“Steepest slope ever.”
By Steven Goddard
We have been hearing a lot about how the decline in Arctic ice is following the “steepest slope ever.” The point is largely meaningless, but we can have some fun with it. The Bremen Arctic/Antarctic maps are superimposed above, showing that ice in the Antarctic is at a record high and growing at the “steepest slope ever.” You will also note that most of the world’s sea ice is located in the Antarctic. But those are inconvenient truths when trying to frighten people into believing that “the polar ice caps are melting.”
There are several favorite lines of defense when trying to rationalize away the record Antarctic ice.
1. It is the Ozone Hole – which is also the fault of evil, American SUV drivers. That is a nice guilt trip, but sadly the Ozone Hole doesn’t form until August and is gone by December. Strike one.
The next one is to point out that some regions of the west side of the tiny Antarctic Peninsula have been warming. Never mind that the Antarctic Peninsula is an active volcanic ridge, and that the waters around it have not shown any significant warming. Strike two.
UAH shows Antarctica cooling slightly over the last 30 years.
The third favorite line of defense is to argue that “we expected Antarctica to warm more slowly because of the mass of the southern oceans.” Nice try – “slower warming” is not the same as “cooling.” Strike three.
(The AGW view of Antarctica is every bit as irrational as FIFA’s stand that not having instant replays somehow helps the referees’ reputations.)
On to the Arctic. First graph is a JAXA comparison of 2006, 2007 and 2010. Note that 2006 and 2007 were nearly identical, until early July. The main difference between 2006 (second highest in the JAXA record) and 2007 (lowest in the JAXA record) was that strong southerly winds compacted and melted the ice in 2007. As you can see below, the summer extent numbers are nearly meaningless before July/August. So far, 2010 is tracking very closely with both 2006 and 2007, and it appears the three will intersect in about a week.
Let’s take a closer look at the mechanisms using the PIPS ice and wind data. If we watch the movement of Arctic ice during the summer, we can see that when the winds blow away from the pole (i.e. from the north) the ice expands. When the wind blows from the south, the ice contracts. Some summers, the winds alternate between north and south, and the ice extent changes less during the summer – like in 2000 below.
Other years, like 2007, the summer winds blew consistently from the south, causing the ice to melt at a faster pace and compress towards the north.
So basically, it is weather (wind) rather than climate which controls the summer minimum. Of course, it is harder to compress and melt thick ice than thin ice – so the thickness of the ice is important. It is too early to determine if 2010 will see winds like 2007, or if summer winds this year will be more like 2006.
No one has demonstrated much skill at forecasting winds six weeks in the future, so it is really anybody’s guess what wil happen this summer. Before August arrives, the pattern should be clear.
The video below shows ice movement near Barrow, AK over the past 10 days.
The winds were blowing strongly and contracting the ice edge until the last few days, when they died down. Over the past two or three days, the ice edge has not moved very much.
Over the last week, almost all of the ice loss in the Arctic has been in the Hudson Bay, as seen in the modified NSIDC image below in red. The Hudson Bay is normally almost ice free in September, so the recent losses are are almost meaningless with respect to the summer minimum.
The modified NSIDCimage below shows ice loss since early April. All of the areas shown in red are normally ice free in September.
The modified NSIDC image below is a comparison of 2010 vs 2007. Areas of red had more ice in 2007. Areas of green have more ice in 2010.
‘
The modified NSIDC image below shows the current deficiencies in red. Again, all of those areas are normally ice free in September, so they don’t tell us much about the summer minimum.
Below is my forecast for the remainder of the summer.
But it all depends on the wind.
From the 9th century to the 13th century almost no ice was reported there. This was the period- of Norse colonization of’ Iceland and Greenland. Then, conditions worsened and the Norse colonies declined. After the Little Ice Age of 1650 to 1840 the ice began to vanish near Iceland and had almost disappeared when the trend re versed, disastrously crippling Icelandic fisheries last year.
The thick ice that has for ages covered the Arctic Ocean at the pole has turned to water, recent visitors there reported yesterday. At least for the time being, an ice-free patch of ocean about a mile wide has opened at the very top of the world, something that has presumably never before been seen by humans and is more evidence that global warming may be real and already affecting climate. The last time scientists can be certain the pole was awash in water was more than 50 million years ago.
Is it possible that the IPCC is trying to rewrite the history books?
Sponsored IT training links:
Guaranteed success in 350-029 exam with latest 70-290 questions and 642-974 practice test!
David Gould
Satellite photos show that there isn’t any missing ice in the Arctic Basin.
villabolo
June 29, 2010 at 5:12 pm
You also believe in the Hockey Stick?
villabolo
June 29, 2010 at 5:12 pm
I think we are on different wave lengths or something here. Maybe you can exchange comments with someone else. There may be others who will relate to you more.
Freeman Dyson on global warming (a topic I’ve just been told he knows little about, because a quick Google said so)
stevengoddard,
On the cryosphere today map, their definition of the Arctic Basin does seem to include areas that are empty of ice – I am looking at the region between the two islands (one is likely Spitzbergen, but I am not completely sure, to be honest). There also appears to be some open water to the north of the Canadian Archipelago. This is right on the edge of the Arctic Basin/Beaufort Sea areas, but some of that open water looks as though it protudes into the region defined by cryosphere today as the Arctic Basin. (This is using the map on the main page for 26 June). I may be reading it wrong, however.
What about my other questions re your arctic basin ice area calculations? Am I wrong? If so, how/where? Again, these are genuine questions.
villabolo
He actually says no ones knows much about it.
There also looks to be some open water to the side of the Nares Strait – a very thin strip up against the Canadian Archipelago. This was also in Modis imagery I saw yesterday. This may close due to winds, but it looks like open water at the moment.
And, indeed, there appears to be open water in the Arctic Basin next to the Kara Sea. Again, it is tricky to tell for sure with some of these, as the orientations of the maps are different. But using the islands as reference points seems to work. (However, I should also note that my spatial sense is not the best …)
Thanks to Just The Facts for the explanation on what PIPS means.
Wattsupwiththat (WUWT) is writing the book on how to defeat Big Media, Big Academia & Big Bureaucracy, their lies, falsehoods and their DELIBERATE ignorance of the INCONVENIENT TRUTHS that prove them wrong. Your work is really impressive. I wish so much that a place like WUWT existed for macroeconomics “science” since macroeconomics is among the worst pseudosciences that exist. It is obvious that you scientists have rigour and are trained in the scientific method.
But economists have a really appalling lack of rigour and do horrifying damage with their pseudoscience, it is not surprising that Jeffrey Sachs, a very well known economist, wrote “one of the slimiest post ever” against WUWT, the superb blog that is destroying Academia, Media & Bureucracy world of falsehood and lack of logic.
Macroeconomics is one of the most corrupt of the pseudosciences, it would be so great that honest macroeconomists visited more often places like WUWT to LEARN how you actually do science.
Cheers, keep the superb work going.
middle of September is coming soon, we will see that there is no alarming thinning
Amino Acids in Meteorites,
Again, I say that it is not coming soon enough. 😉
Steve says: … there isn’t any missing ice in the Arctic Basin.
There’s no Open Water in the Arctic ???
Just look at PIPS 2.0.
The Navy wouldn’t Lie.
You said.
2009: http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/pips2/archive/retrievepic.html?filetype=Thickness&year=2009&month=6&day=29
2010: http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/pips2/archive/retrievepic.html?filetype=Thickness&year=2010&month=6&day=29
It must be the Internet Moths. They’ve eaten holes in the website pic. Off West Canada. And Central Siberia (the New Siberian Islands). Off the Bering Strait too, but that was large in both years
…just like 2007:
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/pips2/archive/retrievepic.html?filetype=Thickness&year=2007&month=6&day=29
… And how about the AMSR-E at http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/cgi-bin/seaice-monitor.cgi (another site you can pick days out of the past).
>>> It’s warm, admit it.
In the ARCTIC.
You’re Right, the Antarctic is gaining Ice.
And I, for one, Hope the rapid-reversal of Global Sea Temps continues
http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/AMSRE-SST-Global-and-Nino34-thru-June-17-2010.gif
And Of course, you ARE right about the Ice: it’s not missing. It never left. It’s still there.
It’s Water now.
This shows a picture of a sub in open water at the North Pole. Why are we investing so much in the Arctic ice melt? Worse yet why do I look at it enery day? It’s like watching paint dry!!
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/26/ice-at-the-north-pole-in-1958-not-so-thick/
Amino Acids in Meteorites says:
June 29, 2010 at 5:47 pm
villabolo
June 29, 2010 at 5:12 pm
I think we are on different wave lengths or something here. Maybe you can exchange comments with someone else. There may be others who will relate to you more.
**********************************************************************
Amino Acids in Meteorites says:
June 29, 2010 at 5:54 pm
Freeman Dyson on global warming (a topic I’ve just been told he knows little about, because a quick Google said so)
**********************************************************************
June 29, 2010 at 6:02 pm
villabolo
He actually says no ones knows much about it.
**********************************************************************
VILLABOLO RESPONDS:
Amino Acids, did you actually READ my post at 3:33 PM, June 29? I clearly quoted and cited what he said in a magazine interview. I assumed that you read my link.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/06/28/sea-ice-news-11/#comment-419828
Here, once more, is the portion I quoted from Environment 360; June 09, 2009 with the link (the quote is at the end of Dyson’s first exchange with 360, right under the audio link) :
http://www.e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2151
“My objections to the global warming propaganda are not so much over the technical facts, about which I do not know much, but it’s rather against the way those people behave and the kind of intolerance to criticism that a lot of them have.”
David Gould says:
June 29, 2010 at 6:04 pm
There also looks to be some open water to the side of the Nares Strait – a very thin strip up against the Canadian Archipelago. This was also in Modis imagery I saw yesterday. This may close due to winds, but it looks like open water at the moment.
The Nares strait is very interesting, in most years it is blocked off by ice until late in the summer, when some ice floes (the thickest ice in the Arctic) leak out into the Baffin Sea where it later melts. One of the unusual factors of summer 2007 was that the Nares strait opened very early and much more ice escaped. The same thing happened this year and ice has been flowing out all spring. If you look at the strait on Modis at the 250m scale you’ll see that it’s filled with small floes passing through.
Here for example, about halfway down, choose 250m from the side and scan down.
http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/realtime/single.php?T101802240
Notice also outside the entrance to the strait all the breaks in the ice that Steve says aren’t there, he really needs to use the zoom button more.
Amino Acids in Meteorites says:
June 29, 2010 at 6:34 pm
middle of September is coming soon, we will see that there is no alarming thinning
VILLABOLO SAYS:
The thinning has been happening even when the surface area expanded in 2008. Also look at 2009 where the <2 year ice gets riddled extensively with <1 year ice. It has been alarming all along.
http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20091005_Figure5.png
Charles Wilson says:
June 29, 2010 at 7:12 pm
Steve says: … there isn’t any missing ice in the Arctic Basin.
There’s no Open Water in the Arctic ???
Steve didn’t say there is no open water in the Arctic. He said there is no missing ice, according to the sat photo he referenced–meaning the ice is about what you’d expect this time of year.
No need to read all your links and no time anyway. Just a lot of arm waving to confuse the issue… You don’t work for Media Matters do you? If you do, there are lots of people who have a bone to pick with you for lying about what they say.
@villabolo
Dyson said he didn’t know a lot about it. But, I suspect his gut feelings are worth a lot more than the life’s work of a whole boatload of trenbreth’s, mann’s, hansen’s, etc.
stevengoddard says:
June 29, 2010 at 12:13 am
Curious Yellow
Reading your comment, I sense that you didn’t read the article very closely.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Perhaps too closely
It’s not off-topic. It comes directly from the first paragraph in your post. To quote again:
The ice cap is the land-bound ice. But your counter argument rests on sea ice. They are two different things. I am asking you to clarify if you believe that the Antarctic ice cap (land ice) has also increased, contrary to scientific estimates. Or else admit that you were unaware of, or temporarily forgot, the difference.
Phil and others re: my request that the hit or miss predictions be explained, whether the prediction turns out right or wrong, at the end of the melt season.
Just because a prediction about melt turns out to be way outside the bullseye does not mean that the fallback explanation will be: “It’s AGW what done it.” Sea ice is at the mercy of weather and oceanic conditions to a far greater degree than a very small percentage increase of CO2 (which already is a tiny fraction of atmospheric gasses), of which only a part of that is related to human sources. If your “it’s worse than we thought” prediction is closer to the actual amount of melt, and you decide to simply refer to AGW, I will so call you on it as being a very lame explanation. AGW is not, by itself, an ice melting parameter.
For AGW proponents, weather parameters and oceanic conditions must be tied to a CO2 mechanism if your prediction turns out to be correct, and you must outline that mechanism, with references, in your post. Those are my terms and of course are binding to no one other than myself.
villabolo
You are taking what he said in that instance out of context. You rush to find out what he is like from a ‘quick Google’ and now you think you know everything about him. If you’ll take the quote in context he’s not talking about the ‘technical facts’ of global warming but the ‘technical facts’ of the propaganda.
“My objections to the global warming propaganda are not so much over the technical facts, about which I do not know much, but it’s rather against the way those people behave and the kind of intolerance to criticism that a lot of them have.”
And the IARC-JAXA daily loss is out for 29th June at just under 84,000 sq km down from the rather drastic 140,000 of the previous day.
In terms of comparisons with 2007 the next 7 days will be interesting. From the 29th June 2007 to 4th July 2007 the daily ice losses were:
-119688
-112968
-143282
-162031
-201875
-130937
Will we see somthing simliar this year or will the losses stay in the 80-100,000 range?
Don Shaw says:
June 29, 2010 at 7:37 pm
This shows a picture of a sub in open water at the North Pole. Why are we investing so much in the Arctic ice melt? Worse yet why do I look at it enery day? It’s like watching paint dry!!
*************************************************************************
Don when you actually read the article you will find that they were surfacing through polynyas which are, and have been, very common in the Arctic Ice Cap. This is so regardless of whether it was a thick ice cap like it was back then or the radically thinned out one of today. Polynyas are NOT and indication of an ice free arctic. Polynyas exist even in Antarctica today.
Please see a portion from the article you linked and notice how these openings open and close quickly:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/26/ice-at-the-north-pole-in-1958-not-so-thick/
“The Ice at the polar ice cap is an average of 6-8 feet thick, but with the wind and tides the ice will crack and open into large polynyas (areas of open water), these areas will refreeze over with thin ice. We had sonar equipment that would find these open or thin areas to come up through, thus limiting any damage to the submarine. The ice would also close in and cover these areas crushing together making large ice ridges both above and below the water. We came up through a very large opening in 1958 that was 1/2 mile long and 200 yards wide. The wind came up and closed the opening within 2 hours.”
************************************************************************
As to why it is so important to watch this paint dry:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/06/25/the-trend/#comment-418293
Steve, it would be nice if you would bother to answer folks questions to you. You have still not provided anything about what your predictions are based on.
It seems clear to me from your avoidance that you are not basing it on any physical basis, but rather what you want it to be. The reality is your recovery you wrote about so passionately this spring did not come to pass. This summer will continue yet another anomalously sea ice year despite how desperately you want to avoid it.
It is happening, and a warming fingerprint is clear not just in regards to the sea ice but all facets of the Arctic. It doesn’t matter what your PDO, PNA, ENSO, AMO, AO, DA is doing from year to year. The warming is clear. So instead of spending so much time trying to deny what is obvious, why not spend time trying to figure out why it’s happening.
You need to come back to the basics. The only energy input into the climate is the sun. So “natural variability” would mean variability in the sun’s energy received by the Earth. Some other natural variability could be things like volcanic eruptions and earthquakes. But that’s about it. Of course the system can be chaotic (which is what weather is about). But the long-term trends, what is causing those? Is it the sun? Is it volcanic eruptions? earthquakes? From everything I’ve read, those are not causing the warming today. We’ve already done the warming that happens when you come out of an ice age, and now we’re doing that warming again.
To me it seems “skeptic” energy is misplaced. Instead of looking foolish trying to deny what is clearly obvious (like the decline in Arctic sea ice), challenge the ideas of what is causing that decline.