The Pseudo-Skeptics’ Worst Nightmare?

Extent, ,

On June 17th 2014 the Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI for short) published a news article which said amongst other things (and translated from the original Danish) that:

On Tuesday, June 17, 2014 daily mean temperature of the Arctic area north of the 80th northern parallel rose above the melting point. Thus, the summer melting season in the central part of the Arctic Ocean has begun.

Here’s the DMI’s graph that is being referred to:

DMI daily mean temperature and climate north of the 80th northern parallel, on June 22nd 2014
DMI daily mean temperature and climatology north of the 80th northern parallel, on June 22nd 2014

The DMI’s news article continues:

This year’s onset of melting is 7 days later than usual and 2 weeks later than in 2012, when later in the season – in September – the sea ice shrank to the smallest area ever measured.

According to Rasmus Tonboe, one of the DMI’s sea ice experts from their Centre for Ocean and Ice:

There is a clear correlation between the start date of the melt season in June and the area of ​​the same year’s minimum ice coverage in September. When the season starts later than the year before, then extent in September is more than the year before – and vice versa. This applies in 4 out of 5 cases since 1972.

As you might expect the usual suspects have greeted this news item with unconcealed glee. According to Steven Goddard on his so called “Real Science” blog the news is the “Alarmists’ Worst Nightmare – They Have Already Lost 15% Of The Arctic Melt Season”:

Them:

The Sun has begun its descent towards winter, and the high Arctic melt season hasn’t started yet.

Us:

As is usual these days, Steve has neglected to publish my comment on his article, which reads as follows:

20140622-RealScience

By way of an explanation for my cryptic comment, Steve seems happy to ignore that fact that the graph shown above reveals that the metric under consideration was way above “average” for the entire 2013/14 Arctic sea ice freezing season, as we ourselves pointed out not so very long ago. 2014’s numbers have only been lagging behind “normal” since around day 130. Perhaps this will prove to be enough of a difference from Rasmus’s historical records such that the 2014 melting season will be one of the exceptions that proves his “4 out of 5 rule”?

As some sort of support for this theory we suggest you take a good long look at our regional Arctic sea ice extent breakdown and our ice mass balance buoy overview. The sea ice extent in the Central Arctic Basin is currently much the same as last year, with barely any visible reduction in extent as yet. However in important areas for the overall Arctic sea ice extent in September, such as the Laptev and Beaufort Seas, the melt in 2014 is way ahead of 2013. In the former case the melt is even ahead of 2012 at the same time of year.

Do you suppose that Steve will be able to spot the difference between these two satellite images, taken one year apart?

NASA Worldview “true-color” image of the Beaufort Sea on June 21st 2014, derived from bands 1, 4 and 3 of the MODIS sensor on the Aqua satellite
NASA Worldview “true-color” image of the Beaufort Sea on June 21st 2014, derived from bands 1, 4 and 3 of the MODIS sensor on the Aqua satellite
NASA Worldview “true-color” image of the Beaufort Sea on June 21st 2013, derived from bands 1, 4 and 3 of the MODIS sensor on the Terra satellite
NASA Worldview “true-color” image of the Beaufort Sea on June 21st 2013, derived from bands 1, 4 and 3 of the MODIS sensor on the Terra satellite

 

We’ll keep you posted!

Forecasting Sea Ice Extent in the Dark

Censorship, , , , , , , ,

My title today refers to the fact that the summer Arctic sea ice forecasting season is with us once again. The ARCUS Sea Ice Outlook (SIO for short) started in 2008, with the aim of gathering together and publishing “community predictions of the September sea ice extent”.  The SIO is now part of the recently created Sea Ice Prediction Network, and the deadline for submission for the first set of forecasts of 2014 was June 10th.

I have a professional interest in UK and international energy policy, and as a consequence I have been commenting on the recent attempts of  Professor Richard Tol to debunk the so called “97% climate change consensus” elsewhere in the blogosphere. As luck would have it I allowed myself to become engaged in what was supposedly a conversation about that very topic on the What’s Up With That blog.  Feel free to read all about it if you’d like to see a pseudo-skeptical gish gallop in full swing:


Whilst over there I couldn’t help but notice that Anthony Watts had left things until the eleventh hour before asking his faithful followers to contribute to the Sea Ice Outlook June survey. I also couldn’t help but notice that despite assurances to the contrary a few short weeks ago (and even after my recent “extra heads up“!)  the  WUWT “Sea Ice Reference Page” is still sadly lacking in a wide range of  information about Arctic sea ice thickness and volume. Consequently I figured I would be performing a valuable public service by bringing this to the attention of Anthony and his readers. Here’s what happened after that:

Us:

2014-06-10_1654_WUWT

Them:

June 10, 2014 at 8:55 am

[snip no, we are not going to have you thread-jack again by pushing your own website and own views – Anthony]

Us:

June 10, 2014 at 9:32 am

Re: @Anthony says: June 10, 2014 at 8:55 am
It’s not my “own views” Anthony. In fact it’s a long list of useful facts and figures for anybody attempting to forecast the future of Arctic sea ice. A long list of useful information still noticeable only by its absence from the WUWT sea ice reference page.
 

Them:

REPLY: We aren’t forecasting volume, we are forecasting extent, so again, your views that we should pay attention to volume graphs on your website (your favorite hobby horse) in this extent forecasting exercise are irrelevant. Don’t clutter up this thread further – Anthony.

Them & Us:

 

Them:

In the absence of a wide range of scientific information concerning the current thickness distribution of sea ice in the Arctic, and after due deliberation about the likely value of the NSIDC Arctic sea ice extent metric in September 2014, Anthony concluded:

A value of 6.12 million sq km will be sent to ARCUS.

Us:

We’ll keep you posted!

 

 

 

 

 

Debating skeptics is like mud wrestling with pigs

Satire, ,

In an article entitled “Exeter University Prof: ‘Debating skeptics is like mud wrestling with pigs’” a guest poster on the “Watts Up With That” blog quotes my fellow Exonian Dr. Stephan Harrison of Exeter University, whilst simultaneously managing to misspell his name:

Them:

Dr Harrison [was] asked about climate skeptics and he goes on to say that they are not worth debating their viewpoint as it’s “like mud wrestling with pigs. Firstly you get covered in mud and secondly, the pig loves it” he then goes on to say he won’t debate skeptics because geographers don’t debate with people who think the world is flat and biologists don’t debate with people who think evolution isn’t happening or that the world is only 6000 years old.

Us:

Fresh from indulging in some “mud wrestling” with Anthony Watts myself, I felt compelled to contribute my own two new pence worth to the ongoing “debate”:

I don’t know if this counts as “mud wrestling with pigs” but here at WUWT seems to be no place to “engage in a fair public debate”. By way of example see:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/04/09/study-wuwt-near-the-center-of-the-climate-blogosphere/#comment-1611483

et seq.

Them:

Your comment is so cryptic it is worthy of Mosher. Whatever your comment/link means, I don’t understand it.

 

Us:

A recent screenshot of some mud being flung at WUWT:

2014-04-29_1557_WUWT

 

Them:

Jim,

After reading your comment on WUWT, it looks like you thought the moderator who snipped your comment was me. It wasn’t.

In fact, I made the moderator’s comment under the comment you made on April 12, 2014 at 10:25 am on the ‘Study: WUWT near the center of the climate blogosphere‘ thread.

I don’t like it when an anonymous moderator snips a comment without a good reason. In your case it was done improperly. I am sorry about that.

Sincerely,

 

Us:

Thanks for your note. I previously hadn’t the faintest inkling that you are one of the moderators at WUWT, let alone a senior one. It did however seem to me that your comment on the “Mud wrestling” thread deserved to be balanced by recounting my own recent experience on the “Study” thread.

That said, my riposte to GreggB’s long list of wholly unjustified accusations remains “snipped”, and my request for Anthony to reveal his sources remains unanswered, so I remain an unhappy bunny!

Best wishes,

Jim

 

Them:

We’ll keep you posted!

“Real Science” Censorship – Episode 2

Censorship, , , ,

After having a brush with the “Real Science” censor last month I’ve really gone and done it now. Steven Goddard’s blog has been badmouthing Al Gore recently. I’m afraid I couldn’t let that slight on Al’s predictive abilities go unchallenged. Steve evidently didn’t care for my suggestion that he “is fond of poetic license”, so my alter ego is “now spam” there too:

I’ve cut out much of the gratuitous abuse in the ensuing conversation, but you can peruse an archived version if you so desire. Note amongst other things that Al Gore never mentioned “16 foot thick ice in the Beaufort Sea”. Here are the expurgated highlights:

Them:

Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Al Gore says that the 16 foot thick ice in the Beaufort Sea will all melt in the next few weeks.

http://www.examiner.com/article/gore-arctic-ocean-ice-free-as-early-as-2014

Us:

“Some of the models suggest that there is a 75 percent chance that the entire north polar ice cap during some of the summer months will be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years,” Gore said in 2009.

There’s still plenty of time left for some of the models to be proved 75% correct!

 

Them:

“Some models suggest.” I love that – so very scientific. Some do, others don’t.

 

Us:

I realise Steve is fond of poetic license, but my point is that in the article Steve references Al Gore did not “predict an ice free Arctic in 2014″. He didn’t even “predict an ice free Arctic by 2016 at the latest”

 

Them:

I have warned you numerous times about lying about me. This is your last warning
http://www.examiner.com/article/gore-arctic-ocean-ice-free-as-early-as-2014

 

Us:

Steve – My Gore quote from April 15, 2014 at 10:41 am is cut/pasted from the article you just linked to. Here’s another quote from the same article, presumably a journalist’s interpretation of Gore’s words:
“Today at the U.N. climate conference in Copenhagen, Al Gore said there is new computer modeling that suggests the Arctic Ocean may be nearly ice-free in the summertime as early as 2014.”

 

Them:

“Some of the models suggest that there is a 75 percent chance that the entire north polar ice cap during some of the summer months will be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years,” Gore said.
Attack Gore for being an idiot. Not me for reporting on it.

 

Us:

Unpublished comment on Steven Goddard's "Real Science" blog from Wednesday April 16th at 12:55 UTC
Unpublished comment on the “Real Science” blog from Wednesday April 16th at 12:55 UTC

 

Them:

They have so far neglected to publish the above comment.

 

Us:

We’ll keep you posted!

North Pole Webcam Begins Transmissions

Webcams, , , , , ,

Construction of Ice Camp Barneo 2014 began close to the North Pole at the beginning of April, and now the first scientific data has started flowing  from the sea ice near the Pole. The first of three webcams has been successfully  installed on the ice, and the slightly noisy initial images are available from the North Pole Environmental Observatory 2014 web site:

NPEO webcam 1 image from April 14th 2014
NPEO webcam 1 image from April 14th 2014

Data is now also arriving from ice mass balance buoy 2014E, which as you can see if you click on the pushpins on the map below, has been drifting at the rate of 16 km / day during its brief lifetime on the Arctic sea ice so far:

Here’s the initial temperature profile for 2014E:

Temperature profiles for ice mass balance buoy 2014E from April to May 2014At present the ice on the floe is 1.7 m thick, covered with 19 cm of snow. As you can see, temperatures were a touch chilly when the buoy was installed on April 12th, at around -32 degrees Celsius. A variety of expeditions have already set off from Barneo in various directions. Expedition Hope are heading in the direction of Cape Discovery on Ellesmere Island, and here Bernice Nootenboom illustrates the effects of such low temperatures on the human body:

Bernice Nootenboom near the North Pole. Photo: Martin Hartley
Bernice Nootenboom near the North Pole. Photo: Martin Hartley

You can also view data from IMB 2014E and the other active ice mass balance buoys on our IMB overview page.

 

New Arctic Sea Ice Resources

Volume, , , , , ,

Stung by some unusually constructive criticism from Anthony Watts we have (somewhat hurriedly) added several new pages to the Great White Con “Resources” section of this web site. They contain the sort of information that is rather tricky to update automatically on a daily basis, and concentrate on resources that help the interested searcher after truth get a handle on the thickness and hence volume of the sea ice in the Arctic, on a regional as well as pan Arctic scale.

The first section is entitled “Arctic Sea Ice Graphs“, and here’s an example of one graph which reveals the ice volume in various regions of the Arctic, based on the output of the PIOMAS model:

PIOMAS regional volume breakdown for March 2014
PIOMAS regional volume breakdown for March 2014

[Graph by Chris Reynolds on the Dosbat blog]

The second section is entitled “Ice Mass Balance Buoys“. As the name hopefully suggests, this section displays data reported by the Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory’s currently active ice mass balance buoys in a variety of novel formats. These buoys are deployed on a regular basis at selected locations across the Arctic, and report on a number of different parameters including snow depth, ice thickness and temperature. By way of example here’s a couple of reports from IMB 2013F, which was originally deployed last August on what was then classified as “first year” ice in the Beaufort Sea. First of all here’s the Google Maps/Earth view that reveals how the buoy has moved around the Arctic since then, and shows how clicking on one of the “pushpins” reveals the values of a variety of interesting metrics on a daily basis:

Google map of the movement of IMB 2013F
Google map of the movement of IMB 2013F

As you can see, last August the thickness of the ice floe that the buoy is located upon was 1.4 metres thick. If you click through to the live map and experiment you will discover, amongst a variety of other things, that the ice under the buoy is now 1.68 meters thick, with an additional 49 cm of snow on top of that.

A second set of images shows graphs revealing the temperature above, below and within the ice, currently on a monthly basis:

2013F-Temp-20140401

Click on the graph to view a larger version. This one requires a certain amount of interpretation, but the first thing to note is that the numbers across the top represent the position of thermistors spaced 10 cm apart on a pole that is mounted vertically through the ice floe. Number 1 is in the air above the floe, the rightmost side of the graph (number 26 in this case) is in the water below the ice floe, and somewhere in between those extremes the temperature sensors can also be in the midst of either ice or snow.

At the end of March the interface between ice and snow in this case was somewhere between sensors 8 and 9, and hence at a temperature of around – 7 degrees Celsius, by which time the buoy had moved from the Canadian waters where it started into the area of the Beaufort Sea north of Alaska.

For further discussion about the interpretation of our new resources please use the comment section on the “About Our Arctic Sea Ice Resources” page. For technical observations and suggestions for improvements feel free to comment below!

 

 

Snow White is Actually a “Cowardly Cross Dresser”!

Satire, , , ,

In order to avoid the malicious “spammer” label attached to me by Steven Goddard of “Real Science” fame many moons ago I have been using the nom de guerre “Snow White” in skeptical circles for a while. Unfortunately my pseudonimity didn’t stand a chance against the laser sharp investigative skills of Anthony Watts. My embarrassment is now archived in the public record, plain for all to see:

An extract from the "WUWT near the center of the climate blogosphere"
An extract from the “WUWT near the center of the climate blogosphere” thread on the “Watts Up With That” blog on April 9, 2014 at 2:01 pm

A commenter at “Watts Up With That” then piled on the scorn:

"Snow White" is revealed as a "Cowardly Cross dresser", for all the world to see.
“Snow White” is revealed as a “Cowardly cross dresser”, for all the world to see.

The thing is though, that in the process of so skilfully “outing” Snow White Anthony kindly pointed his loyal readers in the direction of our humble “Resources” section and our videos, so I suppose we’ll have to tart them all up a bit now!

 

The Arctic Sea Ice “Recovery” Vanishes Even More

Volume, , ,

Whilst a variety of climate change “skeptics” have been pointing out recently that the April 2014 edition of the National Snow and Ice Data Center’s Arctic Sea Ice News mentioned that:

A large area of the multiyear ice has drifted to the southern Beaufort Sea and East Siberian Sea

which led said skeptics to claim things like:

There is a lot of thick ice in the western Arctic, which will be difficult to melt this summer.

they glossed over the bit where the NSIDC added:

Where warm conditions are likely to exist later in the year.

In fact conditions have been very warm (relatively speaking!) in the Arctic for all of 2014 so far. The DMI daily mean temperature of the Arctic area north of the 80th northern parallel has never dropped below the long term average all winter:

DMI mean temperature north of the 80th northern parallel, on April 8th 2014
DMI mean temperature north of the 80th northern parallel, on April 8th 2014

and the surface air temperature anomaly chart for the Arctic for the first three months of 2014 looks like this:

Surface air temperature anomaly plot for January to March 2014
Arctic surface air temperature anomaly plot for January to March 2014

Those anomalously warm temperatures may well have something to do with the fact that the latest PIOMAS Arctic sea ice volume estimates which have just been released reveal this:

PIOMAS arctic sea ice volume on March 31st from 1979-2014
PIOMAS arctic sea ice volume on March 31st from 1979-2014

As you can see, according to the PIOMAS model at least, Arctic sea ice volume has now reached the second lowest level for the date since the satellite record began.

Whilst the skeptics have been complaining about the amount of ice on the Great Lakes of North America they seem to have somehow failed to notice the anomalously low coverage of snow over Siberia. Here’s the surface air temperature anomaly forecast for the northern hemisphere tomorrow:

GFS 2m temperature anomaly forecast for 09:00 UTC on April 9th 2014
GFS 2m temperature anomaly forecast for 09:00 UTC on April 9th 2014

Do you see the bright red patch over the coast of the Laptev Sea, indicating temperatures 20 degrees Celsius above normal? Now take a look at a similar chart, but of the surface air temperatures themselves:

GFS 2m temperature forecast for 09:00 UTC on April 9th 2014
GFS 2m temperature forecast for 09:00 UTC on April 9th 2014

That reveals that the temperatures over the edge of the Laptev Sea are forecast to be above the freezing point of fresh water tomorrow. Just in case you’re wondering what the shores of the Laptev Sea look like at the moment, here’s a picture we recorded earlier today, courtesy of NASA Worldview and the MODIS sensor on the Aqua satellite:

The Laptev Sea as seen by the Aqua satellite on April 8th 2014
The Laptev Sea as seen by the Aqua satellite on April 8th 2014

What do you suppose the same area will look like in a day or two’s time, or in a month or two’s time for that matter?

 

 

What’s Up With Watts Moderation? Episode 1

Censorship, , ,

We proudly present some “Shock News” concerning a disappearing comment of ours on the “Watts Up With That” blog.

According to the April 2014 edition of the NSIDC’s Arctic Sea Ice News:

The percentage of the Arctic Ocean consisting of ice at least five years or older remains at only 7%, half of what it was in February 2007. Moreover, a large area of the multiyear ice has drifted to the southern Beaufort Sea and East Siberian Sea (north of Alaska and the Lena River delta), where warm conditions are likely to exist later in the year.

We thought we’d point out to any interested WUWTers that actually warm conditions have existed in the southern Beaufort Sea and East Siberian Sea for quite some time now. However it appears as if the powers that be in WattsLand had other ideas:

Them:

Caleb says:
April 3, 2014 at 7:06 pm

RE: Tom in Denver says:
April 3, 2014 at 9:12 am

I think we need to pay less attention to 2 meter surface temperatures, and more attention to the temperature of the sea. Any time a polynya forms the sea is getting severely cooled by churning winds. Also the ice that has been moved south is going somewhere. In the case of Baffin Bay it was surging south right along the coast of Labrador and out into the Atlantic, creating above-average ice-extents in an area adjacent to the Gulf Stream.

Us:

A comment by "Snow White" visible on the "Watts Up With That" blog on April 3rd 2014

 

Surface air temperature anomaly plot for January to March 2014
Surface air temperature anomaly plot for January to March 2014

 

Them:

As of April 5th 2014 at 13:27:41 BST:

A comment by "Snow White" now invisible on the "Watts Up With That" blog on April 5th 2014
A comment by “Snow White” now invisible on the “Watts Up With That” blog on April 5th 2014

Us:

A comment by "Snow White" visible on the "Watts Up With That" blog at 16:43 BST on April 5th 2014

Them:

We’ll keep you posted!

Watts Up With the Maximum Trend?

Extent, , ,

The self proclaimed “world’s most viewed site on global warming and climate change”, otherwise known as the “Watts Up With That?” blog, recently published an article entitled “Arctic Sea Ice Appears to Have Reached Maximum And Other Ice Observations”. Since I’ve been speculating about the date of the 2014 maximum Arctic sea ice extent myself I avidly read the article but found myself ultimately somewhat perplexed. There were lots of graphs and charts displayed, but there was no sight or mention of what seems to me the most relevant one of all. The long term trend. Here is an expurgated version of my attempts to bring this oversight to the attention of the Watts Up With Thatters:

Us:

A "dull" comment about Arctic sea ice trends
A “dull” comment about Arctic sea ice trends

Them:

Re: Michael Jennings says:
March 26, 2014 at 7:07 am

[snip . . this is dull. Put some content into your contributions or you are just trolling . . mod]

Us:

At the risk of repeating myself, here’s the latest dull content out of NSIDC:

Do you see the blue line heading for the bottom right?

[snip.. lots of dull references to Antarctic sea ice and “Real Science” removed.. mod]

Them:

Snow White needs to get up to speed on the Scientific Method: skeptics have nothing to prove.

Rather, the onus is on the alarmist crowd to provide scientific evidence showing that their CO2/cAGW conjecture is true. They have failed miserably.

But there is no scientific evidence supporting their belief in manmade global warming. None at all. Every last climate model has failed. They were all wrong.

The alarmist crowd is fixated on Arctic ice, instead of on global ice cover. Why? Because that is their last forlorn hope; every other climate scare has been debunked. Well, it’s time to debunk the ‘disappearing Arctic ice’ scare, too:

Global sea ice is at it’s 30-year average [the red graph – click in chart to embiggen]. We already know about the polar see-saw, in which the NH and SH poles balance each other out. That effect can be clearly seen in the global ice chart above.

There is nothing either unusual or unprecedented happening. What we observe now has happened before, repeatedly, and to a much greater degree. Rational folks understand that. It is called the climate Null Hypothesis, and it has never been falsified. The Null Hypothesis is a corollary of the Scientific Method. So is the fact that the onus is on those who produce the catastrophic CO2/AGW conjecture, to suport their belief with scientific evidence.

But there is no evidence proving that Arctic ice is in unprecedented decline. None at all. There is no evidence to prove that the current Arctic ice fluctuation is anything other than natural climate variability. Occam’s Razor says that natural variability is by far the most likely explanation.

The Arctic ice scare is just the same as all the other climate scares. It is promoted by religious True Believers, who expect everyone to share in their Chicken Little panic.

But that only works on those who are ruled by emotion, and fright is an emotion. Scientific skeptics, OTOH, are logical, and therefore they are unaffected by the silly ‘Arctic ice’ scare.

Us:

So to summarise, you cannot muster a single chart to refute my assertion about Arctic sea ice decline, let alone “hundreds”.

For your edification, and for that of the writer of the original article who for some strange reason neglected to include a graph showing the long term trend in Arctic sea ice maximum extent, here is one I prepared earlier:

Provisional NSIDC annual maximum extent graph for 1979 – 2014
Provisional NSIDC annual maximum Arctic sea ice extent graph for 1979 – 2014

Them:

From a comment on a different thread on WUWT, on April 10, 2014 at 3:33 am (WUWT time)

I’m sorry Snow White (or Mr Hunt, if you prefer), but I think that a little courtesy would be in order. I’ve read every word on the link you’ve provided, and the central theme of your original post was that “there was no sight or mention of what seems to me the most relevant one of all. The long term trend [of Arctic sea ice]“. You described more than one attempt to bring this deficit to the attention of WUWT.

Given that Michael D posted on your page at April 9, 2014 at 4:01 pm, politely pointing out that the WUWT sea ice page has just such data presented, it would seem a basic courtesy to either acknowledge his assistance (in this blog or yours) and either thank him, or explain why graph does not answer your criticisms.

I acknowledge that your arguments seem to have moved on to volume now, but they have been addressed by others, and better than I could have done. As an aside, I suppose I could run a blog with limited data about Antarctic sea ice coverage and volumes. I’m sure that I would be criticised, with comments explaining that I was looking at the mural through a microscope, and that the Antarctic buildup cannot be considered in isolation. I think that such criticism would be valid – your thoughts?

Us:

As you can see from the historical record, I asked on more than one occasion for someone to supply a link to “A long term (let’s say 30 years or more) graph for any measure of Arctic sea ice “quantity” showing anything other than a trend in the direction of the bottom right hand corner.” Nobody did. Nobody suggested looking at the WUWT sea ice page either, presumably because no graphs fitting my description can be found on there.

Q.E.D. ?

Them:

 We’ll keep you posted!