Average Ice Extent Increasing Since 2005


The lowest January-July average ice extent was in 2006, with 2012 ranked third highest. The trend has been slightly upwards over the last seven years.

Every month we hear that 2012 is the record lowest, which leads us to the conclusion that using climate math, the sum of a large quantity of negative numbers is a positive number.


About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to Average Ice Extent Increasing Since 2005

  1. tckev says:

    Do they use ‘i’ notation and Smith charts to calculate the ice extent?

    • Eric Barnes says:

      That or they just made it up. Something smells funny on this thread. Almost like there is a TurDuncan near. Ugh. Looks like we’re stepping in him.

  2. Tony Duncan says:

    I must say it is fascinating to witness your apparent descent into complete fantasy. What is the point of this piece of information? Ah, so THIS is your retreat position if there is a record low extent this year.
    but of course now that you have shown once again the arctic is doing just fine, you must surely be willing to take my bet. Just checked and arctic ice is STILL over ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED Manhattan’s less in 2007 than this year. What IS you objection to taking my money Steve?

  3. WOT says:

    Tony, as usual, he’s cherry picking data:

    • The graph is the average January–July ice extent 2005-2012. How could that possibly be cherry picking? Are you completely daft?

      I’m starting to realize that you aren’t playing with a full deck.

    • Tony Duncan says:

      WOT, he isn’t really cherry picking, he is just desperate. because of the exceedingly cold winter in alaska the ocean froze much more than usual so that the total ice extent was higher in March than it had been in many years. he was crowing as if this showed the arctic had recovered. So now that the arctic is melting like crazy (in spite of that cold front in july that he said was going to stop melting early this year) he is flailing around for ANY way to keep from admitting that there is no recovery.
      The guy is such a wimp he won’t even bet against the Houston Astros winning the World Series even though they are 30 games out of first in what would be the greatest comeback in any sport in history!

      • You are a moron, Tony. Remember the death spiral since 2007? Where is it?

      • Eric Webb says:

        Tony, the reason why Alaska had more ice was because the PMO has become cold, and sea ice on the pacific side of the arctic has recovered. Once the AMO turns cold in the next 7-10 years the Atlantic side will begin to gain sea ice, and sea ice will return to where it was 1979. However, loss in sea ice in the Arctic is not as impressive as the INCREASE in ice in the ANTARCTIC, which is surrounded by oceans, meaning it takes more energy to change the temperature of that area, and with the sea ice gains since the 1970s, it is just as impressive, if not more than the losses over the arctic. It would make sense to see how the arctic would lose ice because it is surrounded by land, and a drop in ice over the north pole isn’t as great as the gain over the Antarctic, because the exchange in energy needed to change the ice over the antarctic is MUCH GREATER than the arctic. I thank Joe Bastardi for helping to realize this gaffe in the warmist argument.

      • Tony Duncan says:


        please link to Bastardi’s paper. I would be interested in reading it. I am happy to pay if it is behind a paywall.
        Good to know someone has figured it out and it is such a simple explanation.

        Steve, we are watching the death spiral right now. As I have said repeatedly. I expect arctic to be basically ice free in the next 10 years or so

      • MFKBoulder says:

        ice area or ice extend?
        Ice extend is somewhat ramdomized since wind drift is affectig this number as well as ice melt.

  4. WOT says:

    “You are a moron, Tony. Remember the death spiral since 2007? Where is it? ”

    You are so mature. I love your logic:

    1) Someone shows that you might be wrong about something
    2) Your first conclusion is that they have to be a moron because you couldn’t possibly be wrong about anything
    3) You call them a moron without bothering to check their claims
    4) Since you don’t bother to research their claims (since you must be right) you just post a quick insult and non sequitor.
    5) Profit?

  5. WOT says:

    “You need to look at my post above, maybe you’ll learn something.”
    I wasn’t addressing you, sweetheart.

  6. WOT says:

    “I’ll address you, sweetheart. You’re a basket case that gets to post here anyway.”
    You should be happy, because a particular basket case who can’t address anything he’s been shown clearly wrong on is the author of this blog. No wonder you feel so welcome, dear.

    • Eric Webb says:

      I know you weren’t addressing me, that doesn’t mean anything, because I’m not going to sit here and take your BS, WOT (Way Out of Touch).

  7. Andy DC says:

    Gentlemen, please mind your manners!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s