There has been a great deal of speculation about the possibility that the arctic sea ice could, at the worst case, melt entirely, or more realistic, possibly break the record sea ice melt set last year.
Judge for yourself. This photo with 1 kilometer/pixel resolution was taken yesterday July 12th at 17:05 UTC:
Click for full size image – link to original source image is here
Note that the image above has been rotated, and the annotation for date/time added to make it easier to present here. There is some cloud cover, but if you look carefully, you can determine what is cloud cover and what is sea ice.
Here is the area covered by the AQUA/MODIS satellite on this photo:
The North Pole is visible in the satellite image, and I’ve marked it on the image with a “N” and crosshair.
Now compare to a similar photo from ten days ago:
Image rotated- click for source image.
I’d say we have a ways to go yet before the sea ice melts completely.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“I’d say we have a ways to go yet before the sea ice melts completely.”
You are hereby awarded the degree of M.U. (Master of Understatement), honoris causa.
The Alarmists love to make dire predictions (e.g. the NW passage will open for the first time ever this year) because they know it will get a good run in the news. If they end up being right, they can bask in the glory of their predictive abilities. If they end up being wrong, nobody notices and there aren’t any news stories like “This Just In: ice didn’t melt much this year, NW passage didn’t open. Film of frozen water at 11.” Dire predictions are a win-win game for them.
I recommend that NASA immediately knock Aqua out of the sky with an ASAT and claim they had to because its serious malfunctioning was posing a “grave threat” to humanity.
Link to original doesn’t work for me.
[…] Up has the story “Satellite Imagery Shows Arctic Ice Still Unmelted” (and thanks, Anthony, for your hard work). Arctic Ice Hanging In Through Melting […]
Well, in fairness, the image doesn’t indicate the thickness of the ice, does it?
I also have no experience interpreting this sort of image – to me it looks like there is practically no open sea visible. That makes me wonder where the photos I saw in the paper were taken. I don’t trust my interpretation.
Capt. Obviousness makes an excellent point that is true of the entire Warming controversy.
I also recall discussing this ice question in a class on remote sensing in my MA program in about 1992. The professor was a image interpretation specialist from the UN. He had the same conclusion – imagery didn’t support the notion of excessive melting.
A simple but honest question. Have the gloom and doomer greenies every gotten an apocalyptic prediction right. Whether it was exploding population, resources running out, silent spring, arctic ice melting, species extinction, number of hurricanes, etc. etc. Could someone make a list for me of when they’ve gotten it correct?
North Pole looks cloudy and cold. Not likely to result in a lot of melting today.
If I’m selling something, and that something fails to perform as advertised, then customers can take me to court. I’d be in trouble from the Trade Practices Commission (aus), the Department of Fair Tading (nsw, aus) and guilty of offences under the Trade Practices Act (aus) at the very least.
If I go on TV and totally defame someone, I’m guilty of numerous offences.
If I’m in a shopping center and yell “Fire!” and cause a mass panic, I would be in quite a deal of trouble.
In short, if I go around lying, misrepresenting the truth or causing mass panics, I’m probably going to be doing jail time.
Why is it, then, that a person can yell “The ice caps are melting” or “temperatures are rising” or “sea levels are rising”, and when it doesn’t happen there is a collective shrug and no one is charges with (at least) causing a public mischief?
Theres an article here from the BBC which, if you didn’t know any better would, make you think the arctic melt this year was ahead of last year.
Here’s a quote which I thought was particularly good:
It manages to imply this years melt is already ahead of last years and invoke an emergency at the same time. Perfect.
Captain Obviousness, actually it’s worse than that. The media blurs the distinction between prediction and reality. So the prediction becomes the reality for most people. I bet if you surveyed people, most would think Arctic ice is already at a record low due to the stories about the predictions that it will and written to look like fact by the media.
Thank G— for the internet.
Oops, you must have posted the raw satellite images. I’m sure you can find some adjusted ones at GISS that will show open water at the pole.
Reading the details in the scientists interviewed in the “Arctic Ice Will Melt This Year” articles, I noticed that those interviewed said the odds were 50-50. A cute way to set yourself up for a win whichever way it happens. But the layperson reading only remembers something about the Arctic ice is melting. Clever.
Climate audit had a fascinating post last week pointing out that the key melts in past years normally occur right now in the cycle. If there’s not a ton of melting now, no way we match last year.
It will all be gone by August 15.
Or September 23.
Or as soon as NASA gets one of their crack Imaging Teams to “adjust” the raw data from AQUA.
The most aggressive prediction of an ice free Arctic I know of is in 2012. I think a more common prediction is about 2030?
The problem with the failure of predictions is that the failure is never acknowledged. Instead it is explained away as resulting from some heretofore unknown ‘human influenced process’ that caused the prediction to fail. The underlying theory is proclaimed ‘correct’ even though prediction after prediction fails. Or, in some cases, mind boggling statistical procedures (some unique and never before seen) that ‘prove’ the actual observed result is actually within acceptable distributional limits.
So the non-deniers now deny the undeniable…..
lol
The lowest amount of arctic sea ice almost always occurs around mid September so we’ve got a ways to go yet. It is obvious that the western Arctic sea melts more than the eastern due to warmer currents coming through the Bering Staits and since we have not yet reached the annual high temps for that water, more melting is sure to come. More melting from ocean currents that is, not air temperature.
You can check on the progress of the melt at the National Snow and Ice Data Center. On the home page is a graph you can click on to get a nice large graph which is updated daily. Currently shows that this year’s melt is much slower than last year’s and even seems to be moving closer to the 21-year average than to last year’s melt. Not a bad showing for all this “fragile” new ice.
Terry S (15:17:44) :
Theres an article here from the BBC which, if you didn’t know any better would, make you think the arctic melt this year was ahead of last year.
In the last couple of weeks, I’ve heard several ‘experts’ on the radio news proclaiming the impending doom. As a regular oberver of this site (Thanks, Anthony for your work, and hope you and yours are safe), I either laugh or shout back at the radio (headphones on, observers think the mailman’s whacked).
Steve Moore (15:43:58) :
It will all be gone by August 15.
Or September 23.
Or as soon as NASA gets one of their crack Imaging Teams to “adjust” the raw data from AQUA.
I believe they call the progran that can do this “Adobe Photoshop”
I guess we’ll have to wait to September. June is the arctic ice at it’s peak, after all.
Reasonably facile, thoroughly hypocritical pretense at science.
Like most know-nothing systems of propaganda, semantics overrules peer-reviewed science. Whether addressing 4 guys paid to show up as cheerleaders or a single sat image which pretends to forecast September open water, you cover your buns well – with words.
I’ll drop by in September to see what you have the integrity to post. Or the following September. Babbling about climate in weekly increments is only “legitimate” for politicians.
Well, in fairness, the image doesn’t indicate the thickness of the ice, does it?
Ice thickness is not irrelevant. but it is secondary. What really matters is area because that is what affects albedo.