This image shows the average concentration of Arctic sea ice on Feb. 25, 2022. The yellow outline shows the median sea ice extent for the month of March, when the ice generally reaches its maximum extent, as observed by satellites from 1981 to 2010. A median is the middle value. That is, half of the extents were larger than the line, and half were smaller.Credits: Joshua Stevens/NASA Earth Observatory
Arctic sea ice appeared to have hit its annual maximum extent on Feb. 25 after growing through the fall and winter. This year’s wintertime extent is the 10th-lowest in the satellite record maintained by the National Snow and Ice Data Center, one of NASA’s Distributed Active Archive Centers.
Arctic sea ice extent peaked at 5.75 million square miles (14.88 million square kilometers) and is roughly 297,300 square miles (770,000 square kilometers) below the 1981-2010 average maximum – equivalent to missing an area of ice slightly larger than Texas and Maine combined. This maximum ties with 2015 as the third earliest on record.
Sea ice waxes and wanes with the seasons every year. In the Arctic, it reaches its maximum extent around March after growing through the colder months, and shrinks to its minimum extent in September after melting through the warmer months. In the Southern Hemisphere, Antarctic sea ice follows an opposite cycle.
To estimate sea ice extent, satellite sensors gather sea ice data that are processed into daily images, each image grid cell spanning an area of roughly 15 miles by 15 miles (25 kilometers by 25 kilometers). Scientists then use these images to estimate the extent of the ocean where sea ice covers at least 15% of the water.
This graph shows Arctic daily sea ice extent in 2022, 2021, and 2012 compared to the 1981-2010 average. This year’s annual maximum extent was reached on Feb. 25.Credits: Joshua Stevens/NASA Earth Observatory
Since satellites began reliably tracking sea ice in 1979, maximum extents in the Arctic have declined at a pace of about 13% per decade, with minimum extents declining at about 2.7% per decade. These trends are linked to warming caused by human activities such as emitting carbon dioxide, which traps heat in the atmosphere and causes temperatures to rise. NASA’s analysis also shows the Arctic is warming about three times faster than other regions.
This February, Antarctic sea ice dropped to a record-low minimum extent. But unlike in the Arctic, this sea ice has shown irregular ups and downs mainly because of the geographical features that surround it. Winds and ocean currents specifically linked to the Southern Ocean and Antarctica have a strong influence on sea ice extent.
Sea ice in the Arctic is surrounded by land, whereas sea ice in the Antarctic is surrounded only by ocean and can thus spread out more freely. Overall, the Antarctic sea ice record shows a slightly upward – but nearly flat – trend or increase.
Gains in Antarctic sea ice are not large enough to offset the losses of the Arctic. The ice in both regions helps regulate global temperatures. Even if Antarctic gains balanced sea ice levels globally, Arctic sea ice losses could still contribute to further regional and global warming.
Banner image: This image visualizes wintertime sea ice change in the Arctic using data provided by the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency’s Global Change Observation Mission 1st-Water “SHIZUKU” satellite, which is part of a NASA-led partnership to operate several Earth-observing satellites. The full video can be accessed at https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/4985.
Credit: NASA’s Scientific Visualization Studio By Roberto Molar Candanosa
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md.
Last Updated: Mar 23, 2022
Editor: Roberto Molar-Candanosa
The tenth? The hell you say!
But what happed in 2012 I wonder. Extra co2 around then or what?
10th in 43? Nothing to worry about here. Move along to next scare number.
It’s still higher than that from 1974, but apparently our understanding of concepts like area then were unreliable.
Hmmm… That is the opposite of the Bristlecone pine trees, when the old records are deemed more valid and the new records are so bad they have to be discarded.
Some data source for Arctic sea ice since e.g. 1961?
More global warming…
UNUSUAL MARCH FREEZE GRIPS MEXICO; MORE THAN A FOOT OF SPRING SNOW SETTLES UP NORTH; + APRIL FLURRIES ON THE CARDS FOR THE UK?
March 24, 2022 Cap Allon
Loveland Pass in Colorado was closed Wednesday after an avalanche struck (see featured image).
RECORD SNOW HITS AMARILLO; 3 MILLION HOMES IN JAPAN THREATENED WITH BLACKOUTS DUE TO COLD WEATHER & RECENT QUAKE; + GREECE & GEORGIA LOG INTENSE FROSTS, AS ISRAEL SUFFERS ONE OF ITS COLDEST MARCHES EVER
March 23, 2022 Cap Allon
A total of 3.1 inches of snow officially accumulated in Amarillo Tuesday, almost doubling the 1921 record.
SUBSTANTIAL SPRING SNOW TO HIT TWO-THIRDS OF THE UNITED STATES–FROM THE NORTHWEST, THROUGH TEXAS, TO THE NORTHEAST (GSM)
March 22, 2022 Cap Allon
The COLD TIMES are returning in line with a COLD SUN. Prepare.
It is simply disingenuous to always, exclusively show places which experience current cooling, let alone to carefully hide their past data, preventing us here to put your spots in appropriate relation to the rest.
While Southern Germany keeps colder all the time due tom its near to the Alps, we experience in Northeast Germany since about 10 years exactly the contrary of your scaring stuff.
The winters in 2010/11/12 were the last really heavy ones deserving that name (though they were already way way weaker than those in 1956, 1963, 1979, 1986/7)
We had little 10-15 cm snow in 2018, and since then the sky brings us snow drop by drop.
Last year and this year our springs were somewhat cooler than usual, but nothing to really care about.
We are currently in a moderately strong La Niña phase, although weaker than those of 2010 or 1999.
” The COLD TIMES are returning in line with a COLD SUN. Prepare. ”
You are since years totally fixated on this scaring message.
What about looking yourself at places contradicting your apocalyptic predictions, by processing raw data like GHCN daily in a manner showing you where it is warmer than usual?
In terms of sea ice extent 2012 was higher than 2022 .
The winter max in 2012 was 15.29e6 km2.
The winter max in 2022 was 14.88e6 km2.
Go to “nsidc daily” and click on all years back to 2015….really no change in sea ice cover as of late March in past 7 years…
What are two La Niña years compared with the rest?
Here is the top 10 of a sort of the yearly averages of the NSIDC data:
2016: 10.16 (Mkm²)
What will you tell us when some 2016-like El Niño comes around, and shuffles the poker cards anew?
And btw: while the Arctic experiences some increase
the Antarctic experiences some decrease at the same time:
Powerful storm broke up a lot of ice that made part of it too small for the Satellite to see and made larger ice break up and melt more easily.
I was puzzled as Arctic sea ice a few weeks before the expected maximum was showing a larger area than the last ten years for that time of year. I think it was an article at this site.
Biodata shows that the Arctic was most probably almost ice free in summer for most of the last 10,000 years
The current high levels are a hang-on from the LIA.
Late 1970’s was the exceptional high… the most ice since the very cold period of the LIA.
A really stupid and unscientific point to have as a reference point.
But that’s the CC agenda for you… scientific nonsense and malfeaces.
The amount of Arctic sea ice is more about what is happening around the edges of the ice sheet as you move down in latitude. Where the big Pacific winter storms track and the Polar jet over the Pacific have a big say on how much ice there is around the Bering Sea and the AMO, Greenland High and Iceland Low determine what freezes and doesn’t freeze in the North Atlantic. The core of the sheet is well below freezing during the winter and will always be solid.
Plus, the sun goes below the horizon 24 hrs a day so the heat reflectivity of ice becomes irrelevant.
Can you post a link to the peer reviewed study from which are basing that statement? I’d like to review it if you don’t mind.
This will help,
Little to No Summer ice in the Arctic (ai-jane.org)
There are 11 published reports listed some are FULL access.
Thanks. From a cursory look only it appears that it was the early to mid Holocene period which had low sea ice extents. I’m sure you’ve had the opportunity to read them thoroughly already. Is that gist of what the evidence says?
Yes, it was after the MWP when it stopped being so low to the point of NO summer sea ice, but you are missing the point here since Humans Polar Bears and Republicans are still with us today the world didn’t go down the drain over some missing sea ice cover.
And that makes sense given the Greenland ice core proxy temperature record. Generally speaking Arctic (or at least Greenland) temperatures have been on secular decline since the Holocene Climate Optimum and through the present (defined as 1950 in the literature) so I don’t think Arctic sea ice has been close to < 1e6 km2 of extent over most of the last 10,000 years. In fact, during the LIA and more recently the 1970’s Arctic sea ice extents were higher than the surrounding years.
Did a change in CO2 cause that decline, or did CO2 levels lead that decline?
I’m not sure what “that decline” is. But generally speaking CO2 can both lead or lag the global average temperature depending the circumstances. Sometimes it leads and sometimes it lags.
Interesting, arctic sea ice in general did not last through the summer until the lead up to the LIA, so it appears we ARE heading into the next glacial cycle!
I wonder if those bird choppers and solar panels will stop this scary progression.
Drake said: “Interesting, arctic sea ice in general did not last through the summer until the lead up to the LIA”
Where are you seeing that?
The recent 3 Ma (the ongoing Ice Age) have been the coldest of the last 200 Ma. Earth and life have no problem with a warmer climate. And during the Eemian (130 kya) Hippos swam the Thames.
Just looked at UAH satellite lower trop temperatures for Australia. No warming trend for the last 104 months.(Easier to measure than over Antarctica).
What global warming?
What existential crisis?
Plus 15! Amazing.
What global warming?
What existential crisis?
I won’t discuss these points with you.
Just a hint after having let my spreadsheet calc compute the linear trends over the last 104 months in °C/decade, for the main latitudinal and regional series of UAH6.0 LT:
As you can see, your Australia is, like CONUS, a little bit of the Globe, and it shows.
Source as usual:
A propos: why is Australia easier to measure than Antarctica?
Why do you assume a linear best-fit?
I have more faith that everybody here who understands a curve fit of y = Cx will just as well understand y = ax**n + bx**(n+1) + …, particularly if they see it on an Excel graph, for the purpose of curve fitting. Just a hunch.
Do your comment’s conclusions depend upon a linear fit? If so, then I’m not sure the conclusions are warranted.
Been consistently cooler here on the Gulf coast here too.
Why is it colder where most people live, but they keep assuring us all the places where no one lives (aka the oceans) it is definitely getting warm enough to balance that out at levels enough to make the planet steadily warmer, and we must just believe them? I’m 50 and its cooler here than when I was a child.
This is probably why March will be cool in North America.
in other words, one of the highest since 2007
If they don’t fiddle data it probably would be 20th, with 40 years of records that means somwhere in the middle or about average.
Anyone with half a brain cell knows that the climate liars fiddle with the temperature record, but I haven’t seen any evidence of tampering with the satellite data for Arctic sea ice. Is there any evidence for data fiddling aka scientific fraud?
Whatever, I’m looking forward to the class action lawsuits and will probably participate. The first one will end this, as it will be like the old patent trolling lawsuits – file against 100 or more defendants and watch the scumbags who need to get out of it squeal on the a-holes who can be hit for real damages.
Since satellites began reliably tracking sea ice in 1979
Arctic sea ice extent according the first five IPCC reports:
The first three IPCC reports start in 1973 and as is the case with nearly all things relating to climate change it looks like the supporting data was regularly changed.
That was back when we used things like biology to explain the difference between a man and a woman. Concepts like truth and area weren’t fully appreciated.
Now we know that truth is as fluid as a cross dresser and honesty is just some pretend concept.
There’s no ice in Milton Keynes….
Steve will (hopefully) understand that 😉
Pretty sure that people back in the “stone age” of 1973 just couldn’t read numbers properly and so they needed “adjustment” to fix their bad measurements.
Firstly, your 2014 chart differs from the others, as it shows absolute data instead of anomalies, as shown by all others.
Then, all charts visibly are based on different evaluation techniques, those for (1) and (2) certainly obsolete .
You probably would be the first one to complain about techniques not evolving.
Last not least, anomalies are constructed wrt a reference period, which changes over time.
These are also the reasons why nobody looks today at, for example, revision 5.2 of UAH.
They aren’t my charts, they are the IPCC’s charts.
They were correct at that time with respect to current knowledge and data, Steve Case.
What is not right at all is to show them side by side in order to draw the wrong conclusions from their obvious, understandable differences, and publish them.
It’s just BS, basta ya.
“They were correct at that time …”
By what metric shall it be determined that enough data are “correct” such that everyone should be banned from eating beef and shall be forced into EVs? And by which dictator?
” … everyone should be banned… ”
Are you serious?
How many people on Earth, do you think, lack money for eating beef, let alone for buying a car?
About a billion people lack even access to clean water, and you go on whining here?
Nice pseudonym, btw.
I’m disappointed that you didn’t respond to my words before “such that.”
Being forced by government to live in the same poverty as the rest of the world is quite serious, especially for those in the 3rd world, not just for us. Without the transfer of our riches in products and services to other nations those nations would have no one to sell their shirts, oil, coffee, and bananas to. The lessening of productivity in one part of a trading world will lead to more poverty in the rest of the world, not less.
Not many people catch the pseudonym. Good for you.
Arctic sea ice just a small step down from the extreme high levels of the LIA
That chart only goes up to 0 YBP which is 1950.
While it may have hit its high on Feb 25th, it may not have as well, it has been trending up for the last few days and still has a chance to peek higher. Regardless 10th highest in the last 40 years not meaningful since AMO conditions are high.
The consensus 15 years ago was that by now we would have ice free summers at the north pole by now, unfortunately for the consensus the trend in arctic sea ice has been up since 2013.
For summer sea ice low, I think it’s 2007 actually but I don’t have time to do a Lord Monckton plot, easy though it is.
Excuse me, but I don’t want ice to “regulate global temperatures.” I prefer Miami Beach to Aspen.
Either way, is still racist.
What? Heads I win, tails you lose?
I don’t see why any ice up there is good – it blocks the Sun and so the plankton starve, and then of course so does the rest of the food chain.
No no the ice makes the plankton survive. It isolates and therefore protects the ocean from losing its heat during winter when there is no sunlight up there.
As is taught in freshman year college-level science, snow-covered ice has a much higher albedo (0.96 to 0.98 in the visible and near-UV range) than Earth’s average albedo (about 0.30).
Therefore, if you are at all concerned about the current century-timescale warming trend that Earth is obviously in, having ice “up there” (i.e., within the Arctic ocean) would help to reduce Earth’s absorption of solar radiation, thereby lowering the rate of “global” warming.
BTW, plankton in Arctic oceans are doing quite fine:
“Single-celled algae that rely on sunlight to survive form the basis of the food chain throughout the world’s oceans. In the Arctic, these algae can live in sea ice (ice algae) and in the water column (phytoplankton). Scientists use satellite-based observations of chlorophyll (the green pigment vital for photosynthesis) as a proxy for phytoplankton productivity.” — source: https://www.climate.gov/news-features/featured-images/sea-ice-withers-while-phytoplankton-blooms-arctic (my underlining emphasis added)
Granted, the phytoplankton “bloom” during reduced, summer sea ice areal coverage, but they have adapted to living even with the extended winter sea ice coverage of the Arctic ocean.
Here is a plot of all the NSIDC data since the beginning through March 22, 2022. Every two days at first, then daily. 14,201 data points. Looks like the overall trend has flattened out since around 2007 in both the maximum and minimum extent.
great lakes ice has been stable (although very variable) since 1998. Not sure why they haven’t added 2021’s 46% into the graph. yeah. and this year came in at 56%
Historical Ice Animation: NOAA Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory – Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Here is a revised plot to show the annual cycles a bit better.
” Looks like the overall trend has flattened out since around 2007 in both the maximum and minimum extent. ”
Correct! And it is even better visible in the following chart, generated out of a yearly average of NSIDC’s monthly data (I love the daily variant, but it is rather useless here because many ASIE daily values are low pass filtered away in the monthlies):
Melt: from -0.81 ± 0.06 Mkm² for 1979-now, down to -0.12 ± 0.29 (hmmh) for 2007-now
Mean: from -0.55 ± 0.03 Mkm² for 1979-now, down to -0.39 ± 0.13 for 2007-now
Growth: from -0.40 ± 0.03 Mkm² for 1979-now, down to 0.37 ± 0.17 for 2007-now
Not surprisingly, no one here seems to care that the following trends are emerging from the data in Antarctica (sorry for being too lazy for a melt/growth split):
Mean: from -0.06 ± 0.05 Mkm² for 1979-now, up to +0.70 ± 0.33 for 2007-now
So, still in double digits
If this delusion that without hom sap this world would be unchanging – stable – were true there probably wouldn’t have been any hom sap to begin with….
Objective truth is overrated, apparently. Without a doubt, a Supreme Court judge nominee can lie in front of congress and what’s worse is that half the people there pretend to believe her.
Pretend. That’s what law has become. That’s what science has become. Objective truth be damned, just pretend. Let the left’s whimsical fantasies rule the day. That is until reality bites.
I present my credentials for the position of justice of the supreme court…
Woman: Adult human female.
What’s the salary?
Perhaps you didn’t get the memo.
Your statement disqualifies you. You cannot define a woman and be woke enough to be on the SC.
Why use the average from 1981-2010? Isn’t the new 30 year reference period 1991-2020? Even better, why not 1979-2022, the full range of the satellite data?
Satellite data goes back to 1972. They just choose to ignore the much less sea ice in the first 2/3 of the 1970s.
The satellite ice data actually starts in the early 1970s.
Because “CLIMATE” is defined as 30 years, and the “Climate Scientists” pick the years.
Also, why pick a 30 year period based on the human calendar and end on a year ending with 0. Why not 5 or 1? Why not just update the reference period EVERY year?
Of course we all know that the 30 year time frame was based on the average age of the “Climate Scientists” since liberals think time started the day they were born.
Wait a few hundred years, that will change.
According to Alarmunists, sea ice is both harbinger as well as cause of climate doom. It’s doubly delicious for them, and the relatively short data period works pretty well in their favor too. How convenient.
2012 was sort of a freak year…it began colder than average and only warmed in August. Obviously the data can suddenly change in any year…I hope this year is freakish on the cold side just to confound NASA.
Cold year means more extreme weather which Griff will then say is caused by AGW because CO2 causes warming which leads to extreme weather except when it leads to cooling which causes more extreme weather.
Today’s maximum 14.88m sq km’s is smaller than the 1981-2010 maximum average by some 770k sq km’s.
So the 1981-2010 average was 15.65m sq km.
(14.88m + 770k = 15.65m sq km)
770 / 15650 = 4.9%
So this seasons final maximum is less than 5% below the 30 year trend from 1981-2010.
FIVE per cent! That’s it. Big wow. How is that not within any normal acceptable range of natural variation? Yet again a total non-story.
What really is more interesting is that NSIDC is still clinging to the 30 year average , 1981-2010, instead of updating to at least 1991-2020.30 years is their definition of climate not weather. I can remember that at the end of the 70’s the Long Island Sound was frozen over. 1981 was likely the high point of sea ice extent over the last 100 years. So when you cherry pick a starting point with high sea ice extent what can you expect the results to be? What would sea ice extent look like now if we were viewing the 1991-2020 lense? The answer is obvious and that’s why they haven’t adjusted their viewing lense.
Oh: are we still pretending arctic sea ice isn’t declining in volume, thickness, extent and age?
and pretending that this is not the lowest in some hundreds of years (satellite being not the only record).
There you go again, Griff, pretending not to be a moron.
Your lies get boring why not stop making them and pay attention to the headline:
NASA Finds 2022 Arctic Winter Sea Ice 10th-Lowest on Record
Which means there 9 years of lower numbers from a 42-year record that started near the highest level of the entire 20th Century.
No one here has said there was no decline only liars like YOU seem to make that claim which is stupidity on your part.
The 2022 winter max is not the lowest in a hundred years. In fact, you only have to go back 2021 to find a winter max that was lower so it is literally not even the lowest in the last 2 years nevermind the last however many hundred.
Thank you griff, for pointing out the obvious.
The atmospheric level of CO2 has never been higher in human existence. For it to be the control knob of average global temperature demands that there also be less average sea ice extent, which the satellites measure.
There is something wrong with the satellite data. For the CO2 theory to be true it must be the lowest ice extent each and every year as CO2 concentrations rise. Cause and effect, you know.
Absolutely. The fact that Arctic sea ice extent does not go down in tandem with CO2 going up definitely falsifies the hypothesis that CO2 and only CO2 modulates Arctic sea ice extents. But science knew that hypothesis was false for at least many decades and likely as far back as the mid-1800s so this isn’t even remotely close to an epiphany.
The hypothesis that we really want to falsify are:
The observation that the wintertime maximum Arctic sea ice extent in 2022 is 10th lowest in the satellite record is not sufficient to falsify any of these hypothesis. Therefore the link between CO2 and Arctic sea ice extent changes survives another test.
or how about –
“CO2 has been higher while ice cover has grown or remained stable for decades”?
What about it? Is that a hypothesis you want to test?
That’s an observation, not a hypothesis.
But it is an observation that countermands the hypothesis that CO2 is the determinant influence on the extent of sea ice cover.
Where did you get that observation?
Assuming the observation is correct it falsifies the hypothesis that CO2 is the one and only thing can modulate sea ice extents. But science has known that hypothesis to false for decades and likely as far back as the 1800s. The prevailing hypothesis is that CO2 is one among many things that can modulate sea ice extents. That has not been falsified yet.
Since “everything else” is never the same, you have no hypothesis to falsify. Neither global temperatures nor Arctic sea ice (much less Antarctic) track changes in atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Additionally, the UN IPCC CliSciFi climate models (used to “prove” CO2’s impacts) have been falsified.
One needs to keep up with the actual science, not post-normal science.
I agree that few things in nature remain unchanged, but I’m not sure if Doonman is getting that. The statement “For the CO2 theory to be true it must be the lowest ice extent each and every year as CO2 concentrations rise.” indicates that the “theory” he is testing hypothesizes that CO2 and only CO2 can modulate Arctic sea ice extents and that no other factor regardless of whether it has changed or not matters.
You can falsify the link between CO2 and Arctic sea ice extent in many ways. Some are relatively easy like showing that CO2 does not impede the transmission of radiation and some are difficult and require controlling other variables that might also be in the causation sequence. Controlling a variable means either keeping it constant or accounting for its effect if keeping it constant is not possible.
It makes no difference if CO2 can have a long term tiny effect on planetary energy balance. The hypothesis we really want to falsify is:
CO2 changes will outweigh natural variation to cause more than 1.5 degrees of warming.
This hypothesis has failed many times, both in the ice core records and global data from ~1935 to 1975. Assuming the hypothesis was true and using computers to account for other variables and resulted in ‘best estimate’ that temperature would warm 0.4 degrees per decade this century, with a range from 0.24 to 0.64. Results of the last two decades have been far lower, meaning that if there is any connection between CO2 and global temperature, it is far less than the hypothesis.
The problem is that fortunes are spent on promoting these hypotheses while none are spent on falsifying them.
So you admit the LIA was the peak sea ice in the last 10,000 or so years…. and want to use that as the “normal” period.
Only a complete moron wants to go back to those freezing cold years of famine and pestilence…
Yet again Griffy-baby, you display your true credentials of being a Climate Denier – no I have no idea what one of those actually is but I get called it frequently by people like you. The ONLY climate Change Deniers I have ever encountered are those who ignorantly claim a changing climate on Earth is something unusual & unheard of!!! Still waiting on those two feckwat (apologies for poor spelling) climate scientists to come back to tell me when the Earth’s climate never changed & simply stayed the same, perhaps you my dear Griffy-baby would kindly oblige given your vast knowledge on climate science???
The era of coal fueling ships was quite brief, lasting only from 1871 to 1914. However, it was a crucial period for increased shipping, and the most famous ship of all, the Titanic, ran on coal. The Titanic used a massive amount of coal, amounting to roughly 825 tons of it daily.
When you stop to think about it, 43 years of coal powered shipping should have melted their own iceberg death traps.
So I think we need a new measuring unit of sea ice extent, measured in Titanics..
For some reason there is a complete separation of the Arctic sea from Arctic land. During the peak months of this winter (and previous winters) the area of land and sea below 0C stretched from the Himalayas, just over from India, and all the way over the top of the world and down into the southern states of the US. That is roughly about 8,000 miles, or a little more than the diameter of the Earth. We all know the warm Atlantic and Pacific encroach either side to make the cold area shaped like a lozenge. Areas that are included in the maps of Arctic ice include, Hudson Bay, the coast of Newfoundland, Gulf of St Lawrence, Bering Sea and the Sea of Okhotsk, all of which are at a similar latitude to the UK but with the latter being further south.
Looking at the NRL map of Ice Thickness and Ice Speed and Drift it is not difficult to sea the huge volumes of ice in the Arctic basin being pushed out and into the Atlantic. In fact the sea ice in the Barents and Kara seas is constantly being pushed away.
The Arctic is not ‘screaming’, or is it in a ‘death spiral’. It’s just ice.
Edit: “For some reason there is a complete separation of the Arctic sea from Arctic land…” When shown in any charts.
Idiotic. “10th lowest.”
NASA Finds 2022 Arctic Winter Sea Ice 10th-Lowest on Record
So it’s growing, right? If it isn’t the lowest on record then by definition it’s growing. Just saying…
It’s shrinking less fasterer
It’s experiencing negative shrinkage
Negative shrinkage. It’s the highest minimum extent since 2015. Every year since 2012 has been higher than the record low in 2012. So not shrinking. There’s a lot of variation so there’s always the possibility that it may be lower next year, but the 10-year trend isn’t declining. It’s increasing slightly, but you never hear it expressed that way. “10th lowest on record” is a sneaky way to make it sound bad and avoid admitting that it’s increasing. It’s behaving contrary to all the dire predictions.
” Every year since 2012 has been higher than the record low in 2012. ”
It’s amazing to see that people concentrate on what fits their narrative.
Why don’t you consider a logic choice instead, namely the average of all 12 months in each year?
You then obtain this upon an ascending sort of the yearly values:
2016: 10.16 (Mkm²)
Does it speak to you that in this ascending sort, there are in the top 21 only years after 2000?
Everyone knows that the rate of Arctic sea ice loss decreases if you look at it e.g. from 2007; mainly in the ice melting season, but also in the ice growth season (though the decrease is much less here):
Melt: from -0.81 Mkm² down to -0.12 (!)
Growth: from -0.40 down to 0.37
Are you saying it’s getting worser???
Uh…Charles, to clarify, while NASA uses NSIDC as a data center, it is not part of NASA. Nor should it be; its mission is operations, not research. Huge difference. “The U.S. National Ice Center (NIC) is an inter-agency sea ice analysis and forecasting center comprised of the Department of Commerce/NOAA, the Department of Defense/U.S. Navy, and the Department of Homeland Security/U.S. Coast Guard components.”
10th lowest jives with only 7th hottest ever
Darn it! . . . I missed the announcement of the 9th lowest Arctic sea ice extent on record.
How careless of me.
Yet even in scare-year 2012 there was a net mass balance of PLUS 50 gigaton of snow and ice on the Greenland Sheet.
Darn, the things one learn when one fight incompetence and political EPIC FAILS.
NEVER yield to nonsense.