I don’t have much time for a detailed post, a number of people want to discuss sea ice, so here is your chance. We also need to update the ARCUS forecast for August, due Monday August 6th. Poll follows:
I understand that the most important factor in Arctic Ice melt is the wind breaking it up and pushing it into the North Atlantic. That ‘s exactly what has happened most of this spring and summer – and even last winter.
Just look at WUWT’s fantastic Sea Ice Reference Page’s section on Arctic Sea Ice Speed&Drift.
And I would like to see a study on the influence of soot on Arctic Sea Ice melt. The whole year round, soot rains down on the ice.
While the sun melts the ice, soot concentrations on the surface become higher and higher, the albedo becoming lower and lower. The warming influence of the sun must be strongly and progressively enhanced by the soot, but exactly how much?
@Smokey
“There are numerous other reports of open sea at the North Pole, this one from 1926.”
I just cannot help but wonder if the open water they saw were nothing but Polynya… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polynya
Jesuswept writes,
“So yeah, nowhere near as bad as 2007 as some claim.”
Declarations that Arctic ice extent has been equally low in the recent past, in 1920 or 1940 or 1950s some other recent years have no scientific or historical basis. But people who want to believe this, and don’t grasp the scale of the Arctic, can always pick out anecdotes of open water occurring someplace.
Robin Kool says:
August 5, 2012 at 2:45 am
“I understand that the most important factor in Arctic Ice melt is the wind breaking it up and pushing it into the North Atlantic. That ‘s exactly what has happened most of this spring and summer – and even last winter.
Just look at WUWT’s fantastic Sea Ice Reference Page’s section on Arctic Sea Ice Speed&Drift.”
I think Ice-Breakers are a significant factor in breaking up sea ice. How many ice-breakers and trips now versus 30 years ago?
beesaman
August 5, 2012 5:05 am
How refreshing it must be for the visiting Warmists to come to a site where differing views can be aired without the heavy hand of censorship. Maybe when they return to their usual web spaces they could remember that?
One thing you can count on, all of the ice that melts, no matter how many ‘millions’ of km2 are left, refreezes, as it always does by midwinter. Maybe AGW only works at certain times in certain places?
J.Hansford
August 5, 2012 5:17 am
2012………. And the Arctic Ice is still there.
So much for the catastrophism of the AGW crowd…. So what’s the next date? 2030 now?
I suppose they’ll try and say that it’s not really ice, it’s gone rotten or something…. It’s ice Jim, but not as we know it…. sigh.
Chris B
August 5, 2012 6:00 am
Verity Jones says:
August 4, 2012 at 8:44 am
Re the ice situation in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas…….
_________________________
Check our the latest Arcticrow post. LOL http://www.arcticrow.com/2012/08/04/a-tough-spot/
Günther Kirschbaum
August 5, 2012 6:21 am
What are you LOLling, those people are in danger. They should get out of there.
Gneiss
August 5, 2012 6:31 am
beesamen writes,
“How refreshing it must be for the visiting Warmists to come to a site where differing views can be aired without the heavy hand of censorship.”
Those of us who post politically incorrect views here find that we quite often get censored, even on technical points like the direction of sea currents. Those censored comments sometimes get re-posted on other sites, but if you don’t venture there you never see the censored posts.
On the other hand, purely ad hom attacks against this site’s villains are encouraged.
“As usual, Günther plays the smart ass with snark. He’s actually Neven. No scruples with this one. – Anthony”
“Kirschbaum is German for Cherrytree. Picked enough for a big pie yet, Neven?”
[Reply: Gneiss: Site policy is here. That is what commenters get snipped for. That includes mindlessly repeating talking points over and over again or introducing topics to a thread which is devoted to something else. We also do not encourage ad hominem attacks… and your two examples are not examples at all. As the old soldier’s saying went: “If you can find a better ‘ole, go to it.” (The one in Fan-ling Station was always a favorite destination.) Now, if you want to continue falsely griping about moderation policy, that too will be snipped. Capice? -REP]
J.Hansford writes,
“2012………. And the Arctic Ice is still there.”
Not nearly as much of it, and it seems to be going down fast. Keep watching this month, and see which prediction looks more real: “death spiral” or “recovery.”
“So much for the catastrophism of the AGW crowd…. ”
The “AGW crowd” (Arctic scientists, in this case) are not certain, or agreed among themselves, on the exact date that summer ice will be mostly gone. How could they be? But they are agreed on predicting further decline, borne out by the physical reality. The decline is happening much faster than many (such as IPCC 2007) thought it would, and not very much slower than even the more pessimistic projections like Maslowski’s. All gone by 2012? Maybe not, but it’s going.
“So what’s the next date? 2030 now?”
Some modelers think so, while others think sooner. Boots-on-the-ice researchers seem to be among the pessimists. So am I.
“I suppose they’ll try and say that it’s not really ice, it’s gone rotten or something…. It’s ice Jim, but not as we know it…. sigh.”
In your mind, is all ice the same? In the ocean, it’s not. The thin, fractured and salty first-year ice that dominates the Arctic now is very susceptible to weather. Winds easily blow it around, whether out the door through Fram Strait or just spreading it which makes extent misleadingly look large, It’s more susceptible to both top and bottom melt too, depending on water temperatures and insolation.
Justthinkin
August 5, 2012 8:09 am
“Günther Kirschbaum says:
August 5, 2012 at 6:21 am
What are you LOLling, those people are in danger. They should get out of there.
”
Neven. Those publicity hounds are not in any danger.Well,yeah.Maybe in danger of having their scam exposed.Arctic Crossing.What a hoot. But then they are using the eco-cultists logic….one record high temp anywhere,AGW…..one open lead in the ice,ice free Arctic Ocean.One would laugh if your religion wasn’t so pathetic.
Chris R.
August 5, 2012 8:50 am
To chris y:
Among the so-called experts you cited “Ehrlich”. Would that be Paul Ehrlich, whose predictions of doom since the publication of The Population Bomb have all been false?
Kelvin Vaughan
August 5, 2012 8:50 am
Gneiss says:
August 5, 2012 at 4:31 am
Jesuswept writes,
“So yeah, nowhere near as bad as 2007 as some claim.”
Declarations that Arctic ice extent has been equally low in the recent past, in 1920 or 1940 or 1950s some other recent years have no scientific or historical basis. But people who want to believe this, and don’t grasp the scale of the Arctic, can always pick out anecdotes of open water occurring someplace.
So what use is Arctic ice to the human race?
Gneiss
August 5, 2012 9:36 am
Kevin Vaughn writes,
“So what use is Arctic ice to the human race?”
We seem to be running that experiment to find out. Loss of summer ice will certainly change mid-latitude weather, and ocean circulation, so the rain won’t fall and the winds won’t blow as we’re used to, and our farms and infrastructure expect. Will it stop the Gulf Stream? Modelers aren’t sure. Loss of a thermal shield from sea ice is already speeding the melt of Greenland land ice, which unlike sea ice could substantially affect sea level. Faster effects could be on permafrost, which hold enormous stores of methane and carbon. Or the submarine clathrates, released by warming water. Those are huge possible multiplier or positive feedback effects, that could take Earth’s climate somewhere that most of the human race won’t like at all.
The most striking thing about current Arctic melting is not just that it’s moving toward a state not seen in several thousand years. It’s that the change is happening so fast, with no external drivers except us.
Griffin
August 5, 2012 9:43 am
When will the next ice age occur? When will Chicago be covered by an ice sheet? It will happen.
chris y
August 5, 2012 9:57 am
Chris R.- regarding Paul Ehrlich. Yes, the famous bug biologist.
Ehrlich’s list of failed predictions is legendary. Remarkably, he was recently interviewed (2011) and asked about his list of failed predictions. He responded-
“Well first of all, the predictions that most people quote were actually scenarios, little stories about the future we said would not come exactly true…”
Ehrlich is a morally bankrupt publicity hound.
Jimbo
August 5, 2012 9:58 am
What matters is not that GLOBAL ice has hardly changed since 2000 but local ice. 😉 Unless of course that Arctic local ice picks up then its off to……………………….another local area. Even one receding glacier will do quite nicely. Next, ignore the tiny, local Antarctic which holds just a fraction of the world’s ice and absolutely ignore all advancing glaciers and soot, then blame a gas called co2.
Bruce Cobb
August 5, 2012 10:10 am
Gneiss says:
August 5, 2012 at 7:09 am The decline is happening much faster than many (such as IPCC 2007) thought it would, and not very much slower than even the more pessimistic projections like Maslowski’s. All gone by 2012? Maybe not, but it’s going.
“So what’s the next date? 2030 now?”
Some modelers think so, while others think sooner. Boots-on-the-ice researchers seem to be among the pessimists. So am I.
By “pessimists”, don’t you really mean optimists? After all, if the Arctic sea-ice were to all melt, that would prove your CAGW religion was based on fact not fiction, which would be cause for celebration, yes?
But, have no fear; for when the ice does recover you can always claim that it isn’t ice extent that matters but the ice thickness.
Gneiss
August 5, 2012 10:20 am
Jimbo writes,
“What matters is not that GLOBAL ice has hardly changed since 2000 but local ice.”
Not true even with your cherry pick, the GLOBAL ice area anomaly has declined significantly over the whole satellite record, and more steeply (about 70,000 square kilometers per year) since 2000.
But I’ve never heard any polar scientist declare that Arctic ice did not matter, it’s GLOBAL ice that’s important. Have you?
Gneiss
August 5, 2012 10:36 am
Bruce Cobb writes,
“By “pessimists”, don’t you really mean optimists? After all, if the Arctic sea-ice were to all melt, that would prove your CAGW religion was based on fact not fiction, which would be cause for celebration, yes?”
No, I meant what I wrote. Also, I don’t have a CAGW religion, my views about the Arctic are based on facts, and I don’t view a harder future for my kids as cause for celebration. All this mind-reading is projection.
“But, have no fear; for when the ice does recover you can always claim that it isn’t ice extent that matters but the ice thickness.”
More failed mind-reading. Coming back to reality, why not argue with something I actually said?
Rob L
August 5, 2012 10:50 am
Antarctic area about 14,000,000km², Greenland Area about 2,000,000 km². Sea ice area is about 19,000,000 km² on average, so globally about 35,000,000 km² of ice coverage. And at the moment sea ice is about 1,000,000 km² down.
So we are talking about <3% reduction in ice cap area in this near low point of the 30 years that we have data for. Or less than 0.2% of earth's surface. All in areas that are get minimal sunlight compared to the rest of the world anyway.
Big hairy deal.
Clouds cause massively more global albedo variation.
Rob Dekker: “Now compare this to the 82 deg North that one could venture north of Svalbard in ice-free conditions, all through WINTER of 2011… ”
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2011/02/arctic-oscillation-brings-record-low-january-extent-unusual-mid-latitude-weather/
The NSIDC [snip – “disagrees” would be better]. You better write them a sternly worded letter.
[Please be more careful in your wording ~jove, mod]
I understand that the most important factor in Arctic Ice melt is the wind breaking it up and pushing it into the North Atlantic. That ‘s exactly what has happened most of this spring and summer – and even last winter.
Just look at WUWT’s fantastic Sea Ice Reference Page’s section on Arctic Sea Ice Speed&Drift.
And I would like to see a study on the influence of soot on Arctic Sea Ice melt. The whole year round, soot rains down on the ice.
While the sun melts the ice, soot concentrations on the surface become higher and higher, the albedo becoming lower and lower. The warming influence of the sun must be strongly and progressively enhanced by the soot, but exactly how much?
@Gneiss
August 1932 Arctic ice state:
http://brunnur.vedur.is/pub/trausti/Iskort/Pdf/1932/1932_08.pdf
So yeah, nowhere near as bad as 2007 as some claim.
@Smokey
“There are numerous other reports of open sea at the North Pole, this one from 1926.”
I just cannot help but wonder if the open water they saw were nothing but Polynya…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polynya
Arctic Sea Ice loss 70% Man Made
http://julesandjames.blogspot.com.au/2012/07/loss-of-arctic-sea-ice-70-man-made.html
Jesuswept writes,
“So yeah, nowhere near as bad as 2007 as some claim.”
Declarations that Arctic ice extent has been equally low in the recent past, in 1920 or 1940 or 1950s some other recent years have no scientific or historical basis. But people who want to believe this, and don’t grasp the scale of the Arctic, can always pick out anecdotes of open water occurring someplace.
Robin Kool says:
August 5, 2012 at 2:45 am
“I understand that the most important factor in Arctic Ice melt is the wind breaking it up and pushing it into the North Atlantic. That ‘s exactly what has happened most of this spring and summer – and even last winter.
Just look at WUWT’s fantastic Sea Ice Reference Page’s section on Arctic Sea Ice Speed&Drift.”
I think Ice-Breakers are a significant factor in breaking up sea ice. How many ice-breakers and trips now versus 30 years ago?
How refreshing it must be for the visiting Warmists to come to a site where differing views can be aired without the heavy hand of censorship. Maybe when they return to their usual web spaces they could remember that?
One thing you can count on, all of the ice that melts, no matter how many ‘millions’ of km2 are left, refreezes, as it always does by midwinter. Maybe AGW only works at certain times in certain places?
2012………. And the Arctic Ice is still there.
So much for the catastrophism of the AGW crowd…. So what’s the next date? 2030 now?
I suppose they’ll try and say that it’s not really ice, it’s gone rotten or something…. It’s ice Jim, but not as we know it…. sigh.
Verity Jones says:
August 4, 2012 at 8:44 am
Re the ice situation in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas…….
_________________________
Check our the latest Arcticrow post. LOL
http://www.arcticrow.com/2012/08/04/a-tough-spot/
What are you LOLling, those people are in danger. They should get out of there.
beesamen writes,
“How refreshing it must be for the visiting Warmists to come to a site where differing views can be aired without the heavy hand of censorship.”
Those of us who post politically incorrect views here find that we quite often get censored, even on technical points like the direction of sea currents. Those censored comments sometimes get re-posted on other sites, but if you don’t venture there you never see the censored posts.
On the other hand, purely ad hom attacks against this site’s villains are encouraged.
“As usual, Günther plays the smart ass with snark. He’s actually Neven. No scruples with this one. – Anthony”
“Kirschbaum is German for Cherrytree. Picked enough for a big pie yet, Neven?”
[Reply: Gneiss: Site policy is here. That is what commenters get snipped for. That includes mindlessly repeating talking points over and over again or introducing topics to a thread which is devoted to something else. We also do not encourage ad hominem attacks… and your two examples are not examples at all. As the old soldier’s saying went: “If you can find a better ‘ole, go to it.” (The one in Fan-ling Station was always a favorite destination.) Now, if you want to continue falsely griping about moderation policy, that too will be snipped. Capice? -REP]
I recall reading this about a year ago. Did it get published?
General comments linked ~
http://www.the-cryosphere-discuss.net/5/C843/2011/tcd-5-C843-2011.pdf
J.Hansford writes,
“2012………. And the Arctic Ice is still there.”
Not nearly as much of it, and it seems to be going down fast. Keep watching this month, and see which prediction looks more real: “death spiral” or “recovery.”
“So much for the catastrophism of the AGW crowd…. ”
The “AGW crowd” (Arctic scientists, in this case) are not certain, or agreed among themselves, on the exact date that summer ice will be mostly gone. How could they be? But they are agreed on predicting further decline, borne out by the physical reality. The decline is happening much faster than many (such as IPCC 2007) thought it would, and not very much slower than even the more pessimistic projections like Maslowski’s. All gone by 2012? Maybe not, but it’s going.
“So what’s the next date? 2030 now?”
Some modelers think so, while others think sooner. Boots-on-the-ice researchers seem to be among the pessimists. So am I.
“I suppose they’ll try and say that it’s not really ice, it’s gone rotten or something…. It’s ice Jim, but not as we know it…. sigh.”
In your mind, is all ice the same? In the ocean, it’s not. The thin, fractured and salty first-year ice that dominates the Arctic now is very susceptible to weather. Winds easily blow it around, whether out the door through Fram Strait or just spreading it which makes extent misleadingly look large, It’s more susceptible to both top and bottom melt too, depending on water temperatures and insolation.
“Günther Kirschbaum says:
August 5, 2012 at 6:21 am
What are you LOLling, those people are in danger. They should get out of there.
”
Neven. Those publicity hounds are not in any danger.Well,yeah.Maybe in danger of having their scam exposed.Arctic Crossing.What a hoot. But then they are using the eco-cultists logic….one record high temp anywhere,AGW…..one open lead in the ice,ice free Arctic Ocean.One would laugh if your religion wasn’t so pathetic.
To chris y:
Among the so-called experts you cited “Ehrlich”. Would that be Paul Ehrlich, whose predictions of doom since the publication of The Population Bomb have all been false?
Gneiss says:
August 5, 2012 at 4:31 am
Jesuswept writes,
“So yeah, nowhere near as bad as 2007 as some claim.”
Declarations that Arctic ice extent has been equally low in the recent past, in 1920 or 1940 or 1950s some other recent years have no scientific or historical basis. But people who want to believe this, and don’t grasp the scale of the Arctic, can always pick out anecdotes of open water occurring someplace.
So what use is Arctic ice to the human race?
Kevin Vaughn writes,
“So what use is Arctic ice to the human race?”
We seem to be running that experiment to find out. Loss of summer ice will certainly change mid-latitude weather, and ocean circulation, so the rain won’t fall and the winds won’t blow as we’re used to, and our farms and infrastructure expect. Will it stop the Gulf Stream? Modelers aren’t sure. Loss of a thermal shield from sea ice is already speeding the melt of Greenland land ice, which unlike sea ice could substantially affect sea level. Faster effects could be on permafrost, which hold enormous stores of methane and carbon. Or the submarine clathrates, released by warming water. Those are huge possible multiplier or positive feedback effects, that could take Earth’s climate somewhere that most of the human race won’t like at all.
The most striking thing about current Arctic melting is not just that it’s moving toward a state not seen in several thousand years. It’s that the change is happening so fast, with no external drivers except us.
When will the next ice age occur? When will Chicago be covered by an ice sheet? It will happen.
Chris R.- regarding Paul Ehrlich. Yes, the famous bug biologist.
Ehrlich’s list of failed predictions is legendary. Remarkably, he was recently interviewed (2011) and asked about his list of failed predictions. He responded-
“Well first of all, the predictions that most people quote were actually scenarios, little stories about the future we said would not come exactly true…”
Ehrlich is a morally bankrupt publicity hound.
What matters is not that GLOBAL ice has hardly changed since 2000 but local ice. 😉 Unless of course that Arctic local ice picks up then its off to……………………….another local area. Even one receding glacier will do quite nicely. Next, ignore the tiny, local Antarctic which holds just a fraction of the world’s ice and absolutely ignore all advancing glaciers and soot, then blame a gas called co2.
Gneiss says:
August 5, 2012 at 7:09 am
The decline is happening much faster than many (such as IPCC 2007) thought it would, and not very much slower than even the more pessimistic projections like Maslowski’s. All gone by 2012? Maybe not, but it’s going.
“So what’s the next date? 2030 now?”
Some modelers think so, while others think sooner. Boots-on-the-ice researchers seem to be among the pessimists. So am I.
By “pessimists”, don’t you really mean optimists? After all, if the Arctic sea-ice were to all melt, that would prove your CAGW religion was based on fact not fiction, which would be cause for celebration, yes?
But, have no fear; for when the ice does recover you can always claim that it isn’t ice extent that matters but the ice thickness.
Jimbo writes,
“What matters is not that GLOBAL ice has hardly changed since 2000 but local ice.”
Not true even with your cherry pick, the GLOBAL ice area anomaly has declined significantly over the whole satellite record, and more steeply (about 70,000 square kilometers per year) since 2000.
But I’ve never heard any polar scientist declare that Arctic ice did not matter, it’s GLOBAL ice that’s important. Have you?
Bruce Cobb writes,
“By “pessimists”, don’t you really mean optimists? After all, if the Arctic sea-ice were to all melt, that would prove your CAGW religion was based on fact not fiction, which would be cause for celebration, yes?”
No, I meant what I wrote. Also, I don’t have a CAGW religion, my views about the Arctic are based on facts, and I don’t view a harder future for my kids as cause for celebration. All this mind-reading is projection.
“But, have no fear; for when the ice does recover you can always claim that it isn’t ice extent that matters but the ice thickness.”
More failed mind-reading. Coming back to reality, why not argue with something I actually said?
Antarctic area about 14,000,000km², Greenland Area about 2,000,000 km². Sea ice area is about 19,000,000 km² on average, so globally about 35,000,000 km² of ice coverage. And at the moment sea ice is about 1,000,000 km² down.
So we are talking about <3% reduction in ice cap area in this near low point of the 30 years that we have data for. Or less than 0.2% of earth's surface. All in areas that are get minimal sunlight compared to the rest of the world anyway.
Big hairy deal.
Clouds cause massively more global albedo variation.