Not only has NSIDC lost track of the South Pole, but Real Climate has too
Polar Amplification
Filed under: Arctic and Antarctic Climate modelling Climate Science Greenhouse gases — group @ 2 January 2006
Guest commentary by Cecilia Bitz, University of Washington“Polar amplification” usually refers to greater climate change near the pole compared to the rest of the hemisphere or globe in response to a change in global climate forcing, such as the concentration of greenhouse gases (GHGs) or solar output (see e.g. Moritz et al 2002). Polar amplification is thought to result primarily from positive feedbacks from the retreat of ice and snow. There are a host of other lesser reasons that are associated with the atmospheric temperature profile at the poles, temperature dependence of global feedbacks, moisture transport, etc. Observations and models indicate that the equilibrium temperature change poleward of 70N or 70S can be a factor of two or more greater than the global average.
Antarctica is cooling and ice is increasing. The theory is fatally flawed.
The whole amplification theory has been pole-axed.
Real Climate? I never go there now. A visit there seems a bit like walking in to the wrong part of a city you don’t know.
Bunch of climate modellers trying very hard to convince everyone that what they are paid to do isn’t utterly worthless.
‘Observations and models indicate…’
‘Observations OF models indicate…’ Note to Real Climate: Pick a lane. If you choose fantasy, please stay in your lane.
http://www.intellicast.com/Global/Temperature/Current.aspx
It seems that intellicast has lost the Antarctic as well.
They are the greatest losers!
So the ice surrounding Antarctica is at lower latitudes (therefore reflecting more energy) then the Ice in the artic circle. In the S.H,. as the seasons move towards the S.H. summer, the earth moves closer to the sun and the S.H. ice is reflecting insulation that is at its peak, 7% more intense then in the N.H. Antarctica sea ice reflect more intense and more direct sunlight!
So the antarctic is reflecting more sunlight whilst the ice-free arctic is LW radiating away loads of extra heat. Doesn’t sound too good overall, does it?
That may well be the case, but I have not seen any decent research or studies on that.