The sea ice surrounding Antarctica, which, as I reported in my book, has been steadily increasing throughout the period of satellite measurement that began in 1979, has hit a new all-time record high for areal coverage.
The new record anomaly for Southern Hemisphere sea ice, the ice encircling the southernmost continent, is 2.074 million square kilometers and was posted for the first time by the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign’s The Cryosphere Today early Sunday morning.
The previous record anomaly for Southern Hemisphere sea ice area was 1.840 million square kilometers and occurred on December 20, 2007.
Global sea ice area, as of Sunday morning, stood at 1.005 million square kilometers above average.
More here: http://talkingabouttheweather.wordpress.com/2014/06/29/antarctica-sets-new-record-for-sea-ice/
And also at the WUWT Sea ice page: http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/sea-ice-page/
Why are the graphs different? They are labeled the same
REPLY: One is southern hemisphere, Antarctica , the other is both Arctic and Antarctic i.e. global. – A
As usual those nutty right wingers are trying to make that Gore guy look crazy again. Shame on us, I mean them.
I see a hockey stick on this graph. Certainly the last two or three years is taking on an unmistakable blade-shape:
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomaly.antarctic.png
I’m surprised it hasn’t been adjusted to massage away the inconvenient truth.
I was expecting the sea ice anomaly to rise above 2 mil in late July or August. This is early.
It’s a good thing we have all that man-made warming going on… No yelling where the ice would be if we were cooling.
I read NZ Willy,s comment which talks about possible satellite mechanical changes as having influence on the rise of thst trend line. That would be important to know.
The Antarctic sea ice has large increases whenever two the ice outgrowths bulge and develop a wedge between themselves which being cooled on both sides instead of on rapidly freeze over. Such a wedge had been developing to the right of the South American ice edge over the last 3 weeks and presumably just filled in giving the extra 100,000 square Kilometres.
No need to invoke machine errors it is a genuine reading.
Had been predicting it for a week. Tm angech
First off, seasonal sea ice differential is not as strong as a case for or against climate change as ocean temperature and the state of very old glaciers.
http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retreat_of_glaciers_since_1850
You cannot deny that humans have impact on the place where we live. Your sh*t does stink (and it takes a lot of clean water and energy to properly treat it), air pollution is real (ever been to LA, Salt Lake City, or Mexico City???) and garbage doesn’t go ‘away’ (it’s put into an ever growing landfill or maybe burned with heavy metals and toxins released into our atmosphere). Of course this planet has carbon spewing volcanoes and natural sulfur vents… but that doesn’t mean our burning of fossil fuels has no impact. This Earth will heal itself with or without us around, but we are certainly reaching some sort of climax. Today is our opportunity to make changes regarding population growth and consumption/waste rates to ensure a healthy future for many generations.
Lastly, please remind me the negative impacts of acting against climate change. Are you people afraid of cleaner air & water, and seeing a workforce shift to renewable energy development from digging in coal mines? Personally, I’d much rather see a consumption based tax focused on what you buy rather than what you make or already own. Get rid of property and income tax and let’s implement a consumption based tax (exempting food)!
Ah Clem, of course you are correct, there are no polar bears in the Antarctic and this article focus on the Antarctic.
I took freezing-warming projections into global and historical; polar bears have been used to refocus emotions and sympathies.
Reason concludes various species are already extinct.
This then is reasonable to expect more.
Behind the Global climate discussion is the implication the world has arrived, it is fully evolved in ‘our’ lifetime and our ‘behavior’ is causing ie; polar bear and our own extinction.
The same was said by peoples who practiced child sacrifice, tossing them into erupting volcanoes to save their lives, off of cliffs at sunrise so they’d live longer, burning them alive to spare themselves disease.
The same convictions are still around today. They just wear suits and ties or jeans and loafers.
Today we throw money at governing bodies for the same reason, the sun will scorch, the ice will cover us, there won’t be water for the ” too many people”.
As if wars and disease won’t occur in a controlled climate and millions won’t die of these 2 scourges.
The science deniers are all on the political Left.
how can this be the poor polar bears are scratching on little ice flows with no land in site. why this heresy of the most agregious type. you are not allowed to print the truth you will be excommuniquated by the un climate panel. would someone please get a pro and con panel debating this chicken little science and pipe it world wide for all to hear! by te way i also heard antatica has been adding miles of ice also! we live in wacky times
REPLY: Polar bears live in the Arctic.
Ice ice baby.
Rhys Jaggar says:
June 29, 2014 at 11:50 am
_______________
Good points.
—————–
Scott says:
June 29, 2014 at 11:49 am
____________
“Forgive me – there’s a lot of passion in this thread with a lot of people making bold statements that are contradictory to some science”
—————–
Which statements, which science?
____________
“I… am often left to gain information from either left or right leaning news sites and thus am fairly confused as to what is truly happening.”
———————–
Join the club. Many have begun to understand the deeper agenda, that the issue of man- made climate change is neither left nor right, that such terms are merely used to keep everyone arguing among themselves and not paying attention to the real money and power brokers behind the scenes.
_______________
“… does it seem logical that as industry release millions of chemicals into the air …”
——————-
Please do not fall into the trap of believing the EPA trick of calling CO2 an industrial chemical with harmful consequences. Current atmospheric CO2 levels are on the low end of the range for optimum plant growth. Before man began releasing CO2 into the atmosphere by burning limestone to make cement and burning fossil fuels, life on planet earth was headed for a crash, as atmospheric CO2 was arguably heading in a downward direction, without sufficient volcanic and plate- tectonic releases to replenish the natural CO2 diminution through the process of oceanic sequestration (limestone production.)
Most calculations from various source have estimated climate temperature sensitivity to doubling of CO2 in a range from .8C to 1.5C. (Yes, the IPCC made scary noises of 3.5C increase/doubling, but they uses a dishonest trick to derive that high figure.) Fact is, there is no modern data set which shows a clear CO2 signal in the temperature record. In other words, while CO2 has been increasing steadily, global temps have remained flat for well over a decade.
_________________
” If I burn a wood fire in my living room, perhaps it first the impact is negligible, but eventually, the whole house will be filled with carbon dioxide and I will die. Isn’t this feasible on much larger world scale should we continue to run industry without improvements and reductions in emissions?”
————————-
Oh, ye of little understanding… the wood fire in your house is a poor analogy. Earth is not a closed and sealed room and just as there is a water cycle, there is a CO2 cycle. That wood which you would burn and which grew and sequestered Carbon (while releasing Oxygen,) eventually falls to earth and feeds multitudes of tiny organisms during decomposition which return CO2 to the atmosphere, where it will ultimately be stored as limestone, beyond the reach of the living biosphere.
All of man’s activities to this point in history have alleged added up to maybe, 120 ppm in atmospheric volume of air, all of which is causing the biomass of Earth to be undergoing an increase. The Sahara is once again, beginning to bloom. We are helping life on Earth with each drop of oil we burn, regardless of whether or how much climate change results.
Ps, With your last statement, you are getting close to invoking “The Precautionary Principle”, which says in effect, if the possibility exists that something might happen, then we need to do something to stop it from happening, or negate the effect. At what cost should we take measures to stop any possible event? To stop “climate change”? When costs are proving a burden on living human beings and when efforts to (purportedly) thwart CO2 increases have already been shown to be responsible for the deaths of several hundred thousands (if not millions,) of living human beings, then when do efforts at mitigation become unreasonable?
When do we grow weary of transferring wealth from the many to the few, under the rubric of stopping “climate change”?
It’s amazing when there is a link from the Drudge Report to WUWT, how the thread posts go from scientific/rational to crazy/troll-like all over the place… but I still think all should be welcomed…
Warmunists, rejoice!
More proof!
Praise Aljazeera Gore!
Watch ya’ll don’t slip on that ice while yer waving that hockey-stick around.
Not one person here, and certainly not one among the radical left with their global warming hysteria, can say exactly what the optimum ice cover for mother earth is or should be. What we do know is there have been numerous periods in earth’s history in which the planet was substantially colder and substantially warmer; neither situation lead to the earth’s doom. The planet’s climate is far too dynamic and complex to suggest scientists know what global temperature target to shoot for.
NikFromNYC linked to phys.org on the following, but how about the Reuters’ contradictory spin?
30 June: SMH: Alister Doyle/Reuters: Emperor penguins slide towards endangered list
Oslo: Global warming will cut Antarctica’s 600,000-strong emperor penguin population by at least a fifth by 2100 as the sea ice on which the birds breed becomes less secure, according to a new study.
***The report urges governments to list the birds as endangered, even though populations in 45 known colonies were likely to rise slightly by 2050 before declining…
“It’s not happy news for the emperor penguin,” said Hal Caswell of the US Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, a co-author of the study in the journal Nature Climate Change…
The impact of climate change on penguins gets less attention than the effect on polar bears, which are often portrayed by scientists as victims of man-made warming and shrinking ice at the other end of the planet.
***Despite rising global temperatures, sea ice around Antarctica has expanded in recent winters…
http://www.smh.com.au/world/emperor-penguins-slide-towards-endangered-list-20140630-zsqbr.html
Eric L says:
June 29, 2014 at 4:21 pm
________________
Where to begin- You actually linked a Wiki article on glacier retreat <i.since the Little Ice Age? Do you not understand that glaciers have effectively been retreating since the end of the last BIG Ice Age, throughout such times as the Medieval, Roman and Minoan warm periods, when human civilization flourished, excepting regrowth during the Little Ice Age, which drove (newly discovered) settlements in Greenland and the Alps out of existence?
Regardless of the fact that you have absolutely zero data to support your assertion that too many humans exist and populations must be reduced, I could recommend some very tall buildings to you… what’s that? You only meant reduction of other people?
On your tax scheme- the first thing you need get through your head is that tax systems are designed to keep the little guy little and that your proposal to tax consumption instead of wealth and wealth production is the surest method to concentrate wealth increasingly in the hands of the elite few. Things are already bad enough, with just 85 individuals owning as much wealth as the poorest half of humanity.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/laurashin/2014/01/23/the-85-richest-people-in-the-world-have-as-much-wealth-as-the-3-5-billion-poorest/
Dems will still try to legislate a narrative change hurting the American people in the process! All Democrats and supporters here and abroad, are trying to flood the media with hysterical climate change & global warming alarms and fabricated evidence to take the heat off Dem candidates in the November 2014 and 2016 elections due to the train wreck of Obamacare! They shout, scream, cry, make outlandish claims and won’t stop till after the elections! Poor Democrats! The tsunami cometh!
No amount of Evidence will convince progressive fools of their stupidity.
Their “global warming” is just as big of a scam as ObamaCare and Border Security – or anything else their greedy little minds have concocted.
Face it… all Progressives are liars and deceivers. .
Jeff Christie says:
June 29, 2014 at 5:47 pm
Is there a distinction between land ice and sea ice we should be paying attention to? When ice melts on land at 32° F and the resulting water flows into seawater which freezes at 28°, does the salt-free water from snow-pack freeze again?
____________________
Yes, the fresh water freezes right quick at 28°. In the coastal waters of Antarctica, Summer melt water has been shown to form underwater “ice falls”. Curiously, as sea water freezes and expels salt, a very cold and dense brine is created, which forms little frozen “tubes” as it sinks and freezes the less- saline water around it, forming an icy tube through which the dense/cold brine sinks and the tube extends…
On the difference between land ice and sea ice melt- the scary stories of sea level rise invoke the specter of land ice melting into the sea, as sea ice melting actually reduces sea level, much like ice cubes melting in a glass of water reduce the water level in the glass. Sea level rise has remained relatively constant since measurements began and incidentally, is not occurring at the same rate, worldwide.
LIAR !
[To whom do you speak? To how many of those whomever’s do you speak? .mod]
Maybe Mr. Harold Ambler could obtain a comment from lying demoRAT-COMMUNIST party operative and colossal fraud, algore.
If it walks like a duck, quakes, and looks like a duck, it’s a duck. It appears were are observing the start of the cooling phase of a Dansgaard-Oechger cycle. If the planet cools we will have chance by observation to see how much of the warming in the last 30 years was due to solar magnetic cycle changes and how much was due to AGW.
The paleo record shows there is cyclic ‘natural’ warming and cooling of the Antarctic peninsula that matches the periodicity of the warming and cooling cycle in the Northern hemisphere. The fact that the proxy record shows cyclic warming and cooling of both hemisphere provides support for the assertion that the forcing mechanism is solar magnetic cycle changes which affects both hemispheres simultaneously and is cyclical due to the large planet’s affect on the solar tachocline which drives the solar magnetic cycle. Internal process such as ocean currents affect only one hemisphere at time and are chaotic not cyclical.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/09/05/is-the-current-global-warming-a-natural-cycle/
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/davis-and-taylor-wuwt-submission.pdf
Davis and Taylor: “Does the current global warming signal reflect a natural cycle”
…We found 342 natural warming events (NWEs) corresponding to this definition, distributed over the past 250,000 years …. …. The 342 NWEs contained in the Vostok ice core record are divided into low-rate warming events (LRWEs; < 0.74oC/century) and high rate warming events (HRWEs; ≥ 0.74oC /century) (Figure). … ….The current global warming signal is therefore the slowest and among the smallest in comparison with all HRWEs in the Vostok record, although the current warming signal could in the coming decades yet reach the level of past HRWEs for some parameters. The figure shows the most recent 16 HRWEs in the Vostok ice core data during the Holocene, interspersed with a number of LRWEs. …. ….We were delighted to see the paper published in Nature magazine online (August 22, 2012 issue) reporting past climate warming events in the Antarctic similar in amplitude and warming rate to the present global warming signal. The paper, entitled "Recent Antarctic Peninsula warming relative to Holocene climate and ice – shelf history" and authored by Robert Mulvaney and colleagues of the British Antarctic Survey ( Nature , 2012, doi:10.1038/nature11391),reports two recent natural warming cycles, one around 1500 AD and another around 400 AD, measured from isotope (deuterium) concentrations in ice cores bored adjacent to recent breaks in the ice shelf in northeast Antarctica. ….
Greenland ice temperature, last 11,000 years determined from ice core analysis, Richard Alley’s paper. William: As this paper shows there the Greenland Ice data shows that have been 9 warming and cooling periods in the last 11,000 years.
http://www.climate4you.com/images/GISP2%20TemperatureSince10700%20BP%20with%20CO2%20from%20EPICA%20DomeC.gif