Arctic Sea Ice Extent Is Highest In The Past Three Years

Desperate to keep their fraudulently obtained funding coming in, climate experts continue to insist that the Arctic is hot and rapidly melting.

The exact opposite is occurring. Arctic sea ice is growing very fast, and is now higher than 2015 and 2016.

Ocean and Ice Services | Danmarks Meteorologiske Institut

The ice edge is close to the 1981-2010 mean.

‎nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_daily_extent.png

Greenland is blowing away all records for ice gain this winter, having gained nearly 450 billion tons of ice since September 1.

Greenland Ice Sheet Surface Mass Budget: DMI

Global warming is the biggest scam in science history.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

65 Responses to Arctic Sea Ice Extent Is Highest In The Past Three Years

  1. Latitude says:

    I’m sorry, I just don’t trust any of this Arctic ice info…
    …until Griff condemns it

    :)

    • Sunsettommy says:

      He is busy being clobbered at WUWT today.

      https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/01/25/the-beginning-of-the-end-of-epa/#comment-2406742

      He will be here soon as he has a hard on over the North Pole.

      • Griff says:

        I’m concerned about a serious impact on our climate, yes…

        you? what’s your excuse for excusing the scientific evidence?

        • Gail Combs says:

          Because we know you are all wet and about to freeze solid.

        • Sunsettommy says:

          Gosh Griff, you mean this neat exchange which you quickly dropped out of:

          “Griff
          January 26, 2017 at 6:36 am

          I’m trying to think of something which actually might get through to you lot…

          catweazle666
          January 26, 2017 at 6:47 pm

          “I’m trying to think of something which actually might get through to you lot…”

          With your history of mendacity and slandering the likes of Willie Soon, Susan Cockcroft and Patrick Moore – to name but three of the individuals you have attempted to discredit professionally with your lies, plus your continuous lying about aspects of climate science, of which you are entirely ignorant, you’ve got no chance whatsoever.

          So you can tell your paymasters you’ve been blown, you pathetic little troll.

          Tough.”

          https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/01/25/the-beginning-of-the-end-of-epa/#comment-2408176

          • Sunsettommy says:

            Then later in the thread,Griff replied ME with his idiotic claim,ignoring the point that he never acknowledges:

            ” Sunsettommy
            January 25, 2017 at 7:58 am

            Griff, it is clear you didn’t notice that Jay didn’t advocate a return back to 1960’s level of protection,in fact he touted the existence of the EPA in the early years:

            “A Promising Beginning

            In the late 1960s, the United States faced real problems regarding the quality of its air and water, waste disposal, and contamination from mining and agriculture. Pollution crossed borders – the borders between private property as well as between cities, states, and nations – and traditional remedies based on private property rights didn’t seem to be working. The public was overly complacent about the possible threat to their safety.

            Many scientists, myself included, lobbied the federal government to form a cabinet-level agency to address these problems. [1] In 1971, EPA was born. During the agency’s first 10 years, Congress passed seven legislative acts to protect the environment, including the Water Pollution Control Act (later renamed the Clean Water Act), Safe Drinking Water Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and the Clean Air Act.

            At first, these laws worked well, protecting the environment and the health of our citizens. Problems were identified, measured, exposed, and major investments were made to reduce dangerous emissions and protect the public from exposure to them. EPA and other government agencies regularly report the subsequent dramatic reduction in all the pollutants we originally targeted. By the 1980s, nothing more needed to be done beyond monitoring our continuing success in cleaning up the environment. It was time to declare victory and go home.”

            Many laws and acts were passed to remove most of the problems that were of real concern,that by the 1980’s were of great success. But after that it becomes a diminishing returns, to keep squeezing the last bit of toothpaste from the container.

            Drop your off note concern for the “children”,since that is a leftist propaganda tactic to promote more regulations that have little reason to exist. The laws of the 1970’s had already addressed the concern for children when lead was taken out of gasoline and paint among other things. That the air and water became much cleaner.

            There will be no drive to repeal the original Air, Water and drinking water acts of the 1970’s as they did what was needed,now enforcement is what should be maintained, That is being proposed,for the 50 states to maintain.

            Stop trying to support an obviously corrupt,politically motivated institution!”

            Griff
            January 26, 2017 at 6:38 am

            Tommy -and I’m saying that when you relax the regs and hamstring the EPA, you start the drift – sprint? – back to the good ole days.

            who wins here? Corporation owners cutting their costs and increasing their dividends.”

            https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/01/25/the-beginning-of-the-end-of-epa/#comment-2406949

            The very next comment:

            “DonM
            January 26, 2017 at 4:32 pm

            Griff?

            What do you mean by “Corporation owners”? The stockholders?

            Corporations are not evil … intentional ignorance is evil. The City that you live in is a corporation. The entity that supplies you with with electricity is a corporation. Planned Parenthood is a corporation. Uber is a corporation. You are an idiot.”

            You are exposed as being a world class galoot!

        • 4TimesAYear says:

          Bin-busting crop yields?

    • Griff says:

      your wish…

      The extent is still at a record low for this time of year.

      which means it is the lowest it has been at this point in the arctic winter in human history.

      There has been a slight uptick in extent due to another tremendous storm pushing the (thin) ice about. It will be declining again shortly and is pretty near its winter peak – exceptionally early.

      If the red line is at the bottom of the chart, how is it recovering or the highest for 3 years?

      • Zardoz says:

        Wow! So you are aware of the extent of Greenland ice mass in arctic winter since the dawn of human history?! I had no idea.

        Funny, 800,000 years of ice cores don’t seem to dent your confidence (ice cores of this length have been sampled by the Russians showing several periods hotter than now – those ancient alien SUV’s must have been something!).

      • pmc47025 says:

        What a load of crap. The “in human history” part is hilarious. C’mon Griff, drink a cup of coffee and get both neurons firing before posting.

      • Gail Combs says:

        “which means it is the lowest it has been at this point in the arctic winter in human history.”

        Seems Griffy forgot that the Vikings HAD a written history.

        A sensational find at the bottom of an ancient rubbish heap in Greenland suggests that Vikings grew barley on the island 1,000 years ago

        …The Vikings are both famous and notorious for their like of beer and mead, and archaeologists have discussed for years whether Eric the Red (ca. 950-1010) and his followers had to make do without the golden drink when they settled in Greenland around the year 1,000.

        The Greenland climate was mild when they landed, but was it warm enough for growing corn?

        Researchers from the National Museum in Copenhagen say the answer to the question is ‘yes’. In a unique find, they uncovered very small pieces of charred grains of barley in a Viking rubbish heap on Greenland.

        The find is final proof that the first Vikings to live in Greenland did grow barley – the most important ingredient in brewing beer…

        The find also substantiates a well-known text from about 1250, ‘King’s mirror (Konungs skuggsjá)’, which mentions in passing that the Vikings attempted to grow corn on Greenland. It is the only report about cultivating barley that we have from that time….

        Sep 7th 2006 (When NC was experiencing hot 100F weather unlike now.) Bringing back the barley

        THE Middle Ages were unusually warm in northern Europe, and it was during that period that the Vikings settled in Greenland. They cultivated land, growing mostly barley. The climate then cooled down, which made the place too chilly for arable farming. These days Greenland’s 56,000 people rely largely on sheep farming in the south, hunting in the north and fishing in the west.

        Or at least they did until the world started warming up again. Average temperatures in Greenland have risen by 1.5°C over the past 30 years. The barley is back. Kenneth Hoeth has been growing it, but only as an experiment.

        Of course that article is a bit misleading given new cold tolerant cultivars.
        Recently, even more frost tolerant mutant has been identified….. The mutant variety Taran has higher cold tolerance than initial and check varieties (table 2).
        From Russia of course (and reported by the USDA)
        Mutations and Barley Breeding for Thermo-period Reaction and Cold Tolerance
        V. M. Shevtsov, N. V. Serkin, D. Chanda, and V.M. Chumak
        Krasnodar Lukyanenko Research Institute of Agriculture

      • Otheus says:

        Griff is correct. The chart above shows that while it is growing, as Goddard correctly states, it was this month the lowest in modern record keeping.

        • neal s says:

          You conveniently seem to be ignoring anything before 1979.

        • pmc47025 says:

          Otheus,
          The red dot (2017) on the Arctic extent graph is greater than the same time period in 2016, tied with or greater than 2015 (2017, 2016, 2015, three years), and insignificantly (margin of error?) less than 2014 and 2013. What other part of this Griff post is, uh, “correct”?

        • Gail Combs says:

          Notice the twist on words…
          “Griff is correct. …. the lowest in modern record keeping.”

          WRONG!!!

          The EXACT wording by Griff was
          “…The extent is still at a record low for this time of year.

          which means it is the lowest it has been at this point in the arctic winter in human history….”

          and as I showed that is incorrect.

          I was even nice about it and gave him WRITTEN history.
          …..

          Actually, since Homo Sapien has been around for the entire Holocene Griff is doubly wrong.
          THE CLIMATE has cooled overall despite the fluctuations in WEATHER which Griff and the ClimAstrologists stay focused on.

          Abstract

          …..Arctic sea ice cover was strongly reduced during most of the early Holocene and there appear to have been periods of ice free summers in the central Arctic Ocean……
          http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277379110003185

          Holocene fluctuations in Arctic sea-ice cover: dinocyst-based reconstructions for the eastern Chukchi Sea

          abstract
          Cores from site HLY0501-05 on the Alaskan margin in the eastern Chukchi Sea were analyzed for their geochemical (organic carbon, δ13Corg, Corg/N, and CaCO3) and palynological (dinocyst, pollen, and spores) content to document oceanographic changes during the Holocene….
          Sedimentation rates are very high (∼156 cm/ka), allowing analyses with a decadal to centennial resolution. The data suggest a shift from a dominantly terrigenous to marine input from the early to late Holocene…. Results indicate a decrease in sea-ice cover and a corresponding, albeit much smaller, increase in summer sea-surface temperature over the past 9000 years. Superimposed on these long-term trends are millennial-scale fluctuations characterized by periods of low sea-ice and high sea-surface temperature and salinity that appear quasi-cyclic with a frequency of about one every 2500–3000 years. The results of this study clearly show that sea-ice cover in the western Arctic Ocean has varied throughout the Holocene. More importantly, there have been times when sea-ice cover was less extensive than at the end of the 20th century.
          http://cjes.geoscienceworld.org/content/45/11/1377

          Temperature and precipitation history of the Arctic

          Miller et al
          Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research and Department of Geological Sciences, University of Colorado, USA et al

          …. Solar energy reached a summer maximum (9% higher than at present) ~11 ka ago and has been decreasing since then, primarily in response to the precession of the equinoxes. The extra energy elevated early Holocene summer temperatures throughout the Arctic 1-3°C above 20th century averages, enough to completely melt many small glaciers throughout the Arctic, although the Greenland Ice Sheet was only slightly smaller than at present. Early Holocene summer sea ice limits were substantially smaller than their 20th century average, and the flow of Atlantic water into the Arctic Ocean was substantially greater. As summer solar energy decreased in the second half of the Holocene, glaciers re-established or advanced, sea ice expanded

          And more recently…
          The Arctic was wide open in 1951 according to the 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

      • AndyG55 says:

        “The extent is still at a record low for this time of year.”

        Total BULLSHIT!!

        Even NSIDC has 2017, day 25 above at least 3 other years.

        • Zardoz says:

          Wanh wanh! I wonder… when we get past this crisis… that is, the crisis where powerful political entities have interceded to destroy the remotest credibility of science itself by fabricating another crisis – AGW – will there be trials? Expulsions from scientific societies? Public mockings? Pillories? I sure hope so!

      • Sunsettommy says:

        Griff,

        You sure have visual problems, since the chart shows a sharp uptick recently, to where it is at or slightly higher than 2015-2016 levels.

        Wait a few more days, it will become very obvious as the recent upsurge continues.

  2. gator69 says:

    Global warming is the biggest scam in all of history. It encompasses every country on Earth, it is being pushed by virtually every entity on Earth, and it has the capacity to enslave everyone who is not a rulemaker. Even if you consider religion to be a scam, not one of the great religions comes even close to the size and scope of the great global warming swindle.

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      They have some superstars on the team.

      • Gator says:

        Yes, the party of womens’ rights has the greatest leaders of all time. I’m guessing Bill was breaking in a new intern, and Weiner was busy taking midsection selfies to update his MySpace account.

    • Michelle says:

      I’m in southern Idaho and we have broken snowfall records and temperatures have been 9 degrees below average for over 6 weeks, and currently 15-20 degrees below average for at least another week. This winter is beyond anything I’ve ever witnessed here in 50 years.

    • Donna K. Becker says:

      I live in Bend, Oregon. We’ve had snow on the ground for going on eight weeks now.

      December’s average temperatures were 7.65F below normal, and it looks as though this month’s will be similar.

    • John F. Hultquist says:

      You missed the area near Lake Tahoe.

    • GW says:

      Can it collapse on that Bimbo’s head, the one who wants to head the DNC ! If it doesn’t, I sure hope she wins.

  3. Steve Case says:

    OK Goddard, so the ’30s were hotter, No one including Exxon had a correct forcast, climatologists haven’t gotten temperature or precipitation exactly right, and sea ice is up.

    But what about sea level? What about that? Do a news search on sea level and it’s bad bad bad news, Miami, New York and San Francisco to name a few are going to be under water in just a few decades. We need a global carbon tax and a “Leave it in the ground.” policy now!

     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     

    Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

    • John F. Hultquist says:

      My screen shows a blank space between:

      now!

      &

      Ha ha
      ————–

      Is that where the ‘sarc’ tag is supposed to be?

      What does “a few decades” mean?
      More than 2 but less than 4? More than 4 but fewer than 7? Or, maybe, 8 to 18?
      Regarding Miami: If you build at and below sea level, flooding will happen.
      Guest Essay by Kip Hansen, at:
      https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/12/07/miamis-vice/

      NY & SF – – – no problems in the foreseeable future, or in a few decades either.
      I must be missing something — the big white space in your comment?

      • Steve Case says:

        No, you aren’t missing anything, I didn’t think tags were necessary (-:

        However, I do think that of all the Climate Change scares that emanate from our good friends on the left, Sea Level is the one that resonates most with those gullible enough to allow themselves to get all worked up over the issue.

        And in my humble opinion, debunking the usual claims of a meter of rise by 2100 doesn’t get nearly the attention from the more rational side of the argument that it deserves.

        • Minamidaitōjima is located approximately 360 kilometres east of Okinawa Island. Minamidaitō covers 30.7 square kilometres. This tiny island includes a lakes area and is clearly not a steep projection like many of the Hawaiian islands. They and the folks in coastal Netherlands might notice waking up underwater.

          • John F. Hultquist says:

            The highest point is 74 metres (243 ft) above sea level.
            If I were King there, I’d claim that spot.
            Still, this has nothing to do with CO₂.

    • GoFigure says:

      Whew…. that hysterical laughter at the end was quite a relief !

  4. Michelle says:

    Tony, a big shoutout to you for this information. Interestingly I submitted a comment yesterday on the Yale Environment article that you referenced today showing the accelerated Arctic sea ice growth, which I found in the NSIDC January 5, 2017 summary showing a 40% above long term average ice growth for December 2016. It’s unsurprising my comment was not accepted on their website as it was awaiting approval-another indication how biased our scientific community has become.

    Keep up the great work!

    • Michelle says:

      Oops, the Yale article doesn’t show Arctic sea ice growth, didn’t write it very well, sorry for the confusion.

  5. AndyG55 says:

    Even in the NSIDC data here…

    ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/north/daily/data/

    2017 extent has been above 2006 for the last 4 days. (days 21-24)

    • Stewart Pid says:

      Can anyone give Griff some job leads …. I guess he is looking for work now ;-)

      • Griff says:

        I’m gainfully employed… which is more than you can say for most posters on the net.

        Really, extent is scraping along the bottom/lowest ever… (do check on how NSIDC calculates by the way.

        I found a map of August 1952 ice which actually has more ice than today…

        • Gail Combs says:

          SOOooo?

          We are talking CLIMATE here, not minor blips in the weather.

          December 2016, Scientists Find Greenland Is Now Much Colder With More Advanced Ice Sheet Margins Than 90% Of The Last 7,500 Years

          Fifteen international scientists recently collaborated to assemble one of the most comprehensive analyses of temperature and ice sheet changes for Greenland and the Canadian Arctic ever produced. Briner et al., (2016) synthesized over 100 records from a large and accumulating database to publish “Holocene climate change in Arctic Canada and Greenland” in the journal Quaternary Science Reviews.
          The results are not good news for those who wish to maintain that today’s Greenland Ice Sheet is losing ice area at an unprecedentedly accelerated rate, or that modern temperature values for the Arctic region are dangerously high. Greenland’s Ice Sheet has a larger ice extent now than it has had for most of the last 7,500 years; only the Little Ice Age period (~1300-1900 A.D.) had more ice mass. And both regions (Canadian Arctic and Greenland) are still 1 to 2°C colder now than they were just a few thousand years ago.

        • Colorado Wellington says:

          “If you’re in the con game and you don’t know who the mark is … you’re the mark. ”

          —David Mamet

          Griff, it’s good you work for a living but unless you are here because you run errands for The Company you don’t understand the game.

        • AndyG55 says:

          “Really, extent is scraping along the bottom/lowest ever…”

          EVER?

          omg, you truly are the most stupid of the brain-washed AGW cretins. !!

          Totally ignorant of anything outside your 15 years of meaningless existence.

          Read up on Arctic sea extent for most of the first 3/4 of the Holocene, and stop being a moronic idiot !!

          • Gail Combs says:

            AndyG55,
            I have shoved those peer reviewed papers on the Arctic at Griffy several times but I guess he can’t read at the level.

    • Andy says:

      So what and why did you pick 2006?

      Andy

      • AndyG55 says:

        Oh dear.. I didn’t “pick” 2006, the data did

        You really are an ignorant little putz, aren’t you !!

        in NSIDC, 2017 day 25 is now above that of 2006, 2011 and 2016

        • Gail Combs says:

          Remember AndyG55 the average IQ is 100. That means 50% of the population has an IQ BELOW 100.

          “moron” (IQ of 51–70).

          IQ between 0 and 25 are idiots; IQs between 26 and 50 are considered imbeciles. So Tony is being nice when he uses the term “moron”

  6. Andy DC says:

    Those few missing ice cubes from the 1981-2010 mean are a far greater threat to humanity than all of the nuclear bombs and all of the terrorist organizations on earth.

    I am obviously being sarcastic, but for people like Al Gore, John Kerry, Bernie Sanders and all other members of their doomsday cult, that kind of nonsense is dead serious rhetoric.

    • Griff says:

      As great a threat in years to come, yes.

      • Gail Combs says:

        Griffy,

        PAY ATTENTION!

        Glaciation is the real threat. Global warming at this stage of the Milancovitch cycle is impossible. All CO2 could possibly do is keep the earth from becoming an ICE BOX.

        I already gave you papers from Quaternary Scientists saying we are staring at Glaciation or the Climatic Madhouse as the chaotic climate system whips between the two stable states.

        Here is more from a differnt point of view. As the planet has cooled down and the oceans have become so incredibly cold (average temperature 3.9°C), despite being sandwiched between a 14°C atmosphere and a crust that radiates heat, the obliquity cycle is no longer capable of glacial termination as it did before mid-Pleistocene transition. Luckily every 2-3 obliquity cycles (100k average) the planet gets cold enough that the sea level gets low enough as to provide a strong positive feedback that pushes the planet briefly out of glacial conditions in the next obliquity cycle.

        The role of obliquity in glacial pacing has been modelled and studied quite convincingly by Peter Huybers. See for example:

        Obliquity pacing of the late Pleistocene glacial terminations. Nature 434 491-494.
        The authors are Peter Huybers from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, and Carl Wunsch from Massachusetts Institute of Technology,

        Here we present a formal test of the pace-
        maker hypothesis, focusing on the rapid deglaciation events known as terminations10, 11 .The null hypothesis that glacial terminations are independent of obliquity is rejected at the 5% significance level. In contrast, for eccentricity and precession, the corresponding null-hypotheses are not rejected. The simplest inference, consistent with the observations, is that ice-sheets terminate every second (80ky) or third (120ky) obliquity cycle—at times of high obliquity—and similar to the original Milankovitch assumption12 . Simple stochastic and deterministic models are presented which describe the timing of the 100ky cycles of the late Pleistocene glacial terminations purely in terms of obliquity forcing.

        To test whether the glacial variability is related to changes in Earth’s astronomical configuration, we adopt a formal null-hypothesis (H0 ) that glacial terminations are independent of obliquity variations, and the alternate hypothesis (H1 ) that glacial terminations are paced by it. Our focus on obliquity is motivated by previous indications of nonlinear interactions between obliquity period and quasi-100ky glacial variability13 , but we also make identical tests for pacing by precession and eccentricity. The test is focused on glacial terminations because their magnitude and abruptness facilitate accurate identification.

        ….The observed obliquity phases produce R = 0.70, and H0 is rejected (Fig 1b). This rejection of H0 is robust to all plausible reformulations of the test. Thus, the phase of obliquity has a statistically significant relationship with the timing of deglaciation. The mean phase at deglaciation is indistinguishable from zero and is associated with maxima in obliquity….

        …In the case of eccentricity, H0 is not rejected using the random walk probability estimate (Eq 1), but is rejected using weaker formulations of the eccentricity null-hypothesis. The discrepancy arises because null-hypotheses which assume a glacial timescale of roughly 100ky (which seem more physical) tend to have higher R’s and are more difficult to reject. As the hypotheses of negligible influence of precession and eccentricity on the glacial terminations cannot be rejected, we adopt a minimalist strategy, retaining only obliquity to describe the glacial terminations….

        From the paper:
        http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v434/n7032/images/nature03401-f2.2.jpg

        The Earth is COOLING, with periodic jumps out of the ice box. Please pay attention to the long view. Run away Global warming is just not possible.

  7. Jim Hunt says:

    An alternative interpretation, also from DMI.

    Arctic sea ice volume is the lowest for the time of year in their records:

    • Gator says:

      Gosh Jim, the lowest in 13 whole years! That’s reason enough to starve seven million innocent humans again this year. Nice job killer!

      • Andy says:

        It’s still a length of time 3x more than Tony picked for this thread on his blog. You seem to have forgotten that though.

        Poor job killer … perhaps you need to down grade to being called Gecko ?

        :p

        Andy

    • AndyG55 says:

      There’s Jimbo the clown again

      They released you from re-hab for a few days, hey. !

      Sea ice is still MASSIVELY above the extent for most of the first 3/4 of the Holocene.

      Not that much below the HUGE EXTREMES of the LIA.

      But you KNOW that, don’t you Jimbo, you lying piece of s**t

      • gator69 says:

        It’s not just Jimbo the serial killing clown acting stupidly alone, now he has a sick sidekick who also feels that sacrificing 21,000 innocent humans daily is just awesome. And if that wasn’t just incredibly stupendous enough, Andy feels so very superior about himself, that he insults those who don’t wish to condemn innocent humans to a needless and very painful death to the tune of seven million per year.

        The douchebag duo on ice!

      • Jim Hunt says:

        No Andy(G),

        I figured Tony would be spinning the current thin ice in Bering and Okhotsk, so I popped in here to take a look.

        I wasn’t disappointed!

        • gator69 says:

          I wasn’t disappointed!

          How about the alarmist body count for last year Jimbo? Did you make your eight million goal? Or were you disappointed?

  8. Andy says:

    This is where I object to short term gains or not in watching sea ice. If we roll back the clock a short period no doubt some people would be saying the Arctic ice extent was “flat lining” if you wanted to make a point. Now it swings upwards as extra ice in the Pacific side is being put on. Such short term flat or steep swings need to be ignored.

    If you look at Jaxa

    http://www.zen141854.zen.co.uk/ice26012017.jpg

    It’s higher than 2016 but lower than 2015, but it is so close it does not actually mean anything. Compare instead against 2000 to 2017 and also the 1980’s and 1990’s average.

    We had this same argument at the end of the summer minima where a large increase or bounce happened. Then another flat line period. I said wait till the New Year, it will be about average.

    More interesting things are happening in the Antarctic at the moment I think. Still waiting to see how that plays out.

    Andy

    • AndyG55 says:

      “Compare instead against 2000 to 2017 and also the 1980’s and 1990’s average. ”

      Compare against the first 3/4 of the Holocene..

      Why is it you are TOTALLY INCAPABLE of reading and actually learning even the simplest thing !!!

      Did you get one of those climate CD’s from Gore or Cook , and just keep regurgitating the total ignorance they are filled with.

      • Gail Combs says:

        They yammer about CLIMATE but only talk about WEATHER…

        The weather shows a MINOR hot blip while the CLIMATE shows overall COOLING…

      • Gail Combs says:

        They yammer on and on about tenths and hundreths of a degree (NOISE) and ignore the perfectly natural changes of 5-10 °C with a max changes of ~20 °C often within decades called Dansgaard-Oeschger events .

        Rapid changes of glacial climate simulated in a coupled climate model

        Abrupt changes in climate, termed Dansgaard-Oeschger and Heinrich events, have punctuated the last glacial period (~100 – 10 kyr ago) but not the Holocene (the past 10 kyr). Here we use an intermediate-complexity climate model to investigate the stability of glacial climate, and we find that only one mode of Atlantic Ocean circulation is stable: a cold mode with deep water formation in the Atlantic Ocean south of Iceland. However, a `warm’ circulation mode similar to the present-day Atlantic Ocean is only marginally unstable, and temporary transitions to this warm mode can easily be triggered.

        I’ll translate for The Lazy.

        That says that the glacial frozen state is the only stable one. BUT, sometimes, you can get a bit of a kick into a warmer state (like we are having now). The warmth just is not very stable, and the “tipping point” is back to cold.

        The orbital mechanics that make it possible to have an interglacial are rare, only happening about once every 100,000 years or once every couple obliquity cycles as I pointed out above. We are now exiting that BRIEF regime and the present W/m^2 above 65 N is within the range of glacial inception. The current value = 479W m−2 while glacial inception range is 500 W m−2, and below. SEE Can we predict the duration of an interglacial?

        Two main types of abrupt climate changes have punctuated the last glacial period: Dansgaard-Oeschger (D/O) events and Heinrich events. D/O events typically start with an abrupt warming of Greenland by 5-10 °C over a few decades or less, followed by gradual cooling over several hundred or several thousand years. This cooling phase often ends with an abrupt final reduction of temperature back to cold (`stadial’) conditions.

        The basic driver for the D.O. warming events still exists and can be seen as the ‘bond events’ including the Minoan, Roman, Medieval and Modern Warm Periods, during the Holocene.

        So where we are at is that the orbital mechanics have already left the very brief warm state that can cause an ‘inter-glacial’ excursion. We are now ‘on the cusp’ of a return of the glacial conditions. There is a single highly stable state, and that is glacial / frozen. There is no “tipping point” to the upside from this brief warm period called the Holocene.

  9. GoFigure says:

    So, where are we? The “hot spot” remains missing, so the basic theory of the alarmists has no validity. (If that’s not right, or not what an attending NECESSARY condition means, please enlighten me.)

    Then there is the MWP. The alarmists still insist that it (1) ain’t global, and (2) not nearly as warm as today. But, what about the 6,000+ boreholes (Joanne Nova site) which show a global trend, and are not restricted to just ice core locals? Then there is Mendenhall glacier which recently exposed a 1,000 year old forest, and a similar situation in the Alps, but that forest is 4,000 years old. Trees haven’t grown at this latitude anywhere near those two sites. Then there’s gisp2 (Greenland) study, which is also not close to Europe, and shows the real MWP temperature trend (much higher) compared to our current temperatures. Then there are the hundreds of numerous peer-reviewed MWP studies. co2science.org provides links to all those studies and provides a convenient sort by region. Some of those in each region specifically address temperature and the temps are at least as high as current temperatures. I wondered through several regions, some time ago, but am too lazy to go back and do that. That certainly seems sufficient to render the alarmist DENIAL dubious. My understanding is that the existing computer models cannot explain a 1,000 year old global warming with co2 level fixed at 280ppmv for several hundred thousands years.

    The alarmists argues that a global MWP trend does not satisfy the “multi-decadel” warming criteria. (The boreholes seem to conflict with that, and what about our current warming which began at the first bottom during the LIA (mid 1600s ?). That’s natural warming for 200 years before co2 level began increasing, and at 2ppmv per year, how many more years before co2 could have possibly had any impact on our thermometers? That takes us forward another 100 years to 1950. (so 300 years of natural warming). But, from the 1940s to 1975 was a multi-decadel COOLING, so perhaps our current global warming only becomes a new candidate beginning in 1975?

    And that leaves us with RSS and UAH data. (way too much “poetic license” in homogenizing the terrestrial data and then “losing” the raw data.)

    But wait…. now the alarmists have some “new” satellite data which apparently conflicts with RSS and UAH. What’s that about?

    • Sunsettommy says:

      The sad part is that warmists doesn’t realize, that Water and surface temperatures doesn’t matter for the AGW conjecture,only AIR temperature matters. The Satellite data shows negligible to zero evidence of any CO2 warming effect.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.