Pursuant to the previous post on The great 2007 ice crunch – it wasn’t just melt this is a follow up post for questions raised there.
By Steve Goddard
One of the favourite web sites quoted by the AGW faithful, is the University of Washington PIOMASS site – which claims to model ice volume. They show ice volume dropping off precipitously after 2006 and continuing downwards.
On their web site they include the verification graph below, which curiously stops verifying in 2007.
Obviously they have run their models post 2007, so why did they stop updating their verification? The image below gives a clue. I mapped NSIDC November extent (blue) on top of their verification graph, and something stands out like a sore thumb. Ice extent jumped back up after 2007, but their volume model didn’t.
This in itself doesn’t prove anything, because it is possible that extent increased while volume decreased. (Not likely, but possible.)
Below is another one of their verification links, which actually verifies nothing because it only compares their model vs. extent. Since they undoubtedly fed the extent data as an input in to their model, it is rather bizarre that they would present this as verification evidence. It is like predicting the score of a game after it has already been played.
So let’s try doing some real verification. Below are the Navy thickness images from November 2007 and 2009.
Note that across the majority of the Arctic, 2009 thickness is greater than 2007. Notable exceptions being the 2007 pressure bump in the Beaufort Sea, and along the north coast of Greenland.
Conclusion: The PIOMASS models are probably not an accurate representation of current ice conditions. Most of the Arctic has increased in thickness since 2007.