Sea Ice News Volume 4 #2 – The 2013 Sea Ice Forecast Contest

The race to forecast the minimum is on again. Will it be another Serreze death spiral media opportunity? Or will it be ho-hum- nothing to see here, move along?

Once again I’m inviting readers to submit their best guess, best SWAG, or best dartboard result to the poll for the SEARCH Sea Ice Outlook. Deadline, according to the recent announcement I posted on WUWT from ARCUS is close of business Friday June 7th.

Of recent interest has been the recent tendency for the current data to hang between the 1990’s and the 2000 normal line.

Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) – International Arctic Research Center (IARC) – Click the pic to view at source

We are in that time of year when all of the years converge into a tighter grouping. This makes judging where the current year is going to be a tough challenge at this stage.

I’m going to give WUWT readers an opportunity to make a forecast for the ARCUS SEARCH sea ice contest submission, based on voting. See the poll at the end.

I’ll run this poll each month in the week before the deadline, and we’ll see how we do as the minimum approaches. The value used by ARCUS  for judging the contest is the NSIDC value in square kilometers. The object is to guess what the September minimum will be.

I suggest that you should not be using the JAXA graph to forecast minimums, though it it useful for determining short term trends as it is more responsive than the NSDIC graph below, which is averaged.

http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png

Here is what the June 2012 forecast submission reports looked like:

Figure 3a. Distributions of Outlook estimates for September 2012 arctic sea ice

The archive of the 2012 contest is available here: http://www.arcus.org/search/seaiceoutlook/2012/summary

For a complete overview of Arctic and Antarctic Sea Ice, see the WUWT Sea Ice Reference page: http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/sea-ice-page/

Here is the forecast poll, deadline is Friday June 7th. Bear in mind that traditionally, forecasts in June have been too high. Last year’s minimum was 3.41 million square kilometers (1.32 million square miles) at its lowest point on 16 September, and in June, WUWT readers forecast 4.9 million sq kilometers.

Note: The mean is the monthly average in sq km2 for September, which is what the contest is looking for. It is not really as interesting as the minimum, but that’s the number ARCUS is looking for. Given that many of the June forecasts are too high anyway, shooting for the minimum rather than the mean might be just as good.

Note: The POLL HAS CLOSED, and I’ll be submitting the forecast to ARCUS – Anthony

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
128 Comments
Editor
June 13, 2013 11:27 pm

Steven Mosher says: June 8, 2013 at 7:52 am
It took you a day to come up with that answer?
1. You need to compare august sept oct air temps
This is the best I’ve got for you;
[caption id="" align="alignnone" width="632"] Danish Meteorological Institute – Climate Sanity – Click the pic to view at source[/caption]
what is it that we should be looking for?
( you also have to look at mositure which is what they explicitily mention )
Explicitly explain the mechanism by which low Arctic Sea Ice Area in September is a primary driver of jet stream activity in late winter/Spring.
2. AVOID hadcrut. I’ve explained this over an over again. Its broken dont use it.
Then present alternative observational data that falsifies the HadCRUT4 Arctic 70 – 90 N data.
3. For this area and the variables you need to look at Reanalysis is the best source.
Then present some of that…
4. To test a claim somebody makes you have to actually test the claim.
A) When there is more open water in the melt season ( pick this data )
B) the air is warmer and moister than it would be otherwise ( like duh)
C) that can lead to higher amplitude jet stream.

And how long do you think that effect lasts against the influences of the Atmospheric Circulation;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_circulation
and Polar Vorticity?
http://climatewiki.org.uk/Polar_Vorticity
So, to date you havent even some close to touching the analytical problem
You haven’t presented any observational evidence in support of your conjectures, thus I have nothing to to touch and analyze.
When you do that you will be unfooled.
You are clearly very knowledgeable on the subject, you even have your own lexicon for it…

1 4 5 6