Arctic Ice Discussion 2013-14: the refreeze...

[BornFromTheVoid]

With most of the extent and area measures now in the bottom 3, it seems the call for slow growth I made on the last page was warranted.

 

I reckon we'll see a moderate increase over the next 3 days before a large jump in the latter half of the week as a lot of cold air looks like flooding the Bering sea. It will be interesting to see if we have another late maximum this year, and if the dipole returns in April.

[knocker]

Unreal

 

http://tamino.wordpress.com/2014/02/10/unreal/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

[Gray-Wolf]

I think that much the same as the 'deal' with crying " ooh! look at the max" when all the extra ice is outside of the basin and areas in the basin are either light on ice or thin ice the cry of 'Recovery' really doesn't work if it is just confined to August and September?

 

As we can see above current Arctic Extent/Area is not doing so well a.t.m.? We have the best part of 8 weeks for it to pull it out of the hat or we are heading into a Nino summer ( 2010's Nino summer did a real number on the Ice Volume) and a lot of folk asking about the 'recovery'?

[drgl]

Unreal

 

http://tamino.wordpress.com/2014/02/10/unreal/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

 

What's "unreal" about it? 

 

IF, and it's a BIG if the graph shows a decline in the next 5 years you can pat yourselves on the back & say I told you so. Until then you don't know what the next few years will bring any more than I do. What will you say if in 5 years the graph shows we are "only" back to the 1980 maximum rather than minimum? Don't tell me, it will be global dimming cause by China masking the real global warming problem!

[knocker]

What's "unreal" about it? 

 

IF, and it's a BIG if the graph shows a decline in the next 5 years you can pat yourselves on the back & say I told you so. Until then you don't know what the next few years will bring any more than I do. What will you say if in 5 years the graph shows we are "only" back to the 1980 maximum rather than minimum? Don't tell me, it will be global dimming cause by China masking the real global warming problem!

 

It's not about the future it's about portrayal of the present. If you don't have a scientific argument to disprove a point then manipulate a few graphs. Anthony Watts achieved his masters in it.

[drgl]

Using that logic lets forget the past. It's gone, forget it. The present shows ice increasing so all bets are off.

 

Using common sense, yes the extent was much higher in the past, where the current increase fits in the long term trend we do not know. 2 years in it could be a blip, 5 years in it could be an upward trend. 10 years in it could be a full recovery. 15 years in it may exceed the past, does it then become the new norm? Who (no one) knows.

[4wd]

What is almost certain is that the reduced area of recent years is not a direct consequence of CO2.The current fad for predicting zero ice at some point between last year (!) and 2050 is the same trap as all those misleader graphs extrapolating the global temperatures in the 1990s as if a cyclical rise was all caused by Co2 and would consequently carry on up like a ski slope.

[Gray-Wolf]

D'ya know Four , though I shouldn't, I will really enjoy the next 5 years if only to see you explain away what is happening!

[jonboy]

D'ya know Four , though I shouldn't, I will really enjoy the next 5 years if only to see you explain away what is happening!

 

Perhaps GW the boot might be on the other foot then we might also enjoy the explanations!!!

[drgl]

I personally can't wait for the next 5 years. Either way we should have a better idea where things are heading. Although I'd say 5 years is not long enough, 10 years should be.

[knocker]

I personally can't wait for the next 5 years. Either way we should have a better idea where things are heading. Although I'd say 5 years is not long enough, 10 years should be.

 

Purely as a matter of interest why do you expect this trend to reverse? I mean isn't this a pretty good idea where things are heading? I mean 35 years!!

Edited February 11, 2014 by knocker

[BornFromTheVoid]

Using that logic lets forget the past. It's gone, forget it. The present shows ice increasing so all bets are off. Using common sense, yes the extent was much higher in the past, where the current increase fits in the long term trend we do not know. 2 years in it could be a blip, 5 years in it could be an upward trend. 10 years in it could be a full recovery. 15 years in it may exceed the past, does it then become the new norm? Who (no one) knows.

If the next 2 weeks show a cooling trend does that mean all bets are off with regard to getting warmer temperatures in Spring? Or do you look elsewhere, such as the sun rising ever higher, the days growing longer, the general warming of our hemisphere and historical observations?

[BornFromTheVoid]

What is almost certain is that the reduced area of recent years is not a direct consequence of CO2.The current fad for predicting zero ice at some point between last year (!) and 2050 is the same trap as all those misleader graphs extrapolating the global temperatures in the 1990s as if a cyclical rise was all caused by Co2 and would consequently carry on up like a ski slope.

What scientists simply extrapolated temperature graphs to predict future climates?What proof have you that all previous warming was cyclical and that CO2 has no influence?Science is all about making predictions, what approach would you prefer to work things out?

[drgl]

Are these the same scientists that said snow would be a thing of the past & the arctic would be ice free any time now?(or perhaps make that another 50 years as it hasn't happened, yet). Or the ones that coined "global warming"  yet that hasn't quite turned out to be the case so it's re-branded "climate change". The climate has ALWAYS changed (& always will) it isn't static. This thread is pointless & I remember now why I stopped bothering with it many years ago. I'll come back in 5 years (if I'm still here). I'll either look like a total dipstick or we will be discussing what went wrong with what the scientists told us. Seeing as we can't even make a model that can get things right for the weather next week I'll be amazed if we can make a model that can get the climate in 50 years even remotely correct.

[knocker]

Are these the same scientists that said snow would be a thing of the past & the arctic would be ice free any time now?(or perhaps make that another 50 years as it hasn't happened, yet). Or the ones that coined "global warming"  yet that hasn't quite turned out to be the case so it's re-branded "climate change". The climate has ALWAYS changed (& always will) it isn't static. This thread is pointless & I remember now why I stopped bothering with it many years ago. I'll come back in 5 years (if I'm still here). I'll either look like a total dipstick or we will be discussing what went wrong with what the scientists told us. Seeing as we can't even make a model that can get things right for the weather next week I'll be amazed if we can make a model that can get the climate in 50 years even remotely correct.

 

That observation is almost worthy of one of Anthony's acolytes.

[BornFromTheVoid]

CT Arctic sea ice area now lowest on record for the time of year.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/arctic.sea.ice.interactive.html

 

 

Are these the same scientists that said snow would be a thing of the past & the arctic would be ice free any time now?(or perhaps make that another 50 years as it hasn't happened, yet). Or the ones that coined "global warming"  yet that hasn't quite turned out to be the case so it's re-branded "climate change". The climate has ALWAYS changed (& always will) it isn't static. This thread is pointless & I remember now why I stopped bothering with it many years ago. I'll come back in 5 years (if I'm still here). I'll either look like a total dipstick or we will be discussing what went wrong with what the scientists told us. Seeing as we can't even make a model that can get things right for the weather next week I'll be amazed if we can make a model that can get the climate in 50 years even remotely correct.

 

You mean the one scientist (of 10s of thousands), quoted by the BBC that said snow would become rare, and cause large disruptions when it does occur? Takes quite some effort to see that as no more snow right anymore from now on.

Or was it the one study (among 10s of thousands) that said Arctic sea ice could largely disappear at summers end around 2013? Some studies get things wrong, that's why you look at more than one!

Global warming and climate change are interchangeable, and have been interchanged for decades. Did the IPCC used to be the IPGW? No. But reality shouldn't stand in the way of a good conspiracy!

I'm sure most self proclaimed AGW "sceptics" will still be "sceptics" in 5 years time. It's not like conspiracy theories, dismissal of evidence, burying ones head in the sand, mixing up weather and climate and the Dunning Kruger effect will disappear by then. 

[Gray-Wolf]

The "50% increase since last year" continues leaving us lowest on JAXA extent and C.T. volume.........

 

............do you think the deniers think that if its in print folk will just accept it as 'fact' even if the measures show the diametric opposite?

 

The recent 'average' start date for the melt season has been March 15th, thats 4 weeks for us to gain significant amounts of ice to gain to help insure some defence should we see the Nino develop later in the year. 

 

On that point we would really need to see next winter pile on ice if it is to face a full nino Summer?

[Interitus]

What's "unreal" about it? 

 

IF, and it's a BIG if the graph shows a decline in the next 5 years you can pat yourselves on the back & say I told you so. Until then you don't know what the next few years will bring any more than I do. What will you say if in 5 years the graph shows we are "only" back to the 1980 maximum rather than minimum? Don't tell me, it will be global dimming cause by China masking the real global warming problem!

 

Of course nobody knows, but answer honestly looking at the trends and evidence, how BIG is the IF that the graph will show an increase in the next 5 years, never mind get anywhere near 1980s levels?

[BornFromTheVoid]

NSIDC extent now down to lowest on record for time of year, as is IJIS/JAXA with CT area second lowest.

[BornFromTheVoid]

IJIS/JAXA extent now lowest on record for February 12th by 109k.

[The PIT]

Are these the same scientists that said snow would be a thing of the past & the arctic would be ice free any time now?(or perhaps make that another 50 years as it hasn't happened, yet). Or the ones that coined "global warming"  yet that hasn't quite turned out to be the case so it's re-branded "climate change". The climate has ALWAYS changed (& always will) it isn't static. This thread is pointless & I remember now why I stopped bothering with it many years ago. I'll come back in 5 years (if I'm still here). I'll either look like a total dipstick or we will be discussing what went wrong with what the scientists told us. Seeing as we can't even make a model that can get things right for the weather next week I'll be amazed if we can make a model that can get the climate in 50 years even remotely correct.

Some did and have been since discredited.

Back on subject so far the refreeze has been a bit of a disappointment hopefully the summer melt won't be as bad. Hopefully.

[BornFromTheVoid]

IJIS/JAXA extent now lowest on record for the 13th by 146k.

[Gray-Wolf]

Any idea what's driving the losses BFTV ?

[BornFromTheVoid]

Any idea what's driving the losses BFTV ?

 

Looks like the heat over the 80N/Svalbard area is driving some losses in the central Arctic Basin, enough to counter the recent gains in the Bering sea and Gulf of St. Lawrence.

[knocker]

Warm Arctic Cold Continents pattern persists; Arctic (north of 78 deg.) temperature anomaly climbing in recent days pic.twitter.com/HclmYDDPXf