Arctic sea ice continues to grow at unprecedented rates, and is the highest for the date in over a decade.
Meanwhile, the government controlled press and government agencies continue to tell endless lies about the Arctic
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Ellen Flees To The UK
- HUD Climate Advisor
- Causes Of Increased Storminess
- Scientist Kamala Harris
- The End Of Polar Bears
- Cats And Hamsters Cause Hurricanes
- Democrats’ Campaign Of Joy
- New BBC Climate Expert
- 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- “the United States has suffered a “precipitous increase” in hurricane strikes”
- Thing Of The Past Returns
- “Impossible Heatwaves”
- Billion Dollar Electric Chargers
- “Not A Mandate”
- Up Is Down
- The Clean Energy Boom
- Climate Change In Spain
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
Recent Comments
- Peter Carroll on Causes Of Increased Storminess
- arn on HUD Climate Advisor
- spren on HUD Climate Advisor
- conrad ziefle on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Tel on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Petit_Barde on Ellen Flees To The UK
- dm on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Gamecock on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Richard E Fritz on The End Of Polar Bears
- Richard E Fritz on Scientist Kamala Harris
Periodicity-my dear Watson!
AMO is changing on the Atlantic side.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/esrl-amo/from:1900/to
N Atlantic is changing “fast and furious” back to pre-1995 temps,
http://www.climate4you.com/images/NODC%20NorthAtlanticOceanicHeatContent0-700mSince1955%20With37monthRunningAverage.gif
In fact, it’s going down as fast as it went up in 1995, suggesting that the flip to negative AMO could happen already this decade.
No wonder the Globalists are so frantic to get an agreement at the Paris-ite meeting in December! The lies aren’t going to hold much longer.
The hyper-duper El Nino is not helping them very much – temperatures are not rising as in 2010 or 1997-98 – and the polar icecaps are obviously on our side! 🙂
They cannot “explain” anything that lasts more than 2 weeks…
That is a cool chart, pardon the pun.
It explains some of the old newspaper stories I read and post on Twitter.
Is there a similar chart recording heat content for the North Pacific?
Cheers
Here is another chart, for all oceans
http://www.climate4you.com/images/ArgoGlobalSummaryGraph.gif
the entire article at climate4you is here,
http://www.climate4you.com/SeaTemperatures.htm#Global%20ocean%20temperatures%20from%20surface%20to%202000%20m%20depth
the one for the Pacific ocean 0-100 meters depth is
http://www.climate4you.com/images/Pacific3monthTemperatureSince1955Depth0-100m.gif
but, if the PDO is in negative phase since 2008, how the Pacific can be so warm? Maybe it’s following a similar path as the Atlantic but out of phase by a few years.
I have to admit that I don’t understand what is happening with the PDO very well. The AMO, on the other hand, looks like a very precise thermometer of Earth’s global temperatures.
Where is MS troll we miss you LOL
eliza…. oh no, don’t provoke him – he’s back at 2.54pm… damn.
antarctic ice also above average
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/S_timeseries.png
we are globally cooling from the top latitudes downward
obviously, at some places in between these latitudes it will get warmer:
bigger T differential between pole and equator
H2O (g) => H2O (l) + energy
logical….?.
I guess so, if you think that top latitudes are more sensible to solar radiations.
Radiations are lower now than at the end of 2013 and 2014, and the increasing Arctic ice seems to be reflecting this fact.
If this is true, 2016 will be a “paradise” for the skeptics.
We had solar minimum in 1976, 86 and 96, corresponding to cycles 20, 21 and 22, and very low in 2006. Next year we could again have low intensity of solar activity, which could extend, in the present cycle, up to 2018 or 2019.
Depending on how cycle C25 starts, we could have a period of 7 to 8 years of very low radiations ahead of us, directly affecting the polar icecaps and Earth’s temperatures, and depleting the amount of energy stored in Earth’s atmosphere and oceans.
I believe the 2020’s will be cold.
SWAG here. I think it is the solar radiation in the tropics that is intercepted by O2/O3 that makes a big difference.
I never understood the role of O3 on climate very well.
Do you have a reference, Gail?
I was thinking in terms of smaller layer of atmosphere at the poles, therefore the surface is closer to the stratosphere and more directly affected by solar activity.
I am afraid it is not very straight forward. The Brewer-Dobson Circulation is part of it.
A couple links to old comments with luck the right ones. The rain has been making my computer connection dicey so I rather not check.
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/06/22/global-warming-causes-simultaneous-british-droughts-and-floods/#comment-527180
http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2014/12/18/agu-presentation-argues-that-ne-pacific-centennial-trend-is-mostly-natural/comment-page-1/#comment-95825
(I have 20 pages of notes/links on the subject.)
Thanks Gail, you’re the best! 🙂
Steven, you are using the wrong graph again. This is the correct graph from the Danish Meteorological Institute. They know more about their data than you do: http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icecover.uk.php
By now it should be clear to everyone that you intend to deceive your readers. But thanks for publishing the three articles explaining what is really happening in the Arctic. Kind of an own goal on your part.
Your bizarre paranoia is entertaining, to say the least.
Martin, your comments have reached an incredible level of absurdity. I think we might be able to help you if you could provide a mission statement.
My mission statement here is the same as Steven Goddard’s: Just having fun.
Your mission, though you do not know it, is to destroy the alarmists’ credibility by repeatedly making provably false accusations on this site. Please prove me wrong and show me where you have pestrered alarmists over their false statements.
You mean, just being ridiculous?
Same mission, hmmm. I don’t know whether to declare fraud or send you a minion card.
Are you crazy? No card! The Minion Local 80305 will not allow it. Smitty’s doing minion work for free. Thousands of card-carrying Goddard minions are out of work.
According to Martin, those two weeks in late August and early September are climate while the rest of the chart is weather.
“is to destroy the alarmists’ credibility ……”
The one and only thing he is actually having great success at ! 🙂
Martin-
Why do you believe the 15% concentration graph is more appropriate than the 30% graph? I don’t claim to know which is better, so I’m interested in your thoughts on the differences.
Tony-
Same question, but for the 30% graph.
30% is more accurate since you can see the ice better. 15% means it is really spotty. Also 15% is going to change a lot more depending on the wind bunching up or spreading out the sea ice.
Gail, the biggest difference is that including the coastal zones will show less ice.
Also, Tony has been using the 30% graph as his baseline for years. I remember requesting an explanation of the 15% vs 30% years back and Tony obliged.
So he’s picked an indicator (that the DMI obviously thinks is significant) and has hung his hat on it for quite a while. I’ve yet to see him jump between the 15% and 30% charts when it either suited his purposed.
On a purely objective basis, the 30% chart shows data since 2005 but the 15% chart seems to show only 5 years. That alone is a factor that gives an edge to the 30% chart.
It’s just Smitty being himself. I mean Shifty. Err, Speedy …
https://coloradowellington.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/troll-shifty-and-speedy.jpg
No, dave, they don’t. Here is what the DMI says about it: “The plot above [the 15%graph] replaces an earlier sea ice extent plot [the 30% graph], that was based on data with the coastal zones masked out. This coastal mask implied that the previous sea ice extent estimates were underestimated. The new plot displays absolute sea ice extent estimates. The old plot can still be viewed here for a while.”
Steven uses the 30% graph because, as the DMI points out, it implies that “the previous sea ice extent estimates were underestimated.” Stevenis using that to claim that Arctic sea ice is recovering. It is not recovering.
You are WRONG, Martin the Gore bot.
Your trolling misdirection becoming A JOKE
The second graph is an alternative methodology. Neither graph is incorrect.
The graph SG uses is the same one he has been using and is the most CONSISTENT it also displays data over a longer time period. It is the CORRECT graph to use.
This CORRECT graph shows that this year has an Arctic sea ice level, under that consistent longer term metric, that is above all years back to 2005.
That is the only reason Martin the Gore bot has for not liking the graph, is because it conveys REAL FACTS that his brain-washed miasma cannot accept
Ted, the Danish Meteorological Institute, where Steven gets his 30% graph, says the 15% graph is correct. Here is the DMI’s explanation: “The plot above [the 15%graph] replaces an earlier sea ice extent plot [the 30% graph], that was based on data with the coastal zones masked out. This coastal mask implied that the previous sea ice extent estimates were underestimated. The new plot displays absolute sea ice extent estimates. The old plot can still be viewed here for a while.”
Thank you for your response.
I asked the question because I genuinely don’t know, so any opinion I could give on the relative merits of the two datasets would be pointless. But it’s been mentioned that Tony has used the 30% graph for many years. As you correctly imply, the two graphs aren’t showing the same data. As such, how would you propose that Tony keeps his historical comparisons relevant? Perhaps you could suggest a similar data set that goes back as far as the 30% graph. Again, as you’ve correctly implied, there can be no meaningful discussions between people using incompatible data.
DMI does not say SG is using the wrong graph.
All the second graph is, is an alternative methodology. Neither graph is incorrect.
The graph SG uses is the same one he has been using and is the most CONSISTENT it also displays data over a longer time period.
This CORRECT graph shows that this year has an Arctic sea ice level, under that consistent longer term metric, that is above all years back to 2005.
That is the only reason Martin the Gore bot has for not liking the graph, because it conveys REAL FACTS that his brain-washed miasma cannot accept.
Yes, they know they have two sets of data that show slightly different things, and they probably do know the data better better since they work with it every day but what the hell does that have to do with anything? It’s data. I find “using the wrong graph” very telling. There is no “wrong graph”, only data. Both graphs give information. One shows free floating ice away from the coast and the other shows all image-able ice (with different %’s). That’s why Warmistas love the GIS graphs instead of RSS. GIS shows a nice adjusted uptrend and RSS shows the pause. You need to look at both to really try to get the whole picture.
Discerning ice along coasts can be quite troublesome at times. It is more error prone.
The count is also more affected by winds etc.
The graph masking out the costs is more CONSISTENT and contains less error.
and because it goes back more than just a couple of years, it is almost certainly the CORRECT graph to use.
Martin the Gore bot is just throwing in a damp squib misdirection, because its all that he has to work with.
typo correction
The graph masking out the coasts is more CONSISTENT…..
The low-level gore bot returns.
Martin is a software engineer with ZERO understand of anything to do with climate science.
He also markets himself as a technical writer.. one can only imagine how un-technical those rants would be !!
He also thinks the cartoonist site , SkS, actually present something resembling science.. seriously !!!
He frequents a site run by a Peter Sinclair aka Greenman, who fancies himself as a low-end videographer making propaganda mis-information videos about anyone who questions the AGW meme. Peter was apparently “trained” ie brain-washed, by Al Gore.
His soul reason for being here is DISRUPT, because he has absolutely ZERO knowledge or intent to learn.
https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/troll_closet_scr.jpg
The only person trying to deceive is You, Martin the Gore bot.
SG is using the longest term graph that DMI produce. It is the one he has always used.
The one SG uses is the CORRECT graph, It is CONSISTENT, and covers a longer time period.
What really hurts the Gore bot is the FACT that it shows that this years sea ice, using this consistent metric, is now greater than any year back to 2005, and still climbing rapidly.
That is data that Martin the Gore bot just cannot allow past its brain-washing.
It is data Martin the Alarmist Pigeon can not allow to become common knowledge.
The Gorebots Ready to fly to the rescue of Paris-ite funding!
http://www.pigeondb.com/images/hero/site/pigeondb/raceday.jpg
Can’t jeopardize the fleecing of the Sheeple now can we?
Ahh our hero is back! Actually the graph you like 15% DMI is showing highest ice on that record as well Idiota~
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icecover.uk.php go ahead and use it here as much as you like we agree!
In a couple of weeks it could be above 2013 and 2014 and possibly comparable to 2004, which was the last time the anomalies were near zero at the end of the year,
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomaly.arctic.png
WRONG GRAPH!
WRONG GRAPH!
WRONG GRAPH!
Sorry, I couldn’t resist.
🙂
https://coloradowellington.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/troll-wrong-graph.jpg
Neither could I. Smith essence personified.
CW, I like your renditions of Martin.
They are child-like and obviously brainless and very stupid.
A very good match.
Have you got one of him sucking his thumb or a child’s dummy ?
I found this in minions’ archives:
https://coloradowellington.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/troll-wong-gwaf.jpg
perfect 🙂
The above directly link is giving the wrong graph, the present anomaly if -0.69 million km2
https://dmhscratch1.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/arctic-atmos-uiuc-edu-cryosphere-seaice-anomaly-arctic-nov-11-2015.png
Eyeballing that NH sea ice graph, it also shows ‘The Pause™” for about 10 years.
Yes, and I think It’s related with solar radiation and the AMO.
The ice started to decline in 1995 and reached a “threshold” in 2007. It was low the entire year of 2007 and this pattern never happened again after that, not even in 2012, which had a lower minimum but also a high extent in the first trimester, indicating that the Arctic basin was colder than 2007.
I tend to think that the Arctic ice recover actually started when the present low solar cycle began, but only became more obvious in the last 3 years.
If solar activity was high after 2007 the Arctic would probably be ice free, during the summer, by now.
MS is paid to do this its obvious. I don’t think he is even interested in the subject. Its like work for him instructions from da Boss quite entertaining indeed!
There’s a group of morons from Peter Sinclair’s blog that tend to spread themselves around realist blogs in an attempt to disrupt.
From what I have seen, they are all equally as inept and ignorant.
They get their info from SkS, so that is one obvious reason for their combined idiocy.
Martin Smith says: “….Steven, you are using the wrong graph again. This is the correct graph…”
Steven can use what ever damn graph he please from DMI. IT is HIS BLOG, so Piss-off troll!
This from the Guardian article above: “In 2010, Shakhova’s team published results showing that 7 teragrammes of methane was bubbling to the surface annually in the ESAS.”
Now, I’m not a geologist but is teragram a common unit for gasses? Just wondering. Seems they usually use metric tons, so this would be 7 million metric tons, I think.
Not common, but acceptable in the grosso modo sense. The teragram is one trillion grams, but as there are different values in the common use for “billion” and “trillion” depending on the language and/or history of the word use, it can be useful.
And yes, 7 million metric tonnes would be it.
Martin the Gore bot also shows his ignorance wrt the AMO and the Arctic sea ice mean on his “incorrect” DMI graph. He makes moronic comments about the current level being below the mean, therefore isn’t growing.
For a guy would says he once did a Uni maths degree, this is a pretty bizarre comment.
Lets look at the AMO and look at the period that mean is calculated on. (1979 – 2000)
http://climate.mr-int.ch/images/graphs/amo.png
You can all see that this period is at the very bottom of the AMO cycle, when Arctic sea ice would be near its maximum extent in the 60 odd year cycle.
You can also see why the alarmista ABSOLUTELY MUST start in 1979 with their ice trend, and do everything to ignore the FACT that the AMO is now heading downwards again.
Martin the Gore bot is making a FOOL of all climate alarmists by constantly displaying his ABJECT IGNORANCE.
Well done Martin. 🙂
At the present pace the AMO and the Arctic ice will be back to 1970’s / early 1980’s anomalies and extent in about 10 years.
If solar cycle C25 turns out as low as many are predicting, we could have LIA levels in 20 years.
This is very serious stuff, and MS and his team are talking about “warming”…
The big problem is the USA got rid of their Grain Reserves
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/sep/21/opinion/la-oe-kaufman-food-hunger-drought-20120921
Yep, the fact that Arctic sea ice is edging back into less than 1 sd below the cold period mean, so soon after the peak in the AMO, is certainly not a good sign.
Where’s all this global warming they promised us 🙁
From that chart, I’d comfortably say that in 2035-40 AMO may well be same as 1970 and the whole “Another Ice Age is Beginning” mantra will suddenly reappear. At the same time, I reckon the political elites will have their global carbon tax in place and be cashing in big time as the demand & price of fossil fuels increases. Soros buying coal companies is a case in point. And Royal Dutch Shell will be enjoying increases in the oil price again, similar to 1970-80.
It explains to me why the Arctic was wide open in 1951 according to my old Australian newspaper records on Dr Hans Ahlmann of the Swedish Geographic Institute
” In 1910 most of the (Russian Arctic) sea lanes were open for only three months. Now they are open eight months each year.”
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/71392865
And in 1920 the Russians were battling the ice.
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/152932080
It does match the AMO and not CO2.
We’ve already seen the template for this, with the “ozone hole.” Once they’ve passed all the legislation they think they can get, they’ll declare victory, and find a new crisis to ride toward whatever goals they’ve already established. They’ll point to the lower temperatures as proof of their omniscience. They’ll tell us that since they saved us from the last unsolvable existential crisis, we have no choice but to trust them to fix whatever the new one is.
I always figured the Ozone Con Game was the trial run for the Global Warming Con Game.
Thanks for the additional information on the relation of the AMO with Earth’s temperatures, the correlation is impressive and I only started to notice it in the recent months.
Here is the global lower troposphere temperature above oceans since 1979 (UAH). Look at what happened in 2008,
http://www.climate4you.com/images/MSU%20UAH%20SST%20GlobalMonthlyTempSince1979%20With37monthRunningAverage%20WithARGO.gif
The original article is here,
http://www.climate4you.com/SeaTemperatures.htm#Sea%20surface%20temperatures
PS Andy,
May I use that chart on Twitter?
Along with Chris Beal’s solar activity/ENSO charts, its one of the best ones I’ve seen.
Cheers from Australia.
not my chart.. hunted for it on the web, found it.
go for it.
here is another one showing the same sort of relationship with Swiss glaciers.
Very instructive , I reckon.
http://oi51.tinypic.com/24yptu0.jpg
Cheers from NSW 🙂
Cheers mate.
Nice graph re Antarctic sea ice. 🙂
Was global warming what done it !!
https://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2015/11/10/sea-ice-extent-global-antarctic-and-arctic-day-313/antarctic-sea-ice-extent-for-day-313-from-1978/
Try that link again. wrong copy.
https://sunshinehours.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/antarctic-sea-ice-extent-for-day-313-from-1978.png
First of all, “The Guardian” is Hell’s mouthpiece, they “Love-the-Lie” and hate the Truth ! Which (Witch) lie it is doesn’t !
I am not exaggerating !!
Second, as for a completely depleted Arctic Ice circa Summer 2016, know one, but know one can be at such a high level of a complete loss of standing Brain Cells because that would be at such a far level of depletlessness that it would surpass all of the World’s Ice vanishing tomorrow, without waiting !
Therefore that cannot come from anyone in the Military, no way…
Now the problem is to seek out the “complete” idiot who added his/her mindlessness to something that came out from the U.S. Navy !!!
Even the “complete” nut-job currently residing in the White House would not delve so completely into such a asinine view !
This idiot deserves some kind of reward if only for the effort, know one is that stupid…
Dmh above just showed som ocean graphs from Climate 4 you.
HMMmmmm Look at what is happening in the deeper ocean where the shorter wavelengths of sunlight are penetrating:
http://www.climate4you.com/images/ArgoCircumArcticSince200401%2055N-65N.gif
http://www.john-daly.com/sverdrup.gif
Ouch.. cooling on its way !
Trenberth will have to look elsewhere for his “missing” heat !!
Yeah, isn’t that an interesting bit of data?
In the 600, 800, 1000 and 1200 meter depths there seems to be a dip ~2009, a peak at ~2012 and a decline from there.
Here is the sunspot data for that time period:
http://www.solen.info/solar/images/cycles23_24.png
Here is the Solar polar fields:
http://www.solen.info/solar/polarfields/polar.html
(Above graphs by Jan Alvestad based on data from WDC-SILSO, Brussels)
Oulu Neutron Count 1964 – 2014
https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/image_thumb.png
Solar Wind Flow Pressure 1971 – 2014
https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/image_thumb1.png
Several other sun related charts at WUWT:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/03/03/the-sun-wakes-up-highest-values-of-solar-cycle-24-observed-in-february-2014/
I sure would like to see the charts of Visible to EUV for the time period though.