From NSIDC sea ice news
During the first half of August, Arctic ice extent declined more slowly than during the same period in 2007 and 2008. The slower decline is primarily due to a recent atmospheric circulation pattern, which transported ice toward the Siberian coast and discouraged export of ice out of the Arctic Ocean. It is now unlikely that 2009 will see a record low extent, but the minimum summer ice extent will still be much lower than the 1979 to 2000 average.
Figure 2. The graph above shows daily sea ice extent as of August 17, 2009. The solid light blue line indicates 2009; the solid dark blue line shows 2008; the dashed green line shows 2007; and the solid gray line indicates average extent from 1979 to 2000. The gray area around the average line shows the two standard deviation range of the data. Sea Ice Index data.
Figure 1. Daily Arctic sea ice extent on August 17 was 6.26 million square kilometers (2.42 million square miles). The orange line shows the 1979 to 2000 median extent for that day. The black cross indicates the geographic North Pole. Sea Ice Index data. About the data. <!–Please note that our daily sea ice images, derived from microwave measurements, may show spurious pixels in areas where sea ice may not be present. These artifacts are generally caused by coastline effects, or less commonly by severe weather. Scientists use masks to minimize the number of “noise” pixels, based on long-term extent patterns. Noise is largely eliminated in the process of generating monthly averages, our standard measurement for analyzing interannual trends. Data derived from Sea Ice Index data set. –>
Note: This mid-monthly analysis update shows a single-day extent value for Figure 1, rather than the usual monthly average. While monthly average extent images are more accurate in understanding long-term changes, the daily images are helpful in monitoring sea ice conditions in near-real time.
Overview of conditions
On August 17, Arctic sea ice extent was 6.26 million square kilometers (2.42 million square miles). This is 960,000 square kilometers (370,000 square miles) more ice than for the same day in 2007, and 1.37 million square kilometers (530,000 square miles) below the 1979 to 2000 average. On August 8, the 2009 extent decreased below the 1979 to 2000 average minimum annual extent, with a month of melt still remaining.
Conditions in context
From August 1 to 17, Arctic sea ice extent declined at an average rate of 54,000 square kilometers (21,000 square miles) per day. This decline was slower than the same period in 2008, when it was 91,000 square kilometers (35,000 square miles) per day, and for the same period in 2007, when ice extent declined at a rate of 84,000 square kilometers (32,000 square miles) per day. The recent rate of ice loss has slowed considerably compared to most of July. Arctic sea ice extent is now greater than the same day in 2008.
AMSRE from JAXA shows similar extent conditions:
As does NANSEN:
Leland Palmer (22:34:51),
Leland likes to scare himself. He probably likes ghost stories, too.
Cherry picking only the Northern Hemisphere because it supports Leland’s frightful beliefs leaves out the Southern Hemisphere: click.
There is more new polar ice in the S.H. than the [temporary, and rapidly recovering] ice loss in the N.H. Therefore, global sea ice is increasing.
But I’m sure that won’t stop Leland from scaring himself. His ghost stories are just too much fun. Then, he gets into his fossil fuel powered car, drives to work emitting CO2 all the way, and tells anyone who will listen that we’re all
DOO-O-O-M-‘D!!
If no one is going to be alarmist about this, I’ll step up to the plate…
2009 is the third worst Arctic melt we’ve seen since 2007.
(That’s how you write it up in a newspaper story, anyway).
Leland Palmer (22:34:51),
Leland likes to scare himself. He probably likes ghost stories, too.
Smokey (05:57:56) : -Probably likes to read NOAA’s Hurricane predictions, too,
to him, like reading Steven King….
Flanagan (02:04:42):
Flanagan is a devious alarmist, deliberately omitting the rapidly increasing Southern Hemisphere ice.
Innocentious 8/18 (23:00:30) :
If it “Bad” it is global warming. If it isn’t then it is just the wind. Why does the news media continue to publish activist scientists instead of real information.. Oh that is right, news organizations ARE biased… I have no idea where we as people came to the conclusion that they only report the truth. Any time you make a decision to report one side and not the other all semblance of truth just goes out the window… Sorry to rant I just get angry when I see things like this and remember the dire predictions if we don’t do something now.
“Why does the news media”????? Innocentious and others, I wish you would pay attention to me! You keep saying MSM as if the media is for the mainstream like it once was — as if it had investigative journalists like it once had. The MSM is the GCM (Global corporate media) today. Guess who paid bajillions of dollars for Obama’s election; guess who prevented any — yes any — veting of the faceless individual who became our president; guess who will make even more bajillions for cap-and-trade; guess who is paying gajillions for “health reform”; guess who owns the media; guess who will not pay for science, skepticism, truth.
Remember the old saying — capitalists do not like capitalism. Yes, they are making use of marxists and their cronies to achieve their purposes and to mislead conservatives (who are the majority of Americans using the most general definition of the word). Paulson and Bush (and Greenson) set up the financial debacle by lessening regulations for their cronies, who are similar to the marxist cronies (e.g., Obama’s czars and appointees) who have been infesting our academic institutions — all of whom are/will be raking in most of our tax dollars. (It is not just the Dems relaxing mortgage financing regulations.) Global corporations will make more profits if middle (most) Americans (and Europeans and Latin Americans) do not profit.
Why do I keep writing this stuff on WUWT? In the hopes that scientists/engineers/technology types (how I admire you) will also look behind the pseudo-science operating as propaganda and work for the truth of who is paying for it. WUWT is doing a great job in all respects.
I disagree with VG. When Hansen and Schmidt are propagating non-science, silly science, stupid activism, they no longer deserve their (public trust) jobs. Both the non-science and the job are fair game. When you put ’em both together — science and public-trust job — there is no person of integrity there.
Leland Palmer (22:34:51) :
You’re right, the tipping point has arrived. How could I have been so foolish?
Oh.. Wait.. the arctic ice cap extent may be 35-40% above its low of 2007? Jeez! That’s inconvenient!
Hi Smokey and all-
Clearly, the Arctic icecap is melting, relative to the recent average, at least.
On this blog, the myth appears to have developed that the Antarctic is not melting.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8200680.stm
This is all very serious stuff.
My understanding of what is going on in Antarctica is that it is kind of a mixed bag, these days, but that glacial breakup and ice sheet movement in parts of Antarctica appears to be accelerating.
We’ve heard the word “unprecedented” so many times, from so many scientists, we are getting numb to it.
But for changes that generally happen over many thousands of years, it is a very nasty word, IMO.
Reply: So based on one glacier, you surmise the entire Antarctic is melting.? Let’s hear it for the record. Yes/No.
Interesting interview from the outgoing head of that bastion of science; Greenpeace. Turns out they were wrong about the ice catastrophe. (No! It can’t be true!!!)
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/amcelhinney/2009/08/19/exclusive-lies-revealed-greenpeace-leader-admits-arctic-ice-exaggeration/
Well, I am shaken to my core…
On the longer run, every person, institution, newspaper or Government body predicting future events that don’t materialize risk a total loss of credibility.
This is process is currently effecting all those involved in the current climate scam.
Bill Illis (05:40:00) :
So, if the full range of (quality) data is used, it looks worse for AGW?
Jeremy Thomas (04:19:08) :
The NSIDC uses two standard deviations to indicate the range of past ice extent in their graph.
It’s more common to use three standard deviations to define the area beyond which (for a Gaussian distribution), a random deviation is very unlikely. Variation beyond 2 standard deviations is quite likely.
Does anyone know if the use of two standard deviations is common practice in climatology?
If so, that would explain the alarmism.
Two standard deviations is common practice in reporting data in science, also what level of deviation is unlikely depends on the number of data points considered and with such a small number as 30 the criterion would be less than 3 (e.g. see Chauvenet’s criterion, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauvenet%27s_criterion)
In any case it’s moot since the data show that we’re not observing the fluctuation within the bounds of the past distribution but rather a systematic drift away from the former situation.
Phil. … (seconds after midnight)…Funny how YOU “neglected” Fiona’s fate??
I suspect Fiona had to have some help from a Canadian icebreaker, or, backed
north, and then south again….[Since you are the “uncrowned king of Amundsen
route sailing boats passages knowledge”…] Well, some 3 hours ago Fiona’s position was 70,5564 N 96,5626 W 13:35 GMT [Rule Britania…]
“The computer models predicted this right?
NOOOooooo?”
Don’t worry they’ll predict 2009 next year…..
I think we can forget 2007 and probably also 2008 (melting is much slower this August compared to august 2008) and when checking all curves from 1979-2009 it looks like 2009 right now is the 5:th lowest and can end anywhere between 3:th and 10:th
“So we’re actually waiting now to see whether 09 will be the second lowest or third lowest extent of the satellite area? I really don’t see how that would be a proof of ice “recovering”…”
What do you expect Flanagan, “The Day After Tomorrow”? This isn’t a Hollywood fantasy.
Smokey (06:16:03) :
Flanagan (02:04:42):
“So we’re actually waiting now to see whether 09 will be the second lowest or third lowest extent of the satellite area? I really don’t see how that would be a proof of ice “recovering”… Because we’re actually already lower than the average minimum sea ice extent!”
Flanagan is a devious alarmist, deliberately omitting the rapidly increasing Southern Hemisphere ice.
Quite right by him too since it doesn’t exist!
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/s_plot_hires.png
Flanagan:
“The sea ice concentration has been free-falling the last days, so we’ll see…”
Free-falling? Looking at the AMSR-E graph, it looks to be falling about the same rate as 2006, and 2005, not “free-falling” like 2007 or 2008. Do you just like using alamist language?
RE: Gordon Ford (19:23:53) :
Your clipping had the following:
**********************
WINNIPEG – A cold summer in many areas of the country may have meant fewer barbecues and camping trips this year, but lower temperatures have been a boon for the beleaguered Hudson Bay polar bears.
Experts say the summer sea ice has lasted longer than it has in years, which has given the region’s more than 1,000 bears extra time to hunt, feed and raise healthy cubs.
One scout captured a picture of a mother with three strapping youngsters – a rare sight that has heartened those who are fighting what they say is the probable extinction of the iconic mammal.
Andrew Derocher, a biology professor at the University of Alberta, said it’s good news in an area where the polar bear population has declined by 25 per cent. He’s been tracking some bears using satellite collars and said the extra time the animals have had on the ice can make all the difference.
“They’ve had longer to hunt which is a real benefit to them,” said Derocher, former chair of a polar bear specialist group run by the International Union for Conservation of Nature.
“It really makes a difference. Even just one or two weeks out on the sea ice can make a difference in how many seals they kill and how much fat they’re able to store on their bodies.”
Canada is home to about two-thirds of the world’s polar bears but scientists warn that populations are starting to dwindle because of thawing sea ice, over-hunting, industrial activity and increased toxins in the food chain.
While experts say this summer is an anomaly and doesn’t mean the mammals are no longer under threat, Derocher said it bodes well for the coming winter on Hudson Bay.
When the sea ice takes longer to break up in the summer, the water doesn’t warm up as much, he said. That usually means sea ice forms earlier in the fall, which gives polar bears more time to procreate and bulk up on fat for the following summer.
“A respite from the long-term conditions is certainly good news, but … this is still a major concern. We’re talking about global change here. This is just one summer.”
In other parts of the Arctic, temperatures continue to be warmer than usual, scientists point out.
Robert Buchanan, head of Polar Bear International, said northern sea ice generally continues to melt at an alarming rate.
“The overall prognosis for bears on a worldwide basis still remains dim at best,” Buchanan said in an interview from Alaska. “This is an aberration.”
Polar bears will continue to suffer from greenhouse gases that are warming the planet unless we plant more trees, make more use of recyclable materials and reduce energy consumption, he said.
“We’re killing polar bears from the comfort of our armchairs.”
Even the biggest polar bears these days aren’t as big as they used to be, said John Gunter, general manager of Frontiers North Adventures in Churchill, Man.
But after years of watching polar bears shrink and dwindle in population, it’s nice to observe them doing well this summer, he said.
“It’s a one-off, but it’s still really encouraging to see.”
Gunter also pointed out that there is still some ice on Hudson Bay. Usually, it’s long gone by now.
*****************************
Today’s Winnipeg Free Press had the following:
Fluke cold summer helps polar bears
TOO many cool, wet days resulted in a lousy summer — but you won’t find any polar bears complaining.
The cooler-than-usual summer produced thicker ice on Hudson Bay, giving the area’s polar bear population several extra days to feed on tasty ringed seals.
“This is the time of year when polar bears eat the most, and the ringed seals are so full of fat and energy,” said Daryll Hedman, the northeast regional wildlife manager for Manitoba Conservation.
Hedman said polar bears stay on the Hudson Bay ice for as long as possible so they can feed, adding this year the ice was so thick the bears stayed out for an extra two weeks.
That’s resulted in fatter, healthier bears this summer, Hedman said, adding, however, the development is not likely a long-term trend.
“It’s probably a blip,” Hedman said of the thicker ice and cooler temperatures.
********************************
So they call it a blip or a fluke if it is not Global warming.
And where is the “alarming rate” according to Robert Buchanan???
Leland Palmer (06:42:08):
“My understanding of what is going on in Antarctica…”
Well, there’s your problem right there, Leland.
And Phil, notice that global sea ice is increasing. Global is what matters.
In addition, N.H. sea ice is clearly increasing, as you can see from this University of Bremen graphic: click on graphic to expand.
It is truly amazing that despite the fact that every one of the alarmist claims, including sea ice, the ozone hole, ocean acidification, CO2=AGW, glaciers retreating everywhere, etc., etc., have been debunked and falsified, the alarmist contingent still believes, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that Al Gore was right.
In a world that has established a 0.5 degree warming trend over the last century or so, wouldn’t you expect the recent year’s ice extent to be well below a 30 year average?
What about the global averages of ice extent (NH+SH) for the century/30 year/recent year?
The ice increases again!
The consensus of scientist’s are wrong again. And again. And again. And again.(broken record syndrome)
For those trying to show how rapidly the Antarctic is growing, please take alook at the trends you show – where the error is equal to the trend itself. How statistically relevant is that? Mmmm, that must be skeptics’ science!
For those who plot sea ice extent when I’m talking about sea ice concentration, please find some dictionnary and then come back.
For the one implying that academics take 6-8 weeks holidays in the summer, this answer should be self-sufficient.
PS: today, the Arctic lost 75937 km2. That’s more than last year, or 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002 and probably even before that but I don’t have the data here.
Smokey (08:05:07) :
Leland Palmer (06:42:08):
“My understanding of what is going on in Antarctica…”
Well, there’s your problem right there, Leland.
And Phil, notice that global sea ice is increasing. Global is what matters.
And as of today global sea ice area is 1.115 Mm^2 below the average for the day!
In addition, N.H. sea ice is clearly increasing, as you can see from this University of Bremen graphic: click on graphic to expand.
A set of images from early June and a graph from May, earth to Smokey ‘It’s August now’.
It is truly amazing that despite the fact that every one of the alarmist claims, including sea ice, the ozone hole, ocean acidification, CO2=AGW, glaciers retreating everywhere, etc., etc., have been debunked and falsified, the alarmist contingent still believes, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that Al Gore was right.
Perhaps because that falsification you claim hasn’t happened.
Phil.:
“And as of today global sea ice area is 1.115 Mm^2 below the average for the day!”
As pointed out, it’s late August.
Sorry about the June images, they’re the only ones I have. Post the same July/August images if you’ve got ’em — and if you dare.
I repeat, none of the alarmist predictions have come true. None of them.
Where is your god now?
Flanagan (08:52:48) :
For those who plot sea ice extent when I’m talking about sea ice concentration, please find some dictionnary and then come back.
Hmm …