Really, Joe.
“Examination of several proxy records (e.g., sediment cores) of sea ice indicate ice-free or near ice-free summer conditions for at least some time during the period of 15,000 to 5,000 years ago”
– Dr. Walt Meier, NSIDC
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/14/nsidcs-dr-walt-meier-part-2/
OK.. so I decided to bite the bullet and visit Climate Retrogress (for the first time in a while) so I could find out what wRommg means by “recent”. Has the article disappeared, because I couldn’t find it.
Usually I just totally ignore Joe, but this claim piqued my curiosity.
It is right on top
I found it posted on September 8th:
http://climateprogress.org/2010/09/08/arctic-sea-ice-history-paleoclimate-polar-amplification/
Though a link to that article was inside the one on top, thanks.
Leonid Polyak, of Ohio State’s Byrd Polar Research Center:
“To be conservative, the closest candidate is the early Holocene (roughly ~10 kyr ago), when the insolation in the Arctic was high due to the beneficial orbital configuration; however, the more data I see, the stronger is my impression that there was not that little ice at that time. The next best (actually, better) candidate is the Last Interglacial, about 125kyr ago, again due to orbitally-driven high insolation: the ice was likely very low, but we can’t say whether it was completely ice free in summer or not”
Here’s some science Mr. Romm:
A peer-reviewed paper published in the Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences finds that Arctic sea ice extent at the end of the 20th century was more extensive than most of the past 9000 years. The paper also finds that Arctic sea ice extent was on a declining trend over the past 9000 years, but recovered beginning sometime over the past 1000 years and has been relatively stable and extensive since.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/23/surprise-peer-reviewed-study-says-current-arctic-sea-ice-is-more-extensive-than-most-of-the-past-9000-years/
Actually here is a report on the actual science;
“The ice loss that we see today — the ice loss that started in the early 20th Century and sped up during the last 30 years — appears to be unmatched over at least the last few thousand years,”
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/sedcore.htm
And here is the actual science paper;
“The last low-ice event related to orbital forcing (high insolation) was in the early Holocene, after which the northern high latitudes cooled overall, with some superimposed shorter-term (multidecadal to millennial-scale) and lower-magnitude variability. The current reduction in Arctic ice cover started in the late 19th century, consistent with the rapidly warming climate, and became very pronounced over the last three decades. This ice loss appears to be unmatched over at least the last few thousand years and unexplainable by any of the known natural variabilities.”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VBC-4YKFMY0-2&_user=10&_coverDate=07%2F31%2F2010&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_origin=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1572183538&_rerunOrigin=scholar.google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=58094da38a8bfaf686802293bfd091ec&searchtype=a
Let us change your claim of actual science to Real Pathological Science!
The problem is there are so many conflicting reports about Arctic ice extent there are no real values that can be expressed about the current state of ice. There has been logs found on coasts that are currently ice shelves that gt there during the last 10 thousand years when there was no ice.
Claims that we are experiencing the lowest ice extent in the last 20 thousand years are total crap. The historical biological activity in the region shows the level of the BS being passed off as scientific research that “Marks” like LAZ are sucked by.
LAZ:
Your source for information should be run out of the field of science as they represent what is wrong with science today. Just like the latest BS from NASA.
Mike there is a lot of uncertainty about both Arctics. But saying peer reviewed science is ‘total crap’ only tells us something about your belief system and nothing else.
LAZ:
I am saying that peer reviewed research that claims Arctic ice extent was greater in spite of all other research findings is BULL CRAP! Just Made up STUFF.
Here is one source:
http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/RS_Arctic.htm#longterm
LAZ:
I found another source for research articles that show your reference paper is less than POND SCUM!
http://climateaudit.org/2007/01/09/ward-hunt-ice-shelf-stratigraphy/
Excerpt:
The driftwood pieces located back of the present Ellesmere Island ice shelf with ages varying from 3000 to 6120 years could not have arrived at their present positions in the presence of the ice shelf and therefore give a maximum age for the beginning of the ice shelf. Although this driftwood could most easily have been brought in during a period of an open or nearly open Arctic Ocean, sample 261A with an age of only 980 years was most likely deposited when the Arctic Ocean was ice-covered. (p 43). … Thick growths of ice, of which T3 [an ice island] is a remnant, probably began in Yelverton Bay about 5500 years ago and in the vicinity of Ward Hunt Island about 3000 years ago