“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!
stevengoddard says:
June 28, 2010 at 2:17 pm
Roald
There seems to be some control which keeps global sea ice fairly constant.
GeoFlynx
A good mechanism for the above observation would be: it’s winter in the Antarctic when it’s summer in the Arctic. Climatologists claim that Northern Hemisphere ice cover and extent has a greater effect on global temperature than ice in the Southern Hemisphere. The sum of both ice fields may not be a good indicator of climate change.
Ric Werme says:
June 28, 2010 at 2:57 pm
____________
Yes, I used adjacent days. Jan 1st = 1, Jan 2ns = 2, Jan 3rd = 3, etc
Excellent post. But I still do not know what PIPS mean. PIP is the spread between the “bid” and “ask” prices when you trade currencies. It is really annoying to see all that unexplained acronyms. You USA people have some kind of fetish for acronyms, courtesy mandates that you explain at least ONCE every acronym on a post on wattsupwiththat.com, the most popular science blog that ever existed. You will lose your worlds first place if you do not care about such elementary courtesy.
If you want ONLY a few specialists to read your posts then your superb work on showing the climate pseudoscience will be destroyed. Your FORCE comes from the fact that NON SPECIALISTS are reading you and your SUPERB DEMOLITION of the lies, falsehoods and logical errors of Big Academia, Big Media & Big Bureaucracy.
We already know that Big Academia, Big Media & Big Bureaucracy will DELIBERATELY IGNORE THE INCONVENIENT TRUTHS that show their theory is garbage. It is US non specialist people that have been demolishing their lies, faslsehoods and errors. Writing for Big Academia, Big Media & Big Bureaucracy is useless, ask Henrik Svensmark about how his superb work showing the sun influence on climate was simply IGNORED by Big Academia, Big Media & Big Bureaucracy those entities: They HATE people that tells them how incompetent they are and, probably most important, if their theory is proved FALSE then they have to say bye to $billions$ in grants for useless academic research, $$Trillions$$ in taxes and they hace to say goodbye too to the insane OPPRESSIVE POWER & CONTROL over our lives that they want by controlling and taxing co2. Write for us, do not write for the people that will deliberately ignore the INCONVENIENT TRUTHS that go against their oppressive political agenda
Cheers and thanks for such superb posts.
[Reply: There is an acronym list under “Glossary” at the mast head menu that may be helpful. ~dbs, mod.]
The Antarctic sea ice may increase even faster than Arctic sea ice, but then what? Is there any relation between the two? Should we be happy if the whole Arctic sea ice piles up in Antarctica? Does this confirm that there’s no climate change? I really don’t get the meaning of this comparison.
@RAYQ MCMULLEN
your 4th order polynomial fit is meaningless, you cannot base your claim just on this.
If you ask me, Its the Combo of the AMO and PDO. The AMO lags the PDO by almost 10 years, so, as the PDO Tanks in the nextYear, the AMO wll still be at its record warm phase… until 2016 or so??????????
Oceans cover 2/3 of earths surface, so it seems logical that Oceanic oscillations would have something to do with this.
There is some anomaly that seems to keep everything in balance globally…… And NO, it does not seem logical that CO2, a Trace gas essential to Life on earth, will cause our doom.
Trees Need CO2, More trees=more oxygen, which we need. Trees Absorb CO2, and So do The Oceans. If there are more tres to absorb CO2, and More oxygen in return, wouldn’t that be Beneficial?? LONGER growing Seasons, Humans will be able to Live Further North…… Lowering Poverty……… a warming climate would help, rather than hurt.
It is All a Natural Cycle, everything balances out, as one end tips, the other rebounds, and visa versa. Our planet is not in trouble, and we will be ruining our economy, and employment, over absolutely Nothing.
Expect to see, over the Next Year, the AGW crew Really try to Push thus out, HARD/FAST< because, they know……. Their Time is Almost Up. If they don't get a bill/Cap and trade out within a year, "climate change", will die slowly.
Here’s someone who wants to start the next Ice Age to counter “climate warming”by painting mountains white – a sort of twinking whiteout. Wonder what it will do to the weather.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/7859009/Inventor-paints-mountains-white-to-combat-climate-change.html
Below is my forecast for the remainder of the summer.
No one can get your prediction wrong now. 🙂 Pretty daring by the way. You must have lots of experience.
Is it possible that the IPCC is trying to rewrite the history books?
Ya.
this also a Steven Goddard video that shows the stationary mystery spot that disintegrated the moving chunk of ice near Barrow.
See http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jan/21/global-warming-antarctica
Scientists have solved the enigma of the Antarctic apparently getting cooler, while the rest of the world heats up.
New research shows that while some parts of the frozen continent have been getting slightly colder over the last few decades, the average temperature across the continent has been rising for at least the last 50 years.
In the remote and inaccessible West Antarctic region the new research, based on ground measurements and satellite data, show that the region has warmed rapidly, by 0.17C each decade since 1957. “We had no idea what was happening there,” said Professor Eric Steig, at the University of Washington, Seattle, and who led the research published in Nature.
This outweighs the cooling seen in East Antarctica, so that, overall, the continent has warmed by 0.12C each decade over the same period. This matches the warming of the southern hemisphere as a whole and removes the apparent contradiction.
—-
This is just a news paper article, but it seems worth following up on.
@ur momisugly Smokey: You should read the article, not just the headline.
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/nyt_arctic_77442757.pdf
The “expert” is a non-scientist and the scientists think he his wrong. Jeeze.
Steve:
Your first graphic is worth a 1000 words.
Just The Facts says:
June 28, 2010 at 1:34 pm
Can anyone offer a counterpoint as to why they think Arctic Sea Ice offers a better proxy for Earth’s temperature and/or temperature trend?
{Sarcasm alert} Because, as per usual, Warmists are still desperately trying to “get lucky” – just once – at which point they’ll declare “victory” 24/7 in spite of the relevance of other natural and non-CO2AGW factors such as solar activity, clouds, currents + oscillations, winds and soot; and in spite of the vast preponderance of contrary fact and failed CAGW predictions, including, of course, the previously “critical” ones.
Postnormal Science works in flat-out reverse when compared to the Scientific Method, don’tcha know.
So surely if that one Yamal tree can try so valiantly to hold out for CAGW “tenets”, even against all of Scepticdom with its massive resources and quite mysterious powers of nearly Total World mind control, it’s well past time for the rest of the Artic to step up and do its part! Or at least until…uh…the next great PNS “proof” is delivered unto us…
GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 37, L09501, 5 PP., 2010
doi:10.1029/2010GL042652
Synoptic airborne thickness surveys reveal state of Arctic sea ice cover.
Christian Haas (and others)
Abstract:
“While summer Arctic sea-ice extent has decreased over the past three decades, it is subject to large interannual and regional variations. Methodological challenges in measuring ice thickness continue to hamper our understanding of the response of the ice-thickness distribution to recent change, limiting the ability to forecast sea-ice change over the next decade. We present results from a 2400 km long pan-Arctic airborne electromagnetic (EM) ice thickness survey in April 2009, the first-ever large-scale EM thickness dataset obtained by fixed-wing aircraft over key regions of old ice in the Arctic Ocean between Svalbard and Alaska. The data provide detailed insight into ice thickness distributions characteristic for the different regions. Comparison with previous EM surveys shows that modal thicknesses of old ice had changed little since 2007, and remained within the expected range of natural variability.”
So perhaps the state of sea ice cover in the Arctic is not as bad as we have been led to believe?
Roald says:
June 28, 2010 at 1:44 pm
There’s no doubt that the wind has some influence in the Arctic sea ice extent, but it can’t explain the negative trend:
http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20091005_Figure3.png
Allow me to enquire: If the sea ice RECOVERS FULLY each year —after its melt period— then precisely what point would you be trying to make?
And do tell: Why haven’t you posted a corresponding graph showing ice extent in the deepest part of the maximum ice period of each year?
Would that have been too inconvenient?
Just to show you how easy it is to cherry pick to show ice loss over a particular period is unprecedented. Running a 15 day moving average I was able to isolate a period during all but one of the last 8 years where the ice loss was higher than any of the other years. (Bearing in mind the past 8 years have shown the highest anomalies and lowest September extents).
18th March to 26th March 2003
29th March to 8th April 2004
5th Mar to 1th March 2005
2006 – no highest ice loss but did have several periods of slowest growth/recovery
15th June to 9th July 2007
10th August to 25th August 2008
10th July to 14th July 2009
So for any of the past 8 years you could have at one point said were losing ice faster than any other year in recent times. (or in the case of 2006 gaining ice more slowly).
PALEOCEANOGRAPHY, VOL. 25, PA2213, 21 PP., 2010
doi:10.1029/2009PA001817
Holocene sea ice history and climate variability along the main axis of the Northwest Passage, Canadian Arctic
by David Ledu (and others)
Abstract:
“Palynological, geochemical, and physical records were used to document Holocene paleoceanographic changes in marine sediment core from Dease Strait in the western part of the main axis of the Northwest Passage (core 2005-804-006 PC latitude 68°59.552′N, longitude 106°34.413′W). Quantitative estimates of past sea surface conditions were inferred from the modern analog technique applied to dinoflagellate cyst assemblages. The chronology of core 2005-804-006 PC is based on a combined use of the paleomagnetic secular variation records and the CALS7K.2 time-varying spherical harmonic model of the geomagnetic field. The age-depth model indicates that the core spans the last ∼7700 cal years B.P., with a sedimentation rate of 61 cm ka−1. The reconstructed sea surface parameters were compared with those from Barrow Strait and Lancaster Sound (cores 2005-804-004 PC and 2004-804-009 PC, respectively), which allowed us to draw a millennial-scale Holocene sea ice history along the main axis of the Northwest Passage (MANWP). Overall, our data are in good agreement with previous studies based on bowhead whale remains. However, dinoflagellate sea surface based reconstructions suggest several new features. The presence of dinoflagellate cysts in the three cores for most of the Holocene indicates that the MANWP was partially ice-free over the last 10,000 years. This suggests that the recent warming observed in the MANWP could be part of the natural climate variability at the millennial time scale, whereas anthropogenic forcing could have accelerated the warming over the past decades. We associate Holocene climate variability in the MANWP with a large-scale atmospheric pattern, such as the Arctic Oscillation, which may have operated since the early Holocene. In addition to a large-scale pattern, more local conditions such as coastal current, tidal effects, or ice cap proximity may have played a role on the regional sea ice cover. These findings highlight the need to further develop regional investigations in the Arctic to provide realistic boundary conditions for climatic simulations.”
So perhaps the recent sea ice extent in the NW passage is not that unusual after all?
You go girls!
Geoflynx
Using your logic we should be able to ignore the summer minimum.
As I said in mid-April –I’ll start getting interested again July 1-July 15. And now we’re almost there. If the JAXA line is still below 2007 on July 15th, then I’ll be concerned. I don’t expect that to happen.
I think it would be interesting to see a series of total Earth sea-ice plots. However, it does appear that the Antarctic sea-ice data is not as readily available for public download in simple text form as is the similar AMSR-E Arctic sea-ice extent data.
@Achab
you can cut it down to a 3rd order if you want. The minimum is still there.
Go Figure
Spector
You can get NSIDC Antarctica data here :
ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/
It is a very slow site – be patient.
Whilst I wouldn’t classify the NYT as a font of scientific truth, Steve’s comparison of the two articles is disingenuous.
For starters, the two paragraphs he quotes are talking about two completely different places: the pack ice around Iceland in one, and the North Pole in the other.
Secondly if you actually read the 1969 article you see that even 40 years ago, the effect of CO2 on our climate was beginning to be understood. Steve conveniently quotes the paragraph that talks about the worrying effects of a cooling climate, but ignores all the points in the article that talk about the negative impact of a warmer climate: “A number of specialists believe that an ice-free Arctic Ocean would not freeze again. If so it has been predicted that storm paths would change and the food-producing areas of the Central United States and Eurasia might become deserts.”
So tell me, is it the NYT rewriting history or is it Steve Goddard rewriting the NYT?
All the
stevengoddard,
Over at nsidc.org, they say:
“PIOMAS, the average Arctic sea ice volume for May 2010 was 19,000 cubic kilometers (4,600 cubic miles), the lowest May volume over the 1979 to 2010 period. May 2010 volume was 42% below the 1979 maximum, and 32% below the 1979 to 2009 May average. The May 2010 ice volume is also 2.5 standard deviations below the 1979 to 2010 linear trend for May (–3,400 cubic kilometers, or -816 cubic miles, per decade).”
How do you answer this, same as Arctic temperatures that show station loss=increased temperatures? Even if true, I don’t credit it as being human caused, but still don’t think the figures reflect reality. What do you think?