Nothing definitive, but interesting. The area plot above is from NANSEN. The extent plot also shows a turn:
DMI also shows it…
Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI) – Centre for Ocean and Ice – Click the pic to view at sourceBut JAXA does not….suggesting a difference in sensors/processes.
Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) – International Arctic Research Center (IARC) – Click the pic to view at sourceOf course NSIDC has a 5 day average, so we won’t see a change for awhile. Time will tell if this is just a blip or a turn from the new record low for the satellite data set.
More at the WUWT Sea Ice reference page
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Why, lookee there. Kevin MacDonald is saving all my comments, going back more than three years! Do I send a tingle up Kevin’s leg? Is he [trimmed] in his mom’s basement while re-reading my comments? After I’ve posted more than 17,000 comments, he seems to believe he’s caught me in a contradiction. But stating the obvious — that at some point Arctic ice will recover — isn’t quite the prediction, or the contradiction, that he thinks it is.
Keep on looking for a real contradiction, kevin. You might even find a valid one out of seventeen thousand posts. I am not perfect. But if this is the best you can find, you fail. If anything, I am consistent.
“Everyone has the right to be stupid, but comrade MacDonald abuses the privilege.” ~ Leon Trotsky
You can’t fix stupid. ☺
And I note that in attacking me, KM is avoiding the scientific points I’ve scored. Keep pounding the table; we’ll let the readers decide who argues the science better.
Smokey says:
September 6, 2012 at 5:13 pm
“Everyone has the right to be stupid, but comrade MacDonald abuses the privilege.” ~ Leon Trotsky
==============================
I don’t care what he said about you Smokey, without you, he would be but a quote.
That is strange. My spell checker is not functioning in posts. WUWT? I stand corrected in my spelling errors. Rare for me. Happy that is the only thing that tjfolkerts could dispute.
Claims of him shooting down all my points are ludicrous. He has not even read the articles I posted, let alone shot any of them down. Keep trying though.
People posting that the Arctic has NEVER been ice free in the modern record are being disingenuous. There is little or no data as the area was essentially devoid of humans, and the humans that were there had no written records of any kind. To claim it has NEVER (within the written records) happened is completely misleading. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
tjfolkerts says:
September 6, 2012 at 2:28 pm
“You can’t seem to actually argue the facts, so you use a typo as an excuse to avoid addressing the issues. I point out specific facts, with quotes to back up both what I said and what you said, so you resort to ad hominem attacks. [sigh]”
This is hilarious. Do you think no one can read? You avoided answering ANYTHING in the articles. I will wait patiently. Just because you disagree with what was posted, you claim I was not arguing the facts (as you see them). Again, hilarious.
The desparation is palpable.
dvunkannon says:
September 6, 2012 at 8:22 am
Like I said, … ICEBREAKERS.
Thank you, wayne.
@David Ball – Did you read the section of the Wikipedia article I linked for you? Commercial shipping in 2009 through the Northeast Passage. To be sure, reinforced hulls and escorted by an icebreaker. But the cargo ships were not icebreakers themselves. In any case, check out the accompanying photo. The ice breaker is steaming ahead of them… through open water. Big change from the Sedov getting stuck in the same area for two years, through the summer, in ice.
The Arctic has never been ice free. It isn’t today. But it might be very soon, and that would be a very big change.
Mosher, the Hudson’s bay data is all archived. There are meticulous records and data points collected over the nearly 400 years that they were kept. The Hudson’s Bay company was doing some of the best science in the world at the time. A global experiment to map the transit of Venus in 1796 was accomplished, so try not to mislead the good denizen’s of WUWT?
Newspaper articles my ass. My guess is that you are in a new income tax bracket.
These show it still plummeting.
http://arctic-roos.org/observations/satellite-data/sea-ice/ice-area-and-extent-in-arctic
stephen richards says:
September 4, 2012 at 1:32 pm
This would be a record refreeze wouldn’t it?
=====================================================================
But how thick will it be for the next melt? Six inches? That’s what we need to be concerned about, not how fast it re-freezes this winter.
I really don’t see a problem:
http://www.webcitation.org/mainframe.php
David Ball,
Spot on, Mosher nowadays is all about hot air, non factual statements and BS. For a long time now he seems to have exhibited zero integrity in issues which threaten the CO2 = AGW and everything that happens in the world is due to AGW school of thought.
David Ball says: “This is hilarious. Do you think no one can read? ”
Funny — I was thinking the same thing. But just to humor you, what questions have I avoided? What articles did you want addressed?
Smokey says: September 6, 2012 at 8:14 pm
September 6, 2012 at 8:14 pm
I really don’t see a problem:
http://www.webcitation.org/mainframe.php
I assume you were going for this?
http://www.webcitation.org/6AKKakUIo
also available here:
http://iceagenow.info/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/NorthernHemisphereSeaIceAnomaly.png
From Smokey on September 6, 2012 at 8:14 pm:
I do.
You have been beset by a swarm of gnats, and have unwisely swung wildly.
That’s the main link, that only works if the browser remembers the last webcitation thing you looked at.
Stay calm, be sure of your weapons and targets, be prudent in your attacks.
And no matter how many gnats and tiny flies threaten you, never use a wind-powered bug zapper.
tjfolkerts says:
September 6, 2012 at 8:50 pm
Now I have to hold your hand?
dvunkannon says:
September 6, 2012 at 7:31 pm
“The Arctic has never been ice free. It isn’t today. But it might be very soon, and that would be a very big change.”
Your cognitive dissonance is showing.
kadaka and Just The Facts,
Thank you for your advice. Genuine feedback is always appreciated.
Of course, I’m not going to be advised on science by a man who repeatedly contrived to fail to differentiate between mass and area.
I notice the brain-free cherry pickers from skeptical science spend a lot of time read posts and comments on WUWT only to then mis-represent them on their FB site !! Why is that ?? Oh sorry the answer to my question is in my question !!
Kevin MacDonald said on September 7, 2012 at 1:10 am:
Looks more like he got bored with your repetitious obtuseness and lack of scientific rigor. You’re continually saying Antarctica is losing mass, while Antarctica is gaining ice area as Smokey was showing. How are both true? You never commented on the potential discrepancy, which an inquiring scientific mind should have noticed.
You talked up about Antarctica being in negative ice mass balance, repeatedly flogging this paywalled 2009 paper using GRACE results.
But you didn’t mention this 2011 paper covered on WUWT using additional methods and showing much different results:
So Antarctica could have either a positive or negative ice mass balance.
So which was it, you did insufficient research thus didn’t find this paper that nullified your claim (for me the Googling was somewhat easy),
Or did you deliberately cherry-pick and mention the “alarming” paper while not mentioning this non-alarming work?
(BTW, if you get CA Assistant you’ll have a handy Preview button so you can avoid making stupid HTML mistakes like leaving out a left angle bracket.)
@David Ball You wrote:
Are you seriously putting forward the idea that the Arctic has been ice-free, but we didn’t happen to be looking at it when it happened? That after asking for scientific evidence of a natural cycle in Arctic sea ice area dipping as low as it is today (perhaps 1/3 ice covered, mostly ice-free along the coasts), and being offered Australian newspaper clippings and pictures of submarines as evidence, you are responding that the absence of evidence cannot be counted against your argument?
Yes, I am suffering cognitive dissonance. How can you consider that position scientific? We also have an absence of evidence of UFOs releasing farts into the atmosphere to increase the methane content. In fact, the number of things for which we have absence of evidence is quite literally infinite.
Since you’ve referred to written records, I’ve been assuming that your definition of ‘modern’ is within the last thousand years. If you intended to include the entire Holocene, you could have simply referenced http://www.sciencemag.org/content/333/6043/747.abstract (a readable precis is here http://www.lunduniversity.lu.se/o.o.i.s?id=24890&news_item=5634 ). As you can read, the hypothesis advanced to explain the ice-free Arctic at that time is a natural cycle, the cycle of solar irradiance due to changes in the Earth’s orbit and tilt. But I don’t think you can claim that the same cycle is responsible for today’s conditions.
At the same time, this article shows that even when literate humans are not staring at the ocean, evidence is accumulating.
So what is this cycle? What is its length? What is its cause? What are the error bars?
David, perhaps you meant the article you linked to at http://drtimball.com/2012/2012-arctic-ice-melt-claims-distorted-and-inaccurate-its-the-wind-stupid/
You know — the one that says:
“These reconstructions (of sea ice before the satellite era) have no value.”
and
If you can’t measure accurately with satellites, it’s impossible from the historic record.
Your own article says that it is “impossible” for you to use historical records to compare earlier eras to current conditions. That’s pretty much 180 degrees from your claim that you had “EXACTLY” shown a previous year (1817) was similar to the current decade’s conditions.
I was at least giving you the benefit of the doubt and accepting your one lone report of one lone region as a data point, and then simply asking you to provide further data to support your claim.
Back to the topic of this thread, it looks like NORSEX is still not cooperating with Mr. Watts thesis:
http://arctic-roos.org/observations/satellite-data/sea-ice/ice-area-and-extent-in-arctic
The ice is still melting. No “corner turned” so far.
REPLY: Wasn’t a thesis, just a question. But we know we aren’t allowed to ask questions, so enjoy your moment rooting for less ice. – Anthony
Interesting – last time I posted here I got a password sign in from colorado.edu, the website hosting NSIDC data. Intrigued I clicked on the NSIDC data page at ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/ and got the same authentic box asking me,
“Enter user name and password for ftp://sidads.colorado.edu”
Strange enough to see that at all, but just bizarre to have it pop up on posting to WUWT. Something going on?
(i’m posting this also to test if it happens again – I’ll let you know either way)