By P Gosselin
16 years of no decline
Arctic summer minimum sea ice extent refuses to drop further, surprising and frustrating the alarmist media.
Image: National Snow and Ice data Center (NSIDC), Boulder, Colorado.
Hat-tip: Klimanachrichten
German research vessel Polarstern of the Alfred Wegener Institute (AWI) is currently underway again in the Arctic. where a decrease in sea ice had been expected there, or, probably more accurately said, hoped for.
But this year the minimum Arctic sea ice extent has turned out differently, as Germany’s widely viewed (climate-alarmist) Tagesschau news had to report:
In view of the extreme summer, the question arose in advance: Will the Arctic also see a new negative record in melting ice this year? This time, the Arctic has been spared. AWI director and expedition leader Antje Boetius tells Tagesschau that an unusual weather phenomenon prevented a record melt of Arctic sea ice this summer. According to Boetius, a sequence of low-pressure systems has led to an entirely different ice movement. The so-called transpolar drift, which describes the drifting of ice along certain routes, took a different course this year, she said. Ice from the Siberian region has been held together and compressed instead of drifting out and melting. For the AWI director, this shows that weather phenomena determine the development of sea ice, and that forecasting is more difficult than ever. The Arctic, with its sea ice and life, has been lucky once again, says the biologist. But things could go the other way. “If we are unlucky, if weather phenomena play unfavorably, we can also be affected by large ice-free parts much sooner than expected,” Boetius adds.”
We notice that when the opposite happens, e.g. heat, storms or more melt happens, then it’s all because of climate warming. But when it goes the other way, then it’s weather!
I would have preferred the vertical axis to show numbers rather than percentages.
Attached is a “tweaked” version of the graph I posted yesterday in a comment under another WUWT article (which includes links to the “raw” source data).
NB : Mine is for “annual daily minimum” numbers instead of “August monthly averages”.
For the enviro-mental-ists, in the case of the Arctic (at least) “the trend is not your friend” …
Seems like the Arctic transitioned from 7 to 4 Mkm2 in the decade after the 1997 El Nino and after that leveled off, regardless of all the ever increasing CO2 pumped into the air, especially by newcomers to prosperty like China, India, Indonesia, etc., and all the UHI effect measured by NOAA, MET and NASA, etc., the usual suspects.
Seems like the ice doesn’t care about co2.
They probably only collect coverage in percentages.
Arctic 2023 Refuses To Melt…German Scientists Blame “Unusual Weather Phenomenon”
The media appear to be ignoring the inconvenient Arctic and fixating on Antarctica, instead.
“Antarctic sea ice shrinks to lowest annual maximum level on record, data shows”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/26/antarctic-sea-ice-shrinks-to-lowest-annual-maximum-level-on-record-data-shows
“Antarctic sea-ice at ‘mind-blowing’ low alarms experts”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-66724246
“How to tell your kids about climate breakdown and mass extinction
Filmmaker Josh Appignanesi explains how to discuss the disastrous effects of climate change to your children”
https://www.mirror.co.uk/science/how-tell-your-kids-climate-30387577
And failing that…
“How to talk to your parents about climate change”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-65339214
Right now the Arctic, the bears etc just aren’t newsworthy. And we know why.
I just love all the blatant propaganda out there now, “how to talk about….” – how to spread the lies with out having to prove anything.
Exactly what the alarmists do on WUWT.
It’s OK – they still have their models to provide more reliable data 😉
‘This time the Arctic has been spared.’
Don’t you just love the infantility of such reporting. Spared by whom? A vengeful God having a day off?
“‘This time the Arctic has been spared.’”
Gaia has let them off – this time….
Gaia the Merciless has a wicked sense of humour.
Does anyone think the Arctic cares whether it was spared or not?
Pantheism is a pathetic fallacy.
These people do frying pantheism
Yet it seems to be lost on the sheeple drones that the reporters are reporting as if they are rooting for the Arctic to be decimated by Global Warm…Aahhh they really meant Climate Change all along.
The 1st clue to this being a massive global hoax has always been that the Propaganda Media always seem to be surprised and just a bit disappointed when things don’t go badly.
Global warming —> Climate Change —> Global Boiling
You gotta keep up with the preferred pronouns, er, terminology!
“The Arctic is screaming.”
But is that god male or female? Surely a female cannot be to blame for such tragedy?
non binary
And since when is more ice and more frozen wastelands a GOOD thing anyway?! What kind of twisted logic leads one to such conclusions?!
The warmest period during the current epoch, the Holocene, was called The Holocene CLIMATE OPTIMUM for a reason.
Ice!!
Cue Martha Stewart….
Pity that the RECOVERY from the extreme highs of the LIA, 1979 have stalled 🙁
Still, it has at least allowed some Arctic aquatic life to return..
2012 was clearly weather. Storms that broke up ice at the end of the melt season.
Actually for much of the year it looked as though the minimum might be higher than for the preceding 5 years. It was only in mid August that there was a period of faster melt.
Alfred Wegener’s theory of continental drift was rejected for many years by ‘consensus science.’ It would be ironic if an organization bearing his name should let their research be guided by the current science/media consensus….
This refers to the minimum extent data, which is measured on a single day in September each year, but the chart shows monthly average temperatures for August, and these have been declining at a rate of -220,000 km2 per decade in August over the past 16 years (image attached, same NSIDC data).
September’s monthly average data obviously hasn’t been posted yet, but in the 16-years from 2007-2022 the rate of September decline was -10,000 km2 per decade. Average extent this September has been below the Sep 2022 average extent throughout the month to date and Sep 2008 had a higher extent than 2007; so it is likely that 16-year September monthly average extent loss rate will rise considerably.
Using average monthly or seasonal extent data, rather than that for a single day from one month each year, changes the ’16 years of no decline’ mantra somewhat.
Pass the popcorn…
No it doesn’t, you silly sausage!
He hasn’t measured the temperature of the room…
Did you know that according to biodata, the current level is still in the TOP 5% or so of the last 10,000 years
This is nothing but a very minor RECOVERY from the extreme high of 1979, which was up there with the extreme highs of the Little Ice Age.
Not only that, but Arctic sea life that there has been no evidence of since the MWP is now returning to Arctic. How is that a bad thing ??
Even this slight drop in Arctic sea ice extent is ABSOLUETLY BENEFICIAL to the whole Arctic biosphere.
Too much sea ice (as in 1979) makes it very difficult for Arctic sea creatures.
Please try not to keep smearing your ignorance and your hatred for nature over every comment you make.
As I said above…
“”The media appear to be ignoring the inconvenient Arctic and fixating on Antarctica, instead.””
And so do you.
A few years ago, they IGNORED Antarctica because Sea Ice was growing larger for years……
The only apparent difference between your graph and the lead in graph is you exclude the 2007 data point at the start giving your graph a much higher starting point for your trend line
And yet just 3 years ago Antarctic sea ice was well above the average high. There is no doubt a lot that goes into sea ice forming and persisting and it isn’t CO2 that is the underlying cause.
We are going to have a lot to get through over the next few decades. The reduction in the Earth’s magnetic field probably is the biggest issue at this point. Two more years of an active Sun isn’t going to help. An uptick in volcanic activity with big ones going off may be the icing on the cake.
In 2025 the Sunspot Number is forecast by NOAA to start dropping and continue dropping to single digits in 2031 and zero in 2040 when their forecast ends.
The solar physicist, Valentina Zharkova, who discovered how two magnetic dynamos at different depths in the Sun give the 11-year sunspot cycle and another cycle of around 400 years. She says that the Sun is going to be cooling enough to lead to a mini-ice age for around 40 years with probable crop failures starting in a few years.
‘Modern Grand Solar Minimum will lead to terrestrial cooling’
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7575229/
https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/products/predicted-sunspot-number-and-radio-flux
Where are the plots for the 1920s and 30s?
The open season for the coal port at Spitsbergen went from 3 months of the year before 1920 to over 7 months of the year in the late 1930s
It will be the flattest 17-year trend in the whole record.
That data stops 4 years ago. It even says it in the chart. Plot it again to 2023 when the data come in.
Yes, I posted that graph (from NSIDC) from 4 years ago because it contains the interesting information about the trends, as an illustration. Not much has changed since then. Last year the 16-year trend was also the flattest in the whole record. This year we can already say that the 17-year trend will be the flattest in the whole record (we can follow the daily data and it looks like September monthly mean will be around 4.5 mil km²). That’s all, more or less. You connect the dots.
I notice that you have effortlessly twisted from a 17-year trend to a 16-year one. That 16-year period is still negative (-10,000 km2 per decade).
As I mentioned earlier, the 2023 Sep average will very likely be lower than 2022 and its start year (Sep 2008), had a higher average than the previous 16-year start point, Sep 2007.
That 16-year -10,000 km2 per decade trend is likely rise substantially once Sep 2023 data are in.
So, basically NOTHING MUCH IS HAPPENING…
Arctic is well within the natural variability of the last couple of decades.
… just a levelling off after the natural RECOVERY from the extreme high of 1979.
The Arctic sea life would probably like it a lot lower, like it has been for most of the last 10,000 years.
MASIE shows a basically zero trend since 2015
NSIDC NH has also levelled off completely since 2015
So you can stop your moronic panicking !!
” You connect the dots.”
Ok. The 17 year trends were as flat at the beginning of the data series as at the end. What all of those trends have in common are their statistical weaknesses. For example, the last such trend has a negative EV, but has a ~27% chance of being flat or positive.
OTOH, when you look at ALL of the data, for complete years, starting at either the first data point, or ending at the last data point, you get an annual ice loss of over 50,000 km^2*yr^-1, with a chance of it being flat or positive of ~0.0002%.
bnice’s workup is even more instatisticate. But of course that’s never been a problem for him….
Already heading back upwards for this year, and is above 2007, 2019 and 2020, so will not make any difference.
So, let me get this straight – when somebody compared a different period of data you accused them of all sorts of dodgy behaviour? Now you want to do exactly the same but, suddenly, it’s fine for you to do it? Idiot.
No, you haven’t got it straight. Someone posted that there were ’16 years of no Arctic sea ice decline’ on the basis of minimum extent values (single datum points in a single month, September).
To support this assertion, for whatever reason, the poster showed a chart of August Arctic sea ice extent, which shows a continued clear downward trend over the past 16 years; the exact opposite of the claim being made.
When you look at the monthly average data fir August and September from exactly the same data set, you see that, in fact, Arctic sea ice extent has continued to decline over the past 16 years.
That’s all.
Minimum extent is used for many things…
Sorry if you don’t like it…
…. actually… no-one cares if you like it or not. !
You fixation is hilarious… particularly when combined with your ignorance of the fact that current levels are far higher than they have been for most of the Holocene.
I actually believe the headline for the article is incorrect. He chart included at the lead has 17 data points and 16 connecting lines. The 16 connecting lines aren’t actually the year data points indicating 16 years. The 17 data points from
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
Represent 17 years of no decrease.
Your chart removes the 2007 data point to create the illusion of a continued decrease.
Add the 2007 data point and rerun your trend.
Meanwhile the headline should be altered to 17 years
Can someone interpret what this means, please?
Are they just words and numbers chosen at random?
The Arctic sea ice minimum is what you doomers were crying about because you lot wanted to make it seem as catastrophic as possible. Quit moving the goalposts (and being a hypocrite) if you expect to persuade people.
Arctic sea ice is still in long-term decline. The trend is there for anyone to see.
No goal-posts being moved on this side of the house.
NO.. Arctic sea ice is in a SHORT-TERM decline after an extreme high in 1979.
The extent is actually far higher than it has been for most of the last 10,000 years.
And MASIE shows it has levelled off totally since 2015
Did you know that MASIE shows Arctic sea ice GREW from 2006-2017 !
Notice that Final Nail is ignoring your MASIE charts……
Snicker.
And NO, the trend in minimum sea ice has leveled off.. Get over it. !
“long-term decline” – The earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old. Modern humans have been around for ~300,000-1,000,000 years. 44 years is not a ‘long term’ trend of anything.
“The trend is there for anyone to see.” – This is where you are moving the goalposts around. We are talking about Arctic Sea Ice minimum, not the ‘monthly average’ that you’ve decided is the correct measure (since it better suits your doomsday preaching). The Arctic Sea Ice minimum is the measure that YOU DOOMERS chose to focus on. We are addressing the precise issue using the precise measure that Climate Nutters like you wanted to talk about 15-20 years ago. You want to move the goalposts. I am repeating myself.
“No goal-posts being moved on this side of the house” – See above.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
No, you LIAR! it stopped declining SIXTEEN years ago!!!
You people sure lie a lot when it doesn’t fit your AGW scam which is why more and are wising up to it.
Hmmm. What happened in the 1970’s to make the sea ice grow so large? Any idea?
GOOD. A WARMER CLIMATE IS BETTER.
You live in a fantasy world where cold is worshipped as a virtue.
Maybe you’re The Snow Miser.
Meanwhile, the record-shattering low Antarctic sea ice extent in 2023 continues to draw scant attention here at WUWT.
Now, where is your evidence that this is anything BUT NATURAL.
Did you know that there is evidence that Antarctic sea ice has also been quite a bit lower at times over the Holocene, and that the increased sea ice since the LIA actually meant Elephant seals and similar had to vacate their normal nesting areas.
Try not to keep spreading your ignorance and DENIAL of climate and biological history in your every comment.
The point is, why isn’t this massive climatic event even being discussed at WUWT? Though that may be a moot question.
It has been discussed.
Do you have a goldfish larvae memory span?.
Now do you have any human causation.?
In passing. Totally avoided for the most part.
Doesn’t fit the narrative; so instead talk about another low, but not quite record low, Arctic summer extent.
On-message.
Except it was discussed.
Goldfish !!
Now, where is the human causation for this year’s Antarctic sea ice low that you are in an UTTER PANIC about ?
How many times?
Why wasn’t it mentioned even once in an article about a low, but not record low, Arctic sea ice extent?
You’re hiding from it. Hiding from the reality of it because it does not suit this site’s narrative.
It’s a simple as that and it’s as plain to see as that.
It’s risible. You’re only kidding yourselves these days.
“about a low, but not record low, Arctic sea ice extent?”
Why would anyone say that, when the Arctic sea ice extent is actually VERY HIGH compared to the last 10,000 years.
You are the one hiding from REALITY…
… it is what you have to do to keep yourself in a pitiful state of manic panic based on total ignorance.
I’ll repeat again, because it seems your tiny brain cannot accept reality.
Current Arctic sea ice extent is in the top 5% or so of the last 10,000 years.
“Why wasn’t it mentioned even once in an article about a low, but not record low, Arctic sea ice extent?”
Because the topic was Arctic sea ice, moron. !!
“It’s risible.”
And your comments are petty, gormless, and risible. !
Getting into a complete lather about a highly beneficial RECOVERY from the extreme high extent of 1979.
Of course, satellite data and the IPCC showed MUCH LESS sea ice in 1974.
If you want to see a website with a narrative, go visit RealClimate.org. That’s a true echo chamber. This site on the other hand tolerates skepticism. Your biased comments are visible proof of that.
Well, I have to agree with you there.
This site does permit ‘off-message’ comments. I don’t know about comments on RealClimate because I don’t post there.
I would never join a club that would have me as a member! (HT Groucho.)
“permit ‘off-message’ comments”
You mean like comments on Antarctic sea ice …
when the topic is Arctic sea ice ?
Low sea ice means that the Beaufort Gyre in the Arctic Ocean is more likely to release its fresh water into the North Atlantic slowing down or stopping the transport of heat from the tropics north and cool Europe and the eastern US substantially
First observational evidence of Beaufort Gyre stabilization, which could be precursor to huge freshwater release
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2023/05/230508134956.htm
Recent state transition of the Arctic Ocean’s Beaufort Gyre
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-023-01184-5
Obviously, TFN does not realize this is creating yet another Arctic 2012 minimum. It is quite likely this will be surpassed for decades to come and make climate alarmists look just as silly as they look in the Arctic.
I was just wondering why there is big a fuss here about the Arctic not setting a new low min extent record, whilst at the same time the Antarctic has shattered its lowest max extent record yet it is virtually ignored here.
No new min Arctic extent = big fuss.
Lowest Antarctic max extent record shattered = studiously ignore.
We were assured by “experts” like Al Gore and Professor Peter Wadhams that the Arctic ice would be gone by 2014 at the latest. It’s still there. Yet another failed prediction by Alarmists.
Who said Gore was an ‘expert’?
Wadham is a crank and is widely ignored by the climate science community.
Read the IPCC reports for the ‘official’ projections on Arctic sea ice decline. Right on schedule.
You mean that other crank Mann’s “The Cause”, as he termed his little cabal.
I mean, what legitimate scientist would regard scientific research as a “Cause“?
Reeks of religious motivation.
So why do you think it is that WUWT is nit-picking about another low but not record low minimum Arctic sea ice extent but roundly ignoring the massive record low maximum extent in Antarctica?
What’s motivating that? Religion? Lunatic free-market economics?
Just that the topic is ARCTIC SEA ICE..
Maybe you didn’t realise that, because you have less brain-power than a brick.
So the IPCC projected a zero trend since 2007. did they ;-).
OK ! Well done IPCC if that is the case.
Pay attention at the back, bnasty.
All months show a reducing trend in Arctic sea ice extent since 2007 .
Show one that doesn’t.
SO WHAT!
Pay attention,.. Arctic sea ice is currently far higher than for most of the last 10,000 years.
1979 was an extreme high similar to the LIA.
Arctic sea life is now returning.
Where is the downside?
What is causing your idiotic PANIC ?
Lol! So I call you out on a blatant lie and your answer is ‘SO WHAT’.
What age are you?
Zero trend in minimum sea ice..
What don’t you comprehend about basic maths?
Your ignorance level is on par with a 5-year-old.
Pay attention,..
Arctic sea ice is currently far higher than for most of the last 10,000 years.
The tiny drop down from the extreme high of 1979 has been highly beneficial to all Arctic sea life..
Apart from that, it is TOTALLY UNIMPORTANT….. truly “SO WHAT”
You are full of excuses, and you seem to have forgotten there were many scientists and professors who were also predicting big summer ice decline to zero in a few years time and Al Gore was echoing an actual Arctic scientist….
Ice Free Arctic Forecasts
LINK
You are getting dumber as time goes by as this has been known for years.
Biostudies clearly show Antarctic sea ice has been less at times in the past.
There was a whole post on this only a week or so ago..
NO HUMAN CAUSATION..
A few years ago, the Arctic was low and the Antarctic was setting record highs.
At that time, the climate crew only wanted to talk about the Arctic.
So what direction has the trend in global sea ice gone over thst period? Hint: you won’t like it.
What’s not to like??
(from climate4you.com)
Your graph clearly shows that the 13-month running average global sea ice (bottom set, heavy line) was millions of km2 below the 1979-2022 average extent (red line).
Did you not notice that?
GREAT NEWS isn’t it.
Arctic sea creatures can return after the EXTREME HIGH of 1979.
Did you know that current levels are actually significantly higher than they have been for nearly all the Holocene.
Now, how is this very beneficial slight decrease in Arctic sea ice caused by humans?
You are just rabbiting on mindlessly about tiny amount of natural variability.
Did you know that according to biodata, the current level is still in the TOP 5% or so of the last 10,000 years
This is nothing but a very minor RECOVERY from the extreme high of 1979, which was up there with the extreme highs of the Little Ice Age.
Not only that, but Arctic sea life that there has been no evidence of since the MWP is now returning to Arctic. How is that a bad thing ??
Even this slight drop in Arctic sea ice extent is ABSOLUETLY BENEFICIAL to the whole Arctic biosphere.
Too much sea ice (as in 1979) makes it very difficult for Arctic sea creatures.
Please try not to keep smearing your ignorance and your hatred for nature over every comment you make.
The red line. Yes! Pay attention to the red line. 🙂
You’re getting there. The red line is the average. If the 13-month running mean is below that line, then it means it is lower than average.
Don’t get hung up on the colours though.
And its shows remarkable stability.
Only a couple of years ago Antarctic was above that red line.
Still waiting for the human causation of this year’s Antarctic lower than usual extent (but higher than many periods during the Holocene)
Did you know that the Arctic sea ice extent is FAR greater now than it has been for most of the Holocene !
Or are you deliberately ignoring that fact so you can keep your tiny little mind intact.
Gosh you are so stupid since no one is disputing a small decline in the deep south, but it doesn’t matter worth a dam because it doesn’t support your stupid AGW conjecture anyway.
Why are you such a dimwit?
Of course Arctic ice extent is (marginally) below the figure for 1979, since 1979 was the year Arctic ice was at a century maximum. We know from direct observations and records from Svalbard that Arctic ice was far smaller earlier in the 20th Century.
How convenient. Start your average calculation period at a record high, everything else thereby becomes “concerning.” NOT.
If it has dropped a tiny bit, that is a GOOD thing… nothing to get yourself in a lather of PANIC about.
Too much sea ice is very inconvenient for polar life.
And the fact that we are even discussing sea ice, shows that we are still in a cool part of the interglacial.
This recent study shows that cold weather we have every year causes about 4.6 million deaths a year mainly through increased strokes and heart attacks, compared with about 500,000 deaths a year from hot weather. We don’t protect our lungs from the cold air in the winter and that causes our blood vessels to constrict causing heart attacks and strokes.
‘Global, regional and national burden of mortality associated with nonoptimal ambient temperatures from 2000 to 2019: a three-stage modelling study’
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(21)00081-4/fulltext
Mostly flat. It’s been fascinating how the Arctic and Antarctic are constantly see-sawing back and forth.
Scant attention for a scant amount of ice volume.
… the total volume of [Antarctic] ice calculated for Bedmap2 has risen by 1.2 million cu km to 26.54 million cu km. If you include the floating shelves of ice that jut out into the ocean, the total is very nearly 27 million cu km.
(Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-21692423 )
TOTAL Antarctic Sea Ice Volume: ~ .46 million km3 = ~ 1.7%.
We’re counting uce volume now, after decades of heralding high Antarctic sea ice extent? Sure, change the goal posts anytime. Lol!
O Little Penny Whistle Blower:
Hear, ye! Hear ye! 🙂
We data-driven science realists have been TRUMPETING (bahp-bah-dah-BAAAAAH! 😄 ) both measurements.
Your current tune (which you have been stomping all around WUWT screaming about, lately) begs for a response of CONTEXT, i.e., volume of ice, versus a relatively tiny bit of reduced area.
Context-setting is NOT goalpost-moving.
🙂
So posting a 10-year old article about Antarctic land ice mass in a discussion about current Antarctic sea-ice extent isn’t goal-post moving?
To misdirect from the subject under discussion by diverting to an entirely different subject is the definition of “context-setting’, AKA, ‘goal-post moving’.
Where is your human causation for the sudden drop in Antarctic sea ice extent…
Why is it so important to you ?
Your tiny mind is fixated… and unable to think a single rational thought.
Final. Given, the point of posting that article was the RELATIVE % of Antarctic land versus sea ice (not the absolute quantity), that the article is 10 years old is just fine.
*****************************
@ anyone (probably no one, but, just in case) who thinks TFJ might have a point:
Key: the total VOLUME of ice in the Antarctic is SO LARGE that the relatively tiny % which is sea ice is of negligible consequence — to anything even remotely related to the climate zones of the earth.
It’s the tail end of winter in Antarctica. No ice is melting. Some is being compated by winds and currents.
Look at the chart. The denial is strong here.
yet there was a strong upward trend until 2014 and that was too ignored. Your bias is strong.
No, it wasn’t ignored. It was much debated and talked about. Here at WUWT it was the ready-to-hand response to rapidly shrinking Arctic sea ice for many years.
At one point you couldn’t log in to this site without reading about the expanding or at least persistent Antarctic sea ice extent.
Now that the Antarctic sea ice extent is also falling there is virtually no mention of it here. Persona non grata.
Why do you think that is?
Arctic sea ice is current in the top 5% or so of the last 10,000 years.
Yes, it has recovered somewhat from the extreme debilitating high of the LIA and 1979, which forced all the sea life further south.
But the slight RECOVERY is now allowing those sea creatures to return.
Why do you HATE Arctic sea life so much ?????
Biodata clearly shows that during period of the Holocene, Antarctic sea ice has often been lower than it currently is.
This year’s drop in extent is not related to anything humans have done…
You have proven that.
Extremism causes extremism.
So for about 30-40 years ice in Antarctica increased while for ice in the Arctic decreased substantially. Today, we find ourselves in a paradoxical situation. Ask yourself these trends happening at different times irrespective of the ever-increasing CO2. I think the main point being made here is that it is extremely hard to find a human finger print.
“virtually no mention of it here.”
Because the topic of the post is Arctic sea ice.
Do you have a comprehension level of a 5-year-old… or what !!
”At one point you couldn’t log in to this site without reading about the expanding or at least persistent Antarctic sea ice extent.”
Maybe, just maybe WUWT likes to be the barer of factual reality and good news?? Unlike alarmists such as yourself who seem to be preoccupied with fake and bad news.
So in amongst all your doom and gloom, how do you explain Antarctic ice reached the record level it did by 2014? You can’t blame the poor old CO2 molecule for that.
And he has shown he cannot produce any reason why CO2 caused this years dip in extent, either.
It is not selective ignorance…
… it is total ignorance. !
Where were YOU and many AGW scammer when it was growing for years to a record high…… oh that’s right utter silence…..
You are profoundly pathetic and that the small decline doesn’t support the stupid AGW conjecture anyway.
There’s nothing unusual about Arctic weather – it exactly what anyone would expect and is precisely what’s happening now.
as attached . From MeteoBlue. The colours are NOT= Temperature – the colours are trying to indicate windspeed
There will be another screenshot in a reply…..
As I’ve outlined in blue, that is ‘where the warm water is‘
Without being especially hot, that warm water creates high humidity = very buoyant air
Dare we venture that the North Atlantic waters are around 20°C
That warm moist air rises into the minor blizzard of anti-cyclonic systems to the west and north of Europe. My blue outline.
There’s even a little one in the Med, between Italy and Libya, but The Med is middling/small. It cannot create any significant weather
That moist air as it rises, cools and dries – dare we say it gets to 6,000metres and will be at 20 minus (6×6) = -15°C
It will be cold and dense, looking for somewhere to come back down and The Very Best Place to do that is where there is No Rising Air.
Places with no rising air will be Dry Places, as it is the buoyancy of humid air that causes vertical convection/lift
So what do we make of Europe, highlighted pink in my picture
So Europe is where the air lifted by the anti-cyclones after it has cooled and dried.
It will heat (Lapse rate/Foehn) at 10°C per km and so will arrive on the surface at -15+(10×6) = 45°C
Europe’s running at about 25°C – maybe the air didn’t get as high as I suggested.
See the reply = a wide-angle view of European weather stations right now (mid-day BST)
Europe is the descending leg of a huuuuuge Hadley Cell and the waters of the Atlantic and even as far north as Finland, are the rising leg of the cell.
The anticyclones are pulling air off the Arctic Ocean – it can do nothing else but Get Friggin Cold up there.
It’s absolutely perfect, anyone could have predicted it: Given that Europe is now Bone Dry.
If the landscape of Europe was wet/damp, the descending leg of the Hadley Cell would have had to find somewhere else to descend.
Notice how the wind speeds and flows over Europe are very similar to those of The Sahara.
Europe is in some very deep shit – it is becoming a copy of the Sahara.
here is is: Europe temperatures at around solar noon on 27th September
I highlighted where anticyclones are and where the Cyclonic High is = not going anywhere and why should it?
Things will get a bit warmer in the next 3 or 4 hours but maybe not up to 45C as I guessed at.
Right now I’d settle for 25C
So, when their absurd predictions do not come to pass, it’s “weather”. When they come within a country mile, it’s “climate change” and we are doomed. I see.
Bulls*it. I forecasted what is going on now 7 years ago.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/10/07/evidence-that-multidecadal-arctic-sea-ice-has-turned-the-corner/
Forecasting is more difficult for those who call themselves experts and have no clue.
It looks like a sine curve would fit the data very nicely. The peak would be around 1980, and the trough around 2015. We have already started the up cycle! A very similar cyclical curve could be applied to the UAH global satellite temperature data, with the low occurring around 1980 to 1985 and the peak about 2015 to 2020. I know that the data records are still far too short to have much confidence in this observation, but likewise, the alarmist claims have a similar lack of evidence.
Well spotted. Most weather cycles do seem to follow more of a curve than a straight-line trend, despite the tortuous statistical analyses designed to force them to fit a different pattern.
The Arctic is strongly affected by the AMO which has an erratic 60-80 year cycle.
It affects many things in the NH.
eg Swiss glaciers
Even US glaciers are affected…
NH sea ice also matches the AMO very well…
And is a great match for Icelandic temperatures…
Yes Swiss glaciers have decreased by 10% over the last 2 years.
https://www.euronews.com/green/2023/09/28/dramatic-acceleration-switzerland-has-lost-10-of-its-glaciers-in-the-last-two-years
The AMO is currently turning negative, so cooling is likely in the next few decades. What do predict will happen to the Swiss glaciers then?
Articles like this one simply ignore the existence of short-term variability and its impact on long term trends. We saw the same error being made with the UAH satellite temperature series, where WUWT readers were convinced that global warming had stopped because of 8 years of data.
Important also to note that minimum extent is a singular metric. You can also look at winter time extent in March when sea ice reaches its maximum:
And there the past 16 years show a trend very close to the long term trend.
Who thinks that more ice in the North Atlantic is a good thing? Idiots and fools.
Freshening of the North Atlantic will drive the ongoing slowdown of the AMOC, for one thing. I don’t think anyone thinks that’s a great thing, except idiots and fools, of course.
On which fantasy earth does this occur, please? The Gulf stream or North Atlantic current has increased and decreased slightly over time but envisioning a complete collapse from a tiny bit of fresh water is utterly moronic.
Did I claim a complete collapse resulting from diminishing Arctic sea was imminent? Please point me to exactly where, thanks.
You didn’t claim anything..
… just made a half-arsed zero-evidence comment pertaining to nothing. !
ie… Basically just whinging !
Which of your crystal balls did you get that anti-science nonsense from.
There was far less Arctic sea ice for most of the last 10,000 years..
The world is still here.!!
Sea ice came from ocean waters, and when it melts, returns to it.
Compared to the the annual variation, the increase or decrease of either max or min is so small as to be meaningless.
BTW, the so called slowdown of the AMOC is yet another non-existent scare generated by the climate crew. In other words, only idiots and fools think it is an actual thing.
That is true over a single year, it is not true over decades.
Let’s see those citations.
The climate crew only pays attention to the cycles that support the myth they are trying to push.
Longer term records show that ice levels have been falling for the last 4 to 5 thousand years.
Can you post a link so that we can review it?
OMG the continued ignorance of the bog-alarmist.!
DENIAL of Holocene temperatures for the Arctic will come next !!
Here is just one of MANY charts showing that the Arctic is currently in a COLD period, with extended sea ice cover compared to the rest of the last 10,000 years..
That’d be a ‘no’ then.
Ignorance of climate change history is all you have, isn’t it child. !
I know simple graphs are really, really difficult for you to comprehend…
… but this one shows Arctic sea ice is WAY above the Holocene normal, only marginally down from the LIA extreme high.
Icelandic sea ice records show the same thing.
Extreme sea ice extent during the LIA, a drop around 1920-1950…
Then another extreme high in 1979.
The slight drop since 1979 is a TOTALLY NATURAL RECOVERY partly towards more normal Holocene levels.. !
But doesn’t include data from the last 75 years!
Don’t be so dim-witted., 1979 was similar to the LIA.
There is still HUGE amounts of seasonal sea ice.
Just a small amount down from the LIA.
I was referring to the Stein graph, 1979 isn’t on it.
75 years versus the 10,000 years of the chart………, LOL
Did you read the paper?
Yes I did, as I said that graph ends in 1950. Also it refers to a single location in the Chukchi sea and says that the sea ice in that region “In the past four decades……has decreased dramatically”. It also points out that the Chukchi Sea is ice free during summer now. Wrangel Island is very close to that location, an expedition to there in 1921 led to them being stranded for two years as the rescue ships were cut off by ice, only one survived. The Russians occupied it in 1926 but also had difficulty reaching it in many years, nowadays you can take regular tours there by cruise liners. War
Well the Max extent in 1979 was 16.6million sq km and the Min was 6.95 million sq km whereas this year it’s 14.6 and 4.2 so a drop of over 2 million, not exactly a “small amount down”.
I think you go that the wrong way around. Mark.
Arctic sea ice levels have been INCREASING for the last 3000-4000 years.
It is called the NEOGLACIATION.
And you ignore that the probability of a 16-year pause in September Arctic sea ice extent being due to chance is only 10%. We are getting very close to a 95% chance of climate scientists being wrong about Arctic sea ice. It will happen in 2027 if the pause continues. Then they’ll have to recognize they have no clue what is going on in the Arctic.
I’m not ignoring this probability at all – it isn’t statistically significant. If your hypothetical scenario materializes in 2027 it might prompt some evaluation of Arctic sea ice extent minimum response to the ongoing global warming trend, but we’ll cross that hypothetical bridge when we get to it. Right now there is nothing happening in the Arctic that is not in line with projections.
That is obviously incorrect. There is no barrier that gets crossed when going from 94% to 95%. It is highly improbable that the Arctic sea ice is in a pause by chance.
Besides, those of us that understand what is actually going on in the Arctic, predicted a long pause many years ago.
My AMO model from 6 years ago predicts a slight increase in Arctic sea ice in the 2030s. So far so good.
Understanding comes before, statistics comes after. Those who follow statistics are always late to the party.
The red dashed lines on the graph look like polynomial regressions, is that correct? If so, I’m not sure why you would think either holds predictive power outside the range of the data being fit. The observed trend in Arctic sea ice extent seems to be well within the bounds of projections, including RCP 8.5.
LOL.. massively wide bounds !!
Side of a barn type projections. !
Let’s not forget, current levels are only a tad down from the LIA peak, and still in the top 5% or so of the Holocene.
Which makes sense, because that Arctic region is still rather cold compared to the rest of the Holocene.
Observed looks more like this.
This actually matches Arctic temperatures as well.
There are some really long pauses that can fit inside those envelopes.
That’s a great graph BTW. I’ve posted similar graphs here. They are usually not well received. Hopefully you get a better reception.
From 1996 to 2007, there was an 11% decrease in sea ice extent in the Arctic. Maybe there’s a slight decline from 2007, but it’s at a much smaller rate than before. Again, an indicator that something natural is going on. Yet for some reason, you think that natural variability doesn’t exist.
The decline from 1996 to 2007 is -1.6e6 km2/decade.
The decline from 2008 to 2022 is -0.7e6 km2/decade.
Not only do I think natural variability exists I think it is an essential element in explaining the Monckton pause regardless of whether the pause is for sea ice extent or temperature. I post regarding this topic all of the time. BTW…why not just ask what I think instead of guessing incorrectly?
Natural variability is ALL that exists when it comes to Arctic sea ice.
1979 was an EXTREME HIGH, not much different than the LIA…
…. it is only natural that it has decreased a bit since then.
Not only natural, but highly beneficial for Arctic sea life.
So the warming is natural?
Some of it natural like the short term variation caused by El Nino. Some of it is anthropogenic like the long term trend.
Sorry, but there is no evidence that human CO2 causes warming.
The surface data is one massive indicator of urban warming.
That urban/aircraft temperature measurement issue, + the idiotic anti-science homogenisation and other adjustments is the only “anthropogenic” warming.
But the adjustments are NOT REAL..
and the URBAN is only a small fraction of the planet, smeared across everywhere.
Why then is the satellite temperature record consistent with the surface temperature record? Shouldn’t they strongly diverge if the surface warming trend is nothing more than an artifact?
Why would UAH be immune from UHI influence?
Because satellites are not orbiting within city limits.
Because it’s measured at 14,000′?
“The UAH satellite temperature dataset, developed at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, measures the temperature of various atmospheric layers from satellite measurements of the oxygen radiance in the microwave band, using the Advanced Microwave Sounding Unit (AMSU) temperature measurements on the AQUA satellite. This graph displays the Lower Troposphere aka TLT data. The reason for using the lower troposphere instead of the surface as viewed from space is that the temperature data seen by satellites at the surface is inherently too noisy to provide stable data. The altitude of TLT data used is at approximately 14,000 feet (4267.2 meters) which is representative of surface temperature, without the noise associated with weather and human activity, such as Urban Heat Islands (UHI), which skew the near-surface temperature record. A pro and con discussion can be found at the Everything Climate page on UHI.”
Does GISS really show no warming between 2001-2015, and basically no warming from 1980-1997?, With just El Nino steps?
Hiding the disparity using a mess of lines is very childish!
UAH shows year 2016 no warmer than 1998.
Does Giss do that?
Anyone can see the bulk of the green is warmer than the red on the left, and cooler than the red on the right
Why the puerile and pathetic games.??
So that tiny difference between GISS and UAH, you’re saying that is the sum total of your UHI contamination? But there’s still a global warming trend…
Does GISS show 2016 slightly less than 1998
Does GISS show 2020, 2021 about 0.2 LESS than 1998.
Your “tiny difference, is absolutely NONSENSE.
and I’m guessing you are well aware of that.
Just LYING to yourself to try to keep your pathetic little AGW religion alive in your fetid little mind.
And why do the ocean-only datasets also show significant warming, if it is all an artifact of urbanization? I don’t recall there being many large cities in the middle of the ocean, but maybe you can enlighten me.
How about cloud reduction?
Why no scale along the horizontal, fool.
And ocean warming proves the warming is NOT caused by CO2
Far less warming that the urban areas.. is that what you are trying to disguise ?
Do please tell, this should be entertaining.
You could make up some moronic anti-science of CO2 warming the oceans…
…to fit your putrid little anti-life agenda,
But it would be FAKE.. and you know it.
The graph posted by Javier seems to show that Arctic sea ice is nothing to do with Arctic temperature. (otherwise it would have a 1930,40s level similar to now.)
That pretty much destroys the AGW meme on Arctic sea ice.
It is cold. in most places outside the tropics a person couldn’t live outdoors with no protection for the whole year. They would die of hypothermia.
“can fit inside those envelopes.”
Make the envelopes big enough, you could fit an elephant !
That is how the climate models work !
Interesting how only those things that support the climate crew world view are statistically interesting, no matter how low the likelihood of them actually happening.
You do know that current Arctic sea ice levels are above what they have been for nearly ALL the last 10,000 years, don’t you?
We all know you are intentionally ignorant, but even you must be aware of that fact.
Now put that on a zeroed vertical axis.
There really isn’t much happening, is there.!
And ALWAYS starting at the EXTREME HIGH of 1979. You know, the “new ice age scare” time
It looks like it has found a base and bottomed out.
When will we see this graph on NoTricksZone?
Er, natural variability perhaps?
So what?
Exactly!
Who cares about climatic breakdown?
Where is the evidence this is anything to do with your mental breakdown ?
The sudden drop in Antarctic se ice has no human causation you can point to. !
Tell us one person you has suffered from this totally natural drop in Antarctic sea ice. ?
one person who has suffered…
Silence……
Snicker……………
HA HA HA, the climate remains the same there in Antarctica as it has been for the last 34 MILLION years you dolt!
“remains the same there in Antarctica as it has been for the last 34 MILLION years “
ie… [
naughty word] COLD !!!Has it ever occurred to you that the sea ice extent at both Poles has more to do with ocean currents than air temperatures?
Very little in the way of scientific comprehension occurs to the Foolish Nonce.
The only “breakdown” is the ment breakdown of suckers that have been convinced that a warming climate is bad news.
Mental – damn autouncorrect must be “guided” by Automated Idiocy now.
Carried only by the Antarctic loss this year.. What is the human causation?.
Noted that you missed 2012.. why would you do that?
Loos like cherry-picked years.
Note that 2019, 2020 are well above 2016
15.5 MILLION km² is ON HECK OF A LOT of sea ice. !
You are sweeping under the rug the fact that the reason for the low sea ice this year is because of Antarctica. In 2014, there was record sea ice extent. Very dishonorable. I expected more from you but it turns out that you are a monkey.
No offense, but duh. Everyone knows that the record low Antarctic sea ice is a contributing factor to the record low global sea ice extent. That’s hardly what I’d call sweeping it under the rug. Do you think NTZ will inform their audience of this? Do you think they are sweeping it under the rug? BTW…the graph I posted includes 2014.
So you admit that the drop in Antarctic sea ice is totally natural, so the tiny overall drop in global sea ice is also totally natural.
Isn’t “climate change™” meant to be human-forced change?
Well, I’m sure most people who look at NTZ also come here. So they are well aware of the phenomenon happening in Antarctica. But the mainstream climate community is heralding this as evidence of climate change even though 2014 sea ice extent was record high throughout the whole record. East Antarctica is cooling while West Antarctica is warming.
“as evidence of climate change”
And yet, when asked to provide evidence of human causation.
They remain totally blank.
It is quite funny watching them just ignore the question every time they are asked. 🙂
Yep, a deafening silence from the clown posse (TFN, bdgwx, AlanJ etc).
So when do you think NTZ is going to tell their audience that 1) Antarctic sea ice extent is at a record low and 2) Arctic sea ice is below expectations?
When are YOU warmist alarmists going to tell the truth about the long-known No Summer ice actually happened in various times of this interglacial period?
LOL
I tell people about it all the time. The conversation go something like this. Me: We cannot eliminate the possibility that Arctic sea ice will drop below 1e6 km2. Contrarian: How can you possibly know that? Me: Because it has happened before.
As if people weren’t likely already aware of the situation in Antarctica given the incessantly obnoxious media. Your implication that climate contrarian websites are hiding information just does not hold water. All they do is provide context in a different light. You read way too much into stuff dude.
So its already posted on NTZ? Do you have a link?
“1) Antarctic sea ice extent is at a record low”
Maybe, in a very short time period, with biodata showing it has been lower often in the last 10,000 years.
But really.. It is a very stupid and meaningless comment to make.
“2) Arctic sea ice is below expectations?”
Who’s expectations.. seriously.. what a moronic comment !!
Yet it is still way above most of the last 10,000 years
The Earth is still in a 2.56 million-year ice age.
A graph showing that it’s not a good idea to decide what the standard deviation for this phenomenon is based on 20 or 40 years of sea ice data.
Or you might (nonsensically) start seeing ‘6 sigma events’ every other year and fall deep into ‘climate grief’ for the catastrophic melting (or conversely) the coming ice age.
So in other words, their predictions about climate change don’t come true because of climate change.
In 2001 the IPCC predicted that annual mean sea ice extent would not drop below 11.0e6 km2 until 2025. It first dropped below that value in 2005 and has done so every year since. 2023 is again on pace to be below 11.0e6 km2. So even with the pause Arctic sea ice declines have exceeded IPCC expectations.
But it has not exceeded Gore’s “ice free” call.
Yep. Hopefully Gore learns a lesson from this. That is it is better to form a position around the consilience of evidence instead of making it up on the fly.
Only lesson Gore has learnt is how to make lots of money from gullible AGW idiots. !
Evidence shows Arctic sea ice still very much on the high side compared to the rest of the Holocene..
Gore was echoing Dr [Wieslav] Maslowski statement
LINK
Nope. Here is what Maslowski said of Gore’s prediction.
“It’s unclear to me how this figure was arrived at. I would never try to estimate likelihood at anything as exact as this.”
And here is Maslowswki’s actual publication concerning the topic.
No where in there does Maslowski predict an ice-free state to occur by any particular year. He even states that modeling is inadequate to even make such a prediction. In fact, a large part of the publication is focused on being critical of model predictions in general.
The BBC QUOTED him saying in 2007!
“Our projection of 2013 for the removal of ice in summer is not accounting for the last two minima, in 2005 and 2007,” the researcher from the Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California, explained to the BBC.
“So given that fact, you can argue that may be our projection of 2013 is already too conservative.”
LINK
He originally thought it be open by year 2040 or later then with his updates on modeling resolutions is now saying it would be much earlier supposedly just a few years into the future from 2007.
You tried to mislead people here, shame on you.
He doesn’t say the Arctic will be ice-free by 2013 in that BBC article. The BBC was asking about a slide that was presented at the conference in December 2007 in which the statement “If this trend persists the Arctic Ocean will become ice If this trend persists the Arctic Ocean will become ice-free by ~2013!” appears.
The presentation slides have been archived here.
https://eprints.lib.hokudai.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/2115/34395/5/Maslowski.pdf
And Maslowski is correct. Given that the 2005 and 2007 data were not included in the ice volume (not extent) graph it would be a true statement that 2013 would be conservative. But, remember, Maslowski does not think trend extrapolations are a good predictor of future ice states. However, that message nor the actual prediction was included in the BBC report. The prediction is included on the same slide in the first graph and labeled as “NAME proj” though. The NAME is the model his group worked on. Notice that his actual prediction is no where close to 2013.
This is why it is always best to read what the scientists are actually saying.
He is being vague now because he doesn’t really know either and that he was burned on it, that is what YOU missed, and he DID make far into the future predictions which he has since dialed back to more recent time but still being vague now because at the time there were indeed a number of scientists making no summer ice predictions coming soon claims which he should have stated out completely as the whole thing was just dumb speculative propaganda.
Far into the future predictions indeed…that’s the point. If you’re going to blame someone for the near term predictions of 2013 and 2016 predictions then blame BBC and Al Gore.
And I have not seen an abundance of scientists who advocated for an ice-free summer that soon. Wadhams prediction is one of the few that I can actually semi-verify. And I say “semi-verify” only because the quote in The Guardian is unequivocal. I actually can’t find that prediction in literature. In fact, the soonest I’ve seen in any of his publications is 2040.
And remember, you should not be basing a position off a single source anyway. The skeptical approach is to use the consilience of evidence. As of right now that is about 2050.
“IPCC predicted”… ROFLMAO.
What a totally meaningless comment !!
Alarmist media switched their attention to the Antarctic sea ice. Who cares about the Arctic, the former cannary in the coal mine?
Yeah. Forget the polar bears. It’s the PENGUINS (mostly drowning baby chicks) that are the innocent victims of your CO2 exhalation.
Climate change has been reported to cause more and less ice in the Arctic. Therefore, we must all fight climate change by spending money, but only below 66 degrees north latitude, where the cash registers are.
Bloomberg estimate $US200 trillion to stop global warming by 2050.
All of the stock markets in the world add up to $US109 Trillion. All the gold in the world is worth around $US11 Trillion. Total world’s saving is $US27 Trillion. The total amount of money in the world is around $US40 Trillion. That adds up to $US187 Trillion.
I think that people would prefer a degree or two of warming and keep all of their money compared to spending all of their money to stop a degree or two of warming.
Any rational person would see 11 years of minimum sea ice extent higher than the 2012 low as an increasing trend. But not an alarmist…
So if global warming does not answer “why”, then what does answer the question- though if the planet is as old as guessed then the data record is way too short to answer.
Another female bewailing the failure of Mother Nature to follow their pre-determined path of climate-destruction! Is it my imagination, or is it factual that so many declarations of doom are from such impressionable people? Perhaps it is the human need to follow the humanity-nurturing path? Perhaps they have so little of consequence in their lives that such a reaction is to be expected? Poor things!
I wouldn’t believe anything she says.
If the data don’t bolster the doomsday narrative, then they can’t be accurate.
“The so-called transpolar drift, which describes the drifting of ice along certain routes, took a different course this year, she said. Ice from the Siberian region has been held together and compressed instead of drifting out and melting.”
Has anyone thought of what causes Arctic sea ice to drift? In winter, when the entire Arctic with the possible exception of the Scandinavian coast is encased on ice, the ice probably doesn’t drift much, because it has nowhere to go without hitting land.
In spring and summer, when there is melting along the coasts of Russia and Alaska, but the Canadian archipelago and the north coast of Greenland still have ice, sea ice is free to drift, but is more likely steered by water currents, which can exert greater forces on the ice than wind. Ocean currents in the Arctic are likely affected and steered by the North Atlantic Oscillation, where there is more water exchange between the Atlantic and Arctic than between the Pacific and Arctic through the narrow Bering Strait.
But a fluctuation in the North Atlantic Oscillation can also affect the weather in the North Atlantic, and by extension in the region between Greenland and Scandinavia, which has more open water than anywhere else in the Arctic. Is there some relationship between a warm summer in Europe and a current pushing ice southward into the coast of Siberia?
And the “satellite record” conveniently begins at the end of a 3 decade cooling trend, which makes the starting point effectively a “cherry pick” to begin with.
Of course there will be less ice as the climate warms up, but that says nothing about the cause, nor nothing about how much ice is “normal” outside the temperature trough where they start the “record.”
Again, we need to recount all of the years when we were supposedly going to see the Arctic free of sea ice, which hasn’t even come close to happening.
Their predictions are wrong because they’re wrong about ALL OF IT. The driving forces, the effects of those driving forces, they haven’t got a clue. They’re stuck on their CO2 fetishism and won’t let go no matter how many times they are shown to be wrong.
“an unusual weather phenomenon prevented a record melt of Arctic sea ice this summer”
It’s a weather phenomenon known as bloody cold !!!