It looks like the Maslowski Countdown has ended early and there will be no “ice free Arctic” as predicted this year.
From NSIDC, which has a 5 day average in the plot. It looks like the minimum extent is ~5.0-5.1 million sq kilometers. NSIDC has yet to make an announcement on the turning point as of this writing. Note the minimum is within the standard deviation bounds (grey shading) that NSIDC provides.
Note also that it is still possible to see a drop again, as this has happened in years past, but given the colder temperatures this year, a reversal appears unlikely.
![N_stddev_timeseries[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/n_stddev_timeseries1.png?resize=640%2C512)
The JAXA plot concurs:
![AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Extent_L[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/amsre_sea_ice_extent_l1.png?resize=640%2C400)
The JAXA data says:
09-10Ā Ā 5084063 09-11Ā Ā 5029688 09-12Ā Ā 5000313 09-13Ā Ā 5031094 09-14Ā Ā 5055625 09-15Ā Ā 5063438
The NANSEN plot concurs as well:
More at the WUWT Sea Ice page: http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/sea-ice-page/
Related articles
- Tough Times For Sea Ice Melt Enthusiasts… (wattsupwiththat.com)
- The early chill in the Arctic continues (wattsupwiththat.com)
It may possibly go lower, but the odds on it going below 2010 are very slim.
I guess this means that ManBearPig will be denning early this year. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xf69EEL3WBk
But there are still 6 days to go, anything can happen. š Here are their predictions / projections for an ice-free Arctic. Two have now failed. Maslowski’s partner in crime is part-time professor Paul Beckwith. He said:
He says “An event unprecedented in human history…” This is not true (click). His students beware.
Wouldn’t it be great to get an email list for his classes and send them that link?
So tired of these asshats being wrong over and over and over…and teaching students the same muck that got them there year after year.
Given that the NSIDC’s office in Boulder is shut down due to the flooding, I wouldn’t be expecting any announcements of any kind from them for a while. The staff there have got bigger problems right now.
To the staff of NSIDC, I hope you are all OK, and that you get back on your feet soon.
Thanks Anthony.
Arctic sea ice is now probably past its minimum.
The other indicators point this way too.
Paul Ehrlich has been 100% wrong for 40 years, yet is still beloved by the loonies. The chances a bunch of young skulls full of mush rejecting their well intentioned part-time prof…er, teacher….0%.
What was the WUWT forecast?
temps won’t touch it now…only watch the wind
I said 5 million, was that close enough?
I thought the WUWT forecast that Anthony submitted was 5 million. Looking pretty good.
Real close enough.
the fact the melt is within the standard deviation will be lost on the type of people that frequent the arctic sea ice forum run by neven (the forum,not the blog) it appears standard deviation only applies to climate models that have error boundaries greater than the actual measurements to minimise the falsification test ,although as we can see,even those boundaries are not great enough.
apologies if i have used incorrect terminology to describe the hypocrisy on view in a variety of blogs/forums such sks,the arctic sea ice forum,real climate etc.
Now, just to question all assumptions: What exactly is the “supposed” fear (or justification amongst the CAGW-alarmists) for all of the hype surrounding the loss of Arctic Sea Ice?
What are their actual calculations and what constants are they basing this hysteria upon?
If it the “gain” in heat energy comparing an “open Arctic ocean albedo” compared to an ice-covered Arctic albedo, then should they not be concerned far more about the GAIN in Antarctic sea ice at all times of the year, at latitudes far closer to the Equator where solar energy is actually reflected from the ice at all times? (Rather than just a few weeks at very high latitudes? ) Because around the Antarctic continent, the sea ice at minimum extent is at 69-70 degrees latitude, and at maximum extent, it is past latitude 60 south.
For, in the Arctic (beginning in mid-August, and even more so at this time of year of 12 hours of darkness), the Arctic Ocean loses much more energy when the waters are not covered by an insulating blanket of ice than they gain from the little bit of sunlight available.
Should we begin predicting when Cape Horn will be blocked by Antarctic Sea Ice in April and May, rather than when the (unneeded) Northwest Passage will be open for a few days in August or September? If current trends continue, Cape Horn could be blocked within 8-12 years.
Someone needs to look at the Hycom/SSMI graphic depicting sea ice thickness. Over the last day the ice pack at its thickest point has lost approximately one metre in thickness. Something is amiss!
Leon,
The WUWT forecast made in June was 4.8.
The UK Met Office, with their highly skilful computer models and supercomputers, came up with 3.4
š
Turned into sea ice spotter and see large differences in plots of Arctic sea ice
e.g. from 13the September 2013
http://www.zen183332.zen.co.uk/1309.jpg
could not find the scale for the right hand graphic
What exactly is the āsupposedā fear
====
Poley bears will drown….except them their real numbers go up
The NE will get colder/warmer wetter/drier snowier/less snowier
..and the big one! ski resorts will have two less days…except when they don’t
This past summer has also seen record cold in the Arctic 80th northern parallel since the DMI record began in 1958. Something you might not read in the IPCC summary for policy makers. The climate has indeed changed. First they picked global warming, then they shifted to climate change. What a cat and mouse game of a joke.
“Daily mean temperatures for the Arctic area north of the 80th northern parallel…”
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php
Sea Ice Outlook report for WUWT was 4.8, both in June and August. You can check it here: http://www.arcus.org/search/seaiceoutlook/2013/june
However, 5.0 msq/km had most votes in August. Which is very close to JAXA’s 5000313 sq/km (which may still change..)
Sierra Club ā March 23, 2013
āFor the recordāI do not think that any sea ice will survive this summer. An event unprecedented in human history is today, this very moment, transpiring in the Arctic Oceanā¦.ā
A PHD in climatology? Really? What’s required to obtain such a specialised designation? I think I may have a shot if its simply random guesswork without any basis in reality!
A reminder that, to me anyway, the main point here isn’t whether or not the Arctic is “ice-free’ but that the alarmist said (predicted, projected) it would be based on the whole GAGW premise. They were wrong. Stop making policy based on error.
This late summer the North West passage was blocked with ice. This must be Arctic Amplification at work. It gets hotter in the Arctic every year.
Darn it! – I can’t remember what I voted for now, but I’m sure it was around the 5.0 mark ! Honest Guv!
Yep. Those poley bears are doooooomed to drown. They just can’t swim. Their cubs have had it. The Holocene Climate Optimum wiped them out. The much warmer Eemian interglacial had NO polar bear jaw found. It must have been fake. Polar bears are perhaps the greatest, large mamalian survivors ever.
Was there a prize for this competition, if so send it to Mount Galleywood, Essex, UK in 7 days time – Many thanks LG š
RACookPE1978 says:
September 16, 2013 at 2:39 pm
… āopen Arctic ocean albedoā …
__________________________________
I was just thinking, the albedo issue should be focusing on the ice coverage during the season with the most energy from the sun. This period would clearly be the few weeks surrounding the Solstice when the sun is high in the sky (21 or 22 June). With all the focus on the time of sea ice minimum in mid September, the sun is so low on the horizon (in the arctic) that even water is acting like a (almost) perfect mirror. Next week this time, the arctic will have started its 6 month long night. Realistically, past the middle of August, the albedo likely isn’t even an issue. In fact, at this time of year, a lack of sea ice probably lets the arctic ocean release huge amounts of stored heat back into the atmosphere. As with a lot of issues, it appears that the CAGW crowd have things backwards.
So 2010 was almost three years ago, and 2010 minimum was pretty much right on three years ago.
So how long does it take for these public servants living off the taxpayer’s largesse, to get their #2 pencil out and put in the data up to 2013. Well let’s say at least up to the end of August 2013.
Well I’m talking about the long term average. I care about the 1981-2010 average about as much as I care about the 1492-1776 average.
Are they afraid that the long term average will get lower if they include the 2010-Aug 2013 data in their average ?
They are just cherry picking.
Our next target is this particular professor. He says there will be an ice free Arctic in 2015 and 2016. He even said that an ice-free North Pole would be unprecedented. Wrong. He even thought Maslowski’s model had merits. Partners in utter and abject failure. Just how many more times should we listen to these idiots of the Arctic?
I find it best to use my lying eyes and arrive at my own conclusions, regarding the situation in the arctic. Not that my conclusions are correct, but at least I can admit my mistakes and stand corrected, unlike certain Climate Scientists who would seemingly rather fall prey to their own greed and vanity.
Besides the Sea Ice Page here at WUWT, which I visit amazingly often (especially in September,) as it is an invaluable store of good links, I like to use my eyes by viewing the ice through the “North Pole Camera.” Now there are other, better “O-Buoy” cameras as well, which include an option that lets you see a sort of time lapse film of every picture the camera has taken. Its amazing what you can learn about the thawing and the refreezing just by watching. (Also I once saw the shoulder of a polar bear.)
A good supply of links to various buoys, plus a synopsis of what buoys are reporting, is found at http://imb.crrel.usace.army.mil/newdata.htm . I learned a lot the past few years simply by looking at the line drawn by each buoy’s drift. This year the ice hasn’t moved down and out through Fram Strait, as it usually does.
My own diary of watching-ice-melt, (a most charming occupation on a hot summer’s day, but not so gripping as it starts to get colder,) can be found at http://sunriseswansong.wordpress.com/2013/08/31/the-arctic-sea-ice-minimum-a-september-surprise/
And now I expect to see the following Quote:
Stick Nokes says:
September 16, 2013 at 3.29 pm
Phew, the sea ice is alright! It is recovering! At last some good news we can all cheer, and say that we have indeed turned a corner and the worries about CO2 have been overblown. Thanks everyone for a great effort, lets get back to normal life without the worries!.
Instead we are more likely to see this:
Stick Nokes says:
September 16, 2013 at 3.29 pm
Well I did tell you that the models predicted this type of outlier. Just wait until next year, the sea ice will be gone in both the arctic and the antarctic. I know because I have seen a peer reviewed paper which has a climate model which proves what I am saying! Reduce your carbon footprint and repent you sinners!
The saddest part about all of this is that as the tide is shifting away from the alarmism, the inhabitants of Earth can’t breathe a big sigh of relief, forget about this AGW crap and get on with their lives. The alarmists, rent-seeking scientists and big government redistributionist types won’t admit they were wrong and concede easily. This is SCIENCE (read, their livelihoods) after all!
We will have to soldier on for several more years until it becomes apparent to every elected official that they can’t continue to live on the public purse while spending billions in taxpayer money chasing rainbows and unicorn farts (Australia anyone?) As with the so-called climate scientists, politicians are very adept at determining on which side their bread is buttered in order to maintain their own economic condition. When enough of the voting public realize that they have been duped, most of these clowns will need to discover a change of heart or be thrown out of office.
Of course once the AGW gravy train ends, they will conveniently find (read, manufacture) the next crisis to latch onto….
This is when Mosher drops by, leaves the first cryptic note about paying attention, not over yet. Then after prodding he’ll mention warm water flowing into the Arctic Ocean under the ice, fragile thin ice that’ll virtually evaporate overnight, and/or will point to some storm system developing that we’ll find out later wasn’t full blown for another week and clears out another million square kilometers of extent.
Or he could just keep himself busy polishing up the BEST dataset.
@ RACookPE1978 on September 16, 2013 at 2:39 pm …
Good and proper questions RA, but answering those just doesn’t fit their script of global domination with the “Greens” running the world, dictating what you can and can’t do, where you can and can’t do it, how much in taxes they can get out of you and your family (ie: agenda 21… United Nations). Their goal is NOT answering proper scientific questions, in fact they use psychological projection for just the opposite purpose.
I maybe wrong here but I do believe that Nick Stokes is a CLIMATE MODELLER. A failed one too. š I doubt we will see him here today as he is very busy feeding, his snout is in the CAGW trough. š
Roy UK says:
September 16, 2013 at 3:51 pm
Very Funny! Unfortunately, as always, there is an ironic and black twist to it – in that, one would normally expect climate scientists to be happy that the Earth is much less likely to be ‘doomed’ as originally suggested. Indeed, one might expect them to be ‘glad to be wrong’? But still, the scam continues, how many have proclaimed their happiness at nature showing them to be wrong?
Nelson says:
September 16, 2013 at 3:53 pm
re the next scam/crisis – I foresee this to be ‘the next ice age’! (and no doubt, probably caused by CO2!!)
All time record sea ice in Antarctic.
http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2013/09/16/antarctica-sea-ice-extent-all-time-record-maximum-on-sept-14-2013/
Here is a free tip for young scientists who don’t care about science. Enter climate science, make shitty predictions and you will get money anyway. What is there to lose? Think about it. The only downside is that you will never be remembered for anything. You would have really failed.
Jimbo says:
September 16, 2013 at 2:53 pm
This past summer has also seen record cold in the Arctic 80th northern parallel since the DMI record began in 1958. Something you might not read in the IPCC summary for policy makers.
See below how the DMI record is calculated from the model result and how the models used have changed from time-to-time. Notice how DMI shows that recent winters have been warmer.
Calculation of the Arctic Mean Temperature
The daily mean temperature of the Arctic area north of the 80th northern parallel is estimated from the average of the 00z and 12z analysis for all model grid points inside that area. The ERA40 reanalysis data set from ECMWF, has been applied to calculate daily mean temperatures for the period from 1958 to 2002, from 2002 to 2006 data from the global NWP model T511 is used and from 2006 to 2010 T799 data are used and from 2010 to present the T1279 model data are used.
The climate has indeed changed. First they picked global warming, then they shifted to climate change. What a cat and mouse game of a joke.
In which case it was rather odd that they named the organization The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change back in 1988!
Let me make one thing clear, I am not a scientist at all. What I find amazing is that I can find ‘Arctic climate scientists’ to be wrong. Does this indicate that there is something seriously wrong here? These guys are supposed to correct me and not the other way round. Unless they are actually more concerned about feeding in the global warming money trough. If these are our scientists today then we are really doomed. Eisenhower warned us about this and it’s happening before our very eyes.
Goodnight all.
NorthwestPassage2013 blog: Sept 15 ā the Fat Lady is Singing.
Prepare to winter over.
http://northwestpassage2013.blogspot.com/2013/09/it-aint-over-till-fat-lady-sings-make.html
Of course, that’s just a measure of how surprised people were. More boat taking chances on less ice — and losing the bet.
Sept 16: “Mother Nature welcomes NW Passage yachts in Nome to the Bering Sea with a STORM – STAY IN PORT WAIT FOR A WEATHER WINDOW?”
So you are not worried about summers? I thought summers was the worry. Or are you worried about an ice-free Arctic in the winters? Get your act together boy, I have to sleep. I will come back tomorrow. Also deal with their FAILED predictions to date. Get ready for an ice-free Arctic in 2015 and 2016. Will I see you here? If it fails you will run – I project. Now take a break and have a Kit Kat. š
bit chilly says:
September 16, 2013 at 2:38 pm
the fact the melt is within the standard deviation will be lost on the type of people that frequent the arctic sea ice forum run by neven
Well, within 2 standard deviations so a 7% chance.
Oops!
http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/09/13/crew-filming-reality-tv-show-forced-to-cancel-trek-through-northwest-passage-on-jet-skis-after-costly-rescue/
I am aware of the term ‘climate change’ going back BEFORE 1988! Are you aware of the number of times the term ‘global warming’ was used between 1998 to 2005 compared to 2005 to 2013? The shift is clear. That’s my point. I repeat climate change and may I add ‘global cooling’ and ‘ice age’ were used before 1998. See Rasool and Schnieder.
george e. smith says:
September 16, 2013 at 3:29 pm
āSo 2010 was almost three years ago, . . . ā
International agreement since the 1930s have used the 30 year average for weather data with the last year of that ending in zero, thus 2010 qualifies. They can and will do other things sometimes but on this they are following standard procedure.
As reported by sunshinehours, there is a new all-time record Antarctic Sea Ice Extent recorded on September 14, 2013 according to the NSIDC.
http://s17.postimg.org/wb91x69b3/Antarctic_SIE_NSIDC_Sept15_2013.png
The NSIDC’s Arctic Sea Ice Extent has probably reached a minimum as well. The September monthly average is tracking to 5.23M km^2 (up 44% from last year’s, virtually the same number I predicted in early August and higher than all but one Arcus Sea Ice Outlook prediction game).
http://s24.postimg.org/ul220iiat/NSIDC_Sept_Min_Proj_Sept15_2013.png
JAXA looks to have reached the minimum as well (51% higher than last year).
http://s21.postimg.org/uu3b1hzg7/Jaxa_Min_Proj_Sept15_2013.png
Whilst the apparent recovery this year is impressive – approximately 60 percent more sea ice than in 2012 – I would, again, alert readers to the fact that the ice pack thickness to the north of Nunavut has dropped a metre in the past 24-hours (compare the Hycom/NRLSSC Arctic Sea Ice Thickness graphics for the 15th and 16th September)! This coincides with the thickest section of the Arctic ice pack. There is a need to determine what generated such a decrease.
As Joe Bastardi (WeatherBell Analytics) has pointed out in his most recent report, the recovery is off an exceptionally low base. Readers need to remember that a massive Arctic storm destroyed a significant section of the ice pack in early August last year – rendering the minimum area and extent the lowest since 2005.
Just did a fresh pull of the CT ice area for my article at Climate Etc. It does look like we may have hit min a bit early this year.
This may be part of a much more significant decadal change:
judithcurry.com/2013/09/16/inter-decadal-variation-in-northern-hemisphere-sea-ice
Gregory Beasley (Prospect, NSW) says:
September 16, 2013 at 5:00 pm
… the ice pack thickness to the north of Nunavut has dropped a metre in the past 24-hours (compare the Hycom/NRLSSC Arctic Sea Ice Thickness graphics for the 15th and 16th September)
—————————
Pretty unlikely since temperatures in this region are about -10C.
http://www.uni-koeln.de/math-nat-fak/geomet/meteo/winfos/synNNWWarctis.gif
Eureka Nunavut Canada temps over the past 90 days. Exceptionally below normal temperatures. And Eureka has a world-class climate research station staffed by several researchers so this is accurate.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/global_monitoring/temperature/tn71917_90.gif
Why do the graphs stop at 2 Million Kilometers? Shouldn’t they go all the way to 0? The higher the graph stops, the closer it looks like we’re coming to doom. It’s bad enough we only have 30 years of data, with no real perspective on where the graph has been in the past (heh, using the logic of CAGWers, if we had equivalent graphs from before significant human’s influence on the ice, we’d see clearly that we were in an ice age just 100 years ago…)
Winds are trying to push ice out into Fram again. However, the massive ice jam along the whole northern Greenland shore and nearby islands may prevent it.
I think I’d wait until the official counting is done. After all, millions of public funds and a Nobel prize are riding on an ice-free Arctic. š
Excellent guestimate for those predicting around 5
Just another thought. Does it really matter to the warmists if the prediction is wrong? They make the doomsday prediction, get all the press, we get to wring our hands at impending disaster and then they move on to the next bit of doomsday. No one seems to remember whether their prediction was right or wrong. Their real failure is making he prediction close enough that someone might remember it.
Is this year’s low within the old standard deviations before they did the downward adjustment earlier in the summer to include the averages up to 2010?
Bob, it’s like a 20% chance of rain…
…don’t mean squat….either way they are right
Just noting that the average climatology in the next few days has the sea ice extent dropping. It is normally not enough to bump the minimums off their position but September 16 to 18 have declining numbers in most years. Just the way it happens. Don’t panic if the next few days are lower.
Change in sea ice extent from the NSIDC and Jaxa on average in the climatology and then over the last year 2013.
http://s15.postimg.org/9qsnd5nrv/NH_SIE_Daily_Change_Sept15_2013.png
Great to see the rebound, but it took record/near record low temperatures to help it, and it was still a gigantic melt,,,and the melting season isn’t over yet. That ice is very thin. So I wouldn’t get too excited about this, as nice as it is to see. I recall us getting all excited about the Arctic “recovering” in 2009 after the 2007 melt, and look what happened last summer.
pinetree3 says:
September 16, 2013 at 7:05 pm
That ice is very thin.
How thin is it?
So pinetree (assuming you are a scientist and know what you are speaking of), what thickness do you consider “not very thin” since you seem to have a definition for “very thin”?
Oh no, the increase in the yearly minimum arctic sea ice is UNPRECEDENTED (in recorded modern history)!
AGW gone wild! Reduce your carbon footprint and repent you sinners!
/sarc
I’ll wait till we have 5 years of growing ice minimums before celebrating that the Arctic is rebounding. One good year may just be an outlier.
James at 48 says: September 16, 2013 at 5:36 pm
Winds are trying to push ice out into Fram again. However, the massive ice jam along the whole northern Greenland shore and nearby islands may prevent it.
Maybe an icebreaker can try to breakup that ice jam, e.g. the Swedish icebreaker Oden returned from the Fram Strait on September 1st, after two weeks of important research including:
One wonders why, if we are so worried about the loss of Arctic Sea Ice, we are helping it along by breaking it up in the Fram Strait, while recording it in 360 and recording the sounds it makes…
Oden also participated Ajurak Icebreaker trials in the Fram Strait in September 2009, i.e.:
āIcebreaker and ice-management trials on behalf of ExxonMobil in connection with the Ajurak project. In this research expedition during September 2009 Icebreaker Oden (TransAtlantic management) and Icebreaker Fennica was performing various tests for ExxonMobil.ā http://www.rabt.se/Offshoreicebreaking/Reference-list/
I believe the -PDO firmly established itself this year. That means the AMO will be trending down from here on out. This will allow more and more sea ice to remain in the Arctic. It may take 5 years to see it, but eventually the ice will get thicker and the claims of disappearing ice will fade away.
“”””””…….John F. Hultquist says:
September 16, 2013 at 4:46 pm
george e. smith says:
September 16, 2013 at 3:29 pm
āSo 2010 was almost three years ago, . . . ā
International agreement since the 1930s have used the 30 year average for weather data with the last year of that ending in zero, thus 2010 qualifies. They can and will do other things sometimes but on this they are following standard procedure……..”””””””
So in 2039 we will still be comparing that year’s ice with the 1981 to 2010 average ??
Simply wunnerful. !
So how about they wait tll 2040, before reporting on anything that happens between 2010 and 2039 ??
I don’t mind them using 30 years for their average; any made up number is as good as any other made up number; but the 30 year period should be the 30 years immediately previous to the one year your are comparing to the past average; not to an average that can be separated in time by 29 years from the subject year
According to the NIC the 8-10th arctic ice tally is 4, 943, 662 which is about 200,000 sq km more than on Sept 11th so it looks certain that low point has gone. So we won’t be swimming to North Pole after all then. Doom mongers can always hope for next year, but I think they will have a long wait.
Well, I went with e+Ļ myself, so I’m a bit high, but not that bad!
Antarctic sea ice extent is at a record high – noted above by writer sunshinehours – at 19,500,000 sq km’s.
Add 1,561,000 sq km’s of permanent sea ice shelves.
Add 14,000,000 sq km’s of land area.
Gee. The edge of the Antarctic sea ice is up past 60 degrees south latitude!
On Hansen’s NASA-GISS-favored Mercator exaggeration projection maps, that is equivalent to the total southern sea and land ice now covering everything between the north pole and the bottom tip of Greenland through half of Canada, all of Alaska, cutting off Kamchatka, passing a bit north of Manchuria and Mongolia but covering all of Siberia and half of Russia, cutting the Ural Mountains, and Scandinavia and ending up well south of Iceland, right?
But they claim – based on no drill bore evidence but lots of models, that the Antarctic ice shelves are melting from underneath – where nobody can measure the loss.
From george e. smith on September 16, 2013 at 9:06 pm:
Nah, 2001 to 2030 average. The record lows of the first half will provide excellent justification for the scaremongering of the coming planetary glaciation.
As the behind-the-scenes machinations of the UN with Agenda 21 and the Club of Rome and others to reduce global population to that which can fit in the ice-free tropical land regions, will have failed utterly, and despite numerous UN treaty attempts the unruly peasants there will be too well-armed (including digital weaponry) to be “removed” without direct repercussions, alternatives will be found. As additional atmospheric COā beyond 400 ppmv was proven completely ineffective at providing additional warming twenty years earlier, money went elsewhere.
Thus the great push will be for space colonies for the 0.01%, fully automated living with your own mini-legion of self-maintaining self-replicating robotic servants. All that’s needed is sunlight and some raw materials. Thankfully by then we’ll have batteries good enough to make solar viable on the Moon, if you’re one of those lower 0.01%-ers trapped so close to the frozen squalid cesspool. If you can afford Mars up to preferably armed and armored family-sized independent ships, get the nuclear upgrade.
My investment advice? Asteroid belt mining. From the rock wranglers to processors to ship builders to the dock-to-dock ice salesmen, it’ll be a growth industry, suitable for supporting many family businesses, perhaps another 0.09%.
It’ll sure beat selling yourself and your progeny into permanent servitude in the deep under-ground under-glacier communal bunker cities and “waiting out the ice” if you can’t afford tropical land or space on a floating barge city. Trust me on that.
RACookPE1978 says:
September 16, 2013 at 2:39 pm
If it the āgainā in heat energy comparing an āopen Arctic ocean albedoā compared to an ice-covered Arctic albedo, then should they not be concerned far more about the GAIN in Antarctic sea ice at all times of the year, at latitudes far closer to the Equator where solar energy is actually reflected from the ice at all times?
————————
The sea ice in Antarctica just took another upward leap today. The last several days it had looked like it was not going to reach another record peak, following last years record peak. Then today it shows a spike that may take the sea ice to an all new high…http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/#
And we have another 10 days or so for it to increase even further….. Assuming the ice follows its ‘average’ progress down south.
Somewhat related to melting or not melting ice I was watching Daily Planet on the Discovery Channel in Canada Monday night. It has just been recently announced that Mt. McKinley the highest mountain in North America, due to more accurate measurements maybe slightly shorter than originally measured. Well Dan Riskin a co-host on the show stated climate change might be one of the reasons it is shorter. No mention made if snow cover comes into play here, just climate change. Dan Riskin is a firm believer in AGW. He has a PHD in zoology, his specialty, the study of bats.
Chicken! I said, and say, 5.2.
Huh, the NSIDC site is finally back online and running.
This is interesting, about their new shiny Green Data Center:
100% humidity with continuous rain, you don’t get evaporation, thus the evaporative coolers aren’t very effective.
The outer air is too wet for cooling when raining, you’d need dehumidification equipment.
In case of a power outage with overcast raining skies, the solar array does squat. Where’s the backup diesel generators?
Did the NSIDC put all their eggs in one Green basket, ignoring the many lessons on backup sites, ignoring time-honored engineering principles of using proven last-backup equipment, that fell apart after a few days of mere rain? Did they put all their trust in the magic of sunny cloudless days?
RACookPE1978 says:
September 16, 2013 at 2:39 pm
Should we begin predicting when Cape Horn will be blocked by Antarctic Sea Ice in April and May,
I like winding people up! I will start the ball rolling on my Facebook page right away.
Drake’s passage and Magellan St. may be easier to argue. That would cut off the link between Pacific and Atlantic and block the circumpolar current.
Lots of scope for OMG climate distruption there.
Last rites for the death spiral:
http://judithcurry.com/2013/09/16/inter-decadal-variation-in-northern-hemisphere-sea-ice/
Lord Galleywood says:
September 16, 2013 at 3:25 pm
I spent my boyhood weekends on the Common cycling up,down and round the old clay pit “bumps” and my late youth weekends in the Horse and Groom!
Small world…
Simply by watching on a day-to-day basis, I have seen air temperatures 1 to 10 degrees below the freezing point of salt water have little immediate effect on the extent of the ice. Instead it cools the entire column of water down to the pycnocline, roughly 300-400 feet down.
When the sea is protected from the wind by a layer of ice, the warm AMO can push currents under the ice and melt the ice from beneath, even when the air is cold above. However once the warm AMO creates a large area of open water towards Eurasia, it is in effect hastening its own demise, for that entire area effectively loses heat all the way down to 400 feet below the surface.
I thought this colder water would cause an early refreeze, but I haven’t seen that this year. However I think colder water may have contributed to the colder summer over the arctic. The summer storms couldn’t stir up warmer waters from below when the water was cold all the way down to 400 feet.
Once the air temperatures get down to 20-40 below the freezing point of salt water the surface seems to freeze even when the water is warmer below. Although salt water, unlike fresh water, sinks at near-freezing temperatures, in cases where it is blown and becomes spray, it freezes, and ice doesn’t sink.
Sometimes you read of a “lens of fresh water” atop the Arctic Sea, created by melting fresh-water icebergs. The water is never truly fresh. It is less salty, but still has a freezing point of -1.7 C at best. There are reports of the open water being so cold that when snowflakes (fresh water) fall on the sea they don’t melt, and actually accumulate.
“Sometimes you read of a ālens of fresh waterā atop the Arctic Sea, created by melting fresh-water icebergs. The water is never truly fresh. It is less salty, but still has a freezing point of -1.7 C at best. There are reports of the open water being so cold that when snowflakes (fresh water) fall on the sea they donāt melt, and actually accumulate.”
The term “lens” is a total misnomer. It seems to have been taken from fresh water in atolls where it has that form (albeit underground).
The argument is that this layer impedes convection of the lower waters that are warmer that the surface, it thereby prevents melting by preventing convective mixing. This is suggested to be the origin of the annual negative correlation (aka 2 year cycle).
Spectral analysis shows the 2y signal is split into a triplet by modulation of a circa 12y period:
http://climategrog.wordpress.com/?attachment_id=438
My article at Judith Curry’s site yesterday shows a rectified 11.16 year pattern. This may be the same period. Also interference patterns from the triplet probably account for the reduced variability between 1997 and 2007.
http://judithcurry.com/2013/09/16/inter-decadal-variation-in-northern-hemisphere-sea-ice/#comment-381315
In any case, the energy in the 2y oscillation is significant. Looking at high pass filtered ice data shows strong harmonics of the 2y period as well as harmonic of 1 year.
As a side note one of the side lobes of the 2y triplet seems to correspond to the “quasi-biennial oscillation”. QBO may well have its origins in the Arctic.
cf strong 2.442 peak in trade winds:
http://climategrog.wordpress.com/?attachment_id=283
” There are reports of the open water being so cold that when snowflakes (fresh water) fall on the sea they donāt melt, and actually accumulate.”
The annual anti-correlation is evidence of a very strong negative feedback. This is ignored by those desperately searching for a dominant +ve f/b and a death spiral.
As Steven Goddard points out, all that new ice is likely to became a multiyear one.
So…let the sea ice **creation** begin! See everyone next April for the 2014 Arctic Sea Ice Follies.
(PS Why does everyone in mainstream climate “science” ignore the annual **increase** in sea ice extent, area, and volume? Is it not as interesting as sea ice melt?)
Dermot O’Logical says:
September 16, 2013 at 2:20 pm
Given that the NSIDCās office in Boulder is shut down due to the flooding, I wouldnāt be expecting any announcements of any kind from them for a while. The staff there have got bigger problems right now.
To the staff of NSIDC, I hope you are all OK, and that you get back on your feet soon.
////////////////////////////////////
Of course, Boulder was flooded due to Global Warming/Climate Change/Climate Disruption/extreme weather events – what else…?
/sarc
nc says:
September 17, 2013 at 12:20 am
… Dan Riskin is a firm believer in AGW. He has a PHD in zoology, his specialty, the study of bats.
///////////////////////////////
While some species of bats are notorious for spreading Rabies, the expression “batshitcrazy” instantly springs to mind….
Glenn says:
September 16, 2013 at 7:15 pm
pinetree3 says:
September 16, 2013 at 7:05 pm
That ice is very thin.
How thin is it?
///////////////////////////////
From 3 to 15 feet, respectively, according to
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticictnowcast.gif
Personally, I wouldn’t call that “very thin”.
From a physics standpoint, it has always seemed to me that a transparent body of water radiates heat from the bottom, not necessarily from the surface, sort of like how when you first light a fireplace the heat radiates through glass and can be felt before the glass gets warm, so if the bottom of open arctic waters is 34F or so as compared to an icy surface at 0F then the extra heat radiated is quite large and all this extra lost heat is deep, not necessarily at the surface, and wouldn’t be revealed until much later … perhaps as a large rebound in ice extent the next summer, as the colder waters are slow to melt ice. I may have this wrong if someone wants to straighten me out on this feel free.
The nice thing about all this focus on Arctic ice is that it is sort of like doomsday clock for AGW, when Arctic ice gets above the long term average, AGW is OVER!
NIC shows another, smaller, increase yesterday, so it’s looking like the minimum was reached on Sept. 14 in the NIC estimates.
Arctic Min Date >8/10ths Marg Zone M.sq Km
14/09/2013 4.84 0.67 5.51
21/09/2012 3.28 0.92 4.20
20/09/2011 4.30 0.97 5.27
22/09/2010 4.75 0.91 5.66
21/09/2009 4.58 1.27 5.84
23/09/2008 4.16 0.77 4.93
18/09/2007 3.60 1.01 4.61
A remarkable recovery, especially in the packed ice extent and the early date.
Well that puts the mockers on my wild guess for the sea ice minimum competition! Nice to be wrong, though not too wrong please..
Scott says:
September 17, 2013 at 6:14 am
From a physics standpoint, it has always seemed to me that a transparent body of water radiates heat from the bottom, not necessarily from the surface,
Unfortunately for your belief water is not transparent to ‘heat’, aka IR radiation, rather it is a strong absorber.
Regarding thickness: The satellite remote sensing for concentration and that used for thickness appear to be at odds. What I refer to are areas where concentration significantly above zero is shown, yet thickness is shown as zero or nearly so. Check it out and see what I mean. One of the two “measurements” is wrong.
Caleb says:
September 17, 2013 at 3:13 am
Simply by watching on a day-to-day basis, I have seen air temperatures 1 to 10 degrees below the freezing point of salt water have little immediate effect on the extent of the ice. Instead it cools the entire column of water down to the pycnocline, roughly 300-400 feet down.
When the sea is protected from the wind by a layer of ice, the warm AMO can push currents under the ice and melt the ice from beneath, even when the air is cold above. However once the warm AMO creates a large area of open water towards Eurasia, it is in effect hastening its own demise, for that entire area effectively loses heat all the way down to 400 feet below the surface.
I agree with this picture of a kind of thermal conflict between air and water at the Arctic. The timing of oceanic oscillations such as the PDO and AMO play a role here. In recent years the Arctic air temperatures have dropped possibly influenced by the dropping PDO. However the peaking AMO – lagging behind the PDO – means that warm water, a legacy of 2-3 decades of PDO warm phase (el Nino dominated) results in a continuing supply of Atlantic warm water – via the gulf stream – into an Arctic in which air temperatures are cooling. The result of this is the sharp increase in amplitude seen in recent years between low simmer minima and high winter maxima of ice extent and volume. So there is a tension between cooling Arctic air temperatures and residual subsurface warmer water. However that legacy AMO warm water – hiding as you say subsurface at the Arctic – will eventually be cooled, this process assisted by more open water in the Arctic summer. There was a good article recently by Jim Steele here about this:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/07/22/why-antarctic-sea-ice-is-the-better-climate-change-indicator/
It definitely is a negative feedback, the Arctic sheds the el Nino heat of former decades out to space.
Kelvin Vaughan says:
September 17, 2013 at 1:43 am
RACookPE1978 says:
September 16, 2013 at 2:39 pm
Should we begin predicting when Cape Horn will be blocked by Antarctic Sea Ice in April and May,
I like winding people up! I will start the ball rolling on my Facebook page right away.
Well I put it on asking how long until the Antarctic sea ice reaches Cape Horn and got the reply “1/2 inch on my map”.
Kelvin Vaughan says:
September 17, 2013 at 11:40 am
Kelvin Vaughan says:
September 17, 2013 at 1:43 am
RACookPE1978 says:
September 16, 2013 at 2:39 pm
Should we begin predicting when Cape Horn will be blocked by Antarctic Sea Ice in April and May,
Antarctic ice reaching Cape Horn would block the circumpolar current, leading to some negative-feedback warming at least for a while since the circumpolar current exerts a strong cooling influence globally. But its an interesting question…
So, WUWT wins again.
New record low volume of Arctic ice, as measured by Cryosat, going all the way back to October 2010!
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/358504
Probably not a valid observation, but even if accurate, what would you expect after the storm-driven ice destruction of 2012. Thickness should increase with new addition of multi-year ice after this years piddling melt back.
Kelvin Vaughan says:
September 17, 2013 at 11:40 am
Cape Horn lies at 55Ā°58ā²47ā³S, although shoals extend some way south from it, which would have been exposed during the Last Glacial Maximum. It’s thus possible that during the LGM maximum winter sea ice might have closed at least surface circulation of the Southern Ocean.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/98GL02012/abstract;jsessionid=0A4861126EE11C8E1C61ACCF7CB9861B.d04t03?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false
Abstract
We used modern analog technique applied to Antarctic diatoms to quantitatively reconstruct seasonal sea-ice extent at the Last Glacial Maximum. Winter maximum sea-ice limit occurred around 48Ā°S in the Atlantic and western Indian sectors, around 55Ā°S in the eastern Indian and western Pacific sectors, and around 58ā60Ā°S in the eastern Pacific sector of the Southern Ocean. Summer maximum sea-ice extents during the last ice age and today are similar, which contradicts CLIMAP’s findings. This implies a reduced summer albedo feedback of the Southern Hemisphere and a greater transfer of heat and moisture from the ocean to the atmosphere than shown by previous qualitative studies.
Scotese however shows the sea ice not reaching the Cape at the LGM:
http://www.scotese.com/lastice.htm
Don’t know if he relied on CLIMAP for ice extent, however.
And I thank all for their comments. However, I would point out that the ocean depths between Cape Horn and the Antarctic peninsula are very deep, and that floating sea ice (1-2 meters thick for fresh ice) will do little to retard the strong currents flowing around Antarctica.
On the other hand, such circumpolar currents would tend to “raft’ large sections of the sea ice already formed,and those large sections torn off of the sea ice “plates” are by themselves dangerous to shipping. True, the bows of large merchants are made of formed plates 1-1/2 to 2 inches thick (37 mm to 50 mm, for you of the metric persuasion) but hundreds of thousands of tons of 2 meter ice hitting ships that weight 50,000 to 150,000 tons themselves will form dangerous forces. Thus, it is not really necessary for sea ice to completely “block” the Cape and its smaller straits (themselves prone to ice freezing over) but only that sea traffic be threatened.
Ice breakers? Well, consider that the very storms that frequent the Antarctic oceans blow and twist the ships. thus, meekly following an icebreaker through the small “channel” it breaks in sea will be impossible: Where the ice itself is not blown sideways or blown back across the newly-opened narrow channel, the following ship will equally find it impossible (unsafe) to follow so close as to remain in the wake of the icebreaker. What is possible in calm seas at low speeds at 300 meters should be 3 to 6 nautical miles at rough waters.
Rafting ice islands of dangerously thick ice are also a “longer time” threat – if the merchant captains determine that sea ice is indeed the problem that it may become. ( My at-sea navigation time was not spent on the surface, nor in target (er, merchant) hulls. ) But, since rafts of sea ice could break off randomly even when the edge may be 10, 100, or 500 kilometers from the Cape itself, closure or threatened sea conditions may last for longer than those few days when sea ice ‘touches” both Antarctica and South America.
For a few luxury “yachts” to get through the Northwest passage in a publicity stunt the island straits north of Canada need to be open for only two days – but those two days need to be “open” when the yachts are at the islands, right? Thus, NEXT YEAR, as soon as the ice recedes a few feet for a few days, the boats will rush through – believe me, nobody wants to stay up there another year! – and the CAGW alarmists will declare “Mission Accomplished” and the “The Northwest Passage is open!” and the newspapers and TV crews will fly up and they will get want they want. Commercial exploration of the Arctic as a shipping connection requires known, predictable openings for months-long periods. “Guessing” won’t work. “Potentially open” maybe’s won’t work if the penalty for guessing wrong is a frozen in ship and cargo for another 9 months.
Besides, the real traffic/distance savings is going north past Norway and Murmansk eastwards towards the Bering Strait and then south to the China ports.
Would appear so:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CLIMAP.jpg
RACookPE1978 says:
September 17, 2013 at 12:53 pm
Drake Passage is indeed deep, which is why I mentioned surface circulation only.
Since Cape Horn was passable, though dangerous, during the LIA, presumably it won’t be effectively closed by whatever cooling may occur in coming decades. Don’t know how often it was attempted in winter however, between 1616 & the mid-19th century. The advent of steam propulsion would certainly have helped.
With apologies to Orwell
On the sixth day of Warming Hate Week, after the processions, the speeches, the shouting, the singing, the banners, the posters of the Computer Models, massive screens continually running āAn Inconvenient Truthā — after six days of this, when the great orgasm was quivering to its climax and the general hatred of Deniers had boiled up into such delirium that if the crowd could have got their hands on the 2,000 Denier criminals ā¦ Coolers ā¦ who were to be publicly hanged on the last day of the proceedings, they would unquestionably have torn them to pieces — at just this moment it had been announced that Warming was not after all happening. The World was Cooling, not Warming and Coolers were the allies.
There was, of course, no admission that any change had taken place. Merely it became known, with extreme suddenness and everywhere at once, that Warmists were the Deniers.
Cooling had been happening, Cooling had always been happening. A large part of the political literature of twenty-five years was now completely obsolete. Reports and records of all kinds, newspapers, books, pamphlets, films, sound-tracks, photographs, computer models — all had to be rectified at lightning speed.
ā¦ ā¦
A mighty deed, which could never be mentioned, had been achieved. It was now impossible for any human being to prove by documentary evidence or by Computer Modeling that Warming had ever happened or ever was the Partyās Ideology.
Thankfully, due to the Wisdom of Big Brother Gore and the Partyā¦ the Slogan of āClimate Changeā could still remain – unchanged – as the Bedrock.
The more positive AO and NAO made all the difference this summer compared to 2012. I forecast greater Arctic sea ice extent this for this summer, knowing that the AO and NAO would be more positive through July-August.
Ulric, I must ask, I assume you did that several years ago? I can be a devil can’t I.
Because wind-driven surface currents can be deflected by obstacles, and some is already deflected North into the Pacific anyway, I wonder if the degree of deflection significantly changes due to ice extent prior to entrance into the passage.
See the following for possible consideration in amount of surface current deflection that could increase with a more narrow passage.
http://oceanmotion.org/html/background/wind-driven-surface.htm
Love the graphics in this article on the Antarctic Circumpolar Current. Notice where the Polar Front is in Drake’s Passage. Now imagine ice extent pushing it northward. I am guessing some of that Polar Front cold current gets deflected (more or less depending on where the ice extent is at) into the Pacific where it could eventually find its way past the large South Pacific Gyre and into the equatorial region as a cold tongue?
http://www.ccpo.odu.edu/~klinck/Reprints/PDF/nowlinRevGeo86.pdf
Could this be a possible factor in El Nado/La Nada/Neutral ENSO conditions? Otherwise it swings wildly between El Nino’s and La Nina’s?
We have all been so brainwashed that increasing sea ice is being seen as a good thing. It isn’t. To the extent that it reflects a cooling planet, it indicates that winter deaths will increase, food production will decrease. The more it cools, the more miserable the world will become. Global warming was one of the most positive things ever to be forecast for the planet – and unfortunately it looks like it won’t happen.
We have all been so brainwashed that increasing sea ice is being seen as a good thing. It isn’t. To the extent that it reflects a cooling planet, it indicates that winter deaths will increase, food production will decrease. The more it cools, the more miserable the world will become. Global warming was one of the most positive things ever to be forecast for the planet – and unfortunately it looks like it won’t happen after all.
The wind is no longer pushing the pack into Fram. Now it’s curling it West along the Northern Shores. That’s all she wrote for this year. Some folk are going to enjoy over wintering.
Kevin Vaughan
RACookPE1978
milodonharlani
Pamela Grey
Concerning ice cover to [Cape] Horn etc. It is believed that interruption of ocean currents by ice amd and ice rafting might play a role in glacial termination. Since the mid Pleistocene revolution interglacials have changed from 41000 year (obliquity) to 100000 year (eccentricity) periodicity. Glacial maxima have become colder and deeper but the end-glacial-reversals to warmer interglacials have been much sharper. There is a dissenting view from Maslin at Cambridge that current interglacials are not eccentricity forced. Instead deepening cooling means that obliquity triggers for interglacials are being missed, and the resulting longer and deeper glacials are only ended by some tipping point event. Leaving aside implausible CO2 explanations, the most rational is that increasing sea ice extent and rafting reach a point where ocean circulation currents – the true drivers of climate – are disrupted.
In this context an interruption of the circumpolar current is something that would work as major THC perturbation.
Sorry no link – posting from my mobile. Google scholar eccentricity myth and you will find the Maslin paper.
Pamela Gray says:
“I can be a devil canāt I.”
Me too but I like to keep it funny.
“Ulric, I must ask, I assume you did that several years ago?”
Not the sea ice forecast no, I didn’t notice that there is less (short term) sea ice during negative AO/NAO until last year. The long term shows the same, cold periods for the temperate zone during negative AO/NAO are warmer for the frigid zone:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/23/the-medieval-warm-period-in-the-arctic/#comment-1398577
(and following comments)
Ulric Lyons:
At September 18, 2013 at 3:24 am you quote Pamela Gray having asked
And you reply
That seemed strange because the link refers to 23 August THIS YEAR so I suspected it was similar to all your other claims of having made a forecast: i.e. baseless.
So, I checked the link ā(and following comments)ā.
None of your comments in that thread concern āsea iceā. None, not any, zilch, zip, nada.
Your comments pertain to proxy data for centuries ago and not to the present or future situation.
There is no evidence and/or indication that you made a prediction ālast yearā.
Your comments which come nearest to your fallacious claim are these.
I note that this concerns āAlaska iceā (specifically, āretreating-alaskan-glacierā) and not sea ice.
Again, no mention of sea ice.
Richard
Donāt you just love it when the AGW nuts get egg on their faces?
Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013’
By Jonathan Amos
Science reporter, BBC News, San Francisco (Suck it up, Beeb)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7139797.stm
Professor Peter Wadhams from Cambridge University, UK, is an expert on Arctic ice.
He has used sonar data collected by Royal Navy submarines to show that the volume loss is outstripping even area withdrawal, which is in agreement with the model result of Professor Maslowski.
Using supercomputers to crunch through possible future outcomes has become a standard part of climate science in recent years.
Professor Maslowski’s group, which includes co-workers at Nasa and the Institute of Oceanology, Polish Academy of Sciences (PAS), is well known for producing modelled dates that are in advance of other teams.
“Some models have not been taking proper account of the physical processes that go on,” he commented.
“The ice is thinning faster than it is shrinking; and some modellers have been assuming the ice was a rather thick slab.
“Wieslaw’s model is more efficient because it works with data and it takes account of processes that happen internally in the ice.”
Former US Vice President Al Gore cited Professor Maslowski’s analysis on Monday in his acceptance speech at the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony in Oslo.
Jonathan.Amos-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk
—
August 31, 2009
“the Arctic will be ice-free in the summer of 2013”
ā ā¦ Once you accept the science, it’s clear that such massive environmental change will create dislocation, destruction, chaos, and conflict. And history teaches us that we are deluding ourselves if we think that we are insulated from world events ā¦ ā
– John Kerry, US Secretary of State
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-kerry/we-cant-ignore-the-securi_b_272815.html
—
Sierra Club Canada predicted this spring that the Arctic would be ice-free in 2013
“Why Arctic sea ice will vanish in 2013”
By Paul Beckwith
On March 23, 2013, I made the following prediction:
Breaking: Arctic Ice Breaks Up in Beaufort Sea. {Video} ~ Paul Beckwith
http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/03/breaking-arctic-ice-breaks-up-in-beaufort-sea-paul-beckwith/
āFor the recordāI do not think that any sea ice will survive this summer. An event unprecedented in human history is today, this very moment, transpiring in the Arctic Ocean.
The cracks in the sea ice that I reported in my Sierra blog and elsewhere have spread. Worse news is at this very moment the entire sea ice sheet (or about 99 percent of it) covering the Arctic Ocean is on the move (clockwise), and the thin, weakened icecap has literally begun to tear apart.
This is abrupt climate change in real-time.
Humans have benefited greatly from a stable climate for the last 11,000 years (roughly 400 human generations). Not anymore. We now face an angry climate — one that we have poked in the eye with our fossil fuel stick — and have to deal with the consequences.
We must set aside our differences and prepare for what we can no longer avoid: massive disruption to our civilization.”
http://www.sierraclub.ca/en/AdultDiscussionPlease
I’ll put up a forecast for sea ice extent for next summer at some point soon, based on predictions for the AO/NAO.
Ulric Lyons:
At September 18, 2013 at 4:38 am you say
I will look forward in hope of seeing it.
The important point is that you on this thread – as previously on other WUWT threads – you have attempted to sell your forecasting system by making a false claim and trying to bluster it out when called on it.
Richard
richards courtney is being a tiresome fool, he’s hell bent on discrediting all my claims of making forecasts, and anything else now by the looks, but sadly keeps firing off blanks. The link to the 23rd August was merely to demonstrate that temperatures between the frigid and temperate zones do dot move in unison in the long term, just that only, it was not intended to demonstrate anything in particular about sea ice extent. I am not at all bothered if he doubts that I made a prediction in the slightest, it was a side issue to the facts that I presented about the differential temperature movement between the zones.
Ulric, sorry that data won’t do for your forecasts. You must use planetary positions only. That is after all your area of expertise and the sole source of data used for your forecasts? Please correct me if I am wrong and that you use other indices for some of your forecasts.
phlogiston, I am aware of studies on the total blockage of Drake’s Passage and resultant warming. I am not referring to that phenomenon which has been studied using ocean circulation models (she said with a grain of salt). I am referring to more or less cold water being diverted into the Southern Pacific Gyre and subsequently other places in the Pacific. The cold Circumpolar Current sends some of its cold water into the Southern Pacific Gyre and other places in the Pacific. That happens all the time and I would guess there is a range of water volume that gets diverted into that gyre under typical circumstances.
I am speculating that The Polar Front (the inner portion of the Circumpolar Current) may move northward out of its usual snugged up against the continent location when ice extent is extreme prior to Drake’s Passage. Thus mixing with and cooling the Circumpolar Current prior to moving through Drake’s passage more than under typical circumstances. I don’t know if it does.
And so my question is, is it possible that, under more extreme ice extent prior to Drake’s Passage, the normal diversion of a piece of the Circumpolar Current into the Pacific would increase? And would it cool that gyre more than normal?
Ulric Lyons:
Your post at September 18, 2013 at 4:53 am says in full
NO! That is a series of falsehoods clearly intended to deflect from exposure of you having stated falsehoods.
At September 17, 2013 at 1:21 pm in this thread your post said in total
But you did NOT “forecast greater Arctic sea ice extent this for this summer”.
And when Pamela Gray asked when you had made that forecast in your post at September 18, 2013 at 3:24 am you said “last year” then cited the link to August of this year as evidence.
But in that link you say nothing – zilch, nada, bupkis – about sea ice.
And now you claim it was all me being nasty because you only presented “a side issue to the facts that I presented about the differential temperature movement between the zones”.
NO! You said you “forecast greater Arctic sea ice extent this for this summer” and that you made the forecast “last year”. Those statements seem to have the same basis as your every other claim to have made a successful forecast.
You say you intend to sell your forecasts for the UK. Alright, do that if you want. But you can expect to be called on it if you advertise your product by making false claims on WUWT.
Richard
Pamela Gray says:
September 18, 2013 at 8:54 am
I’m sure you are right about diversion of the circumpolar current into the South Pacific Gyre and variations thereof, this is an important phenomenon to point to for instance in discussion with those who consider that ENSO is a purely meteorological phenomenon, about winds only. Ocean currents play a big part and a poorly understood one.
Yes disruption of ocean circulation can cut both ways, to warming or cooling. Something has to trigger both the beginning and the end of interglacials, and this has to involve ocean circulation as a major or the major player. But the limitation is that most work on this is done with computer models.
The Drake’s passage scenario you describe could potentially be one mechanism of cooling that could have an element of positive feedback, possibly even with interglacial-ending effect. But the question as was raised by RACookPE1978 is – how much would surface ice affect the circulation? However it should be remembered that the Antarctic circumpolar current is a surface current, not part of the deeper THC circulation. One point I remember from my University oceanography lectures many moons ago is that the ocean surface and deep currents are different and weakly connected systems. This would add to the possible effect of Drake’s passage ice-up on diversion of the Polar Front/ ACC.
@Pamela Gray
You are very confused, the data shows what I explained it shows, nothing to do with forecasts.
richardscourtney says:
“And when Pamela Gray asked when you had made that forecast in your post at September 18, 2013 at 3:24 am you said ālast yearā then cited the link to August of this year as evidence.”
Not at all, it is evidence of the temperature differentials between the said zones, the forecast was a passing point and does not matter to the main point I am making in the slightest. And I did not say that I made the forecast last year, I said that I did not know about the ice loss being greater during negative AO/NAO conditions until last year, meaning that I did not make the several years ago as Pam inquired about. So it is obviously implied that I made the forecast since that realisation, but I did NOT say when! You excel at being a false witness richard, probably because you do not actually read my comments thoroughly, just like Willis.
“..making false claims on WUWT.”
That’s what you have just done about what I have said chap, and it’s not the first time either.
I was way off. I said, “zero” square kilometers. I am very disappointed. I have been all set to kayak up to the North Pole proper right about now.
Ulrich Lyons
To quote former French President Jacques Chirac, you have “missed a golden opportunity to keep quiet”.
“Predicting” the sea ice minimum in August is like predicting the Grand National winner when the horses are aready on the home strait.
Shhhh.
Ulric Lyons:
You posted falsehoods in this thread,
I quoted the falsehoods verbatim.
And I demonstrated that you had deliberately posted the falsehoods knowing they were untrue.
At September 18, 2013 at 10:46 am you post more falsehoods by claiming it was not you but me who had posted falsehoods saying “not for the first time”.
APOLOGISE.
Richard
richardscourtney says:
Liar, You posted falsehoods in this thread, they are described in my previous comment.
Ulric Lyons:
Your post at September 19, 2013 at 3:31 am says in total
Nope. You are flailing in desperation.
It is unreasonable to call me a “Liar” because I compared what you claim to have forecast to your own words (which I linked, cited and quoted) where you say you made the “forecast”.
My post at September 18, 2013 at 4:01 am
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/09/16/sea-ice-news-volume-4-number-5-no-ice-free-arctic-this-year-it-appears-that-arctic-sea-ice-has-turned-the-corner/#comment-1420122
quoted verbatim – and linked to – specific statements you had made in this thread and provided links to your own words which show those statements are falsehoods.
Simply, you claimed to have made a forecast for sea ice last year and pretended to have provided evidence of that forecast with a link. But the link you provided does NOT indicate you made any such forecast, and nothing else indicates you dfid except your “memory”.
I repeat what I said to you at September 18, 2013 at 9:02 am.
You say you intend to sell your forecasts for the UK. Alright, do that if you want. But you can expect to be called on it if you advertise your product by making false claims on WUWT.
Richard
richardscourtney says:
“It is unreasonable to call me a āLiarā because I compared what you claim to have forecast to your own words (which I linked, cited and quoted) where you say you made the āforecastā.”
You claimed when you though that I made the forecast, you were wrong. I never said when I made the forecast, I only implied that I made it since last year.
“Simply, you claimed to have made a forecast for sea ice last year and pretended to have provided evidence of that forecast with a link.”
Liar, I never said when I actually made the forecast, and as before, the link was to demonstrate the temp diff between the zones, not as evidence for the forecast, I have told you exactly this already but you choose to ignore it.
Your behavior is beyond excuse.
Usually, I am fully against all CAGW alarmists but I’m not so sure we should be so certain that sea ice extent is either fully recovered or that the ice is not a lot thinner.
Over a longer time frame the ice appears to have retreated considerably (due, IMO, to recovery from the Little Ice Age) the 2013 “recovery” being a blip in this process.
Would someone like to prove this guy (a rabid warmist) wrong? AND tell the Telegraph!
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tomchiversscience/100237031/you-genuinely-have-to-be-an-idiot-to-think-that-arctic-sea-ice-is-recovering/
Paul M says: September 16, 2013 at 2:45 pm
The WUWT forecast made in June was 4.8.
The UK Met Office, with their highly skillful computer models and supercomputers, came up with 3.4.
Yes Paul, but just today the Met made a last-minute adjustment (using estimated aerosols) that increased their forecast to 5.0. Perfect!
Need I say “sarc off”?
[Reply: It’s best. Some folks are very credulous… ā mod.]
– – – – – – –
Oh good. One less thing to worry about.
John