67% Increase In Arctic Ice Over Last Year

Green shows ice present in 2013 but not present in 2012. Red shows the opposite.

ScreenHunter_635 Sep. 16 13.24

Arctic Sea-Ice Monitor

In the original bitmap – Yellow – 24,123 pixels  Green – 19,405 pixels  Red – 2,017 pixels

2013 – 43,528 pixels  2012 – 26,140 pixels   =  67% increase.


About stevengoddard

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

16 Responses to 67% Increase In Arctic Ice Over Last Year

  1. Brian D says:

    May have hit bottom late last week. JAXA 5.0 (Ver 1), 4.8 (Ver 2) on 9/12. NSIDC 5.1 on 9/13, NIC 5.5 on 9/14. MASIE not updated yet. NANSEN looks up, but DMI showed down tick yesterday.

  2. atowermadeofcheese says:

    You know you can’t do this right? NSDIC told you this back in 2008. You have to take into account the stereographic projection, otherwise your figure is almost entirely meaningless. Its ridiculous that you do this primitive pixel counting when IJIS provides the numbers freely, which you can use. Why do something so sloppy and inaccurate over that?

    • As a measure of percentage change can you explain why this method wouldn’t be reasonably accurate?

      I appreciate you’ve whined a lot, but have offered nothing remotely rational in your complaint.

      • atowermadeofcheese says:

        The accuracy depends on the exact nature of the transform, and the distribution of the ice, for Steven to justify his method he would be the one that would have to find out this information. The way a stereographic projection works is by mapping a 3D surface onto a 2D plane. It is mathematically impossible to preserve both area elements and angles, hence there will be a distortion which depends on the X and Y coordinates. Exactly what this distortion is depends on the specifications of the projection. Don’t you think it would be more rational to use IJIS’s sophisticated algorithm instead of this guessing method which may be prone to unnecessary error.

      • Chris says:

        You really can’t just count pixels like this! Because of the projection, not all the pixels are the same size. You have to first calculate the area correction factor, it’ll be something like: ((1+sin(x))/(1+sin(y)))^2 where x and y are the pixel’s latitude and the projection’s standard parallel.

        • All engineering has error tolerances. DMI reports a 70% increase. Cryosphere Today reports a 60% increase. My calculation is in between those two.

          All methods introduce errors. Adults understand this, but academics don’t.

    • suyts says:

      LOL, are you saying the ice hasn’t increased over last year?

      The lunatics put out the maps as their products. It’s entirely proper and legitimate for Steve to demonstrate the changes in the same way the lunatics do. It provides excellent context. A singular map without another for comparison is meaningless. Overlaying the two is quite good for these purposes.

  3. stewart pid says:

    atowermadeofbullshit knows that the increase in sea ice is all wrong and can’t be real since his models say its impossible. The hiatus in temperature rise for the past 15 or 17 years is all wrong too … again the magic models have said temps can only go up. All weather is now climate change – models say so. atowerfullofbullshit will be fun to have around this winter … entire northern portion of the North American continent is below freezing tonight 😉

  4. Gamecock says:

    But wait! What is the meaning of sea ice? You guys are fighting over how many angels can watch TV at the same time. I have never seen anything to suggest that the extent of Arctic sea ice has any relevance to my life at all. Personally, I wish there were far less.

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