NASA finally admits it Arctic cyclone in August ‘broke up’ and ‘wreaked havoc’ on sea ice — Reuters reports Arctic storm played ‘key role’ in this season’s sea ice reduction.
‘The cyclone remained stalled over the arctic for several days…pushing [sea ice] south to warmer waters where it melted’
Monday, September 24, 2012 – By Marc Morano – Climate Depot
In a September 18 video posted by NASA on its website, they admit that the Arctic cyclone, which began on August 1, “wreaked havoc on the Arctic sea ice cover” by “breaking up sea ice.” (NASA story here)
Global warming activists have been giddy in their hyping of the satellite era record low Arctic sea ice extent while ignoring the satellite record sea ice expansion in the Antarctic.
Many climate activists have sought to downplay the significance that the Arctic cyclone played on this year’s summer sea ice in the Arctic. But this new inconvenient video report from NASA now makes the warmists’ attempt to deny the cyclones role in 2012’s Arctic sea ice conditions — impossible.
The September 18 NASA video notes: “A powerful storm wreaked havoc on the Arctic sea ice cover in August 2012. This visualization shows the strength and direction of the winds and their impact on the ice: the red vectors represent the fastest winds, while blue vectors stand for slower winds.”
Reuters news service filed a September 21 report based on NASA’s video admission titled: “NASA says Arctic cyclone played ‘key role’ in record ice melt.” The news segment details how the Arctic sea ice was reduced due to “a powerful cyclone that scientists say ‘wreaked havoc’ on ice cover during the month of August.” (Reuters on “Arctic Cyclone” — 0:47 second long segment — Rob Muir reporting.)
Reuters – Sept. 21 – “NASA says a powerful cyclone formed off the coast of Alaska in early August and moved toward the center of the Arctic ocean, weakening the already thin sea ice as it went.
A large section North of the Chukchi Sea was cut off by the churning storm and pushed south to warmer waters where it melted.
The cyclone remained stalled over the arctic for several days…Scientists say a similar storm decades ago would have had much less impact on the sea ice because they say the ice was not as vulnerable then as it is now.”
#
End Reuters news segment.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Phil. says:
September 24, 2012 at 3:14 pm
In 1944 the St Roch did make it through for the first time in one season, a routine event these days.
How many icebreakers are needed for the routine?
YouTube video of the cyclone
pjrindigo:
You forgot your /sarc tag. (At least 97% of all climate scientists will believe everything you said)
Does Soros now “own” PBS?
numerobis says:
September 24, 2012 at 1:51 pm
Can someone post a description of anyone (well, anyone important) saying the storm was irrelevant?
Everything I’ve read from NASA, NOAA, and friends is that the storm had an effect. But even without a storm or much else unusual, the ice was melting at a similar or greater rate to 2007. The thinking now appears to be that the storm just changed the melt from record-breaking to record-demolishing — at least, that’s what NOAA has been saying.
Exactly! The ice looked crazy sparse much earlier than August 1 and I said so on this site. It would have dropped below 4 million sq. km. anyway.
I love animations like that. Sure wish I could create them.
Phil. says:
September 24, 2012 at 3:14 pm
“a routine event these days.”
If you do not provide evidence for this (without icebreakers), I am calling you a liar.
Where is James Abbott? Where is barry? Where are all the warmists who said the storm was irrelevant. You guys need to stand up and admit you were wrong.
No more Mr. Nice Skeptic. I’ve had it with these BS artists.
dvunkannon says:
8 out of 34 years had similar storms.
KR says:
“…there have only been about eight storms of similar strength during the month of August in the last 34 years of satellite records.”
You both seem to have left out an important word from the article: “estimates”‘
The person being quoted “estimates” 8 out of 34. It would be interesting to know exactly how many out of 34 instead of a SWAG.
Frederick Michael says:
September 24, 2012 at 4:24 pm
You do not know much about the Arctic and how floating ice behaves, do you.
of course when I came on here to warn about the storm commenters:
doubted there was a storm. or thought it was normal. or denied it would have an impact.
given that the ice was already below previous years at that time it was obvious that record would be smashed rather than merely passed.
going forward the weakened pack will continue to be vulnerable
moreover more open water will lead to more storms like this where winds that previously could do nothing now will move ice to waters warmed by agw
where it will melt. no soot required
Steven Mosher says:
September 24, 2012 at 5:23 pm
Extraordinary claims, blah, blah. You know the rest. I’ll be waiting.
Steve Mosher you missed this as a credible explanation on why there was a decline in the first place:
The Dirty Little Secret About Arctic Ice
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/09/23/the-dirty-little-secret-about-arctic-ice/
Did those earlier storms occur as late in the melt season as this one did?
Here’s an excerpt what the NSIDC said on Sept 19th:
.
Apart from the lesser extent the ice has been thinning for years – that makes it more vulnerable to winds, waves, warmth.
As for the increase in sea ice in the Antarctic, note that the amount on LAND is dropping.
In any case, both poles play a role and to imply that the decrease in one is irrelevant because of the increase in another is like thinking you don’t need to cover your head in winter because you put on extra socks.
Mrmethane says:
September 24, 2012 at 4:16 pm
Does Soros now “own” PBS?
—-
No, the govt owns PBS. However, it does appear that Soros owns the govt.
Steven Mosher;
moreover more open water will lead to more storms like this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Why?
I’m a little sheepish about how distrustful I am, concerning Cryosphere Today’s graphics, however I couldn’t help notice a large mass of ice, thirty by twelve miles and up to 82 feet thick, was not noticed by the Ctyosphere “map,” yet stopped a drilling operation.
http://www.adn.com/2012/09/14/2625011/ice-still-delays-shell-arctic.html.
In my grumpy, suspitious manner I started trying to learn more about this mass of ice: Where it came from, where it was going, how big it would look in a Satellite picture, how you can get ice 82 feet thick in area described as “ice free” by Cryosphere Today, and (so far) haven’t learned much about the ice, but I did learn there are other people so grumpy and suspicious they make me look like a jolly, old Santa.
It turned out the same story had been picked up by a lot of environmentalists, on Greenpeace and WWF sites, and those guys have no fondness at all for Royal Dutch Shell and that company’s attempts to drill in the arctic. It was very interesting reading the comments on their sites.
One view was that Mother Nature was standing up to defend the Arctic from the evil oil companies, “just like in the movie Avatar.” It was Mother Nature who sent that ice.
However another interesting view was that the ice never existed in the first place; the thirty by twelve mile mass was a fabrication invented by Royal Dutch Shell to save face, after Greenpeace made it impossible for a support vessel to arrive in the Arctic in time for the drilling. (Some vessel that was suppose to “contain” a spill, if one happened.???)
In any case, I remain curious about the thirty by twelve mile mass of ice, that either did or never did exist, and never showed up on maps.
How many of these masses that don’t exist are floating around up there, and, if they don’t exist, how can we count them?
What is so bad with clear water ? I prefer my garden to be green summertime.
@RayG
How exactly are you hedging your bet?
Because if it only has to be on any one of the outlets you mentioned, you were a loser even before making the wager
Revkin talked about this six weeks ago:
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/08/a-closer-look-at-ice-impacts-of-a-rare-arctic-summer-storm/
Why even have this post?
Arctic sea ice is declining, and so you’d expect a new record every few years. There is no story in exactly why this year happened to be the record year. You could equally well have run a story about how the weather conditions in 2008 – 2011 were not conducive to a record melt.
Why do you bother?
[Reply: Anthony knows how to run a successful site. Feel free to start your own blog, then you can decide what articles to post. — mod.]
D Marshall says:
September 24, 2012 at 5:45 pm
“In any case, both poles play a role and to imply that the decrease in one is irrelevant because of the increase in another is like thinking you don’t need to cover your head in winter because you put on extra socks.”
This knife cuts both ways D Marshall. It is the warmists that are claiming the Arctic ice melt is the “canary in the coal mine”.
More like a canard in a coal mine .
Scientists say a similar storm decades ago would have … not been noticed.
Cat: http://postimage.org/image/elzkgmqdt/full
Pigeons: http://postimage.org/image/mq7oldcsx/full
Argue amongst yourselves, cows will be home for milking soon. Now where did I put that chocolate pipe wrench? Need to mic the clearance on the parlour stall doors again.