Those that have been watching the IARC-JAXA Arctic sea ice plot, and noting the slope of gain, rather expected this to happen. Today it did.
Here’s the current IARC-JAXA Sea Ice Extent plot:
source: http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm
And here is the plot magnified and annotated to show the crossing:
While 2009 minimum on 09/13 of 5,249, 844 was just 65, 312 sq km below 2005 in minimum extent, which occurred on 9/22/2005 with 5,315,156 sq km, it has now rebounded quickly and is higher by 38,438 sq km, just 2 days before the 9/22/05 minimum. On 9/22/2009 it may very well be close to 60-80,000 sq km higher than the minimum on the same date in 2005.
While by itself this event isn’t all that significant, it does illustrate the continued rebound for the second year. The fact that we only missed the 2005 minimum by 65, 312, which is about one days worth of melt during many days of the melt season is also noteworthy.
The sun reappeared on the right column but without the supposed nr.1026 spot!
The AGW position supports the left’s attack on the free market and on enterprise. Also, they have found the best way to promote the redistribution of wealth through cap and trade. I believe they have been trying to push for fast movement on policy change just in case the science turns against them. Once the policy changes are in place, it will be difficult to undo even if the science has been proven faulty.
Any questioning of the science that promotes so much that liberals desire is ridiculed as conservative attacks, even though the attacks are on the science, not on policy.
It appears clear that the onset of refreezing is occurring about a week earlier then the average for the last eight years and maybe ten days earlier than the ‘crisis’ year of 2007. This trend has got to be very discouraging for members of the ‘church’.
Looking at the graphs that include standard deviation, the southern hemisphere may soon exceed normal:
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/S_stddev_timeseries.png
I’ll also put in a prediction of getting back within +/-2 standard deviations by October 5.
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png
Back in April ’07, NSIDC had a press release titled ‘Models Underestimate Loss of Arctic Sea Ice’. Here’s a quote from that release,”… models indicate that about half of the ice loss from 1979 to 2006 was caused by increased greenhouse gases, and the other was half caused by natural variations in the climate system, the GRL study indicates that greenhouse gases may be playing a significantly higher role.” Well, NSIDC underestimated Arctic Sea Ice then and blames it on rising CO2 emissions. This year, NSIDC made predictions that have clearly overestimated Arctic Sea Ice loss and now blame natural variations. But ! But ! Even though Arctic Ice now is at 2005 levels and growing, NSIDC refuses to admit Arctic Sea Ice is rebounding. NSIDC would rather say,’ the ice is too thin’ or ‘ there is not enough multi-year ice’. What trash. I believe that whooshing sound I hear in the background is the reputation of men, like Walt Meir, swirling down the water closet. When its all said and done, I doubt men like that would even be able to get a job as a shaved ice vendor. I think its time to send an e-mail to wmeir@nsidc.org and ask him what his future plans will be when Barry looks for a scape goat to save his A$$. -David Alan-
Ted Annonson (09:38:45) :
And this morning there was snow in the high country of Colorado and Wyoming!
____________
High country my foot. Acouple of hours ago it was snowing in Colorado Springs (that is where the mountains meet the plains.)
Not cold enough for it to stick, though.
Actually I have lived here for 30 years, and such weather is common in late September.
You so rock! Right on the money as usual.
Well, hang on to your hats. Sounds like Ms. Boxer & Co. are getting ready to push the Climate Bill through the Senate. News blip from today was saying the Democrats now think that 60 votes can be found and locked in before Copenhagen.
Maybe they’ll sell this as Climate Insurance reform.
It would be neat if the red line moved above the remaining three lines and topped the chart by December.
Oops–make that “remaining four lines.”
There are two dimensions at play in looking at the minimum sea ice exent: the minimum reached and the date of the minimum.
Comparing the annual absolute minimum therefore leaves us with extra degrees of freedom and a more “noisy” measurement. The range of timing variation being around a couple of weeks according to the above data: the range of the minimum being about 1 Mkm^2.
As the theoretical minimum should be on the date of the equinox (I think), it might make sense to compare sea ice variation on the date of the equinox. This doesn’t necessarily capture the absolute minimum in the year, but it does remove one of the dimensions for making comparisons.
Just a thought – I should imagine that there will be objections.
What is the ice extent graph for the theoretically maximum heat loss state for the N Pole?
wws (09:18:07) :
…it is insane that viewing the scientific claims behind climate change skeptically has come to be seen as a “conservative” view…
I could not agree more.
The cap and tax proposal strikes me as the most incredible hostage to fortune every promulgated by a political party.
If they manage to push this through then all it will take is three hard winters to give us President Palin.
I can see it now – an hour-long science documentary advertising and celebrating the renewal and rebuilding of the Arctic ice cap.
Ok, only joking.
.
wws (09:18:07) : “…The worst thing of all is for a political movement to let themselves get trapped on the wrong side of some issue of fact which could turn against them and thus discredit them by showing lack of judgment….”
Never forget: violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.
Frank (09:28:44) : “Actually, science is liberal, as in ‘free’.”
But “liberal” no longer means a free thinker. It means a pimply PhD in Birkenstocks who judges himself by his noble intentions instead of by his actions and their consequences.
>>This trend has got to be very discouraging for
>>members of the ‘church’.
That should be Church with a capital. The organisation, not the building.
.
Sorry, I meant to say ‘BBC’.
.
I can see it now – an hour-long BBC science documentary advertising and celebrating the renewal and rebuilding of the Arctic ice cap.
Ok, only joking.
.
Benier duster (10:37:27) :
….and AMSU is still showing record high lower stratospheric temperatures for the time of year….hmmmmm
I had a look at the AMSU website, where is your record high lower stratospheric temperature?
http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/execute.csh?amsutemps
David Alan (11:06:33) : “…I think its time to send an e-mail to wmeir@nsidc.org and ask him what his future plans will be when Barry looks for a scape goat…”
You’ve misspelled both his name and his e-ddress. Spelling does count, sometimes, people.
Enduser (09:13:54) :
“… a poor little penguin chick getting all of the deadly noxious oil cleaned off from its plumage with Dawn dish washing detergent.”
That treatment condemns the penguin to death, as it would any sea bird. This we discovered to our horror in Cape Town in 1968. Every bird we cleaned died. You have to use a special solution to strip the oil from the feathers (I have no idea what it is). The feathers are left with a sufficient proportion of their natural oils which prevent the bird from getting saturated with water and dying of hypothermia.
John Edmondson (11:50:04) :
Benier duster (10:37:27) :
….and AMSU is still showing record high lower stratospheric temperatures for the time of year….hmmmmm
I had a look at the AMSU website, where is your record high lower stratospheric temperature?
http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/execute.csh?amsutemps
______________________________________
I suspect that Benier Duster is talking about Channel 5, at 14000 ft. This channel is showing record high temps right now, even though I don’t think that 14000ft qualifies as lower stratosphere.
BTW, bad link above… Try this one.
http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/execute.csh?amsutemps+002
Stop Press, Stop Press…
BBC World are now reporting a STEEP decrease in CO2 levels.
The reason? Either the Met Office are predicting a cold winter, or the authorities have deduced that public opinion is turning against them.
They are looking for a way out.
.
jorgekafkazar (12:01:32) : —————– exactly! Just as much as I would like to give the man credit, his name and position will be as significant as how I posted it: Meaningless. When those in the employ of NASA stand up and take a stand against the corruption being instigated by it, I’ll provide proper links to reputable men.
This article is highly misleading. I notice how none of the graphs at the top show the ice extent before 2002. The reader might want to peruse the actual discussion from the actual Snow and Ice Data Center and their explanation of the wind patterns contributing to the observed ice extents over the past few years, rather than looking at catchy snippets from WUWT:
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
“Arctic sea ice appears to have reached its minimum extent for the year, the third-lowest extent since the start of satellite measurements in 1979. While this year’s minimum extent is above the record and near-record minimums of the last two years, it further reinforces the strong negative trend in summertime ice extent observed over the past thirty years.”
REPLY: The AMSRE satellite data set only extends back to 2002, so it it impossible to present this data in the same time period as NSIDC. That being said, you won’t find political statements like “arctic death spiral” and “ice free North Pole in 2008” from JAXA like we did from NSIDC’s Mark Serreze.
Then there’s the SSMI sensor issue, which NSIDC missed this year, and when I pointed it out, they said “its not worth blogging about” only to then the very next day realize the seriousness of the failure and post data retractions, then going through a repair process.
I trust an organization and its data more when they don’t get politically involved and don’t have issues with sensors where they tell people who spot the problems to essentially “bug off”.
NSIDC has lost a lot of trust with a lot of people for that reason. Use them if you wish, if it suits your world view. I prefer using an data from an organization that is free of such issues. – Anthony