Sunshinehours reports that the Antarctic Sea Ice Extent for September 19th, 2014 is 20.11297 million square kilometers,
which is 1,535,000 sq km above the 1981-2010 climatological mean.
Another 58,000 sq km. was added since yesterday, making it the 7th All-Time Record in 7 Days.
This new record is 610,000 sq km higher than the previous daily record. The red line represents 2014 data.
![antarctic_sea_ice_extent_zoomed_2014_day_261_1981-2010[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/antarctic_sea_ice_extent_zoomed_2014_day_261_1981-20101.png?quality=75)
Data for Day 261. Data source: ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/south/daily/data/
NSIDC concurs:
![S_stddev_timeseries[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/s_stddev_timeseries1.png?quality=75)
A look at the data presented by NSIDC as it would be from space if there were no clouds:
h/t to Thomas Wysmuller
More data on the WUWT Sea Ice page
UPDATE: Andres Valencia reports in comments:
The University of Bremen (The new satellite “Shizuku”, AMSR2 sensor) will have to rescale their plots:
![extent_s_running_mean_amsr2_previous[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/extent_s_running_mean_amsr2_previous1.png?quality=75)
Source: http://www.iup.uni-bremen.de:8084/amsr2/extent_s_running_mean_amsr2_previous.png
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Perfect timing for Ban Ki Moons little party in New York ….. Although, lets face it, this government control wealth re-distribution effort has absolutely F-all to do with science or reality.
Good timing for Anthony also as he prepares to attend the Mann-Cook circus at Bristol UK.
I can’t resist.
We are doomed doomed…
The 9 levels of hell are closing their icy grip upon us.
The Ice Age is coming.
Just like fashion cycles seem to accelerate as I age, the fashions of Doom Sayers are also circling at an ever accelerating rate.
Depending upon your position upon this globe the fools are circling the Bowl in a clockwise or not rotation.
Doomed indeed…
http://climatesanity.wordpress.com/2013/12/26/time-to-recognize-approaching-southern-hemisphere-disaster/
Not sure if satire or serious. 😉
http://builder.cheezburger.com/builder/#step2_4962503936,http://images.cheezburger.com/imagestore/2011/7/11/7de7d18d-7f5f-4e71-8bcf-fe826677affc.png
Not sure? Then I have done my job well!
http://images.cheezburger.com/imagestore/2011/7/11/7de7d18d-7f5f-4e71-8bcf-fe826677affc.png
[wish we could edit posts]
Maybe one day people will be looking for a southern passage.
You’re right. I see a distinct hockey stick in that last graph.
The IPCC had projected an Antarctic sea ice extent decrease due to global warming, yet some scientists insist otherwise because they don’t want to look foolish. Move the goalposts!
I thought the missing heat went into the deep. No surface global warming for 17+ years.
Is that an island to the west?
Yes, South-Georgia is its name, belonging to the U.K.
In the east there’s Kerguelen Island, belonging to France.
Can’t be UK. It’s not pink.
It was occupied (temporarily) by the Argenitinians during the Falkland War. There was a weather station there.
The Argentinians surrendered to three sea lions who were looking at them in a mean way.
It’s coming to get us in Australia. We are very doomed indeed.
But maybe the Russians can save us.
http://rt.com/news/188332-mox-nuclear-fuel-production/
I saw that today as well. Great strides in nuclear energy efficiency and safety are being done in .. The Republic of Russia!!! Da Comrad, ve vill cell it to you zoon!!! 🙂
Nice to see someone working on cutting edge nuclear tech. Go Russia (except when we play hockey against you).
That’s not all they’re up to. http://www.thewire.com/business/2014/09/russians-have-taken-over-pbr/380511/
“… then they came for our crappy beers…”
So how much more does the world have to warm before the entire Southern oceans become covered with ice?
The entire Southern Ocean is now almost covered with sea ice. Sea Ice extent = 20.11297 million sq. km.
Southern Ocean area = 20.327 million sq. km.
I trust you aren’t endorsing global warming as the cause, though.
The “answer” linked to above is an interview by the Aussie ABC with some polar researchers who claim that the apparent paradox of Antarctic ice increasing in extent in the presence of warming is explained by increased wind strength due to warming (emphasis mine):
But these learned professors seem to have overlooked the fact that the Coriolis effect, which causes the Ekman drift, cannot cause an object at rest to start moving. It only affects objects currently in motion. Ekman drift can cause icebergs drifting in fast sea currents to move in directions perpendicular to the wind gradient force. I’m guessing that continental ice shelves aren’t moving very fast (correct me if I’m wrong), so I’m very skeptical that Ekman drift could account for the massive extension observed.
Also, looking at the current weather charts around Queen Maud Land coast (0 to 45E , where new ice extent is large), you can see the prevailing westerlies off-shore in the ACC, but the surface winds on the ice itself appear to be easterly, which would have a southward Ekman drift, if such drift actually occurs on the ice shelf.
http://www.weather-forecast.com/maps/Antarctica?over=pressure_arrows&symbols=none&type=wind [hmm, some mislabeled ‘L’s and ‘H’s on this chart and I’m not sure what the trends are for ice surface winds, anyone know what the dominating surface wind vectors are?]
Finally, the narrator explains why you don’t see any ‘gaps’ caused by the Ekman drift, which is so powerful that it apparently can rip off huge pieces of ice off the shelf and propel them northward. The “gaps left behind freeze over”, the narrator explains. Obviously this happens instantly because there are no visible signs of this happening.
And if it’s so cold at the gap that it can freeze water, then why doesn’t the water freeze in that spot before the Ekman drift occurs?
My BS meter is pegging on this one.
How long before it hits South America.
I did hear only a few years at the current rate of expansion, but have no idea if this is correct.
It’s a valid question: Let me make a few assumptions so we’re all looking at the same page, you tell me the ground rules of the game, then I’ll assign you the task of telling me what “Antarctic sea ice “rate of increase” you want to project into the future.
A few basics:
Sea ice (both Arctic and Antarctic can use either “area” (essentially 100% covered, as measured by the different satellites and agencies competing for research tax dollars and jobs and publicity) or Sea Ice Extents (at least 15% of the water covered by sea ice and icebergs and continuous ice). Obviously, sea ice extents is larger than “area” so let’s use it.
Equally obviously, no prudent ship master and owner is going to take his 200 million dollar investment into solid sea ice, nor is he going to drive the ship right next to the ice in the open ocean, nor right next to the cliffs and shallow waters off of Tierra de Fuego (Cape Horn) chancing storms, winds, waves, ice bergs, and grounding or collision. So the ships WILL stop rounding Cape Horn well before the sea ice forms a complete land bridge from Cape Horn down to Antarctica.
Further, it takes several weeks to get that far south! No captain or owner or shipper is going to RISK his cargo and ship and crew heading south to round the Cape without being SURE that he can actually get clear (stormy of course!) but ice-free water when they get to that point.
We don’t know whether sea ice will start growing south from the islands that form the Strait of Magellan, or whether all of the sea ice will only freeze from the ocean water “northbound” away from Antarctica. In fact, I have not heard of ice forming IN the Straits of Magellan, but that’s not something people write about, so it may be already happening, but we don’t know about it.
Your homework: The Straits of Magellan and Cape Horn (its southern tip) end at latitude 56 south. You tell me what latitude the sea ice extents needs to reach to “block Cape Horn from shipping” … And tell me whether we should “add” a few extra kilometers margin from Cape Horn’s actual southern-most tip. (I will assume that the Straits of Magellan – which lead between the islands NORTH Cape Horn itself – will be blocked by South American coastal ice if Antarctic sea ice continues to freeze the salt water south of Cape Horn. ) Hint: 1.0 degree latitude is 111 kilometers.
The 3.5 million sq kilometers of “permanent Antarctic shelf ice” is NOT included in the NSIDC’s sea ice calculations or graphs. This 3.5 Mkm^2 of shelf ice surrounds Antarctica’s 14.0 Mkm^2 of land ice. The result is a neat “circular beanie cap” centered on the south pole.
The Antarctic sea ice surrounds this cap, varying in side between 2.5 Mkm^2 (20 years ago) and today’s 3.5 to 4.0 minimum sea ice. Yes, even the minimums are increasing, even as the maximums are setting new records!
SO, the maximum Antarctic sea ice extents is actually the area 3.5 + 14.0 + 20 Mkm^2. Plus whatever additional sea ice is added between today and the usual Antarctic sea ice maximum about 10 days from now. (I expect new maximum records will continue to be set this year.)
Your second homework assignment:
From WUWT Sea Ice page, tell me what rate of increase in sea ice area you want to extrapolate with: The 5 most recent years show an extremely rapid increase, the longer period of 1992 to 2014 still show a continuous long-term increase, but not at the extreme rate of the past 5 years.
So, tell me the rate of expansion you want to use (which we will assume is the same for area as for extents), and we will give you a date that Antarctic Sea Ice will close Cape Horn.
Ice can collect on all exposed parts of a ship. If it was my $200 million dollar investment, I would be more worried about ice on my ship than the sea freezing over.
Sounds like a most excellent question for XKCD’s “What If?” feature.
So the China/Russia/Nicaragua canal through central america should negate any need to ship around south america. Now about expanding that Suez canal so we don’t have to go around South Africa. They have lots of resources that need to be shipped out of South Africa so we may need serious rail and port a bit farther north.
@RACookPE1978 September 19, 2014 at 7:15 pm
Sea ice (both Arctic and Antarctic can use either “area” (essentially 100% covered, as measured by the different satellites and agencies competing for research tax dollars and jobs and publicity) or Sea Ice Extents (at least 15% of the water covered by sea ice and icebergs and continuous ice). Obviously, sea ice extents is larger than “area” so let’s use it…
Actually, using Climate Science techniques, we should use ‘Area’ initially (modified downwards with ‘corrections’), and then shift over to ‘Extent’ about half-way through the process. This will give a much ‘improved’ rate of change, and hence more grant money. Possibly even a Hockey stick….
RACookPE, you seem to be thinking of the ocean as having a calm level surface. As the open water gap shrinks, the current through it may speed up, keeping it clear of ice. Supposedly it is stronger winds that are pushing the ice around, expanding its extent and opening more water for freezing, so I think it really will depend on winds and ocean currents, not just extrapolation of the “beanie cap” growth.
TRM September 19, 2014 at 8:55 pm
Now how about expanding that Suez canal so we don’t have to go around South Africa.
_____________________________
A project to enlarge the canal is being devised as we speak. And they have coined a really flashy new title for the project, to tempt international investors. Its called …. wait for it …. the ‘New Suez Canal’.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Suez_Canal
But since Egypt refused to pay for the first canal, and only coughed up compensation after UN intervention, I’m not sure who in their right mind would invest in such a project.
R
If you look at the plot which shows the current ice compared with the median position, you’ll see that due south of Cape Horn there is less ice than usual.
Also, I seem to notice one or two northern hemispere commenters confusing South America with South Africa……..
It would be interesting to estimate the depth of North Pole Ice AND South Pole (floating) ice and to get a handle on the “stored cold energy”. (I.e., balance between melting and putting that energy in the atmosphere…actually a “moderating effect” and to find out HOW LARGE IT IS compared with yearly solar input.)
A quick look at the sea-ice and that the excess ice seems to be at the 58th latitude or so would mean that the changing albedo over a 1.5 million square kilometers icecap above average would increase the reflection in the earth’s energy balance by 0.15 W/m2. This is about a quarter of the reported energy imbalance. Is that taken into effect? Cold begets cold.
No. It is much more than 0.15 watts/m^2.
I was referring to the global effect on the excess sea ice.
I think you will hear the word “albedo” mentioned very little in the near future. It may even become politically incorrect to use the word.
It sure was important back in 2007. It was a vital ingredient to the theory of warming getting out of hand.
I wonder to what degree “albedo” is incorporated into the climate models. Adding a million square kilometers of white ice at 60 degrees latitude on the first day of the southern spring ought cause a model to flinch a bit, wouldn’t you think?
[That was yesterday: Today, 1.5 million square kilometers of fresh Antarctic sea ice is reflecting the sunlight. .mod]
Add this to a possible Icelandic volcanic event and we could see some real fun…
Absolutely. Squashed as we are between these two unpredicted, unmodeled events it is fascinating. Meanwhile, glacier retreat in NZ (Fox Glacier) is attributed to the usual climate change mantra.
Using a fine calculus, a carpenters pencil, I estimate this years excess ice as 1 pencil thickness.
Using Team IPCC ™ logic, therefore the ice will block off Cape Horn in just 8 years and ram into Patagonia in just 4.
Unless we nuke the Panacean and Sues Canals to enlarge them immediately, world trade will be down to starvation rates in just 5 years…
Mann, the nonsense one can extrapolate from short term data..
All these years of observing Climatology ™ has destroyed my reasoning faculties.. Can I now sue the UN and the Canadian Government for causing… whatever victimization label we can invent?
What is the best name for mental disorder caused by CAGW propaganda?
Aghast of that Magic Gas?
Hostile taxpayer Syndrome?
The comedy of those who incite the mob, is they are usually the second or 3rd group to be consumed in the flames they fanned.
I wonder if glaciers in South Georgia island have advanced faster.
The University of Bremen (The new satellite “Shizuku”, AMSR2 sensor) will have to rescale their plots:
http://www.iup.uni-bremen.de:8084/amsr2/extent_s_running_mean_amsr2_previous.png
[ 8<) .mod]
OH NO!
Climate Plot Disruption!
So what? This is one of many facts without an understanding, other than to point out “They don’t know everything.” OK, they don’t, and probably many of them are starting to think so. Let’s get beyond it, and start to figure out how to understand what’s going on.
I suspect, Anthony, that you agree CO2 is a greenhouse gas, that adds energy to the earth climate system, all else being equal. It’s not panning out for the CAGWers the way they thought. Yet, the fact remains CO2 is a forcing function. What are the next steps? I would prefer to see more thought in that area, vs. here is another reason they are wrong.
My view has always been that climate is more complex than simple CO2 knobs, and think it is time to think beyond that.
I wish I could upvote this comment.
Data by itself is useful. It doesn’t NEED a “so what” to justify posting it. Any ‘so what?’ right now would likely just be pure speculation.This is the data. If you think you have a ‘so what’ to explain the data – then by all means feel free to do so.
Personally I think it is on the same level as the arctic is melting, therefore CAGW. Or, the 1980s and 1990s had a huge uptick in surface temps therefore CAGW.
Just because the antarctic is growing in sea ice does not mean CAGW isn’t a reality, anymore than the arctic melting means there is.
I think the point climate is much more complex than previously thought has been demonstrated, and its time to move on to bigger discussions. For instance, it’s pretty clear something is wrong with the models, so how do we figure out better understand what CO2 will do. Where are the gaps in our knowledge.
Ed Barbar,
“Personally I think it is on the same level as the arctic is melting, therefore CAGW. Or, the 1980s and 1990s had a huge uptick in surface temps therefore CAGW.”
I disagree. There is a theory. For practical purposes the models represent the ‘theory’. The models predict certain things:
– Hotspot
– Arctic and Antarctica melting
– Increased Hurricanes
– Temperature increase of 3 degrees a century.
According to ‘science’ and the actual data, the theory has been proven wrong. You don’t get to be right 1 out of 5 times (Arctic melting) and say – “Hey our models are pretty good!”. In fact, you don’t even get to be wrong once.
I think you essentially agree based on your next paragraph:
“I think the point climate is much more complex than previously thought has been demonstrated, and its time to move on to bigger discussions. For instance, it’s pretty clear something is wrong with the models, so how do we figure out better understand what CO2 will do. Where are the gaps in our knowledge.”
Right. Except that this isn’t ‘just’ about science. It’s about policy and public opinion. According to ‘Cook’ (and President Obama himself), only 3% of scientists think the way you and I think (that the theory has been shown to be invalid). So … until opinion changes, until policy changes – we need to keep shoving data/model contradictions in their face.
Ian, I’m with you. The proof of the “C” in CAGW is lacking. The true believers are always going to be true believers until the end of their lives, and its time to start thinking about the broader set of people in the US, who are often put off by tit for tat kinds of things.
What I’m suggesting is it’s time to get to a leadership position on this subject, instead of defensive, “you were wrong here, and here, and here.” All things equal, CO2 forces temperatures. Yet, it isn’t working out as this control knob, as others have noted. So, time to develop a story and theory as to why that might be, that can be explained to normal folks, and get away from yet another partisan divide approach.
It is rather depressing that climate scientists have focused on trying to create or invent some novel process theory whereby a ‘warming’ world can magically increase ice in the Antarctic rather than focussing on the climate mechanisms which have led to no warming in 17-20 years and the cooling of Antarctica along with exceptional growth in Antarctic ice.
The reason why they haven’t is equally depressing; the funding is strictly limited to those who are prepared to meet the political desire to ‘prove’ CO2 is going to destroy the world.
The interesting question is why the Southern Ocean has been gaining sea ice at the same time as global warming has been accelerating, and Antarctica itself has been warming and shedding ice by the billions of tons per year.
@icarus62 says:
“The interesting question is why the Southern Ocean has been gaining sea ice at the same time as global warming has been accelerating,”
Can you provide some reference data that makes you conclude that warming is accelerating? A link? Anything? I can’t. All I can find is records of no warming. Here is a satellite record from 1980 that shows no warming at all:
Everyone who makes this site a regular stop knows how the global temperature record is homogenized in such a way that conveniently subtracts heat from the past and adds it to the present. The scientific method will eventually fix that, but look, here is a homogenized record and even that doesn’t show any warming:
So the real question is why you keep saying the things you do in the face of the facts?
Woops i reversed my graphs.
AR5 shows that global warming has been accelerating –
Antarctica is warming but at a slower rate than the Arctic, as predicted by scientists –
http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/2/0/7/6/2/8/5/GEA-141361307138.png
http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/2/0/7/6/2/8/5/highlat-126252367515.jpeg
Hey Johnny Crash please give us the links for those graphs.
Icarus, I could not find those graphs on Sodahead. Can you trace them back to a scientific site, please?
Thanks
CO2 alone is a very SMALL forcing function.
And that is the point, all alarmism depends on its effect being multiplied by unknown factors. Rather than being drivers in their own rights.
What the Pause shows, is that these other ‘drivers’ are at least twice as powerful as CO2. And what detailed analysis shows is that there is no positive feedback in the climate system. At least not in the way the AGW model has them.
Furthermore, analysis of the actuality of climatic heat transfer – a complex turbulent model of convection and radiation, that cannot be accurately modelled, shows that the system is probably complex enough to require no external drivers at all to account for holocene climate variations.
Which means the real result of the trillions poured into ‘climate research’ has only two conclusions to offer decision makers:
1/. Be prepared…
2/. …For almost any variation in climate….
An answer that could have been got for sixpence if anyone had thought to ask it of anyone who had studied the holocene.
Yes, there you have it. It was just that knowledge that brought me to WUWT. The diminished significance of carbon dioxide gas in a world dominated by water in all it’s forms should be obvious. Add the orbital variations and sun dynamism and you have quite a kettle of fish. The true state of nature remains to be discovered.
Yes, “all else being equal” but that’s the rub. You can’t measure it all, and assuming all else is equal is probably wrong, otherwise the warming would not have stalled.
And they don’t usually include the “all else being equal” caveat.
And in the main stream media reports for this ……(….crickets….).
“Nothin’ to see here. Move along now.”
Not quite correct. This morning Saturday’s Australian newspaper has reported the record indicating it is ” sending mixed messages” to scientists. It also talks about the excuses being trotted out to explain it.
How about the New York Times? Any news of this there? I don’t subscribe. It is the “paper of record” here in the USA.
Which is why its about the only newspaper I will read… the rest can p*&S off with their left-wing biased propaganda.
The response I’ve seen is this is:
– This is totally expected because wind creates ice [wind probably does help create ice and GW may increase wind, but totally expected? That is total bullshit. They predicted melting and now we are being fed revisionist science history]
– Sure the ice extent is bigger, the ice on the continent is melting like crazy [based on data of dubious quality and corrections from GRACE gravity satellites or like 8 years or so. What is the mechanism for this ‘massive’ melting at -20C on a warm day?]
– Sure the Antarctica ice extent is at a record, but the Arctic is still melting like crazy! [except that it’s not, and that the keep pretending it is … so frustrating].
It’s like playing wack-a-mole. Show one area of “the theory” being directly contradicted and they pop up somewhere else. Temperatures could drop 2C, we could head into an ice-age and they’d still be going on about how this was because of CO2 …
Frustrating isn’t it!
David A,
Enough to drive a sane man crazy. 😉
And the Arctic seems to have passed the minimum:
http://www.iup.uni-bremen.de:8084/amsr2/extent_n_running_mean_amsr2_previous.png
No, its even worse than that.
yes, the Antarctic sea ice edge is now extending north from the entire Antarctic Continent to cover a total area from the south pole to latitude 58 – 59 latitude.
But, on today’s date of Arctic Sea Ice minimum (about 5.0 Mkm^2 extents) and today’s almost-maximum Antarctic sea ice record extents of 20.6 Mkm^2, that small bit of Arctic sea ice all lies between the north pole and latitude 79-80 north! At this latitude, the sun – EVEN AT NOON – is no higher than 8 – 10 degrees above the horizon. Half of the day, it is below the horizon. The rest of the day, it is ALWAYS lower than a hand’s width above the horizon. (This elevation angle is about what the sun looks like 15 minutes to 30 minutes before sunset in the mid-latitudes.) At those low angles all day, almost all of the sun’s little remaining energy is reflected from BOTH the water and ice. The open water albedo of ocean water at low angles has been measured several time, by 10 degrees elevation angle, it is already greater than 0.32, and is rapidly increasing.
But it is even worse than that!
Judith Curry measured the actual Arctic sea ice albedo through the summer months: Its lowest albedo was measured at 0.36, but the averaged albedo in mid-July was about 0.42. By mid-September, the Arctic ice albedo
has increased somewhat, but is still significantly below the “nominal” advertised 0.80 to 0.90 albedo for ice that is often mis-used. So the Arctic sea ice through the arctic sea ice in summer is actually absorbing a LOT of solar energy, not simply reflecting “during a 24-hour day” as we have been told so often.
But it is even worse that that!
But little radiation actually makes through the 8 – 15 atmosphere thicknesses between the surface and the top-of-atmosphere radiation at this time of year And, at today’s date, those top-of-atmosphere radiation levels are significantly BELOW what they are when the Antarctic ice is exposed to 24 hours of continuous sun.
But, that same top-of-atmosphere radiation is going through MUCH LESS atmosphere at the 58-59 degree latitude where the edge of the Antarctic sea ice is freezing.
Net result? About 4.5 to 5.0 TIMES as much solar energy hits – and is reflected back into space – by every million “excess” square kilometers of today’s newly-frozen, brightly white, record high Antarctic sea ice than hits the still-dirty, still meltwater-covered, ever-smaller Arctic sea ice at 80 north latitude.
And any open water in the Arctic also is radiating directly to space, unlike the energy received at low angles. This allows far more energy to escape to space than if the water is covered by ice. Ice acts as a huge limiter to power transfer, and also blocks evaporation which is another strong cooling mechanism. Open water cooling will radiate at 307W/m^2, less any downwelling radiation (140W/m^2?), netting about 167W/m^2. To get the same power level through even 0.1m of ice would require the air to be 16°C colder than the water (which is -1.9°C at the melting point of sea ice).
However, you’re forgetting sublimation of the ice, which takes even more energy than evaporation. The net effect, though, is that the sublimation rate is going to be lower than the uncovered water’s evaporation rate and we can’t be sure if the net cooling from evaporation will always be more than the net cooling from sublimation. We need to go measure it.
Boy, am I glad that’s down there in the Southern Hemisphere and not up here where it can bother us!
Or something.
If the Antarctic sea ice does happen to reach Cape Horn, and form a barrier, this would affect the thermohaline circulation, and this could not be a good thing because such an effect would be felt worldwide.
The thermohaline is a few hundred meters below sea level. A bit of ice on top won’t hurt.
Steve B, that is not quite right. Formation of sea ice ‘exudes’ the salt. The immediately adjacent water becomes briny, denser, and sinks. Happens in both hemispheres. The Antarctic ‘bathtub ring just produces distributed cold bottom water. The Arctic, on other hand, is mostly pushed through the Framm straitt region, where the ocean bottom configuration starts the global thermohaline circulation. You can google up on at at several good oceanography sites.
This is somewhat scary. I’m much more scared of cooling than of warming.
Such sudden changes are usually tied to some other anomaly – refer to e.g. 2012 Arctic sea ice minimum after great polar storm. So I wonder if it was an exceptionally quiet and stormless winter on the southern hemisphere or if there was something else unusual tied with it. I’m sure warmists will find an excuse soon but I’m more interested in rational arguments.
Rational argument: There is no “missing heat.” The Earth’s climate system is cooling, ice forms on polar seas. Winters get harsher, summers get milder. The radiative budget at the TOA is being balanced by increasing albedo from clouds, + natural coupled ocean-air pressure cycles entering negative phases, + reduced solar input.
While the data only goes to 2008 in the link below, there has been a trend towards fewer but deeper (lower central pressure) Southern Ocean cyclonic systems – more intense storms.
That would indicate greater temperature differentials by latitude.
Were warming mid-latitudes the cause we should have seen decreasing sea ice. If a cooling Antarctic is the cause then increased intensity storms and increased sea ice are consistent.
http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/met/momu/International_Antarctic_Weather_Forecasting_Handbook/update%20behaviour%20of%20southern%20ocean%20cyclines.php#Fig_3_Cyclones
BTW, I don’t have confidence in the Antarctic land temperature measurements, which are taken at mini urban heat islands.
You may be correct that fewer cyclones are resulting in decreased heat transport across latitudes. No one really knows why cyclone numbers are decreasing.
The warmists are ignoring the implications of the sudden increase in Antarctic sea for all months of the year. The paleo record shows there is cyclic ‘natural’ warming and cooling of the Antarctic peninsula that matches the periodicity of the warming and cooling cycle in the Northern hemisphere (High latitude regions warmed and cooled in the past, same as observed in the last 50 years. AGW warming was predicted (models) to be greatest in the equatorial region as the most amount of long wave radiation is emitted to space in the equatorial region, that is not observed). The cyclic warming and cooling in the past correlated with solar magnetic cycle changes.
The past cyclic warming phases were all followed by a cooling phase. The past cooling phases correlate with Maunder like solar magnetic cycle minimums. The solar magnetic cycle has abruptly slowed down and there is now record high cosmic ray flux (Cosmic ray flux CRF, also called galaxy cosmic rays GCR, is the historic name for the high speed particles, mostly high protons that are accelerated by processes in the Milky Galaxy’s disc. The CRF/GCR strike the earth’s atmosphere and create cloud forming ions. The solar magnetic cycle creates a massive cloud of tenuous gas and pieces of magnetic field, which is called the solar heliosphere. The solar heliosphere, which extends well past the orbit of Pluto, partially blocks the CRF/GCR) . The past solar magnetic cycle minimums have lasted from 100 to 150 years.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/09/05/is-the-current-global-warming-a-natural-cycle/
If Shaviv’s analysis is correct we could see planetary cooling of roughly 0.5C due to the solar cycle 24 abrupt magnetic cycle slowdown.
Okay. Do we care?
((not intended to be snippy, but if I’m not upset over .5C on the up side — heck, I’m not upset over 3C on the upside, and I live in Texas!), what’s the argument for being concerned over .5C down?)
How many standard deviations above the mean is this?
The Antarctic sea ice has been more than 2 std deviations above the mean for about 1-1/2 years now, been steadily increasing at a rapid rate for 4+ years now, and has been increasing (though within 2 std deviations) since the early 19902.
Now? About 2.5 std deviations. But! What is the “new average” – and how long do you wait before re-calculating a new average?
Four standard deviations for 5 days so far this year (or any year).
http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2014/09/20/antarctic-sea-ice-extent-sep-20-2014-four-standard-deviations/
FROM:
The Rime of the Ancient Mariner
Samuel Taylor Coleridge (originally published in Lyrical Ballads, 1798)
. . .
And now there came both mist and snow,
And it grew wondrous cold:
And ice, mast-high, came floating by,
As green as emerald.
The land of ice, and of fearful sounds
where no living thing was to be seen.
And through the drifts the snowy clifts
Did send a dismal sheen:
Nor shapes of men nor beasts we ken–
The ice was all between.
The ice was here, the ice was there,
The ice was all around:
It cracked and growled, and roared and howled,
Like noises in a swound!
. . .
It is an ancient Mann,
And he stoppeth one of three.
‘By thy short ginger beard and glittering eye,
Now wherefore stopp’st thou me?
‘The end is nigh, the Pause will end
And Hades hot t’will be’
To hell with Pause, Its friggin cold,
So take your paws off me’
So when the ice touches Tierra del Fuego or blocks shipping around South Africa do we get a refund from the CAGW bunch? Do they admit that they are wrong about CO2 controlling the climate then? Probably not.
I hate to say it but I think we are in for some cold decades. I’m old enough to remember the 60s & 70s (the last time the PDO was negative) and it wasn’t pleasant. That is the best we can hope for according to Dr Easterbrook.
Hope for the best but prepare for much worse.
The distance from Tierra del Fuego to the southern tip of South Africa is almost 7000 kms, and there is a latitude difference of over 20 degrees. That’s roughly like saying that ice round Baffin Island will disrupt shipping off the coast of Greece
This new maximum ice extent, most of it 1,000+ km from Antarctic continent, is being added because of all the fresh water being added to ocean by all those melting continental ice shelves and glaciers, even though its southern winter. Because as “any real scientist” knows fresh water freezes at higher temp than salty ocean water. Thus global warming causes more ice, except when it doesn’t. Also global warming causes higher wind speeds in the Southern Ocean which removes heat faster from the warm, fresh water ocean, except when it doesn’t.
Geez, don’t skeptics know anything???? Global warming can do anything. It’s “settled science.” I heard those very words from the Messiah-in-Chief himself.
You got any photos of the 1,000 km long rivers of ice water flowing off the late winter ice sheets over top the sea ice all the way to the sea?
Pulitzer Prize material.
I’ve been trying to learn more details of the “more fresh water” excuse. The fresh water really can’t be water pouring off Antarctica, because Antarctica is too cold. Therefore the fresh water has to be from the underside of the sea-ice, melted by up-welling. The only problem with that is the sea-ice doesn’t exist at the start of the southern winter. Sea-ice forms from scratch, it doesn’t flow outwards 1000 km from the coast like ice from a speedy glacier. Therefore, since it is getting thicker and not thinner, where can the fresh water come from?
If anyone knows of a serious paper explaining the more-fresh-water theory, I’d like to study it. As it is, all I can do is poke fun at an idea that floats around the web like a ghost with no body.
http://sunriseswansong.wordpress.com/2014/09/19/regarding-excuses-for-record-setting-antarctic-ice/