materialize for the ones that won’t continue in research, and themselves depend on not antagonizing their friends and colleagues. As AR5 directly remarks — of the 36 or so named components of CMIP5, there aren’t anything LIKE 36 independent models — the models, data, methods, code are all variants of a mere handful of “memetic” code lines, split off on precisely the basis of grad student X starting his or her own version of the code they used in school as part of newly funded program at a new school or institution.

    IMO, solving the problem the GCMs are trying to solve is a grand challenge problem in computer science. It isn’t at all surprising that the solutions so far don’t work very well. It would rather be surprising if they did. We don’t even have the data needed to intelligently initialize the models we have got, and those models almost certainly have a completely inadequate spatiotemporal resolution on an insanely stupid, non-rescalable gridding of a sphere. So the programs literally cannot be made to run at a finer resolution without basically rewriting the whole thing, and any such rewrite would only make the problem at the poles worse — quadrature on a spherical surface using a rectilinear lat/long grid is long known to be enormously difficult and to give rise to artifacts and nearly uncontrollable error estimates.

    But until the people doing “statistics” on the output of the GCMs come to their senses and stop treating each GCM as if it is an independent and identically distributed sample drawn from a distribution of perfectly written GCM codes plus unknown but unbiased internal errors — which is precisely what AR5 does, as is explicitly acknowledged in section 9.2 in precisely two paragraphs hidden neatly in the middle that more or less add up to “all of the `confidence’ given the estimates listed at the beginning of chapter 9 is basically human opinion bullshit, not something that can be backed up by any sort of axiomatically correct statistical analysis” — the public will be safely protected from any “dangerous” knowledge of the ongoing failure of the GCMs to actually predict or hindcast anything at all particularly accurately outside of the reference interval.

    rgb

  107. rgbatduke says:

    And for those who want to see a typical government-funded GCM, here you go…

    http://www.giss.nasa.gov/tools/modelE/

    I urge everyone who has experience with scientific computing to download the source code and check it out. Let me know if anyone can determine what equations it’s solving – they aren’t listed anywhere…

    Sure, but then there is:

    http://www.cesm.ucar.edu/models/atm-cam/docs/description/

    NASA is actually required by law to distribute their code and data, but they aren’t AFAIK required to document it. They should, though. And in fact they do:

    http://www.giss.nasa.gov/tools/modelE/modelE.html

    Beyond that I’m sure that one does have to go down to the level of individual routines and look (although there are a number of papers cited that claim to do an overview). That actually isn’t surprising — As I pointed out in my last reply, this is a grand challenge project, and no single human is likely to be ABLE to write, and integrate, all of the code. FWIW, the code looks like it is a bit better organized than CAM 3, although CAM 3 is definitely a lot better documented. Too bad we can’t have both (at least, not among these two specific examples).

    I haven’t tried to build modelE, though — perhaps I’ll download it and give it a try. I’d very much like to have a functioning GCM of my very own without having to solve multiple problems just to get it running on my own systems. I simply don’t have the time to screw around with the latter stuff.

    rgb

  108. Stephen Skinner says:

    Jimbo says:
    May 6, 2014 at 2:46 am
    “Here is the acclaimed Arctic climate scientist Professor Peter Wadhams of Cambridge University…..
    …Guardian – 17 September 2012
    Arctic expert predicts final collapse of sea ice within four years
    “This collapse, I predicted would occur in 2015-16 at which time the summer Arctic (August to September) would become ice-free. The final collapse towards that state is now happening and will probably be complete by those dates”.

    Since when does ice ‘collapse’? My simple schooling taught me that ice can melt. I thought that the Arctic Ice sheet can break apart and move about, and it does that continuously; during the refreeze as well as the melt season.

  109. vukcevic says:

    Re graph in my comment above, forgot to say, disappointingly : no AMO, no SSN:; while for the noise not clone but a sort of a look alike.

  110. Mike Jonas says:

    Kenny (May 6 4:55am) – “Y’all know that all eyes are going to be on the ice at the North Pole this summer. This has always been their “go to” data. “. I’m afraid you have misunderstood the process, which is to highlight whichever feature suits best at the time. Arctic Ice was good for a while, but now … who knows what’s next.

    Robert Brown (rgbatduke) – “absurd lat/long gridding on the surface of a sphere “. Isn’t this the core issue – that this method can’t work? In other words, it’s hopelessly inaccurate weather modelling masquerading as climate modelling and incapable of predicting anything reliably over any significant period of time. To my mind, a climate model would have to operate very differently, and AFAIK no such model has yet been developed, partly because almost none of the major climate factors are understood well enough.

  111. Ulric Lyons says:

    RGB says:
    “I personally am curious as to whether or not even these SHORT term predictions for things like ENSO, the AMO, and the arctic sea ice cycle are borne out. I do think that the decadal oscillations are a major factor in climate evolution, but since the decadal oscillations themselves are chaotic and at best quasi-periodic and of highly variable strength and duration, one can see their large effect on climate after the fact easily enough, but predicting that large effect beforehand requires being able to predict them and we can’t.”

    I daresay that continuing weak solar activity will make for a generally more negative AO&NAO, and a continuation of a warm AMO phase, as in the weaker solar cycles of the 1880/90′s.

  112. Anna Keppa says:

    Thank yewww! shout-outs to Mike Jonas , RACookPE1978 and everyone else who set me straight on my “anomaly” question.

  113. Angech says:

    Anthony
    I think RGB explanation of the failure of computer models above should be put up as a separate post as it is so compelling along with Mosher’s oft quoted line that a model which is wrong is still more useful than no model at all.

  114. Eric Simpson says:

    If I happened to be a squawking Chicken Little I would say: you guys are making a big deal about “normal” amounts of Arctic ice? Like normal is a “significant story.” Like it signifies plummeting temperatures and the onset of a new ice age? Seriously, normal? We’ve had very low levels of Arctic ice and once this little bit of normal blows over we will go back to being ice free again like we predicted for 2013. And if not, so what, we look elsewhere, like to Antarctica, or well then to U.S. temperatures, or to skyrocketing global temperatures over the last 20 years, or er to our climate models, or er um, uhm, to whatever it is, the media will report our story, and the little people will believe. Like you guys think that the people are going to be all freaked out about “normal” levels of ice. Not! That won’t scare anyone! (/s)

  115. Frank K. says:

    @ rgbatduke says:
    May 6, 2014 at 1:24 pm

    Have you read the “documentation” for Model E? I have – it’s no where near adequate, and again does NOT described the underlying physics, specific equations, or the basic numerical algorithms. I defy ANYONE to find the actual equations they are solving written down anywhere.

    BTW, my background is a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering, with a specialty in Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), and over 20 years of professional experience with CFD and numerical analysis.

    “NASA is actually required by law to distribute their code and data, but they aren’t AFAIK required to document it.”

    This is entirely unacceptable, especially given the purposes to which this “code” is being applied. It really speaks to the lack of any sense of responsibility these people at GISS have for their work. But yet NASA lets them get away with it.

    The NCAR documentation is of course much, much better, and I have lauded their efforts in the past.

    “I haven’t tried to build modelE, though — perhaps I’ll download it and give it a try.”

    Let us know if you’re successful. I’d like to try it myself too, although it’ll probably be troublesome to get the makefiles to work correctly. Then I can go into the code and start seeing how sensitive the numerics are to instability – I suspect it’ll be easy to get it to diverge and give nonsense results.

  116. Phil. says:

    Stephen Skinner says:
    May 6, 2014 at 1:50 pm
    Jimbo says:
    May 6, 2014 at 2:46 am
    “Here is the acclaimed Arctic climate scientist Professor Peter Wadhams of Cambridge University…..
    …Guardian – 17 September 2012
    Arctic expert predicts final collapse of sea ice within four years
    “This collapse, I predicted would occur in 2015-16 at which time the summer Arctic (August to September) would become ice-free. The final collapse towards that state is now happening and will probably be complete by those dates”.

    Since when does ice ‘collapse’? My simple schooling taught me that ice can melt. I thought that the Arctic Ice sheet can break apart and move about, and it does that continuously; during the refreeze as well as the melt season.

    Here’s a nice ice collapse for you.

    http://www.livescience.com/31989-major-glacier-calving-captured-in-time-lapse-video-video.html

  117. phlogiston says:

    SAMURAI

    Water temps count for much more in the Arctic than air temps. Recent record sea ice summer lows have been in spite of low air temps. And this summer’s big recovery will be in spite of the warmer winter air due to the polar vortex. It is, as Joe says, the AMO and water temperatures that boss the Arctic ice.

  118. Phil. says:

    phlogiston says:
    May 7, 2014 at 12:32 pm
    SAMURAI

    Water temps count for much more in the Arctic than air temps. Recent record sea ice summer lows have been in spite of low air temps. And this summer’s big recovery will be in spite of the warmer winter air due to the polar vortex. It is, as Joe says, the AMO and water temperatures that boss the Arctic ice.

    We shall see.

  119. Jake2 says:

    I don’t understand. Can someone simplify this for me, please? This is our current ice level in the arctic, matching that of this time in 2011.

    http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/Sea_Ice_Extent_v2_L.png

    So Joe is saying that come August, the ice is predicted to be above the blue or one more more dotted lines?

  120. Jake2 says:

    Or is he suggesting that the ice will be much thicker, despite volume?

  121. Jake2 says:

    *Despite area.

Comments are closed.