Massive Increase In Arctic Sea Ice Over The Past Two Years

Green shows the 56% increase in Arctic sea ice extent since the same date in 2012. Red shows ice loss

ScreenHunter_1840 Aug. 10 06.55

About stevengoddard

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

50 Responses to Massive Increase In Arctic Sea Ice Over The Past Two Years

  1. Jim Hunt says:

    Which flavour of “Arctic sea ice extent” would that be Tony?

    • Jim Hunt says:

      Let me see if I have got this straight. Your 56% headline number is based on a methodology of your own devising? If so where is this novel methodology described?

      I’m afraid “About the same as DMI’s 30% measurements” just doesn’t cut the mustard.

      http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Doesn%27t%20Cut%20the%20Mustard

      • _Jim says:

        Don’t be afraid, Hump. Embrace the ‘trvth’ … break out of the mold of same-dom and ‘trained’ repetition (as Pavlov trained his canines).

      • If you think that your endless talking is going to melt the ice, you are probably wrong.

        This entire blog is based on using alternative methodologies to demonstrate how ignorant climate alarmists are.

        • Jim Hunt says:

          However these so called “alternative methodologies” are never described anywhere, and your results cannot be replicated.

          It seems instead as if this entire blog demonstrates how gullible your loyal readers are?

        • Hugh K says:

          You really want to go there Jim? All your team has given us for the past 20 years is pictures of polar bears (with study after study showing increasing populations) floating on ice, ‘adjusted’ data that amazingly and with no statistical possibility always shows warming, endless worthless models demonstrating the exact opposite of their predictions/reality and in short – bullshit.
          And you are calling us gullible? More of the same ol’ tired leftist projection….does it never get old for you? Grow a pair Jim and quit whining.
          Quick question Jim – You obviously aren’t an idiot. So, are you profiting from this global warming scam or just a follower that desperately seeks relevancy? Based on your clinging to this obvious hustle, it’s got to be one or the other…so which is it?

        • emsnews says:

          Endless hot air=global warming! 🙂 They work hard at this.

        • geran says:

          Dr. Goddard, please, please, please, never “spam” Jim Hunt (until he goes to the “dark side” and has nothing to offer but insults).

          His continual mis-interpretation of the data is important for all to see. In a small (very small) way, he represents “climate science”. He cannot see reality, just his pre-conceived notions of how it “should” be.

        • Hugh K says:

          Was curious about the definition of ‘climate wierding’ so I looked up the term on an online dictionary…..and there was Jim Hunt’s picture.

      • Bill Illis says:

        Cryosphere Today Arctic sea ice area is up 45%

        http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/timeseries.anom.1979-2008

        • bit chilly says:

          i actually had a guess for a minimum extent of 5.2 million km2 at the start of the melt season,i think that will turn out to be too low. if the low temperatures continue the melt season will end early and could well see the minimum extent pushing 6 million km2.

      • Bill Illis says:

        In 2012 at this time of year, NSIDC was losing a record 140,000 km2 of ice per day while, in 2014, the loss rates right now are only in the 40,000’s kms2, below the average of about 60,000 km2.

      • Bill Illis says:

        NSIDC’s September average minimum (used in the ARCUS sea ice outlook prediction game) is coming in at 5.45M km2 in 2014, up 50% from the 2012 figure of 3.63M km2.

      • Ernest Bush says:

        Except as an attempt to generate excitement on your otherwise useless website, what gives you the right to say “doesn’t cut the mustard?” We know Tony’s bona fides and know he is capable of doing original research in these areas. All I personally see of you is the extreme arrogance of a typical drive-by propagandist hoping to make a quick score. The other thing we see are those beautiful satellite pictures of snow and more snow at the poles year after year. I’ve been hearing about the year the ice melts for 20 years. For a time I actually believed it. Now I can’t believe the breadth of the lies from the government and academia about climate and weather, but today I know why they are doing it. Meanwhile, the Arctic rocks on doing its cyclical thing with little or no input from us humans.

        You meanwhile are a mosquito in a swamp of lies. Your are a rusty icepick against a growing granite mountain. Show those who comment here regularly what you bring to the discussion. “Where’s the beef?”

        • Jim Hunt says:

          Ernest – In “Real Science” reproducibility is what “cuts the mustard”, not your “bona fides”.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproducibility

        • Hugh K says:

          In reality, scientific conclusions are always revisable if warranted by the evidence.
          Science is not based on a consensus.

        • _Jim says:

          reproducibility is what “cuts the mustard”

          As in – even though all the govt’s results, although repeatable (but NOT from year to year as the PLOTS of temperature show) being fallacious (on the ‘adjustment’ basis) and show warming *only* through adjustments and manipulation are nonetheless ‘scientific’.

          GREAT …

          .

        • tom0mason says:

          Jim Hunt
          In “Real Science” reproducibility is what “cuts the mustard”, not your “bona fides”.

          The post modern science of the IPCC and their models do not run on such out-moded ideas.
          Could you find out how the climate model are programmed and run.
          And what independent validation and verification process were they subjected to to prove that –
          1. The code did what it was designed to do, (model global climate).
          2. The model products were close to reality (model output compare well to measured climate).

        • Ernest Bush says:

          This is for Jim Hunt at 4:45. Practically nobody here needs a lecture on reproducibility in the scientific method. Steve/Tony has posted an article on his blog, not a paper. He produced a graphic using data from a credible source. He told you he uses 30% instead of 15% ice data. He tends to use established mathematical methods to produce charts and graphs. Nature, itself, has backed up his assertions by and large as anybody can see from satellite pictures. Arguments about percentages means very little as Nature will have the last word.

          Steve Goddard (the name you use on your website) has “street creds” because he has successfully exposed Progressivist manipulation of real data to fit an agenda. My question, again, is what do you bring to this discussion besides false arguments with little merit? BTW, I’m not defending Tony. He certainly doesn’t need it. I just enjoy engaging arrogant Progressivists who crop up on the site from time to time.

      • Anything is possible says:

        Arctic sea-ice alarmists now reduced to disputing how much the ice has INCREASED.

        That tells me everything I need to know.

  2. Dave G says:

    And piomass as of aug. 1 agrees. You can feel the disappointment in Neven’s blog that the world isn’t ending, even as the Hiroshima heat bomb keeps counting up. How many Hiroshima bombs can explode deep in the ocean without any evidence. Evidentally several thousand.

    • Beale says:

      Are you sure that isn’t The Onion?

      • mjc says:

        No, not The Onion, that’s just the kind of commerciials the whackos produce. Fits right in with exploding children (look up one called “No Pressure”), drowning Santa (“Christmas 2013 might be cancelled!” ) and drowning puppies and kittens (h__ps://www.you tube.com/watch?v=QD2WTK94c1U)

  3. wulliejohn says:

    Dim?
    It’s rhyming. slang, Jim, but not as we know it.

  4. Gail Combs says:

    Hugh K says:

    Was curious about the definition of ‘climate wierding’ so I looked up the term on an online dictionary…..and there was Jim Hunt’s picture.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Well he did go by the name of Snow White until he came out of the closet. (Was pushed and shoved out by A.W at WUWT)

Leave a Reply to ketchemandfleezem Cancel 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