WUWT sea Ice forecast poll, just a few hours left

The poll closes at 12PM PST, Thursday, July 5th. If you have not voted, get your vote in now here. The deadline for submission to ARCUS is today.

Advertisements

14 thoughts on “WUWT sea Ice forecast poll, just a few hours left

  1. It is interesting noting how fast the ice amounts are declining this year, from very high – at the ‘normal line’ and a tad above to the present deficit of nearly 2 million km^2 presently. Joe Bastardi always said that the time to really pay attention to this is not so much the spring but the late summer – what the minimum actually turns out to be.
    I am reasonably certain we will go below the 2007 low this year, but what is interesting is that I am thinking we don’t know still what this actually means. There are so many factors we do not yet understand, and the ice season of 2006-2007 should help as a teacher:
    Here are factors to consider that I know of:
    1. El Nino is coming on, and arctic temps are touching the normal line – though usually slightly below
    2. direction and strength of currents in Arctic Ocean – remember in 2006 ice wasn’t visible at Point Barrow until about December or late November – the warmingistas were screaming that this was the beginning of the end, only to realize the following year that no one took into account a change in current direction that took place that year. The following fall – in 2007, and since then, ice has been present – and usually packed by late September in the same region.
    3. Relationship between temperatures and ice formation, along with winds and currents – Last winter was a bitter one in Alaska, and it seems to have been pretty cold in the even higher latitudes, though I may be wrong about that – someone else can comment. Yet, ice was reported as “thinner” (which I didn’t trust because of warmingista media) and it also was canted in favor of the Western Hemisphere – ice well down into the north Pacific, but not in the Barents Sea. Why?
    4. Long range graphs still point at an INCREASE in sea ice in the northern Hemisphere – one that is coming, as we seem to be at the low end of the cycle.
    5. We also still do not know the relationship between an ice-free arctic and cold weather in the rest of the Nothern Hemisphere continents. What if one doesn’t preclude the other?
    I suspect that the best science we can do on this is to continue to observe. Maybe if we quit extrapolating with our very inadequate data and history, we might actually learn how the system works.

  2. “get you vote in now here. Te deadline ” Voice transcription does typos? Who knew?

  3. How do you process the poll data to say what it really says?
    As I expected there are two main groupings, the hopeful guessing high and the pragmatic guessing lower. As of this writing, as has been evident for days, there’s a “missing peak”. The major peak appears to me to be between 4.6 and 4.5 10^6 km² with 67 and 65 votes each. That interval has more average votes (66) than the 4.9-4.8 (44 and 70, average 57) or 4.8-4.7 (70 and 30, average 50) intervals.
    Thus I see a hidden peak at 4.55 that is greater than the winner otherwise, 4.80.
    What is the correct approach to reveal such a peak with data at such a coarse resolution?
    Guess, votes
    4.7, 30
    4.6, 67
    4.5, 65
    4.4, 35
    Short slope forward:
    [(65-35)/(4.5-4.4) * 0.15] + 35
    = 80 votes for 4.55
    Short slope backward:
    -[(30-67)/(4.7-4.6) * 0.15] + 30
    = 85.5 votes for 4.55
    Average 83 votes for 4.55 10^6km².
    This would be more votes than 4.8, which drops off sharply high and low thus neither 4.85 nor 4.75 would match 4.55.
    Is that an acceptable statistical technique?

  4. mike about town says:
    July 5, 2012 at 8:34 am
    12 PM is noon…not Midnight, which is 12 AM
    =================
    NOAA never uses 12 (AM or PM) in their forecasts anymore.
    It is always rounded up to 1 (AM or PM) now.
    Apparently their database does not include the words: Noon or Midnight 🙂

  5. mike about town says: “12 PM is noon…not Midnight, which is 12 AM”
    Actually, midnight is both AM and PM by equal amounts. Noon is neither AM nor PM, since it’s just plain “M,” for meridiem.

  6. Whats interesting is that voters avoided following Anthony’s guess of 4.7
    they felt compelled to either go higher or lower.
    There are also some oddities like the people who vote more than 5.5. probably trolls

  7. Sea ice concentrations from Cryosphere are really not what they seem from there low res map. Here are the Canadian ice charts showing the actual concentrations for the Beaufort and Archipelago regions. Also have Hudson Bay.
    Cryosphere map
    http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/NEWIMAGES/arctic.seaice.color.003.png
    Canadian maps
    Beaufort and Archipelago regions
    http://ice-glaces.ec.gc.ca/prods/WIS56CT/20120702180000_WIS56CT_0006519774.gif
    Hudson Bay
    http://ice-glaces.ec.gc.ca/prods/WIS54CT/20120702180000_WIS54CT_0006519628.gif
    Here’s an explanation of the Egg codes on the maps. Top number is total concentration for the zone.
    http://www.ec.gc.ca/glaces-ice/default.asp?lang=En&n=B6C654BB-1&wsdoc=FE5C2688-21A8-4165-8FFB-5D28B2A1D943
    Cryosphere, like every year, over doing the lower numbers over the ice. They must be picking up melt water and showing it as sea water.
    Canadian ice home page.
    http://www.ec.gc.ca/glaces-ice/default.asp?lang=En&n=D32C361E-1

  8. Is midnight PST really 00:00 Pacific (ie. PDT, 23:00 PST) or are you ignoring daylight savings?
    If it’s 00:00 PDT, that’s going to be 07:00 UTC (Zulu or GMT) on Friday 6 July.
    However, many people call noon 12pm, which would make it 19:00 UTC, which has already passed.
    We’re a pernickety bunch, aren’t we?

  9. Brian D says:
    July 5, 2012 at 2:16 pm
    Sea ice concentrations from Cryosphere are really not what they seem from there low res map.
    Cryosphere, like every year, over doing the lower numbers over the ice. They must be picking up melt water and showing it as sea water.
    Canadian ice home page.
    http://www.ec.gc.ca/glaces-ice/default.asp?lang=En&n=D32C361E-1

    CT looks reasonable to me compared with this:
    http://lance-modis.eosdis.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/imagery/single.cgi?image=crefl2_143.A2012188113000-2012188113500.2km.jpg

Comments are closed.