Unprecedented Growth Of Arctic Sea Ice Continues

Arctic sea ice continues to grow at unprecedented rates, and is the highest for the date in over a decade.

2015-11-10-06-23-53

Ocean and Ice Services | Danmarks Meteorologiske Institut

Meanwhile, the government controlled press and government agencies continue to tell endless lies about the Arctic

2015-11-10-06-27-02

About stevengoddard

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

74 Responses to Unprecedented Growth Of Arctic Sea Ice Continues

  1. oppti says:

    Periodicity-my dear Watson!
    AMO is changing on the Atlantic side.
    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/esrl-amo/from:1900/to

    • Dmh says:

      N Atlantic is changing “fast and furious” back to pre-1995 temps,

      In fact, it’s going down as fast as it went up in 1995, suggesting that the flip to negative AMO could happen already this decade.

      • Gail Combs says:

        No wonder the Globalists are so frantic to get an agreement at the Paris-ite meeting in December! The lies aren’t going to hold much longer.

        • Dmh says:

          The hyper-duper El Nino is not helping them very much – temperatures are not rising as in 2010 or 1997-98 – and the polar icecaps are obviously on our side!๐Ÿ™‚
          They cannot “explain” anything that lasts more than 2 weeks…

      • Andy Oz says:

        That is a cool chart, pardon the pun.
        It explains some of the old newspaper stories I read and post on Twitter.
        Is there a similar chart recording heat content for the North Pacific?
        Cheers

  2. eliza says:

    Where is MS troll we miss you LOL

  3. Henry P says:

    antarctic ice also above average

    we are globally cooling from the top latitudes downward

    obviously, at some places in between these latitudes it will get warmer:

    bigger T differential between pole and equator
    H2O (g) => H2O (l) + energy

    logical….?.

  4. Martin Smith says:

    Steven, you are using the wrong graph again. This is the correct graph from the Danish Meteorological Institute. They know more about their data than you do: http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icecover.uk.php

    By now it should be clear to everyone that you intend to deceive your readers. But thanks for publishing the three articles explaining what is really happening in the Arctic. Kind of an own goal on your part.

    • Your bizarre paranoia is entertaining, to say the least.

    • pmc47025 says:

      Martin, your comments have reached an incredible level of absurdity. I think we might be able to help you if you could provide a mission statement.

      • Martin Smith says:

        My mission statement here is the same as Steven Goddard’s: Just having fun.

        • gator69 says:

          Your mission, though you do not know it, is to destroy the alarmists’ credibility by repeatedly making provably false accusations on this site. Please prove me wrong and show me where you have pestrered alarmists over their false statements.

        • Dmh says:

          You mean, just being ridiculous?

        • pmc47025 says:

          Same mission, hmmm. I don’t know whether to declare fraud or send you a minion card.

        • Are you crazy? No card! The Minion Local 80305 will not allow it. Smitty’s doing minion work for free. Thousands of card-carrying Goddard minions are out of work.

        • Andy DC says:

          According to Martin, those two weeks in late August and early September are climate while the rest of the chart is weather.

        • AndyG55 says:

          “is to destroy the alarmistsโ€™ credibility ……”

          The one and only thing he is actually having great success at !๐Ÿ™‚

    • Ted says:

      Martin-

      Why do you believe the 15% concentration graph is more appropriate than the 30% graph? I don’t claim to know which is better, so I’m interested in your thoughts on the differences.

      Tony-

      Same question, but for the 30% graph.

      • Gail Combs says:

        30% is more accurate since you can see the ice better. 15% means it is really spotty. Also 15% is going to change a lot more depending on the wind bunching up or spreading out the sea ice.

      • dave1billion says:

        Also, Tony has been using the 30% graph as his baseline for years. I remember requesting an explanation of the 15% vs 30% years back and Tony obliged.

        So he’s picked an indicator (that the DMI obviously thinks is significant) and has hung his hat on it for quite a while. I’ve yet to see him jump between the 15% and 30% charts when it either suited his purposed.

        On a purely objective basis, the 30% chart shows data since 2005 but the 15% chart seems to show only 5 years. That alone is a factor that gives an edge to the 30% chart.

        • It’s just Smitty being himself. I mean Shifty. Err, Speedy …

        • Martin Smith says:

          No, dave, they don’t. Here is what the DMI says about it: โ€œThe plot above [the 15%graph] replaces an earlier sea ice extent plot [the 30% graph], that was based on data with the coastal zones masked out. This coastal mask implied that the previous sea ice extent estimates were underestimated. The new plot displays absolute sea ice extent estimates. The old plot can still be viewed here for a while.โ€

          Steven uses the 30% graph because, as the DMI points out, it implies that “the previous sea ice extent estimates were underestimated.” Stevenis using that to claim that Arctic sea ice is recovering. It is not recovering.

        • AndyG55 says:

          You are WRONG, Martin the Gore bot.

          Your trolling misdirection becoming A JOKE

          The second graph is an alternative methodology. Neither graph is incorrect.

          The graph SG uses is the same one he has been using and is the most CONSISTENT it also displays data over a longer time period. It is the CORRECT graph to use.

          This CORRECT graph shows that this year has an Arctic sea ice level, under that consistent longer term metric, that is above all years back to 2005.

          That is the only reason Martin the Gore bot has for not liking the graph, is because it conveys REAL FACTS that his brain-washed miasma cannot accept

      • Martin Smith says:

        Ted, the Danish Meteorological Institute, where Steven gets his 30% graph, says the 15% graph is correct. Here is the DMI’s explanation: “The plot above [the 15%graph] replaces an earlier sea ice extent plot [the 30% graph], that was based on data with the coastal zones masked out. This coastal mask implied that the previous sea ice extent estimates were underestimated. The new plot displays absolute sea ice extent estimates. The old plot can still be viewed here for a while.”

        • Ted says:

          Thank you for your response.

          I asked the question because I genuinely don’t know, so any opinion I could give on the relative merits of the two datasets would be pointless. But it’s been mentioned that Tony has used the 30% graph for many years. As you correctly imply, the two graphs aren’t showing the same data. As such, how would you propose that Tony keeps his historical comparisons relevant? Perhaps you could suggest a similar data set that goes back as far as the 30% graph. Again, as you’ve correctly implied, there can be no meaningful discussions between people using incompatible data.

        • AndyG55 says:

          DMI does not say SG is using the wrong graph.

          All the second graph is, is an alternative methodology. Neither graph is incorrect.

          The graph SG uses is the same one he has been using and is the most CONSISTENT it also displays data over a longer time period.

          This CORRECT graph shows that this year has an Arctic sea ice level, under that consistent longer term metric, that is above all years back to 2005.

          That is the only reason Martin the Gore bot has for not liking the graph, because it conveys REAL FACTS that his brain-washed miasma cannot accept.

    • chilemike says:

      Yes, they know they have two sets of data that show slightly different things, and they probably do know the data better better since they work with it every day but what the hell does that have to do with anything? It’s data. I find “using the wrong graph” very telling. There is no “wrong graph”, only data. Both graphs give information. One shows free floating ice away from the coast and the other shows all image-able ice (with different %’s). That’s why Warmistas love the GIS graphs instead of RSS. GIS shows a nice adjusted uptrend and RSS shows the pause. You need to look at both to really try to get the whole picture.

      • AndyG55 says:

        Discerning ice along coasts can be quite troublesome at times. It is more error prone.
        The count is also more affected by winds etc.

        The graph masking out the costs is more CONSISTENT and contains less error.

        and because it goes back more than just a couple of years, it is almost certainly the CORRECT graph to use.

        Martin the Gore bot is just throwing in a damp squib misdirection, because its all that he has to work with.

    • AndyG55 says:

      The low-level gore bot returns.
      Martin is a software engineer with ZERO understand of anything to do with climate science.
      He also markets himself as a technical writer.. one can only imagine how un-technical those rants would be !!
      He also thinks the cartoonist site , SkS, actually present something resembling science.. seriously !!!
      He frequents a site run by a Peter Sinclair aka Greenman, who fancies himself as a low-end videographer making propaganda mis-information videos about anyone who questions the AGW meme. Peter was apparently โ€œtrainedโ€ ie brain-washed, by Al Gore.

      His soul reason for being here is DISRUPT, because he has absolutely ZERO knowledge or intent to learn.

    • AndyG55 says:

      The only person trying to deceive is You, Martin the Gore bot.

      SG is using the longest term graph that DMI produce. It is the one he has always used.

      The one SG uses is the CORRECT graph, It is CONSISTENT, and covers a longer time period.

      What really hurts the Gore bot is the FACT that it shows that this years sea ice, using this consistent metric, is now greater than any year back to 2005, and still climbing rapidly.

      That is data that Martin the Gore bot just cannot allow past its brain-washing.

      • Gail Combs says:

        It is data Martin the Alarmist Pigeon can not allow to become common knowledge.

        The Gorebots Ready to fly to the rescue of Paris-ite funding!

        Can’t jeopardize the fleecing of the Sheeple now can we?

  5. eliza says:

    Ahh our hero is back! Actually the graph you like 15% DMI is showing highest ice on that record as well Idiota~
    http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icecover.uk.php go ahead and use it here as much as you like we agree!

  6. eliza says:

    MS is paid to do this its obvious. I don’t think he is even interested in the subject. Its like work for him instructions from da Boss quite entertaining indeed!

    • AndyG55 says:

      There’s a group of morons from Peter Sinclair’s blog that tend to spread themselves around realist blogs in an attempt to disrupt.

      From what I have seen, they are all equally as inept and ignorant.

      They get their info from SkS, so that is one obvious reason for their combined idiocy.

  7. Gail Combs says:

    Martin Smith says: “….Steven, you are using the wrong graph again. This is the correct graph…”

    Steven can use what ever damn graph he please from DMI. IT is HIS BLOG, so Piss-off troll!

  8. chilemike says:

    This from the Guardian article above: “In 2010, Shakhova’s team published results showing that 7 teragrammes of methane was bubbling to the surface annually in the ESAS.”

    Now, I’m not a geologist but is teragram a common unit for gasses? Just wondering. Seems they usually use metric tons, so this would be 7 million metric tons, I think.

    • inMAGICn says:

      Not common, but acceptable in the grosso modo sense. The teragram is one trillion grams, but as there are different values in the common use for “billion” and “trillion” depending on the language and/or history of the word use, it can be useful.
      And yes, 7 million metric tonnes would be it.

  9. AndyG55 says:

    Martin the Gore bot also shows his ignorance wrt the AMO and the Arctic sea ice mean on his “incorrect” DMI graph. He makes moronic comments about the current level being below the mean, therefore isn’t growing.

    For a guy would says he once did a Uni maths degree, this is a pretty bizarre comment.

    Lets look at the AMO and look at the period that mean is calculated on. (1979 – 2000)

    You can all see that this period is at the very bottom of the AMO cycle, when Arctic sea ice would be near its maximum extent in the 60 odd year cycle.

    You can also see why the alarmista ABSOLUTELY MUST start in 1979 with their ice trend, and do everything to ignore the FACT that the AMO is now heading downwards again.

    Martin the Gore bot is making a FOOL of all climate alarmists by constantly displaying his ABJECT IGNORANCE.

    Well done Martin.๐Ÿ™‚

    • Dmh says:

      At the present pace the AMO and the Arctic ice will be back to 1970’s / early 1980’s anomalies and extent in about 10 years.
      If solar cycle C25 turns out as low as many are predicting, we could have LIA levels in 20 years.
      This is very serious stuff, and MS and his team are talking about “warming”…

    • AndyG55 says:

      Yep, the fact that Arctic sea ice is edging back into less than 1 sd below the cold period mean, so soon after the peak in the AMO, is certainly not a good sign.

      Where’s all this global warming they promised us ๐Ÿ˜ฆ

    • Andy Oz says:

      From that chart, I’d comfortably say that in 2035-40 AMO may well be same as 1970 and the whole “Another Ice Age is Beginning” mantra will suddenly reappear. At the same time, I reckon the political elites will have their global carbon tax in place and be cashing in big time as the demand & price of fossil fuels increases. Soros buying coal companies is a case in point. And Royal Dutch Shell will be enjoying increases in the oil price again, similar to 1970-80.

      It explains to me why the Arctic was wide open in 1951 according to my old Australian newspaper records on Dr Hans Ahlmann of the Swedish Geographic Institute
      ” In 1910 most of the (Russian Arctic) sea lanes were open for only three months. Now they are open eight months each year.”
      http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/71392865

      And in 1920 the Russians were battling the ice.
      http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/152932080

      It does match the AMO and not CO2.

      • Ted says:

        We’ve already seen the template for this, with the “ozone hole.” Once they’ve passed all the legislation they think they can get, they’ll declare victory, and find a new crisis to ride toward whatever goals they’ve already established. They’ll point to the lower temperatures as proof of their omniscience. They’ll tell us that since they saved us from the last unsolvable existential crisis, we have no choice but to trust them to fix whatever the new one is.

      • Dmh says:

        Thanks for the additional information on the relation of the AMO with Earth’s temperatures, the correlation is impressive and I only started to notice it in the recent months.

        Here is the global lower troposphere temperature above oceans since 1979 (UAH). Look at what happened in 2008,

        The original article is here,
        http://www.climate4you.com/SeaTemperatures.htm#Sea%20surface%20temperatures

    • Andy Oz says:

      PS Andy,
      May I use that chart on Twitter?
      Along with Chris Beal’s solar activity/ENSO charts, its one of the best ones I’ve seen.
      Cheers from Australia.

  10. ricks2014 says:

    First of all, “The Guardian” is Hell’s mouthpiece, they “Love-the-Lie” and hate the Truth ! Which (Witch) lie it is doesn’t !

    I am not exaggerating !!

    Second, as for a completely depleted Arctic Ice circa Summer 2016, know one, but know one can be at such a high level of a complete loss of standing Brain Cells because that would be at such a far level of depletlessness that it would surpass all of the World’s Ice vanishing tomorrow, without waiting !

    Therefore that cannot come from anyone in the Military, no way…

    Now the problem is to seek out the “complete” idiot who added his/her mindlessness to something that came out from the U.S. Navy !!!

    Even the “complete” nut-job currently residing in the White House would not delve so completely into such a asinine view !

    This idiot deserves some kind of reward if only for the effort, know one is that stupid…

  11. Gail Combs says:

    Dmh above just showed som ocean graphs from Climate 4 you.
    HMMmmmm Look at what is happening in the deeper ocean where the shorter wavelengths of sunlight are penetrating:

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s