This month, we have nearly a perfect bell curve distribution of votes, except for a minority vote that says less than 4.5 million sq kilometers. 750 votes were cast.
PAN-ARCTIC OUTLOOK – WUWT (acronym for WattsUpWithThat.com)
1. Extent Projection: 5.0 million square kilometers
2. Methods/Techniques: web poll of readers
3. Rationale: Composite of projections by readers, projection bracket with the highest response is the one submitted.
4. Executive Summary: Website devoted to climate and weather polled its readers for the best estimate of 2011 sea ice extent minimum by choosing bracketed values from a web poll which can be seen at:
18.27 % chose the value 5.0 to 5.1 Million sq km2 or greater, down from the previous month projection of 5.1-5.2 million square kilometers with 10.93% choosing 4.9 to 5.0 million square kilometers as the second highest vote. Over one third of all votes cast fell in the range of 4.9 to 5.2 million square kilometers, with 37.2% of all votes in that range.
A minority opinion emerged with 8.53% of votes cast for less than 4.5 million square kilometers.
5. Estimate of Forecast Skill: none
Outlook submission deadline: Sunday, 31 July 2011. All Outlooks should be sent to: Helen Wiggins, ARCUS
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I voted for 4.5-4.6 the other day, but in view of today’s chart:
http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Extent_L.png
my forecast may be off the mark……………
I choose 4.9 to 5.0 million square kilometers .
Well it does not mean a lot only that in 750 people you get a SD of guesses. I shall wait to November and see exactly how we all did.
Good work, Anthony. This is fun, and a nice gentle way to draw readers into one aspect of climate-related science.
OK… I see Al “Millions of Degrees Core” Gore showed up and voted 14 times…
5. Estimate of Forecast Skill: none
Sir, I take the greatest of umbrage at this scurrilous accusation! It took me ages to guess the level of ice-melt I voted for, I scanned the tea-leaves, anylised the seaweed, gazed into my crystal ball, read the tarrot cards, talked to a bloke down the pub who’s been on lots of Greenpeace demos who assured me the Inuit’s home was melting beneath them woe woe is me etc, & I even used a puter model!!!!! ;-))
When’s William Hill going to get a hold onto this?
I’m only a layman but do I detect a slight uptick (or perhaps more accurately a slight decline in the rate of decrease) on the WUWT Sea Ice graphs?
The melting has slowed remarkably in the past week. The cries of “worst year ever” are beginning to subside.
Jockdownsouth, indeed you do, particularly on some of the more promptly-updated measures and on the DMI 30% measure.
Of course, any ‘trends’ in the short term can be ephemeral, so I wouldn’t go extrapolating towards the 2002 minimum just yet, especially given the extent of less-than-90% concentrations on the CT chart that could be subject to melt or compression. However, the next 10 days could be key in determining which way the worms will turn.
Does anyone know WHY there was a sudden change in the rate of melt of Arctic sea ice on 19 July 2011?
Is Al Gore visiting the area?
Just checked NSIDC and SHAZAM!! The Arctic Ocean is still covered with ice. Imagine that.
Went with the 4.7-4.8 range. I did a robust analysis of how trend lines work and the result was 4.7324564
I agonized, er waffled, between the 4.9 to 5.0 and 5.0 to 5.1 categories, but wound up voting for the more conservative estimate. My best guess would be 5.0.
Jun: 5.5
Jul: 5.1
Aug: 5.0
The negative trend is clear even here. Anyone on Earth positive on Arctic sea ice?
Jim Cripwell said on August 1, 2011 at 3:25 am:
I’m blaming the North American “heat dome” “heat wave” effect. The warmth is down here, it’s not going up to the Arctic, therefore slower sea ice melting. Other people here can apply the technical terms and explain it better, if that’s what’s really happening.
And ABC’s Good Morning America just informed me the heat dome is reforming. Oh, and they’re also hoping that potential “tropical storm Emily” forms. How many hours does it have to be barely strong enough to qualify as a “tropical storm” these days?
Jim Cripwell says: August 1, 2011 at 3:25 am
Does anyone know WHY there was a sudden change in the rate of melt of Arctic sea ice on 19 July 2011?
One factor appears to be the Greenland Sea, where sea ice began to grow on July 15th and has been trending above average since then:
ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02186/plots/r07_Greenland_Sea_ts.png
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/recent365.anom.region.5.html
JAXA sea ice extent is taking an interesting turn. Greater than 5.5 possible?
‘The cries of “worst year ever” are beginning to subside.’
The alarmists cry to the public about “the worst year ever” and the public remembers that and not the facts when the prediction fails. It is this allowing the alarmists to make failed predictions over and over without loss of credibility that continues to drive this train.
Jim Cripwell says:
August 1, 2011 at 3:25 am
“Does anyone know WHY there was a sudden change in the rate of melt of Arctic sea ice on 19 July 2011?”
The AO had then just recently turned positive and first year ice was running low.
Sure. Mr. Gates’ dipole has not shown up. Nor has the AO turned strongly towards anything. The AO is in slumber at the moment. The temps up there are nearing 0 degrees, being more than half way through the above freezing temperature period, as it heads towards its freezeup. Wind, temperature, pressure systems, and daily ice movement appear stable and would argue for ice being retained in the Arctic Circle. Melt will continue but at a snail’s pace under these conditions.
Probably better to use the median than use the mode for the guess. Not different this time, but a slightly different bucketing scheme could have resulted in a mode that was the <4.5 million category.
The warm is turning.
Why the sudden change in Melt rate: In part, because there is a greater extent of thicker multi-year ice than in the past few years.