By Steve Goddard
NCEP has changed their forecast, and it now appears there will be above normal temperatures over the Beaufort Sea for the next few days.
This will cause continued melt of the low concentration ice, and a downwards drift of the extent line. Daily loss has been declining steadily over the last month, but not enough to keep extent above my 5.5 million JAXA forecast.
Looks like it will be close at the finish line between 2009 and 2010 for JAXA 15%.
The DMI 30% concentration graph looks like 2010 will probably finish ahead of 2009.
Average ice thickness is highest since 2007 and 10% higher than 2009. Hinting at a 10% increase in ice volume next spring relative to 2010.
Barring 2007 style winds, next spring should see a third straight year of recovery since the winter of 2007-2008, when much of the thick ice blew out of the Arctic and melted in the North Atlantic.
Remember the “rotten ice” in 2008, which led to Mark Serreze betting on an ice free North Pole that summer? Looks like we have come a long way since then. Here is what the North Pole looks like today :
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Phil,
You can’t be serious with that last post. The image you linked is from 77N. It is almost 1000 miles from the pole.
The webcam image is this article is from the North Pole Environmental Observatory, taken from their webcam which is currently 230 miles from the Pole
“”” KPO says:
August 24, 2010 at 8:12 am
Sorry to be a complete dunce here, but when measuring ice thickness do we measure it as above the water surface or in its entirety? EG is 2.5 meters on the scale actually 1.6 meters above sea level? “””
I think thickness is usually measured from one face to the opposite face. If you measure it with a radar, how would it know where the sea level was ?
I don’t do predictions; well not until the results are in hand. But I thought 2009 was going to get beat this year; but that crummy DMI Temperature graph suddenly got stuck on warm, and refuses to go down, so maybe 2010 is going to be the third lowest ice extent in history of the post 1979 Ice Data; but I don’t expect 2008 will get challenged for the Avis slot. I could be wrong on that; I was wrong once before !
Phil,
And having a couple ships plowing a path through the ice has no impact? And if there were two ships there when this picture was taken how do we know that there hasn’t been several more recently in that area that led to the ice being broken up? I’ll go with pictures and data from areas that aren’t as disturbed like the floating buoy.
Phil certainly tends to shoot from the hip, doesn’t he!
Julienne
I agree. There appears to still be a fair amount of vulnerable ice which is probably going to melt this week.
NCEP long range temperature forecasts have been consistently too low over the last couple of weeks, but they do show cold weather for next week.
Phil. says:
August 24, 2010 at 8:21 am
More of your nonsense Goddard, as you well know Barber was no where near the location of that image (which is not at the N Pole but actually closing on the Fram strait). The following image is in the vicinity of Barber’s location, and guess what, it still looks rotten!
Looks like melting ice to me, what is this rotten concept you speak of? To me ice melts every year, so this entire “rotten” concept just stinks of some educational misfits who got too high one night and decided to come up with some excuse on why their previous charts are wrong..its not our charts that are wrong, its the ice’s fault for not melting!! Its Rotten I tell ya!
How can you tell ice is rotten by the way? Do you smell it, or do you look at it and say “the way its melting is different then other types of ice, and that means its rotten.” This ice is melting like “swiss cheese instead of like “ice”. Its not real ice, its SWISS ICE!
Speaking of rotten ice, is it like eggs that when rotten smell bad? I think I will head a study to figure this one out. I will have enough US monies through my education grant to fly us to Tahiti three times in the name of finding “rotten” ice. So if anyone is interested in studying rotten ice melt in Tahiti, please let me know.
Who knows, maybe I will run into some scientists who smell rotten…and I can do a study on them and how rotten their science is compared to mine which is based on rotten ice data in Tahiti. We all know the better rotten ice is in Tahiti, so lets go to Tahiti and study some real science folks!
Ice rot is not something to be taken lightly I tell you what!
Steve Goddard.
Dr. Barber is the originator of your “rotten ice” quote referring to 2008 and Phil is quite correct in pointing out that he was talking about ice much closer to the current location of the webcam he linked to than to the north pole.
stevengoddard says:
August 24, 2010 at 9:11 am
Phil,
You can’t be serious with that last post. The image you linked is from 77N. It is almost 1000 miles the pole.
Your repeated failure to educate yourself on the subject under discussion is perfectly illustrated by this post. Rather than take Anthony’s hint and read the article about Barber and the ‘rotten ice’ you just bluster on!
The image I showed is from the region where Barber encountered the ‘rotten ice’ he referred to, he was not talking about the N Pole or the Fram strait.
The webcam image is this article is from the North Pole Environmental Observatory, taken from their webcam which is currently 230 miles from the Pole
Indeed, but irrelevant.
REPLY: Phil. is an academic at a major university, rudeness is one of his regular traits here. – Anthony
Are Phil, Phildot and Son of Phil (or was is Father of Phil?) one and the same person? And do you mean by “academic” that he was not promoted to perfesser or something?
Scott,
Remember that NSIDC took a mulligan, changing their forecast in July. They started at 5.5 million.
I haven’t taken my mulligan yet ;^)
The prediction, based entirely on a phase plot (dA/dt vs. A), of 5,301,000 sqkm looks pretty darn good at this point.
rw says:
August 24, 2010 at 9:33 am
Like a cornered bear, he lashes out. We expect that from the FAGTs (Feeders At the Government Trough). One has to make a decent living, no?
AndyW says:
August 24, 2010 at 9:01 am
Don’t be so sure that your 4.9 will be far off…statistically you still have a decent shot of being close…4.9e6 km^2 is definitely still in the running, though at the low end.
-Scott
stevengoddard says:
August 24, 2010 at 9:46 am
Excellent point Steve. I also didn’t realize that they were forecasting September averages (at least according to Alexej Buergin, is he right?)…that totally changes the game and I see them severely undershooting the value.
-Scott
Phil. says:
August 24, 2010 at 8:21 am
“More of your nonsense Goddard, as you well know Barber was no where near the location of that image (which is not at the N Pole but actually closing on the Fram strait). ”
The webcam picture is co-located with the PAWS buoy which is presently at Lat 86.7. The Fram is at Lat 80-81. The station has drifted from the Pole but is still much closer to it than to the Strait.
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/PAWS_atmos_recent.html
Interestingly, the other webcam buoy(POPS) which quit sending photos back in July has moved 2.5 degrees farther from the Pole but has been reporting temps consistently 8-10 degrees colder than the buoy closer to the Pole. I’m not sure what that means but it seems a bit counterintuitive
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/POPS13_atmos_recent.html
bubbagyro says:
August 24, 2010 at 10:01 am
rw says:
August 24, 2010 at 9:33 am
Like a cornered bear, he lashes out. We expect that from the FAGTs (Feeders At the Government Trough). One has to make a decent living, no?
Who is the FAGT you refer to?
Personally, Phil of Academia, this web site is more educationally stimulating than most academics’ present in thier Academiadomes.
Just a thought from an over educated illiterate.
I commented last week that I preferred another commentor’s honest skepticism as opposed to S Goddard’s ‘triumphalism’ about an accurate prediction and the petty yes/no posting debates he has with “Phil”. SG quickliy responded that he wasn’t being triumphant and the melt season hadn’t ended. I must say, SG has owned up quickly to his prediction ultimately not panning out…. as for Phil… well he’s still petty and rude.
Mr. Goddard I retract my criticism, you are an honest and polite man.. Phil? you’re not only wrong, you’re rude and a “denier” of the of the worst sort.
” Scott says:
August 24, 2010 at 10:10 am
Excellent point Steve. I also didn’t realize that they were forecasting September averages (at least according to Alexej Buergin, is he right?)”
I cannot remember if Steven Goddard has defined his forcast (eg as “the lowest value uf JAXA”) but for the SEARCH people it is defined thus:
http://www.arcus.org/search/seaiceoutlook/background.php
See 3)
Phil is one of the most intellectually dishonest people on this planet, and whatever tiny bit of credibility he might have had with me is now gone. IMO he depicts everything that is wrong with the global warming crowd…rude, dishonest, childish, melodramatic egomania. I’m sorry, Anthony, if I went over the top, but the lack of respect Phil shows here would get one of my kids a warm behind. For an adult to do such a thing in the context of this blog is reprehensible.
Like anyone, Phil. is wrong. Everyone who posts often makes mistakes. Phil’s problem is his inability to acknowledge when he’s wrong. Instead, he gets rude.
Can you imagine being one of his students, knowing that your prof is so insecure he can never admit he made a mistake? Phil shows why tenure should be eliminated.
It all stems from insecurity. Nero had the same psychological problem. And look what happened to him.
We were at 5.6 yesterday. It will hit 5.5 in two or three days at most.
Last year the first day of gain was September 4th. And the minimum was reached on September 13th
Between August 23rd and the minimum last year, the melt was about .5 million
So the math says that around 5.0 or 5.1 should be this year’s minimum.
Smokey says:
August 24, 2010 at 10:30 am
I don’t know anything about Phil, so I’ll leave that alone. However, your description fits with a lot of professors I’ve met (with the possible exception of the reason being insecurity…don’t know if that’s right), even my own advisor. In general, my advisor is great and I like working with him. However, many times he’s refused to back down when he’s in the wrong, and he never backs down when we’re in front of other people. We’ve argued several times during our weekly group meeting. I’ve never been wrong in these arguments (I have to be extremely confident and have overwhelming evidence in support of my argument to argue with my boss in front of the group), yet the group does not know this, as the argument ends with him pulling an argument from authority. Several times he’s admitted to me the next day that he looked it up/ran the numbers/etc and I was right, but never to the group. It really looks bad for me and has given me a bad rep in the group. From what I understand, this isn’t all that uncommon in academia and it seems rampant in some areas, especially CAGW.
-Scott
stevengoddard says:
August 24, 2010 at 9:46 am
Scott,
Remember that NSIDC took a mulligan, changing their forecast in July. They started at 5.5 million.
I haven’t taken my mulligan yet ;^)
——————-
Steve, really? 🙂 I think you know that the 5.5 million sq-km prediction we made based on ice survival rates was never what we actually thought was going to happen. It was purely a statistical analysis of ice age survival rates applied to the March 2010 ice age classes to see what that would give. I never thought it was realistic since the relationship is based on an assumption for age vs thickness relationship which I believe is changing as the Arctic continues to warm (and this was stated in our detailed report). It is also based on an average summer circulation pattern, and that can be very off in a given year. Statistics can be useful to highlight relationships but it’s not always valid which is the reason why it’s always good to look at the actual physical processes occurring.
I finally saw what your prediction of 5.5 million sq-km is based on (submitted to the SEARCH Outlook – I’m responsible for writing the report this month) and it was good to finally read your reasoning behind the value (which I could never quite figure out from the postings on WUWT). I’m sure your readers will be interested in reading the next SEARCH Outlook report.