As we reported on February 18th, some of the Arctic sea ice extent metrics reached the lowest levels for the date in their respective histories quite some time ago. Today though, we’re looking at a full house. The daily NSIDC and IJIS extent numbers have both been at all time lows for the date for quite some time now. Here’s how the NSIDC 5 day average extent looks at the moment:
Meanwhile a series of storms in the North Atlantic have been bringing large surf to the shores of the Western United Kingdom, and battering the edge of the sea ice in the Greenland and Barents Seas. Here’s how GFS looks currently, as visualised by MeteoCiel:
In addition this has resulted in warm air from further south being funnelled into the high Arctic, so much so that the surface temperature anomalies currently look like this:
whilst the temperatures 2 metres above the surface of the Arctic look like this:
If you look closely you’ll see that air temperatures 2 metres above the North Pole are currently similar to those around the shores of the Great Lakes of North America. As a result of all this atmospheric activity today we bring you news that both the Danish Meteorological Institute “new” 15% extent:
and “old” 30% metrics:
have now joined the club.
The Cryosphere Today area metric has been holding out against the trend in sea ice extent for weeks, but we can confidently predict that when their next update is released it too will also reveal the lowest ever Arctic sea ice area for the 65th day of the year, in records going back to 1979. Here’s how their graph looks currently:
Further to the cessation of the brief hiatus in my continuing discussions with “Steve Goddard” about “global warming”, the debate has turned to predictions concerning Arctic sea ice metrics during the 2014 melting season.
Firstly here’s a few charts of assorted Arctic sea ice metrics, hot off the virtual presses:
Chart from Cryosphere Today – http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/arctic.sea.ice.interactive.htmlChart from IJIS – http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htmChart from DMI – http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icecover.uk.phpChart from DMI – http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/old_icecover.uk.php
Here’s a table of the minimum value of some of those metrics for a selection of years:
In brief “Al Gore never ‘predicted’ that the Arctic would be ice-free by now!”
Them:
Well, he didn’t say ’22 years from now’, did he? No, he emphasized the most alarmist position he could find.
You can weasel out of this by stating that Gore did not make the prediction ,but he sure as Hell quoted and emphasized it, over any and all other predictions. And in front of the Nobel committee and entire world at that!
So have you confronted Gore over the failed prediction he parroted in Oslo? When you do, you will have a modicum of credibility. Get busy.
Us:
At the risk of repeating myself, “for the benefit of those who seem unable to understand either English or Mathematics a ‘projection’ is not the same thing as a ‘prediction’”
Getting back to Tony’s predictions, and using the NSIDC daily extent numbers for the moment, would you say that 4.98339 is “exactly” 5.74877? How about “close”?
Them:
Actually, no, your chart is less clear. Steve’s has all the years and it is clear his prediction is correct. Yours does not. Nor does yours have a legible legend. Another snow white lie.
Us:
Have you by any chance tried clicking on my chart? Does that help at all?
At the risk of repeating myself, would you say that 4.98339 is “exactly” 5.74877? How about “close”?
Them:
What bearing does 2013’s minimum have on goddard’s prediction for 2014? Are you a half-wit in addition to being a mentally ill stalker & transvestite?
Us:
What bearing does 2014’s maximum have on 2014’s minimum?
Are you blind?
Them:
You seem to think that some random number you came up with has some bearing on the subject at hand. Hint: it’s why we think you’re mentally ill.
Us:
Of course they’re not random numbers. To save you the bother of doing your own research please feel free to take a look at:
Stark, it’s not about random numbers, it’s about random harassment. This clown takes no issue with ridiculous ‘projections’ delivered by alarmist zealots on a world stage, instead he haunts this site moaning about near misses.
But you are right about the mentally ill bit.
Us:
The conversation about the non-random Arctic numbers has at last taken a statistical turn over at:
Regular readers may recall that way back when in September 2013 we wondered why David Rose hadn’t seen fit to reproduce any visualisations of Arctic sea ice concentration in a previous article about Arctic sea ice, particularly when his source materials from the NSIDC contained some very nice examples.
Today we are pleased to be able to inform you that David has now followed our long standing advice, and his article in the Mail on Sunday yesterday included two such “stunning satellite images”. Of course they are not really “photographic” images, any more than the visualisations of Arctic sea ice extent that David was so keen to show his loyal readers last time around were. Unfortunately David neglected to include a “stunning satellite concentration visualisation” for August 25th 2013 in yesterday’s article. We are pleased to be able to help correct that no doubt inadvertent oversight, albeit somewhat belatedly, with the able assistance of the Department of Atmospheric Sciences at the University of Illinois and their Cryosphere Today web site:
The “Shock News” about Arctic sea ice is coming thick and fast as the 2014 melting season reaches its peak. I’ve been debating the meaning all of the various metrics with none other than my old sparring partner “Steve Goddard” AKA Tony Heller. The theory which is mine (in brief!) is that the ice is actually getting thinner and hence travelling faster. As regular Great White Con readers may well suspect by now, Steve/Tony has other ideas. Here are the edited highlights:
Them:
Steve/Tony’s latest Arctic sea ice prophecy is entitled “My Arctic Forecast“, although it’s actually his fourth of the season. Here’s his take:
Arctic ice extent will continue to decline for a couple of days, then a cyclone near the North Pole will begin spreading the ice, and the extent curve will turn back towards the median.
The minimum this summer will likely be close to the 2006 minimum, which was the highest minimum of the past decade.
Us:
My latest Arctic forecast is more short term than yours Tony, and rather more precise too.
“CT area decline of around 180 k over the next two days”. I guess that equates to “CT Arctic sea ice area will reverse and then decline for a couple of days”?
Them:
Gutsy to go with a forecast, but then the great ones risk it to gain the glory.
Us:
Many thanks for your kind words Phil.
Time passes……
CT Area has just come in at 44,288 square kilometers below yesterday. The “turn on the proverbial dime” has come to pass, and there is only another 135,712 to go!
Them:
CT doesn’t measure extent. This post is about extent. Stop being a moron and wasting my time.
Time passes……
I do appreciate you demonstrating so graphically the dissonance and dishonesty of climate alarmists.
Us:
The pleasure is all mine Tony.
I’ve asked this before without receiving an answer, but is there any way for commenters on here to include an image?
Failing that is there any way you might be willing and able to display the graph at my JAXA link here?
You do have a working knowledge of English. Congratulation!
Us:
Thanks for your kind words DedaEda, once again.
A new month means some masks have changed, so the GWC patent pending crystal ball is cloudier than usual. Undaunted the CT oracle hoarsely whispers “Expect a couple more 100 k declines next. Around 225 k in total”
In some recent shock news over at the “Real Science” blog “Steven Goddard” asked “Who is Steven Goddard” and then answered himself as follows:
My name is Tony Heller. I am a whistle blower. I am an independent thinker who is considered a heretic by the orthodoxy on both sides of the climate debate.
I’m highly unorthodox, so I’ll consider him as a schizoidal cherry picking pseudo-skeptic instead. Steve/Tony finishes his “coming out” article as follows:
I am more than happy to debate anyone who feels up to the challenge, including the President of The United States. Science works through research and debate – not censorship, propaganda, faith, or intimidation.
Steve/Tony has been blogging about Arctic sea ice again recently. His most recent post is entitled “Does The Arctic Need To Be Prosecuted?“, but it seems he’s unwilling to engage in debate about that topic with me.
Them:
Some climate experts want to make skepticism of junk science a felony, and every day it becomes more clear that the Arctic has no respect for climate models or eminent government scientists. This is shocking, and it is time for the Arctic to be prosecuted. The Arctic is aiding and abetting climate deniers, as well as making obscene gestures towards the world’s leading academics.
NSIDC interactive Arctic sea ice extent graph on July 26th 2014
As far as I am aware there is no law against being a schizoidal cherry picking pseudo-skeptic in the United States of America, or anywhere else for that matter. Please feel free to comment below if you know otherwise and/or think that there should be!
Them:
After a protracted exchange on Twitter a copy of my comment eventually saw the light of day:
With the able assistance of some of the regular readers of Steve Goddard’s so called “Real Science” blog I have drawn up a checklist of questions to answer should you (or any “sceptics” you may be aware of) be suffering from the delusion that the sea ice in the Arctic is “recovering” or “rebounding”:
Us:
1. Is the NSIDC daily Arctic sea ice extent number for March 8th 2014 the lowest on record for that day of the year? Yes or No?
2. Is the Cryosphere Today Arctic sea ice area number for March 8th 2014 the lowest on record for that day of the year? Yes or No?
3. Is the IJIS Arctic sea ice extent number for March 9th 2014 the lowest on record for that day of the year? Yes or No?
4. What credible evidence can you provide to show that “The Arctic is getting colder”?
5. In what way has the NSIDC’s data been “contaminated by Mann”?
6. Where might one find “empirical data that hasn’t been contaminated” if not from the likes of NOAA/NASA/JAXA et. al.
8. How much sea ice do you suppose will be left in the Gulf of St. Lawrence by September? [2014-3-12 20:26]
9. Which version of “the [thickness/volume] truth” do you choose to believe? [2014-3-14 09:30]
10. When was it that the DMI “changed the way they read/interrupt coastal features [which] they incorporated into their extent/area numbers”? [2014-3-15 15:08]
11. Why have we been accused of “a lie” and “put on ignore”? [2014-3-16 15:12]
12. Please be so good as to provide us with a link that describes “the modeling used by NSIDC to ‘create’ these numbers” [2014-3-20 13:00]
Now seems like an entirely appropriate time to bring the latest “Shock News!” from the Arctic to the attention of the “mass media” here in once Great Britain. Here’s a copy of an email I sent to John Wellington over at The Mail earlier today:
Us:
Re: PCC – Global cooling in an ideal world
Hello again John,
Further to our previous correspondence on this controversial topic here is the latest “shock news” from the Arctic, hot off the presses down here at Ivory Towers:
In view of the recent inclement weather in this neck of the woods, perhaps you could forward it on to one of your finest investigative reporters for me?
Best wishes,
Jim Hunt
Them:
It’s now March 15th 2014, and this morning I received a “Dear Jim” note from John:
Dear Jim,
Nice to hear from you and I trust you were not hit by the West Country floods, climate-influenced or not.
I have discussed your message with a colleague who is interested in these things and we conclude that March is a little early in the year to be drawing significant conclusions. I have been shown some different graphs that appear to show 2014 is not dissimilar to the last few years. I am attaching these for your information.
Best regards
John
Us:
Dear John,
Thank you for your kind words. We’re situated halfway up Haldon, so we avoided the worst of the inclement weather. The top of the hill took a bit of a battering however.
The entrance to Haldon Forest Park on February 24th 2014Haldon Forest Park on March 8th 2014
Our garden suffered a bit too, but thankfully the house was OK.
A new spring gushes from the side of Haldon Hill on Valentine’s Day 2014
Regarding your own attachments, perhaps in the first instance you might ask your colleague to explain why he or she chooses to send you a NORSEX Arctic sea ice extent graph rather than one from the NSIDC, which I believe we established last summer is The Mail’s oracle on such matters? Please take a good look at the latest NSIDC equivalent to the Antarctic extent graph you sent me, which I attach for your convenience.
NSIDC Arctic sea ice extent graph for March 13th 2014
Whilst you’re at it perhaps you could also ask your colleague to answer at least the first three of these simple questions:
You may also wish to pass on to your colleague the shock news that earlier this week the daily atmospheric carbon dioxide readings from Mauna Loa rose above 400 ppm almost 2 months earlier than last year?
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
