Over the past week, most of the ice “loss” in the Arctic Basin appears to have been due to ice compaction rather than melt. Winds are circulating clockwise and compacting the ice towards the North Pole. Also important to note that the albedo of clouds is generally higher than the ice.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- UK Net Zero
- Erasing 1921
- “the world’s most eminent climate scientists”
- Warming Toledo
- One Year Left To Save The Planet
- Cold Hurricanes
- Plant Food
- President Trump Gets Every Question Right
- The Inflation Reduction Act
- Saving The Ecosystem
- Two Weeks Past The End Of The World
- Desperate State Of The Cryosphere
- “most secure in American history”
- “Trump moves to hobble major US climate change study”
- April 11, 1965 Tornado Outbreak
- The CO2 Endangerment Finding
- Climate Correlation
- What Me Worry?
- Heatwaves Of 1980
- More Proof Of Global Warming
- Shutting Down The Climate
- ChatGPT Research Proposal
- Warming Twice As Fast
- Understanding Climate Science
- Recycling The Same News Every Century
Recent Comments
- gordon vigurs on “the world’s most eminent climate scientists”
- gordon vigurs on Plant Food
- gordon vigurs on Plant Food
- gordon vigurs on “the world’s most eminent climate scientists”
- arn on UK Net Zero
- conrad ziefle on UK Net Zero
- czechlist on UK Net Zero
- Francis Barnett on “the world’s most eminent climate scientists”
- Francis Barnett on “the world’s most eminent climate scientists”
- arn on UK Net Zero
It’s melting. We are DOOMED!!!
Disgaree, most ice is melting in place, most fractured ice is on the Canadian side and that is not being pushed anywhere.
This obsession with wind always making ice disappear is the main problem climate sceptics fall upon to try and avoid any sort of warmth melting ice. Pamela Gray is the main proponent on this at WUWT. So much so she is going for a plus 5.5 million KM 2 extent based only on wind patterns. Give me a break. She says if the AO stays negative it will be 5.5+, funny how AO is low and yet we are seeing massive 2007 style melt at the moment. She really really does not have a clue, even Steve Mosher is getting bored with her claptrap.
Right. You can see individual floes of ice moving undeformed.
Well, given floes have a visible melting of 10% during few days, you’d sell your carbon car?
I don’t see it.
Watching polar ice melt/blow away is like watching paint dry. On what basis do you define the 2007 melt/blow away as “massive”? A meager thirty years of satellite observations is woefully short of sufficient duration to establish “normal” arctic summer ice coverage if indeed there is such thing as the optimal amount of ice coverage. So let’s have fun with this thing, like buying lottery tickets. Because plus or minus a few million square kilometers of Arctic ice means squat to our well-being.