Every year we are told by Nobel Prize winners, climate scientists and environmental activists that the Arctic will be ice-free that year. They are flat-earthers.
It is impossible for the Arctic to be ice-free under current climate conditions, because the Earth is round. Because of the high albedo of clouds and ice and the low angle of the sun, north of 80N they don’t get enough solar energy to melt that much ice. The prevailing winds also jam the ice up against the Canadian Coast, and make it very thick.
Climate scientists have been making idiotic predictions about an ice-free Arctic for generations. They have no idea what they are talking about.
North Pole already ice-free in 2000
Ages-Old Icecap at North Pole Is Now Liquid, Scientists Find – NYTimes.com
Arctic ice-free by 2012.
The Daily Reporter – Google News Archive Search
Arctic ice-free by 2013
BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013’
Arctic ice-free by 2014.
Gore: Polar ice cap may disappear by summer 2014
Arctic ice-free by 2015.
What climate scientists talk about now – FT.com
The End of the Arctic? Ocean Could be Ice Free by 2015 – The Daily Beast
The Argus-Press – Google News Archive Search
Scientists have been saying this same story for generations.
04 Apr 1923 – THE NORTH POLE. – Trove
The Changing Face of the Arctic – The Changing Face of the Arctic – View Article – NYTimes.com
The Argus-Press – Google News Archive Search
19 Jun 1972, Page 41 – at Newspapers.com
12 Dec 2007, Page 25 – Arizona Republic at Newspapers.com
From the first link is this LIE!
“The last time the Arctic was clear of ice is believed to be about 100,000 to 120,000 years ago”
No just early in THIS interglacial period,were long periods of time of little to NO summer ice in the Arctic region.
This was during the Climatic Optimism time that lasted around 5,000 years.
At least they confirm that it is not something to worry about because it is normal in an interglacial period. Ice at the end of summer would be something to worry about.
Its an anecdotal illustration of conditions but if anyone has not seen it in 2007 the BBC TV show Top Gear ran a race of a pickup against a dog sled to the magnetic north pole, to be the first car to get there. Not to mention that its an incredibly enjoyable TV show.
I saw that one.
I started out feeling sorry for the poor schlub with the dogs compared to the guys with drinking hot coffee from a thermos in their heated truck.
When the guys in the truck started hitting fields of ice blocks and they had to go outside and chop a path, mushing behind the dogs was looking a lot better.
The only ICE I can bring myself to care about is the internal combustion engine. I can’t see much happening in polar regions without those.
On the other hand
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-36560548
Those scientists predicted
“The CPOM team has developed a model to forecast the evolution of melt ponds in the Arctic and has incorporated this into a more general climate sea-ice model. Its simulations suggest sea-ice extent for the end of this coming summer will be 4.5 (+/- 0.5) million square km. This number is for an average across the entire month of September – traditionally the period of minimum coverage.”
So they were not too far off as according to NSIDC
Arctic sea ice extent during September 2016 averaged 4.72 million square kilometers.
So deserve a pat on the back unlike Prof Wadham.
Andy
Unfortunately it is crackpots like Wadhams,Maslowski and Beckwith who gets the MEDIA ink.
4.5 Wadhams… That is one HECK of a lot of sea ice.
There are only 6 countries in the world with more area than that.
Did you notice DMI reworked that ice volume chart a few days ago, 2016 is now shown below the 2004-13 mean line it was dead behind for most of the season, and now equal/below 2012 at the minimum!
Nothing but Psy-Ops and lies.
There are a lot of ‘journalists’ and ‘scientists’ that need to be introduced to Madame Guillotine.
Unfortunately for them, I am joking but others are not.
Don’t bother with the tools. Go for those manipulating and funding them and their functionaries and enforcers. Even cutting the list down that much would have many 1,000s making the regretful climb. Set the machine up at the base of the Washington Monument. The tree of liberty needs seriously watered.
There are a lot of ‘journalists’ and ‘scientists’ that know too much. You know what the Clintons do with people that know too much. These ‘journalists’ and ‘scientists’ could have a problem with president Madame Guillotine Hillary. But then who is not in danger with her as president.
Wow I had missed that and I had been using the volume chart all summer as a less diddled with representation of the actual state of the ice.
All is post normal science now with adjusted adjustments comprising most charts and graphs.
One might think that “ice free” means the surface of the Arctic Ocean would have no ice – that is, no, zero, zip, none.
That’s what I thought several years ago. I was wrong!
I missed the memo, but “ice free” was defined to be less than 1 million square kilometers. This is now (a unit) known as the Wadhams.
So, when someone writes “it will all be gone” or “In the end, it will just melt away quite suddenly”, remember that the goal posts have been moved.
I wonder if they will move to “2 Wadhams”?
They never admit they are wrong, just keep moving the goal posts further and further back. But if you look at their actual track record going back 30 years, they have been wrong time and time again. If they were investment advisers, they would have been out on the street a long time ago.
I think they will move to one circumpolar navigation in one season, even if it does not incorporate an official Northwest Passage along with a Northeast passage.
It’s unfortunate that a scientific unit was named after Peter Wadhams (the ‘leading scientist’ cited in the Independent article). He’s a crackpot. He believes three climate scientists: Seymour Laxon, Katherine Giles, and Tim Boyd, were assassinated by either big oil or some evil government.
Laxon fell down a flight of stairs at a New year’s Eve party (alcohol?)
Giles died when she was hit by a truck while riding her bicycle
Boyd was struck by lightning.
I have as much confidence in Professor Wadhams climate theories as I do in his conspiracy theories.
Not unfortunate at all
It makes a MOCKERY of him
Which is exactly what he deserves
Don’t worry too much about a scientific unit being named after Wadhams. I don’t think it is official. I think it was only coined and used here to poke fun at him.
I think we could use a similar unit for lies. “Hillarys”
It likely would be so big as to be awkward to use, so we might commonly use micro-Hillarys and nano-Hillarys. Just the other day I used about 3 atto-Hillarys.
Bookmarking this one for future use
Thank you, Tony, for your efforts to expose the technological web of deceit that engulfs now society. The investigative reported, Jon Rappoport, seems to have realized the problem independently of the global climate change movement.
A report that solar cosmic rays produce electrically charged clouds, lightening, thunder and rain was accepted for publication on 13 Oct 2016.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/COSMIC_RAYS.pdf
The sloping error in the cornerstone of post-Modern Physics was published earlier this year in the three different journals or conference proceedings that are cited as (Manuel, 2016 a,b,d). No scientist or editor of any research journal can realistically claim to be unable to grasp the error in using a sloping baseline to define the nuclear energy that powers the Sun and the cosmos.
That has nothing to do with this topic.
Tony, be aware, that the “Sea Ice Thickness” graph from danish DMI has changed in the last couple of days. I include the graph, as I found it 10-Oct-2016. The change seems to be toward showing less ice. We have a little discussion, if the changes to this model always is toward showing less ice.
You should just be aware of this, if you use this graph in the future.
Let’s look at those two graphs next to each other
WTF are they playing at ?????????
Or are these two TOTALLY DIFFERENT things??
Everything seems to have changed.
Yeah, they seem to have removed about 2,500 km3 of Arctic ice in the spring and maybe 2,000 km3 of Arctic ice in the fall.
You can see both the danish and english graphs by clicking the flag in upper right on the page:
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icethickness/thk.uk.php
They seemed to have changed all the historic graphs on their server (which may or may not make sense, when you change a model), but some are available at the Web Archive:
https://web.archive.org/web/20160317032817/http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icethickness/thk.uk.php
And be aware that some graphs (even on the Web Archive) show one thing in the small format on the website, and something else when you click the image to get a larger version.
Official explanation from
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icethickness/icetext.uk.php
“New graphics
We have improved the DMI operational ocean and sea-ice model HYCOM-CICE with updated HYCOM code, which includes a better description of the tides. The friction between the ocean and sea-ice is also increased and the climatological freshwater input has been updated. The model has been running continuously since September 1997. Therefore, we have by October 13, 2016 updated the graphics of sea-ice thickness and volume using the new and improved data on Polarportal and ocean.dmi.dk.
The improved model setup has led to a slight decrease in the calculated sea-ice thickness, especially during winter. Year-to-year variability has also decreased. However, the trend between years is almost unchanged. Thereby, a year with a large sea-ice volume in the old setup also has a large volume in the new setup, and similar for years with low sea-ice volume.
Mads Hvid Ribergaard – 13. October 2016”
I would not call 10% ‘Slight’. Looking at the distribution of colors on the two maps, they seem to have cut down the thickness of any ice over 3m by about .5 m. This is particularly noticeable just north of the Canadian archipelago and Greenland. The thinner ice (and extent) seems much less affectd by the algorithmic change.
I wonder if they bother to validate the model with actual measurement onsite? You know, go there and put a ruler to it…
Thanks John for this They seem to be always tweaking again, which is fair enough.
That’s why multiple charts from multiple sources need to be cross referenced.
Andy
Pingback: The “Ice-Free Arctic” Big Lie - Principia Scientific International
The extent charts – as here -are showing that the initial refreeze has slowed and that we now have ice extent at a record low for this date… also the rate of refreeze much less steep than in former years…
https://seaice.uni-bremen.de/amsr2/index.html
also the other ice thickness charts show a much worse picture:
https://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticictnnowcast.gif
any discussion of this ice needs to show both volume and extent: switching between them to pick the highest is misleading
this is not ice in good shape/recovering
Now perhaps you can do a tiny amount of basic research and figure out why the Arctic sea ice growth has slowed, but Greenland mass is increasing rapidly.
If can ever engage your brain, you may just be able to figure it out… or not.
Oh , btw, Sea ice area has started to accelerate again the last two day.
It will be up with the rest of the years come December.
Then next year, with no EL Nino.. could get very discouraging for that sea ice worriers. :-)
The “Daily Mean Temperatures in the Arctic” north of 80th northern parallel seem rather high from the normal this time of year.
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php
How much is latent heat from the fast growth of sea ice, we have seen the last month?
There has been a low pressure up at the Pole more than usual. It is like the whirlpool of a bathtub, sucking milder air north and losing it to outer space. The milder plumes of air, sort of like feeder-bands for the low pressure, are responsible for the milder-than-normal (but still cold) temperatures.
It remains to be seen whether this loss of heat to outer space will make the winter colder-than-normal further south, or merely is indicative of the planet holding more heat to begin with, due to the lagged effects of the last El Nino.
Interesting point.
A professor at the university told me recently, that the heat transfer from equator to the poles is about 50/50 by ocean currents and wind. The water can hold more heat than the air, but as the currents are slower than winds, it is about 50/50 heat transfer in the end.
El Niño is release of heat from the ocean (as I understand it), and the heat will start to build up again. So an El Niño event and the higher temperaturen in the Arctic, as we see now means, the Earth gets rid of a lot of heat this year.
Will be interesting to see, how cold it will get the coming years. Not too cold, I hope.