NSIDC has changed their color scheme, but you can see that the area of thick, older ice has greatly increased since 2008. The lack of MYI (multi-year ice) in 2008 led Mark Serreze to bet on an ice-free pole that summer.
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2011/040511.html
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2008/040708.html
when do we get your prediction for this years minimum?
and did you predict this years maximum would be the second lowest on record?
I’m not going to waste my time with that this year. The wind can change extent by 500,000 km^2 in a couple of days, which makes it impossible to predict and of limited usefulness as a measurement.
What are you going to follow then, area or volume?
What difference does it make Peter Ellis? Either way don’t know what you’re talking about.
The melt season seems to be taking a long time getting started this year.
It started then it stopped
http://www.iup.physik.uni-bremen.de:8084/amsr/ext_rates_n.png
quite unsusual.
Also unusual is the Antarctic not putting on ice very fast at the moment.
http://www.iup.physik.uni-bremen.de:8084/amsr/ice_ext_s.png
It will be interesting to see what the thicker ice does this summer. That nutter Steve linked to who thought it would all be gone should be reading this.
Andy
The start of the melt season has historically been dominated by ice at low latitudes, such as the Gulf of St Lawrence. This year that ice never formed to any great extent. Since it’s not there, it can’t melt out, and the start of the melt season is thereby delayed.
This does not constitute recovery.
Is there normally a lot of MYI in Quebec?
Plenty during the Glacial Maximum!
Steve,
If we are comparing ice to glacial maximums, you are in deeeeeep trouble talking about recovery. Never seen you and Mike on opposite sides before. Wow he has given the warmest NEW ammunition to use against you heretics!
ZZZzzzz….
Tony Duncan,
There’s nothing to ‘recover’ from.What’s happening in Arctic ice, including in 2007, is normal. No recovery is needed when everything is normal.
Amino,
are you CRAZY. Using Mike’s starting point we are missing at LEAST a kilometer of ice over Manhattan.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2011/04/07/manhattan-still-above-water/
Steve,
Not to worry, I jumped on that one right away.
It just occurred to me that this is all an elaborate scam. That you PAYED Reiss to say he was wrong, and all of the people who claim to have read the book, and in fact the Salon article WAS accurate.
Boy I would sure have to eat some crow if you pulled that one off.
Of course at that point, faced with irrefutable evidence I will admit I was taken in by a bogus claim and apologize to you for making a mistake! Boy the excitement and nervousness I feel waiting to read that quote. Hard to stand the tension isn’t it?
I hacked the Salon web site. neither Reiss nor Hansen ever said that.
Steve,
That was my original theory remember. But maybe you forget that Reiss says he made the mistake, not that he never said anything like that and some climate denier must have hacked the site.
Steve, I do have some compassion. No one ever said that you were wrong about the salon article originally. Even me, to my shame did not question the veracity of the article.
The problem is that once you were presented with PROOF that you were wrong, you did not just admit it and then proceed to ridicule the REAL prediction. I would have had no problem with that, and your reputation would not be suffering from your constant inability to admit making what was initially an honest mistake.
Again I appreciate you continuing to keep the issue on the front burner so to speak.
Summarizing – Hansen has been making ridiculous bloated predictions for over a generation.
Steve,
summarizing. Steve can’t admit making a mistake.
Yes, I made the prediction and wrote the article. I also control Hansen’s mind.
Steve,
you are confused. But i understand it know. SALLY Hansen wrote the article, not JIM Hansen. Understandable mistake.
and nobody made the prediction in the article, it was a MISQUOTE. And I doubt you control Hansen’s mind, or he would be explaining how evil he was, and that he was wrong about everything, had lied about global warming and that the other scientists who still believe it are engaged in fraud in order to destroy the world economy and enrich the elite liberals and relegate the poor and middle class and all conservatives who are honest to poverty and famine.
Should have some BIG NEWS today. This is exciting!!!
That last chart indicates that the claimed upswing amounts to mere noise. I haven’t seen this chart before. At first glance it’s disturbing. Then I notice there is no 10 or 100 or 10,000 year old ice measured at all, so it really only represents recent fluctuation after all. Still, the Arctic is not as much of a sceptic’s playground as is the Antarctic which is much more massive, at least.
Ice typically traverses the Arctic in five years or less and melts in the North Atlantic. That is why there isn’t any really old ice.
I see the ice experts are coming out for this one. Funny how global warming has spawned so many experts.
I’m not an expert, but eyeballing the ice chart above I’d say whatever change there has been is quite tiny. The temperatures have leveled off over since 1998, the ice leveled off until 2007 then sank like a brick. Why?