UK Met Office backpedals on Arctic Ice – "…unlikely that the Arctic will experience ice-free summers by 2020."

But they do say that “first ice-free summer expected to occur between 2060 and 2080”. By then there will be nobody that remembers this forecast.

Yet on the same day, bumbling Arctic explorer Pen Hadow says in a UK Telegraph interview:

To all intents and purposes the Arctic will be ice free in a decade. I do find the implications of this happening in my lifetime quite shocking.“.

Gosh, who to believe? Somebody that fakes biotelemetry data or somebody that won’t hand over climate data for replication studies?

From a Met Office press release on October 15th

Arctic sea-ice

The extent of Arctic sea ice has been decreasing since the late 1970s. In 2007 it decreased dramatically in a single year, reaching an all-time low. At the time it was widely reported that this was caused by man-made climate change and that the rate of decline of summer sea ice was increasing.

Modelling of Arctic sea ice by the Met Office Hadley Centre climate model shows that ice invariably recovers from extreme events, and that the long-term trend of reduction is robust — with the first ice-free summer expected to occur between 2060 and 2080. It is unlikely that the Arctic will experience ice-free summers by 2020.

Analysis of the 2007 summer sea-ice minimum has subsequently shown that this was due, in part, to unusual weather patterns. Arctic weather systems are highly variable year-on-year and the prevailing winds can enhance, or oppose, the southward flow of ice into the Atlantic. Consequently, the sea ice has not declined every year, but has shown considerable variability — both in extent and thickness.

The high variability has made it difficult to attribute the observed trend to man-made emissions of greenhouse gases, although there is now enough data to detect a human signal in the 30-year trend. The trend and observed variability, including the minimum extent observed in 2007, is consistent with climate modelling from the Met Office.

About half of the climate models involved in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change fourth assessment report, show that ice declines in steps — failing to recover from extreme years. The observed temporary recovery from the 2007 minimum in 2008 and 2009 indicates that the Arctic ice has not yet reached a tipping point, if such exists. We expect Arctic ice to continue to decline in line with increasing global temperatures. If the rate of global temperature rise increases then so will the rate of Arctic sea-ice decline.

h/t to WUWT reader Patrick Davis

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

97 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Alan the Brit
October 28, 2009 5:47 am

Contradictions prevail:-
“invariably recovers from extreme events.”
“show that ice declines in steps — failing to recover from extreme years.”
Well, which is it, it cannot be both!
What human signal, not that old chestnut of CO2 increases coupled with temperature increases? Correlation does not equal causation!

Gary
October 28, 2009 5:48 am

There’s an interesting pattern emerging on the current AMSR-E sea ice extent chart. It looks to be following the 2006 track in shape, but at a much lower total area number. Anybody know if the weather patterns in the two years are similar?

Wondering Aloud
October 28, 2009 5:48 am

“long-term trend of reduction is robust”
“Robust” here is an unclear term. In this case it is used in place of the more accurate but less tasteful term BS.

Colin Porter
October 28, 2009 5:57 am

“About half of the climate models involved in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change fourth assessment report, show that ice declines in steps — failing to recover from extreme years.”
With a 23% recovery from 2007, the Met office must be telling us that 50% of models are wrong. Now we only need to get rid of the remaing 50%.

Back2Bat
October 28, 2009 6:02 am

“Your comment is awaiting moderation”
Mr. Moderator,
What am I, some kinda of bad boy? I see 4 comments after mine that have been approved. Perhaps there is more than one moderator. That I can understand.
I can take insults from Leif since I consider the source but if I am on some special list then just ban me outright or take me off it.

hunter
October 28, 2009 6:03 am

The cowards in the aGW promotion industry clearly do not have the strength of their convictions.
Apocalyptic claptrap always sees these kinds of mealy mouthed excuses and ‘clarifications’.

Robinson
October 28, 2009 6:08 am

In other Stupid news, Global Warming is set to raise the cost of a loaf of bread to £6.50.

Jordan
October 28, 2009 6:11 am

Difficult to know where to start with this one.
“2007 … reaching an all-time low”
By all-time low, can we take it they mean since 1979?
“Modelling … shows that ice invariably recovers from extreme events”
Can’t recall hearing that point being emphasised in the past. Better late than never I suppose.
” in part, to unusual weather patterns”
Can’t recall that point being made at the time. Perhaps they’ve been watching Jeff ID’s most excellent video demonstration.
“The trend and observed variability, including the minimum extent observed in 2007, is consistent with climate modelling from the Met Office.”
We’ll be looking forward to assessing the accuracy of their prediction for next year, taking into account their ability to model trend and variability. When does the Met Office propose to publish its prediction?
“About half of the climate models involved ”
That’s about as even-stevens as it gets. Half don’t agree with the other half.
“now enough data to detect a human signal in the 30-year trend”
So the trend period is varied to get the required answer. What was all that about not cherry-picking the last 10 years to make a point?

David
October 28, 2009 6:11 am

Bearing in mind that TWO of the “quality” selection of people who are credited with proving content for the London Science Museum’s Prove-**it website are from the Met Office, I wonder if the museum will rewrite the content to match this new data?

DR
October 28, 2009 6:13 am

You’d swear the entire history of planet is encapsulated in the last 30 years.
“all time low” “long-term trend” “expected”

October 28, 2009 6:16 am

“Kaboom (04:25:28) :
It really breaks my heart to see those poley bears floating away on their tiny little ice-floes, and no-one cares about them at all.
The deniers screech that “their population is increasing!”
OK, so logic says that there will be MORE poley bears floating around like the flotsam and jetsam of capitalist society.
Shame.”
The funny part is……………………….. You are serious !!!!!!!!!!!!

October 28, 2009 6:17 am

“Back2Bat (06:02:07) :
“Your comment is awaiting moderation”
Mr. Moderator,
What am I, some kinda of bad boy? I see 4 comments after mine that have been approved. Perhaps there is more than one moderator. That I can understand.
I can take insults from Leif since I consider the source but if I am on some special list then just ban me outright or take me off it.

You are not special (insert joke here).
We all wait in que

Frank K.
October 28, 2009 6:24 am

I’m not surprised by this, coming on the heels of the bungled forecast for 2009 ice extent by the NSIDC:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/08/09/tech/main5228298.shtml
UKTOYAKTUK, Northwest Territories, Aug. 9, 2009
Vast Expanses of Arctic Ice Melt in Summer
Scientists Watch for Possible Record Low of Polar Ice Cap

I’m frankly getting sick and tired of this constant scientific drivel about polar ice coming from people who should simply be telling us the facts rather than aiding and abetting the MSM in telling yet another AGW scare story.
And, of course, we should ask where is the follow-up in the MSM when the forecasts are way off, as was the case this year? Well, here’s the follow up:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/10/15/tech/main5385527.shtml
LONDON, Oct. 15, 2009
Study: Arctic Ice Will Melt in 10 Years
British Explorers Return from North Pole with Ice Data Suggesting it Will Soon Disappear in Summer Months
(CBS/AP) The North Pole will turn into an open sea during summer within a decade, according to data released by a team of explorers who trekked through the Arctic for three months.
CBS News correspondent Elizabeth Palmer reports that the explorers walked – and swam – 280 miles across the Arctic ice of the Beaufort Sea, north of Alaska, drilling hundreds of ice samples as they went.
The Catlin Arctic Survey team, led by explorer Pen Hadow, measured the thickness of the ice as it sledged through the northern part of the Beaufort Sea earlier this year during their research project. Their findings show that most of the ice in the region is first-year ice that is only around six feet deep and will melt next summer. The region has traditionally contained, thicker multiyear ice which does not melt as rapidly.

And a mere two weeks later we have the Met office contradicting this report!

October 28, 2009 6:25 am

Good news!, Global Warming is melting away!
No one of us will be here then. How could we do to make them accountable for their predictions?.
Well. Anyway it is an acceptable and political scape goat.

Janice
October 28, 2009 6:28 am

Back2Bat, it was probably that Monty Python quote. They had to check that it was accurate . . .
I’ve had the same thing happen to me, of my comments awaiting moderation, and I’m usually just off topic with my comments. I don’t think you should take it personally. And besides, you don’t know if those four comments were actually submitted before yours, and maybe they had to wait 30 minutes before their comments were approved.

CheshireRed
October 28, 2009 6:30 am

I Googled ‘ice free Arctic’ and here’s a couple of BBC links that positively scream ‘catastrophe’, plus one from NatGeo’.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7139797.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8307272.stm
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/10/091015-arctic-ice-free-gone-global-warming.html
Now what, pray, are the odds of both these august media organisations running similar stories any time soon, just as the Met’ Office has revised back its latest guesses by another 50-70 years?
PS. Note the BBC’s efforts; first in 2007 and then a pant wetting repeat in 2009. Not biased at all, then.

October 28, 2009 6:48 am

“The observed temporary recovery from the 2007 minimum in 2008 and 2009 indicates that the Arctic ice has not yet reached a tipping point, if such exists.”
An interesting sentence, which questions the notion of an arctic tipping point (heresy), notes the recovery since 2007 (near heresy) but refers to it as temporary (back to safe orthodox territory).
So, what’s this mean for the death spiral?

PaulH
October 28, 2009 6:54 am

“Gosh, who to believe? Somebody that fakes biotelemetry data or somebody that won’t hand over climate data for replication studies?”
I think they should bring out that roulette wheel the “experts” were playing with a few months back. Just add numbers representing “the years before the arctic melts after we are gone” and give it a spin.

Myron Mesecke
October 28, 2009 6:55 am

kim (05:24:13) :
“They are tiptoeing around in the dark. What happens when the light goes on?”
They scatter like roaches?

geo
October 28, 2009 7:01 am

“all-time low”. . . in the last 30 years when we have semi-accurate numbers.
I understand newspapers have space constraints, but c’mon.

the_Butcher
October 28, 2009 7:10 am

What about Al Gore’s 5 fingers last year conference in Germany?
It’s 4 fingers left now…

October 28, 2009 7:12 am

Anthony: Of all the questions you’ve asked over the years, this one, “Gosh, who to believe? Somebody that fakes biotelemetry data or somebody that won’t hand over climate data for replication studies?” is the easiest to answer.
Neither.

Stephen Goldstein
October 28, 2009 7:13 am

With apologies to John Cleese, Brilliant . . . Simply Brilliant.
Possibly, responding to criticism of non-falsifiability, the warmists have provided a falsifiable prediction. Sadly, as pointed out earlier, few of us will be around to call them on it in 2060 or thereabouts.

Corey
October 28, 2009 7:18 am

Kim,
I like that line too:
<blockquote.The observed temporary recovery from the 2007 minimum in 2008 and 2009 indicates that the Arctic ice has not yet reached a tipping point, if such exists.
The are packpeddling on the whole idea of “tipping points”, a CYA approach. The only problem is that it is too late for them to take this stance.

October 28, 2009 7:24 am

From the press release, “The high variability has made it difficult to attribute the observed trend to man-made emissions of greenhouse gases, although there is now enough data to detect a human signal in the 30-year trend.”
They can detect it but they didn’t quantify it.
They continue, “The trend and observed variability, including the minimum extent observed in 2007, is consistent with climate modelling from the Met Office.”
But it’s also consistent with a multidecadal period where El Nino events dominate.
They continue, “About half of the climate models involved in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change fourth assessment report, show that ice declines in steps — failing to recover from extreme years. The observed temporary recovery from the 2007 minimum in 2008 and 2009 indicates that THE ARCTIC ICE HAS NOT REACHED A TIPPING POINT, IF SUCH EXISTS.”
[My caps]
They conclude with, “We expect Arctic ice to continue to decline in line with increasing global temperatures. If the rate of global temperature rise increases then so will the rate of Arctic sea-ice decline.”
And if global temperatures do not continue to rise…