arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/timeseries.anom.1979-2008
Arctic ice area has increased by 10.5 million km^2 since mid-September 2012.
The press corpse continues to report this event as record ice loss. Leading experts say that the Arctic will be ice-free in a few months, or sooner.
BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013′
I’ll never forget Julienne telling me that “ice free” would be anything smaller than Egypt…..
The area of counties which voted for Obama is less than Egypt, so we can say that Obama was vote-free.
I like that…….
Reblogged this on Climate Ponderings.
The current adminicastration fits well with the BBC, as they both enjoy terrorizing young children…
Is there a difference between terrorizing with gloom & doom predictions and pedophile activities?
Nope, they’re both hardened criminals!
Scientists in the US have presented one of the most dramatic forecasts yet for disappearance of Arctic sea ice.
Oh, it’s the most dramatic yet, the biggest loudest Chicken Little example of shameless fear mongering yet… so that makes it true. No, they’ve been fear mongering for decades, and EVERY prediction of doom that the warmist and ecoloon propagandists have made has failed to materialize. It never happens. Never. Every single prediction has fallen short, not one exception or two but no exceptions, none, every prediction has been completely off the mark, going back to 1960 or so. It’s a tiresome broken record.
“[in twenty years {2008} ] the West Side Highway [and thus most of Manhattan] will be under water… ” -James Hansen, NASA
“[Inaction will cause]… by the turn of the century [2000], an ecological catastrophe which will witness devastation as complete, as irreversible as any nuclear holocaust.” — Mustafa Tolba, 1982, former Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Program
“Demographers agree almost unanimously .. by the year 2000, the entire world.. [with exceptions] will be in famine.” – Peter Gunter, professor, North Texas State University – Earth Day 1970
“Entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.” -Noel Brown, ex UNEP Director, 1989
“If present trends continue, the world will be .. eleven degrees colder by the year 2000… This is about twice what it would take to put us in an ice age.” -Kenneth E.F. Watt, Earth Day 1970
Please, no more!
There are tens of thousands of lakes that freeze over completely every winter – and yet they are completely ice-free every summer. So it is pretty stupid to think winter growth is inherently correlated to summer ice extent. The question is: where is the trend in arctic sea-ice extent headed?
Here is the week 48 time series going back to 1984 with the recently added data for 2012.
Week 48 Time Series
Say goodbye to arctic sea-ice.
It’s good to see morons like OKneel are still kicking.
Still don’t see the danger of making linear extrapolations w/ cyclical phenomena I see.
What year are you planning your inaugural winter arctic sea cruise genius?
In September, alarmists told us that Arctic ice area is a critical measure which dooms the planet.
But now, Arctic ice area isn’t important. You are completely FOS.
Holy Moly — that is scary. I wonder if the downward trend coincides with each week of the year going back to 1984.(?)
Who put these pictures together?
Experts say that the Arctic will be ice-free this summer, or sooner.
Due to the shrinking ice, the Canadian Navy is likely going to set up at least one permanent base to patrol the emerging shipping lanes close to their borders and the American Navy is actively designing new ships specifically designed for the Arctic. And we have all heard how the oil companies have set their sights on this unfolding bonanza.
The world is certainly changing.
Ice has increased ten million km^2 over the last four months, and you say it is shrinking. You are a genius.
Considering how low the ice was before the refreezing began, that figure comes as no surprise. As Kevin showed us in his link for the week number 48 over the past 28 years, the trend is downward even in early December.
Thank you for acknowledging my genius Steve, but I deserve no credit for what oil companies, the US and Canadian navies are planning in response to the shrinking Arctic ice.
I suggest you take a trip to the Arctic and see how long you survive in -30C
“Considering how low the ice was before the refreezing began, that figure comes as no surprise.”
Apparently you don’t think too much about what you’re saying. Here’s a hint: temperature.
All you have proven is your ability to cherry pick. Your starting year (1984) was right after an unusual cold period that lasted from the late 1950’s into the early 1980’s. If you are interested in a fair comparison, pick a starting map from the early to mid 1950’s, at the end of a long warm period.
???
His chart shows 1980 as the starting point that runs over 30 years of the so called climate pattern minimum.
Since the latest warming trend started about 1978 there is only TWO years of data not used thus not a big deal but now the warming has stopped and probably on its way down.
Well Andy, if you have pictures of week 48 before Kevin’s starting year, then post them and we will see what we will see. However, based on what is in Kevin’s link, Arctic ice continues to shrink even when comparing the same time period in early December year after year. I, myself, would be very interested in seeing comparison’s between other weeks in a year going back as far as there are accurate graphs and/or photos.
As for Dave N, my point is that it is not surprising that there would be a large amount of refreezing during a winter when the summer before set records for ice minimums. If the summer before had a large amount of ice remaining, there would be less capacity for record ice growth the following winter. Comprende?
Obama’s science adviser John Holdren says that ice-free winters come after ice-free summers.
John Holdren in 2009: “…if you lose the summer sea ice, there are phenomena that could lead you not so very long thereafter to lose the winter sea ice as well. And if you lose that sea ice year round, it’s going to mean drastic climatic change all over the hemisphere.”
The phenomena referred to by Mr Holdren includes the release of methane hydrates (ozone killer and very strong ghg) currently “locked” away under Arctic Ice, the melting of permafrost in Russia and Alaska, etc which hold huge amounts of stored CO2, and the absorption of more solar radiation to the open Arctic ocean that once had reflective ice.
All three phenomena are positive feedbacks that would logically affect northern hemisphere temperatures and winter ice .
Holdren sounds like a smart man.
Earth to Drewski. Earth to Drewski
Never mind that methane has a half life of a few days in the atmosphere because it is oxidized to CO2 and water – methane released from pressure under ice or water immediately oxidizes upon pressure drop.
He seems to have toned down the real kook speeches, however.
Ward Nurse to Steve, Ward Nurse to Steve.
Steve, I point you to a peer-reviewed study — published in a highly-respected science journal — on methane hydrates (only one of dozens I chose from) and, in response, you point me to yet another of your own blogs.
You are nothing if not consistent, Steve.
I was studying the chemistry of methane hydrates at Los Alamos National Labs in 1980. Were you born yet Drewski?
Goddard: “I was studying the chemistry of methane hydrates at Los Alamos National Labs in 1980. Were you born yet Drewski?”
Interesting. Do you have anything published?
BTW, A friend and I rode our bikes (I had a Gitane) from Pojoaque to Los Alamos once. The hardest thing I had ever done – the last 26 miles was all incline. Coming back was a blast though.
Brian, FYI.
Methane Hydrates and Contemporary Climate Change
By: Carolyn D. Ruppel (U.S. Geological Survey, Woods Hole, MA) © 2011 Nature Education
Citation: Ruppel, C. D. (2011) Methane Hydrates and Contemporary Climate Change. Nature Education Knowledge 3(10):29
“Concern about the long-term stability of global gas hydrate deposits is rooted in the potential impact that a large CH4 release might have on global climate. CH4 is ~20 TIMES MORE POTENT than CO2 as a GHG, but it oxidizes to CO2 after about a DECADE in the atmosphere. In recent models, the longer-lived CO2 oxidation product (Archer et al. 2009), not the CH4 itself (e.g., Harvey & Huang 1992), is credited with causing most of the excess atmospheric warming that would follow large-scale dissociation of methane hydrates.
Goddard, FYI.
Take the fraction of the Earth’s surface covered by the Arctic ice cap in the height of summer (about 2% of the planet) and multiply that by the average insolation the region receives (170 – 180 watts / m^2) and then by the plausible change in albedo (perhaps 0.5). That gives a change in the amount of energy captured by the earth – before taking into account clouds and such – of about 1.75 watts / m^2 (averaged across the whole planet). That compares to 1.6 watts / m^2 of heating effect caused by humans via other changes to the earth system. The math is slightly different than Wadhams’, but the answer is roughly the same – a warming effect (a ‘climate forcing’ in the parlance of the field) roughly as large as all current human-caused warming.
Isn’t learning fun?
PS Go 49ers!
49ers? ROFLMAO
Methane’s contribution to the greenhouse effect is close to zero, and even a 1000X increase would have almost no effect.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/06/21/methane-contributes-almost-nothing-to-the-greenhouse-effect-in-the-tropics/
You should try learning sometime.
Sorry, posted in wrong place. . .
Steve, I point you to a peer-reviewed study — published in a highly-respected science journal — on methane hydrates (only one of dozens I chose from) and, in response, you point me to yet another of your own blogs.
You are nothing if not consistent, Steve.
The official Russian news (under whose territories most permafrost is located) calls global warming Westerner alarmists, “parasites.”
What to make of that, I don’t know.
PS Go Drewski!
Yes Brian,
So now you are quoting editorials from PRAVDA as your evidence against global warming? Do you also quote priests when you argue that here is no paedophilia in church?
On January 4, 2013, Stanislav Mishin wrote an opinion piece in an online edition of Pravda, Russia’s premiere communist newspaper, titled “Global Warming, A Tool of the West.” Within a predictable and stale rant against free trade and capitalism, it dressed down the “Elites of the West” for ramping up “the myth of Man Made Global Warming as a means first and foremost to control the lives and behaviors of their populations.”
The “Elites of the West” referred to by Mr. Mishin are scientists and their pals in the global warming alarmist camp. And though Mishin doesn’t explicitly include the complicit mainstream media in the ‘Elite’ it should be understood that they are a critical ally. After all, the global warming alarmists wouldn’t have been able to create and strong-arm the American pollution-guilt-psyche if not for a gratuitously supplied big media megaphone.
And this is coming from Pravda, a media outlet that has spent nearly a century as the mouthpiece of the Communist Party USA, the world’s foremost exemplar of communism, a role it continues to this day in post-Soviet Russia.
So you’re anti-Communist? That’s good.
Go tell global warming Communists trying to tear down this country to scratch their asses!
Hey Coolwhip, how did it go fer them 49ers? Quoth the raven, `Nevermore.’ 😆
Reblogged this on If You Voted For It — You Own It and commented:
Who voted for the idiots that claim the arctic will soon be ice free? Oh!
Unfortunately this chart could be more helpful. For you are only charting ice growth during four months. What happens during the other eight? No idea. Sincerely, one who also is a global warming skeptic
Ice grows during the winter
Hence my question. Does it melt any the other eight months? Stay the same? It’s not clear.
“Does it melt any the other eight months?”
It melts from around the end of March til around the end of September, and grows the other 6 months. This graph indicates this:
http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Extent_L.png
Since we’re only in Feb now, Steve’s chart is an apples vs apples comparison of the current growth period against previous years.
At the North Pole, the melting season is about 4-6 weeks.
… and that’s from water current. Effective IR heating at that angle is like, nothing.
Better graph here:
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php
If we didn’t have that narrow window of melt, the ice would be building up indefinitely and we’d be back in an ice age. If you want to worry about something, worry about the possibility of that window closing. Does that make me as smart as Holdren? 😉
Wiil,
That is a very interesting site. Days 1 to 100 and days 250 to 365 were up and down until year 1995 then it has been pretty much up since then.. It also appears that all years from 1958 to 2012 have consistent weather to the mean for days 101 to 249.
Your site makes it clear that spring and summer temperatures in the Arctic have been higher than the average for the past 18 years.
Thanks for that and the answer is no — you are not smarter than Holdrem
Sorry, not spring and summer, I meant fall and winter are warmer than normal (days 1 to 100 and 250 to 365). Wow! That is interesting.
That region of the planet is very cyclical.
RE: Sorry, not spring and summer, I meant fall and winter are warmer than normal (days 1 to 100 and 250 to 365). Wow! That is interesting.
In the words of a recently prolific commenter “Isn’t learning fun?”
I still don’t see how it’s apples-for-apples, if in the summer you might lose more than you gain? Help me understand.
Christopher,
Warmer Autumns and Winters means thinner ice build up which means easier melt in Spring and Summer which means more solar absorption into the open water which means less Autumn and Winter ice which means we have started a vicious cycle.
My God! Holdren was right!
“…which means less Autumn and Winter ice which means we have started a vicious cycle.”
OK, so because there is more winter ice, we can therefore deduce that summer melt isn’t as bad. Do I understand you correctly?
“Bad” for what? Why do you care what the extent of Arctic ice is during a couple of weeks in September?
Christopher,
Ice volume is the real metric. Thinner ice even if spread over a large area will still melt come summer. Multi-year ice — thicker ice — is what has been taking a huge hit over the past 30 years or so.
“Why do you care what the extent of Arctic ice is during a couple of weeks in September?”
Because if winter growth breaks records and summer growth breaks even more records you have a net loss of ice. If in winter you get (for example) five more feet, but in the summer you lose six, the net loss is one foot.
Just a simple question: What is the total net gain or loss over a year? This chart doesn’t tell me. I wish it did, for I would share it with others.
You speak as if Arctic ice somehow affects your life.
In any case the small reductions on ice cover in summer months over the last 30 years still does not support the AGW conjecture and the artic had far less ice earlier in this interglacial period:
Paper finds Arctic sea ice extent 8,000 years ago was less than half of the ‘record’ low 2007 level
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2012/08/paper-finds-arctic-sea-ice-extent-8000.html
============
additional links to less than now summer ice cover evidence here:
This one is a list of links:
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2012/08/paper-finds-arctic-sea-ice-extent-8000.html?showComment=1346343442895#c986533151756315888
=============
NSIDC’s Dr. Walt Meier – part 2
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/14/nsidcs-dr-walt-meier-part-2/
=============
The Natural Medieval Warming Melts Arctic Northwest Passage Sea Ice, But Modern Warming Does Not
http://www.c3headlines.com/2012/08/natures-medieval-warming-melts-arctic-northwest-passage-sea-ice-but-modern-warming-does-not.html
=============
Paper: Current Arctic Sea Ice is More Extensive than Most of the past 9000 Years
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2010/09/paper-current-arctic-sea-ice-is-more.html
=============
This all happened with much lower CO2 levels in the atmosphere showing that something else is the cause of the ice cover variability.
Steve can you correct my big mistake by adding the word NOT in the first paragraph?
In any case the small reductions on ice cover in summer months over the last 30 years still does (NOT) support the AGW conjecture and the artic had far less ice earlier in this interglacial period:
Let’s remember genius Goddard and the fools who listen to him: arctic multi-year ice is on the rebound!
How’s that prediction been working out for ya SG?
The ice-pack is now essentially a 2-year max pack. One 2007-like weather anomaly away from disintegrating completely by the end of summer.
I’ll repeat: many northern lakes freeze over completely in winter. Yet they are ice-free each summer. Winter extent is NOT a predictor of summer extent. Fall extent from the previous year is a very good predictor of the next year’s minimum. So, you can hold up winter ‘recovery’ as a sign of …. something?? But since you’ve been predicting ‘recovery’ for years now and all we see is a steady decline even your most ardent supporters have to start wondering when the actual recovery is going to begin.
Guess what – it isn’t going to happen. The arctic of our fathers, grandfathers, and great-grandfathers is a thing of the past.
RE: Winter extent is NOT a predictor of summer extent.
Present extent loss is not a hindcaster of 4000ft x 65 miles x 0.75 miles of Glacier Bay disappearing in 30 short years 320 years ago, long before the “Great Squawking of the Chicken Littles” commenced in 1988.
RE: The arctic of our fathers, grandfathers, and great-grandfathers is a thing of the past.
1. The arctic of today is also a thing of the past.
2. The arctic of our fathers, grandfathers, and great-grandfathers is a thing of the past.
3. The arctic of today is also a thing of the future.
4. The arctic of our fathers, grandfathers, and great-grandfathers is a thing of the future.
All four statements are true…
Our grandfathers hoped to melt the Arctic.
Are we going to have to put up with your supidity on a daily basis again?
The genetic work with bowheads…says that Arctic ice is returning to normal…..and the distinct tribes of bowheads are starting to inter-breed again…..which is a good thing
Lat, I looked at that study and found it quite interesting for personal reasons. The mDNA analysis clearly shows that the population was originally one group that became split due to a colder Arctic. That they are now inter-breeding again demonstrates that conditions are now returning back to normal conditions for the bowhead.
I did some work in genetic research a few years back where we were using time of flight mass spectrometry to decode mDNA and RNA SNIPs. It is fascinating what cutting edge genetic research is uncovering. Some of it inconvenient to consensus views on a number of fronts. Curiously, there is a propensity for those locked in consensus views to unceremoniously dismiss new information – not unlike what goes on in climate science.
Steve, is there a reason why my reply to Latitude (comment 187425) on bowhead whales and time of flight mass spectrometry study of mDNA would be stuck in moderation whilst other commenters were approved? The comment seemed relevant to the discussion.
Thanks Steve!
I wonder if Holdren’s pal Ehrlich could be coaxed out of retirement to form a co-science adviser Dream Team.
I’d put Carl Sagan in there but he’s not here any more
Maybe we should forward this to Max Keiser and Stacy ‘en mas’?
The graph posted here is COMPLETELY misleading. You are showing the change in ice from the warm period of year to the cold period, not the overall ice that exists. Then you are using that to disprove another headline that is not even related to the data you cite. Here is a graph that shows it a little better. Notice the red line at the bottom that is 2012.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/arctic.sea.ice.interactive.html
I love how people like you copy/paste graphs w/o diving into the numbers.
ROFLMAO. I have spent thousands of hours diving into the numbers. I love how people like you parrot propaganda without using your brain.
Norm, look up the word “growth”
Hehe
I live in an area where and IF the sea faring route thrue the North Eastern Artic rute was Opened, I would have known it, since our comunety have waited for the comerical rute to open.
The polar sea have been with mutch lesser Ice than now, every body knows that, they have driven Icebreakers into the poles for decades, nothing spectaculare about that, but, the rute to the East is still to heavy npacked with Ice to be comercialy viable, its not happening, simply.
To sitt down is sentral europa and drule about artics is for me, simply funny reading.
What I miss in the shittshowling cometition, in the lack of basic knowledge on a planetary scale, to even consider to pick up “some” nubers and highlight it, and then base an entire political consensus on it have never, never had anything to do with credibility and sientific “facts”.
I am a shamed of the drivel, the level is staggering, and this banging with idiotic numbers, taken out of an system, mutch more coplex that to be driven by CO2, to me its utter stupidity, to belive in this, notion. Even to consider it viable simply confirms the low level og basic knowledge.
“co2 have a mol wiight, mutch higher than simpler mol strctures as N, and O in the atmos, so its simply imposible to consentrate in higher altitutes, there by its a Earth bound gass, and food, and its not trees that produc the majorety of our O, its the Plactons, ca 70%, all this known, but not talked about, why”
The magnetcs are fluctuating, in the suthern hemispher, and there are magfeilds that is also new, but non of this is talked about, I have seen havocs on other planets in our solar system, and you idiots dont belive it cane make an impact on our planet, or its been catalogiced as “conspiracy nutty” to belive that events on that scale, like the galactic core, is affecting our planet.
Its the litmus test on bullshitt.
What do you belive.
huh
And instead we drule about CO2, and vindmills/solarcells.
If not, the armeggedons are lining up.
Hehe
We live in an age of morrons, ruled by idiots, belive in stupid consensus based on fear, from the cradel to the grave. Ruled by greed and looting.
Thats our biggest problem.
Not clima.
peace
PS: I am not afraid of ww3, it may take a decade, but compare it to Fukushima, witch I consider to be our biggest problem ever faced as humans, the scale and scope is mindboggeling, will hang a round for MILLENIUMS, and its so quiet, that scears me more than anything else, and its slowly climbing the scale upward, to an ELE.
Drewski,
Maybe you can explain how the ice cap recovered several times during this interglacial?
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/02/02/arctic-ice-growth-blows-away-all-records/#comment-186793
sunsettommey, Why are you linking me to the page we are already on?
And BTW, for future reference, I prefer to read peer-reviewed studies done by people with actual scientific credentials and, ideally, published in a well-respected science journal. Reading opinion blogs to learn anything meaningful about climate is like reading comic books to learn about space travel — entertaining but essentially useless.
Great Drewski! Read and understood. You are a condescending ass who likes to pretend he understands complex matters but is completely at a loss when critical thinking is required. Please go find someone who cares about your problems.
Thank you for your concern Eric, but you have it all wrong. I rely on peer-reviewed studies published by honest-to-God scientists for my critical thinking. I thought it would provide a nice counterpoint to the “science-by-blog” so often practised on this site.
It is obvious that you never read any of the links:
The first one is based on a paper from SCIENCE publication.
The Second one has THREE links to science papers and the last one is from a person who put a lot of work in developing History of the Arctic region showing variations of past Arctic ice.
The Third one is from Dr. Meir who is a scientist who research the Arctic and posted numerous references to science papers to support his presentation.
The Fourth one is based on Scientists who research the arctic and with many references to published science papers in the link.
The Last link is also based on a published science paper.
You are a pathetic jackass!
You are right Eric, I did not read the links. My bad. When I saw it was a link to hockey”schtick”.blogspot. I didn’t bother. But now I will and I will get back to you on what I think.
However, I will bet dollars to donuts that some critical information was left out of the articles that were contained within the source study.
PS I see that you also proscribe to the Steven Goddard school of etiquette. Trouble at home?
And lo and behold! I was right. Just spending a minute reviewing the 1st source paper, I found these gems that somehow were left out of the linked article (simple omissions or were they purposely slanting the article to a biased point of view?).
“It is possible that millennial-scale oscillations of sea-surface conditions in the western Arctic is an amplified response to changes in incoming SOLAR RADIATION, given that it has a similar periodicity as a Holocene cycle observed in the GreenlandIce Sheet Project 2 (GISP2) ice core (Grootes and
Stuiver 1997).”
Conclusion
“The Holocene record from site HLY0501-05 illustrates the sensitivity of hydrographical conditions in the western Arctic Ocean. The data show a long-term warming that is
ÖPPOSITE TO WHAT IS RECONSTRUCTED FOR THE EASTERN ARCTIC and point to a bipolar behavior of the Arctic Ocean at the timescale of the Holocene.”
http://bprc.osu.edu/geo/publications/mckay_etal_CJES_08.pdf
Eric, do you want to bet that each and every link will be just as slanted and edited as the first?
Mikael,
Has anyone ever SAILED through the Northwest Passage before?
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/sailors-beat-arctic-passage/story-e6frg6so-1226472912758
A combination of climate change and new sea technology is what’s making the Arctic increasingly accessible, experts say. The fabled Northwest Passage opened for shipping for the first time in the summer of 2008. Every year since, it has been open for a period of about six weeks during summer.
Commercial traffic, pleasure cruises, and adventurers are already taking advantage of the new northern route.In a matter of decades, The Arctic will be entirely ice-free every summer, something scientists are projecting will start around the end of the 2030s, according to a recent U.S. congressional report.
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/canada/northwest-passage-opens-new-frontier-new-challenges-2-276812.html
“…it was first navigated by Roald Amundsen in 1903–1906.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwest_Passage
What you post has been known for over 100 years but this Drewski thinks he knows all and yet is a proven ignoramus who thinks too highly of himself.
Yes,
And he took 3 years to do it.
PS Did you catch this quote contained from within the link you provided?
“Until 2009, the Arctic pack ice prevented regular marine shipping throughout most of the year, but CLIMATE CHANGE has reduced the pack ice, and this Arctic shrinkage made the waterways more navigable.”
Irrespective of what you read in a news article, the Arctic ice pack continues to prevent regular marine shipping throughout most of the year…
Will, I am simply reading what you, yourself, posted.
And I agree, regular navigation isn’t possible year round, but it is happening with more regularity. That much is undeniable. The trend is clear — not withstanding Goddard’s neat little graphs — the Arctic ice is shrinking and the North Pole is now open for business.
What a condescending jerk Drewsi is:
“Thank you for your concern Eric, but you have it all wrong. I rely on peer-reviewed studies published by honest-to-God scientists for my critical thinking. I thought it would provide a nice counterpoint to the “science-by-blog” so often practised on this site.”
I posted a number of link that directly leads to published science papers and many with the ABSTRACT excerpted and you blew me off with your gumby mouth:
“And BTW, for future reference, I prefer to read peer-reviewed studies done by people with actual scientific credentials and, ideally, published in a well-respected science journal.”
Kindly go away you jerk!
The difference between us sunsetsettommy, is that I read the SOURCE ARTICLE/STUDY and you read what someone from hoceySHTICK.blogspon or realscience wants you to read.
The difference is that you are an idiot and does not bother to put on your glasses and turn your brain on.
Anyone who thinks Holdren is a smart man is actually an idiot because Holdren is long known to be a science kook:
“Holdren sounds like a smart man.”
Drewski dumber by the day……………………
By the way Drewski who is too busy being a condescending jackass ignores the question?
“Maybe you can explain how the ice cap recovered several times during this interglacial?”
LOL
I read the first link you provided and discovered important relevant information that was apparently deliberately omitted. Do you think any of your other links will be different?
Your bias is noted and proof that you are an idiot.
sunsettommy, you ask me to comment on an article purportedly showing that the Arctic was at much lower levels in the past, However, the article did not mention relevant information that was in the source study which was a mention of increased solar radiation or that it was a localized event which was going in an opposite direction to another part of the Arctic.
You think that those were minor details that did not need mentioning? You think I am the one with the bias?
Drewski makes a complete fool of himself when he thinks the first link does not support what MS stated in his headline.
You missed this from the paper itself:
“In this exercise, our records would correspond in the model to an Arctic Ocean sea-ice cover in summer at 8 ky B.P. that was less than half of the record low 2007 level. The general buildup of sea ice from ~6 ky B.P. agrees with the LOVECLIM model, showing that summer sea-ice cover, which reached its Holocene maximum during the LIA, attained its present (~2000) extent at ~4 ky B.P. (fig. S3)”
MS QUOTED the paper and embedded it with his own statement:
“A paper published in Science finds summer Arctic Sea Ice extent during the Holocene Thermal Maximum 8,000 years ago was “less than half of the record low 2007 level.” The paper finds a “general buildup of sea ice from ~ 6,000 years before the present” which reached a maximum during the Little Ice Age and “attained its present (year 2000) extent at 4,000 years before the present””
He then shows a chart figure S3 from the paper that is right there in the link supporting his statement.
From the ABSTRACT itself is this:
“We present a sea-ice record from northern Greenland covering the past 10,000 years. Multiyear sea ice reached a minimum between ~8500 and 6000 years ago, when the limit of year-round sea ice at the coast of Greenland was located ~1000 kilometers to the north of its present position. The subsequent increase in multiyear sea ice culminated during the past 2500 years and is linked to an increase in ice export from the western Arctic and higher variability of ice-drift routes.”
Next time try not to appear to be a dumbass!
What you fail to realize is that this study was for a REGION of the Arctic and that the decreased ice may have been from an AMPLIFICATION of solar radiation — as stated within the study itself.
Like I said, the difference between you and I is that I read the study and you read what others want you to read.
You in serious need of new clean glasses because the paper discussed more than one region and made a declarative statement for the Artic itself as I have already quoted for you earlier:
““In this exercise, our records would correspond in the model to an Arctic Ocean sea-ice cover in summer at 8 ky B.P. that was less than half of the record low 2007 level. The general buildup of sea ice from ~6 ky B.P. agrees with the LOVECLIM model, showing that summer sea-ice cover, which reached its Holocene maximum during the LIA, attained its present (~2000) extent at ~4 ky B.P. (fig. S3)””
I repeat this part “… Arctic Ocean sea-ice cover in summer at 8 ky B.P. that was less than half of the record low 2007 level.”
The ENTIRE OCEAN!
They also talk about an area ABOVE Greenland coastline :
“We present a sea-ice record from northern Greenland covering the past 10,000 years. Multiyear sea ice reached a minimum between ~8500 and 6000 years ago, when the limit of year-round sea ice at the coast of Greenland was located ~1000 kilometers to the north of its present position. The subsequent increase in multiyear sea ice culminated during the past 2500 years and is linked to an increase in ice export from the western Arctic and higher variability of ice-drift routes.”
I repeat this part for your failing eyes:
“….. Multiyear sea ice reached a minimum between ~8500 and 6000 years ago, when the limit of year-round sea ice at the coast of Greenland was located ~1000 kilometers to the north of its present position…”
A THOUSAND kilometers (621 miles) above to the north of the present position
.
Since you have yet to see the other links that also states similar conclusions of a smaller minimum than 2007 in the past because of your absurd position on the first link you appear to be a closeminded idiot.
This is what Dr. Meier says about smaller minimums than 2007:
“Can the Arctic really become sea ice-free during summer?
It has been suggested that the Arctic really can’t lose all its sea ice during summer because there isn’t enough energy to melt all of the ice in the short summer. There are a couple of reasons why this thinking is faulty.
First, we know the Arctic can potentially lose all its sea ice during summer because it has done so in the past. Examination of several proxy records (e.g., sediment cores) of sea ice indicate ice-free or near ice-free summer conditions for at least some time during the period of 15,000 to 5,000 years ago (Polyak et al., 2010) when Arctic temperatures were not much warmer than today.”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/14/nsidcs-dr-walt-meier-part-2/
Drewski,
Here is another paper you need to read:
Ice free Arctic Ocean, an Early Holocene analogue.
Abstract
Extensive systems of wave generated beach ridges along the North Greenland coasts show that these areas once saw seasonally open water. In addition to beach ridges, large amounts of striated boulders in and on the marine sediments from the same period also indicate that the ocean was open enough for ice bergs to drift along the shore and drop their loads. Presently the North Greenland coastline is permanently beleaguered by pack ice, and ice bergs are very rare and locked up in the sea ice. Predictions of the rapidly decreasing sea ice in the Arctic Ocean generally point to this area as the last to become ice free in summer. We therefore suggest that the occurrence of wave generated shores and abundant ice berg dropped boulders indicate that the Arctic Ocean was nearly free of sea ice in the summer at the time when they were formed. The beach ridges occur as isostatically raised “staircases”, and C14-dated curves for relative sea level change show that they were formed in the Early Holocene. A large set of samples of molluscs from beach ridges and marine sediments were collected in the summer of 2007, and are presently being dated to give a precise dating of the ice free interval. Preliminary results indicate that it fell within the interval from c. 8.5 to c. 6 ka – being progressively shorter from south to north. We therefore conclude that for a priod in the Early Holocene, probably for a millenium or more, the Arctic Ocean was free of sea ice at least for shorter periods in the summer.
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007AGUFMPP11A0203F
Repeating this part for your lazy eyes:
“Predictions of the rapidly decreasing sea ice in the Arctic Ocean generally point to this area as the last to become ice free in summer. We therefore suggest that the occurrence of wave generated shores and abundant ice berg dropped boulders indicate that the Arctic Ocean was nearly free of sea ice in the summer at the time when they were formed.”
That was one of the links you decided was no good because you are a biased idiot.
Jeez Louise, are you trying to bury me in paper?
The reasons sunsettomemy, what are the reasons?
No one is arguing that the Arctic had lower ice levels in the ancient history. What matters are the reasons why that occurred. You point me to articles making grand statements that today’s shrinking ice is nothing out of the ordinary and purport to show studies which corroborate that point of view. However, these articles conveniently leave out extremely pertinent information contained in those studies like they were only looking at a part of the Arctic and that part was behaving in an opposite way to another part and, oh by the way, amplified solar radiation may be the culprit.
You know, important details that were obviously contrary to the blogger’s message and therefore omitted. This is a favorite tactic of Steven Goddard.
Lets take for example the latest article you have foisted on me: “Ice free Arctic Ocean, an Early Holocene analogue.”. What reasons could there have been for the shrinking ice in the Early Holocene? Well, surprise, surprise, surprise, it turns out that the CONSENSUS view is that “there was the freshwater release from Lake Agassiz into the North Atlantic was sufficient to perturb the North Atlantic meridional overturning circulation. As sea-level rise on the order of decimetres to metres can now be detected with confidence and linked to climate records, it is becoming apparent that abrupt climate change during the early Holocene associated with perturbations in North Atlantic circulation required sustained freshwater release into the ocean.”http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v5/n9/full/ngeo1536.html
So sunsettommy ,what could be the reason the Arctic ice is melting today? I will also give you a hint — we can rule out amplified solar radiation and there are no giant freshwater lakes currently releasing their water into the North Atlantic.
Hmm, there must be a reason for today’s rapid ice loss. What could it be? What could it be? I know, why don’t we ask a climate scientist?