Arctic Grows Back Eight Years Of Ice Loss In Just One Season

It turns out that the thin, rotten decayed description, was actually referring to the intellects of the experts.

ScreenHunter_342 Aug. 18 03.34

COI | Centre for Ocean and Ice | Danmarks Meteorologiske Institut

Advertisements

About stevengoddard

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

21 Responses to Arctic Grows Back Eight Years Of Ice Loss In Just One Season

  1. gator69 says:

    Too bad our economy is not as ‘fragile’.

  2. Fred Ford says:

    Boy, climate change is confusing.Who do you believe??

  3. Edmonon Al says:

    What caused the short term sag and recovery??

  4. Eric Simpson says:

    Are they going to take that downward glitch out of the Arctic Sea Ice Extent graph? Or perhaps the bottom of that glitch will be taken as the minimum for ice extent this year? Also, it’s odd but as I noted to Caleb at sunriseswansong blog the graph he presents (at the bottom of his post) does not have that glitch. So, odd: sunriseswansong.wordpress.com/2013/08/16/the-big-chill-sea-ice-version/

    • Disillusioned says:

      Eric, The chart above is the 30% chart. The one showing on sunriseswansong.wordpress.com is the 15% chart. The km2 differences are very different between the two.

    • Caleb says:

      “Disillusioned” is correct. I was using that 15% DMI graph at my site. It is easier to compare to the other graphs currently in use, which all show 15% use. However I also consult the 30% graph, because it gives you a different view.

      When you have a bunch of scattered ice blown up against a solid floe by the the wind, the scattered bergs are herded into a smaller space, and the 15% figure can drop, (as sea with scattered ice is now cleared and “ice free,”) while the 30% graph shows a slight upward blip. Then when the wind shifts open water can be filled with wind-pushed bergs, and the 15% area can rise. Even if the actual bergs are the same bergs and neither shrink nor grow, the graphs can have wiggles.

      I wish they would keep that 30% graph, but for various reasons they are phasing it out.

  5. QV says:

    According to the DMI website, the above sea ice extent plot has been replaced by another one.

    Unfortunately, every time I post a link to it, my comment doesn’t appear here, but you can link to it by removing the “old_” from the above link.

    The new one doesn’t show the large fall on August 14th due to missing satellite data but only includes comparison years from 2009.

    Also, the extend figures are much higher on the new graph, presumably for the reasons given in the red comments.

    It seems strange that there is no reference to the new plot on the old one, particularly if the latter one is to be withdrawn at some stage.

  6. QV says:

    Hmm, I didn’t notice that the “new” graph says OSISAF classifies 15% concentration as ice and the “old” one says 30%. An addtional complication.
    I suppose that would account for the higher extent figures, but the red text on the “new” graph also says it is due to the “coastal mask”.
    Do OSISAF really maintain figures based on two levels of concentration?

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 )

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s