Further scientific evidence has been produced to show that summer sea ice in the Arctic has shown no significant decline since 2007. The facts produced make a mockery of attempts by alarmists such as Al Gore and Sir David Attenborough to push the collectivist Net Zero agenda by stating that all the ice will be gone in just a few years. A leading Danish scientist notes a fall in sea ice between 1997 and 2007, but minimal loss in the 44-year satellite record both before and after this period. Furthermore, he concludes in a recently publised paper that there is no apparent correlation between the variable extent of Arctic sea ice and the gradually increasing concentrations of the trace gas carbon dioxide.
Allan Astrup Jensen lays out the facts and states that “there is no indication that we should expect the Arctic summer sea ice to disappear, as predicted, in one or two decades”. Jensen is a distinguished scientist of long standing with over 300 publications to his name. He is the Research Director of the Nordic Institute of Product Sustainability, Environmental Chemistry and Toxicology, and sits on the editorial board of the Springer publication, Environmental Science and Pollution Research.
The facts are very clear, as the graph below shows.

The red bar shows the monthly average for the lowest extent of summer sea ice, invariably reached in September. The fall over 10 years from the 1979-97 plateau can be seen, as can the resumption of the minimal downward trend from 2007.
The September ice trend from 2007 onwards can be seen in the following graph.

Even with the lower extent in 2023, the author notes there has been no significant downward movement during the last 17 years. The figures for these graphs come from the U.S.-based National Snow and Ice Data Centre where Mark Serreze predicted in 2007 that the sea ice would all be gone by 2030.
The decade fall to 2007 was catnip to many climate extremists, and remains so to this day. Declining Arctic sea ice has been one of the main poster scares of the climate catastrophists. Having lost coral on the Great Barrier Reef – two years of record growth – and polar bears – more wandering around these days than you can shake a stick at – alarmists seem loath to give up another old friend that has served them so well. In 2022, David Attenborough reported on the BBC’s Frozen Planet II that the sea ice could all be gone by 2035. Computer models rather than data were thought to be behind his claim. Jensen details other scaremongers including Professor Peter Wadhams from the University of Cambridge, who predicted in the Guardian in 2012 that there would be a final collapse of the ice within four years.
In 2021, the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) stated: “The September Arctic sea ice is projected (by CIM6 model simulations) to be practically ice-free near mid-century under mid and high GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions.” The scare is also kept going with science papers like Kim et al. which predicted last year that the summer sea ice would be “completely absent” in one to two decades. Another author is said to have told the Guardian that it was “too late to save the summer ice”. The prediction was of course wrong, observed Jensen – “unsubstantiated, unscientific, absurd and alarmist”.
There is mounting evidence that Arctic sea ice is cyclical rather than linear, and owes a great deal to natural influences such as a powerful ocean current called the Atlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation (AMO). Historical observations going back to the early 1800s suggest considerable waxing and waning of the ice over periods of around 70-90 years.
In the near record, there is evidence to suggest that the sea ice extent was lower in the 1970s and it peaked in 1979, the year satellite records are said to have began. Of course by starting modern records at this date, a lower trend can be reported from what is a particularly high year. Investigative science journalist Tony Heller notes that there were satellite records available in the 1970s, and he presents two IPCC sea ice graphs – one published in 1990 and the other in 2001.

In the first graph the IPCC plots the lower levels of ice in the 1970s with a peak shown in 1979. But by 2001, the IPCC had removed much of the increase of that decade and the chart showed the ice actually starting to fall from around 1977. Heller also provides evidence that the 1950s, which are not shown on these charts, had lower ice than the 1970s.
Quite what role human-caused carbon dioxide plays in all this is somewhat unclear. No obvious correlation with regard to this one, as Allan Astrup Jensen and Tony Heller clearly show.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Heller argues that the “satellite data” was artificially cut off at the peak, as there was satellite data showing lower levels of sea ice in the 1970’s and earlier.
There is no credible argument against that fact as he shows in the video.
The use of ‘credible argument’ and ‘Tony Heller’ in the same sentence doesn’t make sense!
Phil, making a meaningfull comment.. never going to happen !
Tony Heller has magnitudes more credibility than you ever will.
Heller is a fraud; he lies, manipulates graphs and data, does no research, and has never published in scientific journal. And he is your guy?
Why is ad hominem the only way you can participate?
Show some data dude because no one is going to believe that you know anything.
I do it all the time. When I showed that Heller was wrong on here when he claimed that CO2 solidified in Antarctica. He blew a fit and his subsequent actions were what got him banned from this site.
“I do it all the time.”
BS !!!
Just more petty ad hom.
Very pathetic. !!
So you admit your comment is pathetic..
It must upset you so much to do that !!
Well, if the freezing point of CO2 is -78 C, and Antarctica has gone as low as -89 C (that we know of), it sounds like he’s right… as usual. At least in theory. (I don’t know if anyone has actually observed solid CO2 there, but the conditions can support it, at least some of the time, so it’s not a ridiculous claim by any means)
Tony Heller forgot vapor pressure, as CO2 sublimates at atmospheric concentrations of that gas.
Exactly, which is what I pointed out to him in that post and which he continued denying. Someone designed an experiment which proved it to Anthony and led to Heller leaving in a huff. CO2 doesn’t freeze below a pressure of 5.11 atm.
Hmm, that doesn’t sound quite right Phil. I am getting a triple point at 5.11 atm and a balmy -56 C, which is probably the point you are thinking of. At -78 C, by contrast, I am seeing a freezing point at 1 atm of pressure. All the way down at -89 C, it looks like the freezing/sublimating pressure (vapour pressure) is closer to 0.1 or 0.2 atm, although it’s a little hard to read on the graphs I can find quickly.
From my admittedly rudimentary understanding of vapour pressure, if the vapour pressure of CO2 at -89 C is only 0.25 atm or so, then it will remain (or become) solid as long as the surrounding gas (of all species) exceeds that pressure. Not just the partial pressure of only the CO2 molecules present. Right?
Liquid CO2 doesn’t exist below the Triple point therefore there is no freezing below a CO2 partial pressure of 5.11 atm. At a partial pressure of 1 atm deposition of solid CO2 would require a temperature below -78.5ºC, the actual CO2 partial pressure is 0.0004 atm and deposition will only occur below ~-140ºC.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/06/09/co2-condensation-in-antarctica-at-113f/
From that article and comments, it sounds like the question isn’t nearly as settled as you seem to think it is. Plenty of knowledgeable and qualified people disagree with your conclusions.
For example, I don’t believe you are correct that it is impossible for a substance to transition from gas to solid (freeze) without an intermediate liquid state. (since you said “Liquid CO2 doesn’t exist below the Triple point”) This process is the opposite of “sublimation”, and is called “deposition”. Therefore the lack of a liquid state below the triple point is irrelevant.
It also doesn’t seem to be the case that vapour pressure is a phenomenon of partial pressures. (since you said “At a partial pressure of 1 atm”) It seems to be rather a case of total pressure. (my reference is “A liquid’s atmospheric pressure boiling point corresponds to the temperature at which its vapor pressure is equal to the surrounding atmospheric pressure” from the Wikipedia page) This makes sense since the tendency of a molecule to evaporate off a solid will depend on its rate of collisions with every other molecule of nearby gas, which are otherwise keeping it in place – not just molecules of its own molecular species.
And the total atmospheric pressure in Antarctica is easily high enough to cause CO2 to solidify, when it gets cold enough (“Certainly, at least some of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere at the poles does freeze out during the winter” from David Cook at Argonne National Laboratory)
Overall you are doing an entirely lackluster and underinformed job of defending your claim, I would say. Do you have a chemistry background?
I suggest you read the following on article by Anthony where he shows the result of an experiment which proves that Heller was wrong, it certainly is settled. As shown by me and others the phase diagram refers to the partial pressure of the gas, a point that Heller didn’t understand. Also Cook admitted he was mistaken when contacted later, and yes I do have a chemistry background. There is no way that CO2 at a partial pressure of 0.0004atm will deposit solid CO2 at temperatures above -140ºC. By the way transition from gas to solid is deposition, not freezing.
Ah okay, I think I was not properly appreciating this point made by Flanagan: “I think you actually confound sublimation and deposition with the solid-gas equilibrium, where the rates of these processes exactly cancel each other.”
And the phrase on the Wiki page about vapour pressure is not helping either, which I quoted earlier: “A liquid’s atmospheric pressure boiling point corresponds to the temperature at which its vapor pressure is equal to the surrounding atmospheric pressure.” But boiling is not the same as evaporation, and the rate of evaporation (or sublimation) depends on partial pressure, not surrounding atmospheric pressure. I think I understand the situation better now. Thanks!
You’re welcome.
The willful ignorance of Alarmists has been apparent from the moment I first began debating them around 2003. (Before then I had no computer and lived back in the sunshine of a world with no web.) The wild swings in sea-ice extent are amazing. But they insist on behaving like Sergeant Schultz.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34ag4nkSh7Q
Some the first Nimbus satellite pictures we have shows big areas of open water north of Alaska in September. This picture is from 1969:
The evidence goes on and on and on. For example, compare where William Parry found ice-free waters and was able to sail three quarters of the way through the Northwest Passage in 1819-1820, with where he found the same route blocked in 1822-1824.
Alarmists think that by calling historical evidence unverifiable they make their downward “trend line” credible. Instead they increase their own ignorance until it becomes incredible.
Satellites have continuously monitored sea ice since 1979.
I have no knowledge of satellite coverage before the late 1970s. The claims of ignoring non-existent satellite data before the 1970s make no sense to me.
There were earlier satellites, it was just not continuous coverage.
Many people have seen the shown graph of pre 1979 ice from the IPCC-FAR report
Figure 7.20: (a) Northern Hemisphere, and (b) Southern
Hemisphere sea-ice extent anomalies. Data from NOAA (USA).
Did you know it came with a discussion?
7.8.2 Sea-ice Extent and Thickness
Especially importantly, satellite observations have been used to map sea-ice extent routinely since the early 1970s. The American Navy Joint Ice Center has produced weekly charts which have been digitised by NOAA. These data are summarized in Figure 7.20 which is based on analyses carried out on a 1° latitude x 2.5° longitude grid. Sea-ice is defined to be present when its concentration exceeds 10% (Ropelewski, 1983). Since about 1976 the areal extent of sea-ice in the Northern Hemisphere has varied about a constant climatological level but in 1972-1975 sea-ice extent was significantly less.
So from IPCC, starting at a low point on the left side of the chart falsifies the slope.
“I have no knowledge”..
…. just cut your statement there.. and you get FACT.
Seaice decline started around 170 years before now. You may find data and graphs in the historic sea ice archive
https://climate-cryosphere.org/hica-about/
Other links and explanation via “resources” .
The continuous retreat of ice edge position observed since the second half of the 19th century may be a recovery after significant cooling in the study area that occurred as early as the second half of the 18th century.
Historical variability of sea ice edge position in the Nordic Seas
1979 was a spike in the Arctic sea ice extent.. same period as the “new ice age” scare.
Icelandic sea ice records show this spike very clearly.
Richard Green,
Please see the Nimbus Satellite picture I posted, which will be found above your comment. Also be aware the picture is from September 6, 1969. Ordinarily the melt is not over for another two weeks, so it is likely the extent minimum was even less than that early satellite shows.
Yep, even the IPCC showed that earlier data
It’s shrinking and growing, depending on timescale and significance. It varies and oscillates at all timescales. Multidecadally, it’s starting to grow.
I much prefer zeroed vertical axis when appropriate.. like for sea ice.
It has been a bit, so I decided to check in with NSIDC. Yeppers! Arctic is still covered with ice and snow. And imagine my surprise when looking at other end of planet and Antarctic is still covered with ice and snow. I am shocked, SHOCKED I say!!!!!!
Yes, 14 million sq km of it
https://nsidc.org/data/masie#anchor-0
The modern measure, is 14 Wadhams
All those windmills and solar panels are already having an impact on saving the Arctic!
Amazing 😉
The Polar Science Center has updated the table of estimated Arctic Sea Ice Volume for December, 2023 here.
https://psc.apl.uw.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/schweiger/ice_volume/PIOMAS.2sst.monthly.Current.v2.1.txt
So I updated my time series plot of all months, with each month plotted separately using the Lowess smoothing function. December is in heavy magenta.
The loss of volume from the beginning of the record began decelerating over 10 years ago, and now looks to have leveled out, or nearly so, for all months. We’ll see what happens. A cyclical pattern, as this article describes, makes sense. Attribution of ice loss to incremental CO2 makes no sense.
If anything, the rate of CO2 emissions has increased dramatically in the past couple of decades and yet the ice extent has levelled out.
All that coal burning by China, India, etc., must be blocking the Sun 🌞!
According to your graph since 1980 to now minimum volume has dropped by a factor of three from ~15 to ~5.
Explain why that is a bad thing, when the drop in extent from the extreme high of 1979, has actually been highly beneficial to humans, and all Arctic land and sea animals.
I was commenting on the data shown, do you have a problem with that?
Data shows a recovery of sea ice from an extreme high
Do you have a problem with that ??
And answer the question, .. or just keep whining !!
Your only answer is a red thumb.. seriously !!
Try not to be even more pathetic. !
Correct. And what do you make of it?
Also from the numbers, the ratio of maximum to minimum was about 32:16 at the beginning, and about 24:5 presently. And it’s impressive that the seasonal gain from minimum to maximum (in 1000’s of cubic kilometers) has increased from about 16 to about 19.
“Correct. And what do you make of it?”
It’s clearly due to the change in the nature of the ice, at the beginning of that period the ice was older and therefore thicker and fresher.
In 1985 ~40% of the ice was older than 3 years and only ~35% was First year ice. Over the next 25 years that older ice disappeared, there’s now less than 10% over 3 years and ~70% First year ice. Since 2009 there’s been virtually no older ice left, that’s why it’s flattened out, it’s now all about 1-2 year ice coming and going.
Arctic_sea_ice_age_1985-2022_v2.jpeg
In 1985 Sea ice had barely started to RECOVER from the extreme high of 1979..
Let’s ask the question yet again
Plenty of old ice left each year, unless you think 4 million km² is not enough !!
Explain why that is a bad thing, when the drop in extent from the extreme high of 1979, has actually been highly beneficial to humans, and all Arctic land and sea animals.
Less than 10% of the total sea ice is less than 3 years old, where do you get 4million km2 from?
Regarding the second chart, as stated, this shows only average September sea ice extent. September is indeed the month in which minimum Arctic sea ice extent occurs, but it is not the fastest-receding month since 2007.
It’s not evident from the chart and trendline, but there is a decreasing trend in that data, -60,000 km2 per decade, which is the slowest rate of sea ice extent decline of any month in the Arctic since 2007.
Especially the spring months of March, April and May have all been reducing at a much faster rate than has September over the same period; April in particular (-430,000 km2 per decade).
Using the same data as that used in the second chart (NSIDC) but using annual average Arctic sea ice extent rather than just September, you can see that extent has continued to decrease at a rate of -250,000 km2 per decade since 2007.
If you cherry pick the dates, exaggerate the scale and enlarge an inconsequential trend so it actually looks significant then you, sir, are nothing but an unscientific activist. Scuttle off back under your rock please.
Dmac beat me to it, see his comment below.
As explained, the dates and data are those used by the author of the article for his second chart. The trend was calculated from the NSIDC by Microsoft Excel.
A monkey can apply a linear trend.. especially when it is meaningless.
Did you know that all 3 Arctic sea ice charts show current levels to be highest in some 20 years.
Did you know that current levels are in the top 5% or so of the last 10,000 years .. STILL A VERY HIGH EXTENT.
Don’t let the facts kick you on your way out, fungal !!
A monkey can also post on a comment board, as you prove daily.
So you cannot argue with any rational comment or data.
Nor can you counter what I said..
…. which means you know I am correct.
You really are a LOSER !!!
I think someone should buy you a drink, preferably several – as long as there’s no ice in them, you do seem to be allergic to ice.
I don’t understand why these fools think the extreme high extents of the LIA and 1979 are “normal” or even remotely beneficial.
The slight drop leaves current levels well above the Holocene norms, and has allowed Arctic sea life to return. Allows some sea travel during the summer months.
What’s not to like !!!
“I think someone should buy you a drink,”
Nope.. should never mix alcoholic drinks with recreational/hallucinogenic drugs. !
You accused me of cherry-picking dates, when in fact, as I had already pointed out, I was using the exact same dates used by the author of the article (who you didn’t criticise for doing that, oddly).
Maybe it’s you who needs the drink?
yawn!
Seems you have nothing rational or non-ignorance-based to say on the issue.
Try not to be a “victim” all your petty life.
Off you go and take your ADHD meds, little child.
Here’s an odd thing: the highest March and April ice levels in the past 20 years were in 2012, the year of the record September low. And now we have the highest levels of the past 20 years in early January.
“… the highest March and April ice levels in the past 20 years were in 2012 …”
That is not odd, though.
The loss of sea ice is a powerful NEGATIVE feedback. With no ice cover, the Arctic Ocean can radiate massive amounts of heat back out to space.
The Extinction Rebellion morons think the Arctic Ocean is very cold, which it is to their human perspective.
However, open water in the Arctic is blazingly hot. 30F sea water is radiating to the -455F background temperature of space. With essentially no water vapor in the air above the Arctic Ocean, that radiation is escaping to space and cooling the polar water and the planet overall.
I believe the Denmark Meteorological Institute has documented that exact effect. Their records show that the amount of summer melting has about an 80% correlation to the amount of winter sea ice formation. Small amount of summer melting = small amount of winter new ice formation. Large amount of summer melting = large amount of winter new ice formation.
Apparently, this effect far outweighs the “sea ice albedo” effect that Gore, Thunberg, and the rest of the non-scientists keep pushing.
Add to that, the fact that the atmosphere at the poles is consistently thinner in altitude than anywhere else.
In this case the ice cover was higher before the low level in September, but I agree the basic idea, although it does get complicated by wave behaviour etc..
Oh, I agree with you on a large number of OTHER factors controlling the ice patterns.
That is why the DMI only found an 80% correlation.
If you go back to your chart, look at the amount of ice formation from Sep. 2012 through the spring maximum in 2013. It is a massive amount of new ice!
The 2012 low was 3.387 million sq. km, and the high on 3/15/13 was 15.167 million sq. km. Almost 12 million sq. km of new ice formation in a six month span!
He explained why the September mean was used, it’s when ice extent is minimum. A flat trend in minimum extent means no imminent danger of the ice disappearing, which is what the climate clowns have been predicting will happen at various times. As for your annual means – how does 2023 compare to 2007?
This article is headlined: “No, Arctic Sea Ice Isn’t Shrinking”.
I would call a reduction of 250,000 km2 per decade over the author’s chosen period ‘shrinkage’, wouldn’t you?
Annual average Arctic sea ice extent was 10.49 m/km2. In 2007 it was 10.50 m/km2. Comparing individual years in isolation disguises the shrinking trend, as described above, of course.
It has stopped it recovery from the extremes of the LIA and 1979 at a level well above normal Holocene levels….. and is currently at a 20 year high.
Why are you being deliberately ignorant of the data in front of your eyes ???
What does it benefit you to put forward this show of deliberate ignorance ???
You mean the data in the chart you post above that clearly shows declining Arctic sea ice? That data??
This place gets more like the twilight zone every day.
Clearly shows it has levelled off.
You really are selectively BLIND, and chronically DUMB.
Your mind is perpetually DIM.. not a spark of intelligence to be found.
It will be great when it all melts – it’s just wasted up there! The biosphere needs that water to be freed up and unleashed to the oceans and atmosphere.
The September minimum is the most crucial because it is the month when the temperature frequently hovers around the freezing point. The other months don’t, and March and April are well below freezing. If there is a decline in those other months, temperature is not a significant factor.
Sea temperatures can be.
So you now admit that Arctic sea ice matches Arctic temperature.
And that 1979 was an extreme peak in sea ice. !!
This chart appears to show sea surface temperatures for a selected number of stations (hard to tell, because, true to form, you haven’t given any details).
It’s the temperature of the water below the sea ice that is critical; whether in the Arctic or Antarctic; not the surface temps.
The ice is melting from below, and more so in spring than in the summer.
Yes, I know data is extremely hard, or basically impossible, for you to comprehend.
Up to you to educate yourself.
But you have to CHOOSE to do so, rather than remain deliberately ignorant.
“It’s the temperature of the water below the sea ice that is critical; “
Yet again ADMITTING that there is no human causation..
… and absolutely nothing to do with CO2
Maybe you can become a REALIST.. if you try really hard.
March is the month of maximum sea ice extent. If you’ve ever looked at the SMB (Surface Mass Balance) index for Greenland, you’ll see that June – September are the only months when the country loses ice.
Greenland just set a record for Snow/Ice gain.
Greenland Posts Record Snow/Ice Gains; Models See A ‘Second’ And ‘Third’ Arctic Blast Headed For America; + Historic Snow Continues In Japan – Electroverse
Blimey – currently it’s cold.in the US, Europe, China, and even Japan! Where’s this famous Global warming everyone is talking about? Could we be seeing the start of a cooling trend?
If you watched this video, you would recall Professor Dilley’s prediction for global cooling starting in 2024 based on his “cycle shift” timelines or so
Graphed since 1998, anyone with their eye even partially open can see the levelling off.
fungal , of course has his mind totally closed and a AGW filter on his eyes.
Reality is not welcome
I can see three lines, all with long-term downward trajectories.
What point do you think you are making?
You’re making my argument for me.
Can’t see the levelling off… oh dear…
Clinically BLIND, are you.. or just MENTALLY blind.
Yes there has been a highly beneficial decline since the extreme of 1979.
Be very HAPPY for all the people and land and sea creatures benefitting from this partial return to normal Holocene levels.
Don’t hate the life trying to live up there so much !
As you said above, a monkey with a ruler can apply a linear trend; it doesn’t mean they understand all that the data is showing.
“it doesn’t mean they understand all that the data is showing.”
It actually means they are TOTALLY CLUELESS about what the data is showing.
A constant theme we see in a fungal post !
I can explain that for you…. Now try to concentrate… The point being made is that Max Arctic sea ice has been stable for at least 20 years. Probably since before you ever heard of climate change. Hence the title… ”No, Arctic Sea Ice Isn’t Shrinking”
Alarmist clowns like you always insist on drawing straight lines on sinusoidal graphs, and then extrapolating them far into the future to prove your narrative.
I haven’t projected anything into the future. What “narrative” are you talking about?
All global temperature data sets use linear regression to describe trends, including UAH and GISS, both of which are prominently featured on the side-panel on this very site.
You haven’t said anything worthwhile whatsoever.
Just your normal mindless ignorant prattle.
And STILL absolutely no evidence of any human causation…
… thereby showing that you are in a MANIC PANIC about a perfectly natural warming from a very cold period of the Holocene.
Poor fungal.. you do understand that linear trend are “indicative” and not part of any science … unless the data can be shown definitively to be linear
UAH data most definitely is NOT LINEAR, step based at El Nino events.
Sea ice data most definitely NOT LINEAR, but follows a rough oscillation.
Please go back and get a basic maths education.. you are an embarrassment !!
Why then did you draw a straight line on your graph of ice extent?
If you are talking about a long term trend, then by definition you are projecting into the future, That is your “narrative”.
Data graphed properly .. shows absolutely NOTHING but a slight decline/recovery from the extreme high of the 1979, which , incidentally was similar to extents during the LIA.
Those extreme high levels drove Arctic sea life out of the Arctic.
Some is now returning, Arctic is coming alive again.
STOP YOUR IDIOTIC PANIC !!!
Lol! Only panicky types raise their voices, little b-nasty.
What’s upsetting you?
Poor fungal. cannot face the fact that you are PANICKING over absolutely nothing.
It really is a mindless fetich of yours, isn’t it.
Common practice is someone is in a complete and utter irrational panic.. (as you are)
.. is to slap them in the face..
Doesn’t seem to help in your case, though, does it !!
Point made !!.. Thanks fungal.
At least you are beginning to see yourself as you are.. utterly pathetic !!
The geological climate of the Earth is still a cold 2.5 million-year ice age named the Quaternary Glaciation, 20 percent of the land is frozen, either as permafrost or underneath glaciers.
What’s that got to do with current global sea ice decline?
Sea ice decline that has STOPPED,
Is that what you are talking about ???
Why are you in an absolute lather about the sea ice extent levelling off ??
Please explain… (this will be hilarious)
Poor fungal, all it can manage is a red thumb…
Is there a more pathetic excuse for a human being !!
“Sea ice decline that has STOPPED,”
No-one can argue that FACT except with red thumbs.
Pretty pathetic, hey !
Well, you continue to perform up to specs, totally and massively wrong, as usual.
Thanks, great video to watch, especially calling out propaganda substituting for science.
For today’s date, there is more Arctic sea ice than for the last 2 decades.
Search “NSIDC daily” and click on individual years.
And in a strong El Nino year, no less!!!
It might be the Grand Solar Minimum that is just getting started.
And they are still comparing to the OLD 30 year period.
Scammers.
10-15 years ago I did some searches in the digitized historical NY Times looking for any effect of the 1930’s warm period had on artic ice. I came across few based on expeditions that suggest low sea ice conditions then.
The open season at the coal port in Spitsbergen (Svalbard) went from 3 months of the year before 1920 to over 7 months of the year by the late 1930s.
But that is only anecdotal and one place. No proof it was a worldwide phenomena!!
Do I need the sarc tag?
There is also the 1938 Danish aerial survey of Greenland that show substantial melting of the glaciers there
Saying the ice is not shrinking is similar to saying the global average temperature is not increasing as of May 2023 ,,, and then we had the rest of 2023 as the warmests months in hundreds of years
Ice not shrinking sounds like a predictions and predictions are rarely right. The following chart shows the long term ice extent trend is down but the low point in 2012 was an outlier. I would not jump to the conclusion that Arctice ice melting has stopped.
monthly_ice_09_NH_v3.0-1.png (1980×1530) (nsidc.org)
There are always positive bumps as the AMO trends down towards neutral as it has been. The fact that summer temps at the Arctic have been at or below the 30 year mean during the summer months while only trending above the mean during the cold months.
Why do you think that is? How do the alarmists explain that? Does the magic CO2 molecule run away from the Arctic during the winter months. Of course not! The reason is WV!
Arctic warming is entirely in the coldest six months of the year. Not much water vapor in such a cold climate.
You do know a lot of those measurements come for expanding Arctic town, don’t you
Sorry for asking, but I never know how deep your ignorance runs !!
UAH shows no atmospheric warming in the Arctic this century except at the 2015 El Nino (dissipated now.). (or are you still denying El Ninos cause warming.)
DENIAL of data, yet again, hey dickie.
Data clearly shows extent has levelled off at a value far higher than the Holocene norm.
Current level is at a 20 year high.. get over it. !!
A cherry-picked start at the extreme high of 1979…
(dickie following ALL the AGW scam memes as you would expect an AGW scammer to do)
What is the data for the ‘Holocene Norm’ of which you speak?
OMG pay some attention, idiot,.
Biodata has been posted many times…
Try not to be deliberately ignorant !!
Look at the graph from David further down.
Maybe you will need a little bit of rational thought.
Good luck with that.
Poor little Phil.
Can only manage a red thumb
Pathetic equal to fungal.
I don’t use the ‘red thumb’, that’s you and your friends. thank you for answering where your data came from (sort of).
“is not increasing as of May 2023“
Was actually COOLING since the 2016 El Nino.
It took another strong El Nino to break that COOLING trend.
But I’m sure an AGW stall-wart like you will blame the El Nino on CO2.
With 90 percent of the weather stations in the world in urban locations, it may just be the urban heat island effect.
How exactly would it prove anything if Arctic sea ice disapeared? Many studies indicate little to no sea ice at the Helocene Climate Optimum, as well as every interglaicial for 600,000 years. Proving this interglacial is doing the expected is hardly noteworthy. What is notworthy, even worrisome, is that this is the coldest and the longest interglacial period on record, indicating we are still colder than should be expected, not warmer.
The AMO is declining. As usual there will be plateaus and bumps of postive as it generally trends towards neutral.
Here’s the AMO for the last 10 years to complete your graph:
amo-index-10.png
I was impressed by how clear the language of the publication (GWPF notes) of the late Prof Bates, “Polar Sea Ice and the Climate Catastrophe Narrative,” was that even a layman like myself could understand it. We can make out best case against climate alarmism when our language is lucid, clear and easy to understand. I am happy that the work of Prof Bates does not stand alone as a clear and sober presentation against the alarmist nonsense but more qualified people are speaking out. How can we get our media and politicians to begin listening?
The rich are planning on making trillions off of so-called “Climate Change”. They own the media and control the politicians with their campaign contributions.
To talk about the arctic ice extent without adjusting for the AMO is just stupid. I am constantly amazed at the level of ignorance displayed in most conversations about the Arctic.
What is there to adjust? AMO is just a (detrended) SSTA of the North Atlantic, completely arbitrary, just like all the other regional temperature indices. And since most regions correlate well with the global temperature indices, the pattern/oscillation known as AMO is actually global. Detrend a global (or any other) index, and you will get very similar “AMO” shape.
One has to challenge the basic irrationality: there is no problem with Arctic ice extent, in fact the best thing for the planet would be the ice completely melting away! True environmentalists should be pushing governments to break up the ice as much as possible to prevent freeze up and aid in summer melt, so that all that precious water is restored to the biosphere and also so that the sea creatures have increased exposure to sunlight.
A true environmentalist wouldn’t give a rat’s ass if New York needed to be sandbagged, if high sea levels meant that the biosphere would be enjoying increased moisture and heat.
Is anything changing:
a/ Just eyeballing the top graph, from ’79 to about ’06, the points of the graph bounce around between 6 and 7km²
From from ’07 onwards the points bounce around between 3.5 and about 5.2km².
Thus, doing an ‘eyeball high pass filter‘, year-to-year variability has changed recently.
b/ What could do that, what melts ice?
Warm water melts ice and huge amounts of same arrive via the Gulf Stream Conveyor.
Has the conveyor changed, not temperature, those numbers can be ‘adjusted’ to say anything, we something more visible and robust)
Where does it gets it warm water if not from the GoM and by collecting up what pours off the east coast USA.
b.1/ Has anything happened in the GoM. Probably not, water there will be limited to the Stefan Max of about 31°C – it simply can not get any hotter than it already does.
b.2/ What about water coming out of the rivers, heated by cities and farmland.
So what was the aether like these last 15 years.
Was it cold that the cities used more energy to keep warm….
…. or was it hot that the land heated up and dropped hotter water into the conveyor via the rivers
b.3/ Was it very hot and dry weather, possibly broken up by severe thunderstorms. They would dump lots of muddy water into the Conveyor and El Sol would heat it as it flowed north and east.
c/ Where were the winds during this, did they move lots of dust off the landscape/cityscapes, carry it along the line of the conveyor and ‘de-ice’ the ice via metallic salts (Potassium/Magnesium/Calcium off farmland) and lowered Albedo from soot smoke and car tyres
d/ What about forest fires up the east coast, including Canadia – did soot/smoke/ash/cinders from them fall on the ice and melt it?
e/ Was it unusually cold during any particular winter corresponding to an ice decrease the following year..
i.e. Did the amount of road -de-icing salt correspond to anything happening in Arctica
Feel free to add any more you may feel appropriate.
Did anyone anywhere even think about looking at those things…..
No they didn’t, it would mean an admission of guilt should any sort of correlation be found – best leave it to Climate Change then somebody else did it
Tony Heller’s YouTube channel is well worth watching. He skewers climate gobbledegook very accurately. But he’s been stuck on about 115K subscribers for year – it makes one very suspicious of the YouTube algorithms. He deserves far more – nd perhaps in reality he has them. Who knows?
The problem is that the continuous satellite monitoring of Arctic sea ice began at a time when the extent was close to the Holocene maximum. This was the front page story in the 1970’s:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/07/24/that-70s-climate-crisis-show/
Pre-satellite estimates lack the resolution for direct comparison with the satellite data.
From a geological perspective, the current sea ice extent is larger than the average Holocene extent.
The current sea ice extent might be comparable to the Medieval Warm Period.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/10/08/206154/
Biodata, d18O (see chart) etc, seem to indicate that the current level is significantly above those of the MWP.
Other things like trees under glaciers, permafrost peat beds, Vikings in Greenland , back up that conclusion.
Yes, the chart finishes in 2000, but UAH shows current NoPol temperatures very similar to 2000.
Observations don’t matter, just models. That’s how academics is done these days. And if need be gravity, the laws of mechanics and the structure of matter can all be put aside in favour of any theory that puts money in the pockets of useless charlatans and idiots.
The oceans are down a couple of meters in the last 5-6000 years. If it is not ice, where did it go? looking at sea ice on anything less than centuries is meaningless.
Geology on, for example, the NSW coast, clearly shows a 1.5-2m higher sea level somewhere around 1500 years ago.
Coastal evidence of that higher sea level is found all over the world.
Red thumb for totally provable facts… is that you, fungal?
I know facts really hurt you.
Every person or organization that made outrageous gloom and doom predictions should be made to come forward today and explain to us why his predictions didn’t come true.
…there is no apparent correlation between the variable extent of Arctic sea ice and the gradually increasing concentrations of the trace gas carbon dioxide.
Just don’t exhale burp or fart too much or you’re all doomed bald midgets-
Researches uncover giant 10-foot-tall apes living in China around 250,000 years ago killed off by climate change | Watch (msn.com)
I did a search and the South China Morning Post article was titled:
“South China’s giant apes, a distant human cousin, wiped out by failure to adapt to changing landscape, study finds”
I was dumbfounded. The first page of searching and this article was there!
https://www.msn.com/en-xl/news/other/south-china-s-giant-apes-a-distant-human-cousin-wiped-out-by-failure-to-adapt-to-changing-landscape-study-finds/ar-AA1mMdVB
WOW, I didn’t know SUVs had been around that long !!!!!
The red thumb actually thinks there were SUVs back then.
Why do they continue to make a mockery of themselves. !!
I bet they’re not willing to admit that Gigantopithecus blacki’s diet was wholly vegetarian whilst many of the other apes were omniverous as a factor? Must’ve been difficult foraging for enough vegetation to keep a 3m tall ape alive.
Greenland post RECORD Snow/Ice GAIN.
Rug up in the US for another Arctic Blast !!
Historic Snow in Japan.
Greenland Posts Record Snow/Ice Gains; Models See A ‘Second’ And ‘Third’ Arctic Blast Headed For America; + Historic Snow Continues In Japan – Electroverse
If all the arctic sea ice melted, wouldn’t that result in lowering the sea level?