Arctic Fraud By Government Scientists Reaches A Tipping Point

All winter, climate scientists have been saying the Arctic is “super-hot” “melting at a record fast rate” and “at a record low”

In fact, Arctic sea ice extent is the highest for the date since 2013, melting at a record low rate, and just below the 1981-2000 mean.

Ocean and Ice Services | Danmarks Meteorologiske Institut

Greenland is blowing away all records for ice gain, having already gained 600 billion tons of ice since September 1, 2016.

Greenland Ice Sheet Surface Mass Budget: DMI

Climate science is largely a criminal venture. A few Republicans imagine they are being socially responsible by supporting this scam, but they are doing the exact opposite.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

83 Responses to Arctic Fraud By Government Scientists Reaches A Tipping Point

  1. John F. Hultquist says:

    The year-lines seem to have less of a spread just after the break-over (now) than they do near the peak of the growth (mid-March). A similar things happens in summer — before the minimum the lines get together. At the minimum (3rd wk. Sep), the spread widens.
    To me, the extremes seem less interesting as a place to watch as an indicator of something than do the weeks when the lines seem to get very close.

    Maybe my brain is concocting a visual pattern where none exists. Later this year I’ll find a sun bathed rock on a mountain side and think about this. Right now it is too cold and I have things to occupy my time.

    • Andy says:

      Due to geographical limits on the Arctic, ie solid land masses, the minima is more important than maxima and the maxima is more important to the freeze and refreeze points where the lines all get close together.

      Andy

      • sunsettommy says:

        Typically misleading statement from you,Andy.

        Here is a comment you missed showing that actually the ARCTIC region ITSELF,is above average,going from his website his link went to:

        Arctic Ice Goes Above Average

        4/26/2017

        “I will let you in on a secret: Arctic Ocean ice is doing fine and well above the decadal average. The only place where ice is below normal is outside the Arctic Ocean, namely Bering and Okhotsk Seas in the Pacific. Claims of disappearing ice pertain not to the Arctic itself, but to marginal Pacific seas that will melt out anyway in September.

        I noticed the pattern this April when it became obvious that including Bering and Okhotsk in the Arctic totals gives a misleading picture. For sure they are part of Northern Hemisphere (NH) total sea ice, but currently the Pacific is going its own way, not indicative of the sea ice in the Central and Atlantic Arctic.

        Graphically, MASIE shows that, excluding Bering and Okhotsk, 2017 Arctic Ocean sea ice is well above the 11 year average. Note that 2017 Arctic ice started April 100k km2 below average, and has now opened up a lead of ~300k km2 above average.”

        https://rclutz.wordpress.com/2017/04/26/arctic-ice-goes-above-average/

        • Andy says:

          What did I just say? Read it again rather than quote some blog that means nothing, I don’t really give a flying fuck what some blogger says. Show me a scientist viewpoint opposite. The extent at this time of the year has no real meaning.

          That’s experience from watching the Arctic for far longer than you of course.

          Andy

          • AndyG55 says:

            Yep, real facts and data are an enema to you.

            We have notice that in basically every post you make.

          • AndyG55 says:

            “The extent at this time of the year has no real meaning. ”

            Then why are you getting so het up about it :-)

            You now rank as griff#2 in base-line idiocy ..

            and closing fast.

          • sunsettommy says:

            This is what YOU SAID, that I responded to by posting Ron’s relevant point that you unsurprisingly missed:

            “Due to geographical limits on the Arctic, ie solid land masses,…”

            It is clear you didn’t really read his post since it was all based on the official data. That the low ice coverage is OUTSIDE the actual Arctic region,in the PACIFIC region. While the Actual Arctic region itself is currently ABOVE average,which is being ignored by the likes of you misleading warmists.

            That is what YOU missed,because you didn’t read it.

            With no counterpoint coming from you but veiled insults on Ron Clutz, it is clear you have NOTHING to sell here,and that Ron’s presentation remains unchallenged.

          • rw says:

            But Mr. Clutz is simply quoting from standard sources. And he backs up what he says with a nice table.

            (Incidentally, you’re getting “a scientist viewpoint opposite”, if that’s what you’re looking for [and if I’ve decoded that strange phrase correctly].)

      • AndyG55 says:

        I’ll repeat because you have a flat learning curve.. set at zero

        Arctic sea ice extent is HIGHER than it has been for some 90-95% of the current interglacial.

        • sunsettommy says:

          To be fair,

          the study doesn’t cover the entire Arctic, just this part as shown in the Abstract:

          “In this study, we present new detailed biomarker-based sea ice records from two sediment cores recovered in the Chukchi Sea and the East Siberian Sea.”

          They do mention other areas, but main focus is in a part of the region.

          http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jqs.2929/abstract

        • AndyG55 says:

          Similar results to those from Fram Strait biomarkers.

          Current levels are near an all time high compared to the rest of the Holocene.

          Only the last 400-500 years, during the LIA , has it been higher .

  2. Billyjack says:

    The only difference between Reps and Dems is rhetoric. They are all corrupt and steal from the public coffers.

    • R. Shearer says:

      More or less, but Communists also kill and the Dems are moving in that direction.

    • Latitude says:

      …same dog, different collar

    • Arn says:

      There is one huge difference:

      It is much easier for the banksters to make wars and commit crimes when disguised as democrats.

      That”s why Obama was able to continue Bushs politics
      while at the same time being worshipped for the same things&crimes Bush was criticized for((even Obamas Obamacare was in fact Republicans Romneycare)).

      That’s why the wall street was so pro-clinton
      because they now how they have indoctrinated the masses.
      Hillary can go on bombing people and destroying countries whenever she wants-she just need to call her wars:humanitarian&against Hitler.

      Trump will face 1000* more resistance when he tries to go to war.
      Even the Antiwar movement which completely fell apart under Obama(because criticizing a black mans war is raciss)
      would rise again and stronger than before.

      That”s why a republican US president is a must have:
      Because a large number of people will stay sceptic and oppose him,
      while a democrat (especially one who belongs to a minority can get away with everything as long as he talks some social/minority BS.

  3. AndyG55 says:

    NSIDC has current level for this day of the year above that of 2006, 2015 and 2016
    If it stays on its current trajectory, it will soon over take quite a few other years.

    MASIE has the current level above 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2015 and 2016.

  4. AndyG55 says:

    I wish DMI would give actual numbers so we could get a clearer picture of where exactly it is according to them.. :-)

    I have the others graphed and can get in really close if needed.

    NSIDC has 2004, 2007 and 2014 as the next to go if the current slowish melt rate continues. All very close together….

    .. which highlights the point TH is making, that there is absolutely nothing unusual with Arctic sea ice extent, and those that say so are a LYING pack of con-artists.

    • Andy says:

      If you want some numbers go to JAXA

      https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/#/extent

      They have a nice CSV download for all years which is far better than DMI with their graphs which have caused a lot of problems with FAKE NEWS.

      I have been saying this for years,

      :)

      Andy

      • AndyG55 says:

        roflmao..

        What a pathetic graph. shows 3 or 4 years and some averages.

        Useless for year by year comparison.. Probably why you like it.

        Saves you doing anything except pointing the cursor.

        Zero thought required.

        Its also a day behind my data.

  5. Stewart Pid says:

    With the failure of the ice to melt Griff’s panties are in too tight a knot for the loser to post … a good thing IMHO.
    May the knot in his panties keep tightening until he explodes!

  6. AndyG55 says:

    And in the Antarctic extent is above that of 1980, and rapidly gaining on the decadal minimum.

    Rough graph showing difference between min and 2017 for last 10 days.

    • Andy says:

      Out of 30 years 2017 finally gets higher extent than 1980!
      Can you advise how it compared to the other 38 years, one bye one?

      Are you desperately trying to cherry pick a year?

      As Donald would say…. Desperate!

      Andy

      • sunsettommy says:

        Ha ha ha,

        Still trying to be dumb as usual.

        Why can’t you look at the whole last 10,000 years instead?

        http://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Arctic-Sea-Ice-Holocene-Stein-17-768×496.jpg

        Warmists are the true cherrypickers,who ignore 98% of the sea ice history, of the Interglacial period.

        • Andy says:

          Firstly ha ha ha is not really a good start to a counter argument if you want to be taken seriously.

          Secondly the last 10 000 years has nothing to do with the discussion about the the satellite record, why did you not chose the last 4 billion years when the earth was cooling down from being completely molten in that case? Dumb.

          Finally that No Tricks zone article was ridiculed by Stein, the original author, after I emailed him. Basically No Tricks Zone twisted it all. I can send you the links again.

          Apart from all those minor problems with your argument, ie all, you have a rubbish point to make.

          Have another go, perhaps start off ha ha ha ha ha ha and go downhill from there.

          Andy

          • AndyG55 says:

            Facts and knpwledge of past Arctic, showing that current levels are exceeding high compared to the rest of the Holocene..

            Poor griff#2, can’t take those facts can you. Way too much for your child-mind.

          • AndyG55 says:

            Stein rubbishes his own graph, does he.

            Trouble is , it fits in very well with a lot of other papers, all of which show that Arctic sea ice was MUCH LOWER than now for most of the period before the Little Ice Age.

            DENY the science as much as you like, griff #2.

            It only brings your brain-washed ignorance to the fore. for everyone to see.

          • sunsettommy says:

            That chart is from Stein himself,you moron!

            Here is the words you didn’t read:

            “Stein et al., 2017

            The causes that are controlling the decrease in sea ice are still under discussion. In several studies changes in extent, thickness and drift of Arctic sea ice are related to changes in the overall atmospheric circulation patterns as reflected in the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) and Arctic Oscillation (AO). The NAO and AO are influencing changes of the relative position and strength of the two major surface-current systems of the Arctic Ocean.

            The increase in sea ice extent during the late Holocene seems to be a circum-Arctic phenomenon, coinciding with major glacier advances on Franz Josef Land, Spitsbergen and Scandinavia. The increase in sea ice may have resulted from the continuing cooling trend due to decreased solar insolation and reduced heat flow from the Pacific.

            The increase in sea ice extent during the late Holocene seems to be a circum-Arctic phenomenon as PIP25-based sea ice records from the Fram Strait, Laptev Sea, East Siberian Sea and Chukchi Sea display a generally quite similar evolution, all coinciding with the decrease in solar radiation.

            The main factors controlling the millennial variability in sea ice and surface-water productivity are probably changes in surface water and heat flow from the Pacific into the Arctic Ocean as well as the long-term decrease in summer insolation, whereas short-term centennial variability observed in the high-resolution middle Holocene record was possibly triggered by solar forcing.”

            This abstract and the chart and the link to his paper are all on the No Tricks Zone page.

            http://notrickszone.com/2017/03/02/new-paper-indicates-there-is-more-arctic-sea-ice-now-than-for-nearly-all-of-the-last-10000-years/#comments

            You are so pathetic!

          • Kenneth Richard says:

            Here is another graph from Sha et al., 2017 that also shows a similar sea ice trajectory. Like Stein et al. (2017), the Sha paper also links sea ice variability to solar forcing.

            http://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Holocene-Sea-Ice-Greenland-Sha-17.jpg

            Sha et al., 2017
            http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0031018216305582
            The reconstruction indicates warm conditions with reduced sea-ice cover, associated with the Holocene Thermal Maximum, from ca. 6700 to 5000 cal. yr BP. … A distinct increase in sea-ice cover began at 1750 cal. yr BP, with absolute maximum values during the last millennium. … In order to assess the contribution of different potential forcing factors to sea-ice conditions off West Greenland, we evaluated the relationship between our sea-ice reconstruction and solar activity, as well as with the strength of ocean circulation. The observed agreement between the sea-ice record and solar activity suggests that solar forcing may have been an important trigger for sea-ice variability off West Greenland during the last 5000 yr.

      • AndyG55 says:

        I’m not the one picking only one year..

        You are, bozo,

        2017 is an aberration in a generally increasing trend.

  7. RAH says:

    They’ve been promising that Manhattan will be under water for decades now and it hasn’t happened. When are the Bozo’s that believe that crap ever going to learn that they’ve been deceived? When will they wake up and see the real world and start looking at the data for themselves instead of being led around by the rings in their noses?

    Yea, I know! For many if not most of them never! They are what they are and live in just as dense of a bubble as the leftist media.

    Leftists beclown and make petty every thing they get a hold of or get influence over. I don’t watch pro football anymore because it’s no longer the game I grew up loving. I no longer watch NASCAR now because it is no longer real racing. They’ve made ESPN to sports what MTV is to music. You can’t get away from their influence because it’s even present in your damned toilet that does not flush adequately and the water saving urinals in rest areas that smell like urine. It’s present in my truck in the form of electronic logs and governs my actions because of their mandatory break rules. It’s present at my work in the requirement to wear reflective clothing and the relatively poor health insurance compared to what I started out with there. It’s present on the road with more drivers that drive like crazy Russians and have no consideration for other drivers. I thank goodness that I got out of the Army before they had significant influence there from what I hear from those that live that life now. It was even present during my last trip to the battlefield at Gettysburg where at the new visitor center electric and hybrid vehicles got preferred parking. You can’t get away from their influence and you know it if your a baby boomer or from previous generations.

  8. Andy says:

    Either way this time of year is not a good time to judge the summer minimum. This year has been low up to now but now slowing down, previous years have been very high up to now and then looked what happened, see 2012 and 2007

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

    2012 in dashed, 2007 in dark aqua, 2017 in light aqua.

    2017 is currently like 2007, but does it mean it will be a really low year? No, because 2007 was unusual, just like 2012. It may end up a low year, but you cannot tell from April. You have to wait to see what happens from June onwards.

    Andy

    • sunsettommy says:

      Ok and we should be worried, because?

      Meanwhile another science paper shows that the Arctic Ice level of today are near historic highs of the entire Interglacial period,originally from NoTricksZone:

      Solar Forcing Of Modern, Historic Arctic Sea Ice
      Only Slightly Less Sea Ice Now Than Little Ice Age

      http://www.globalwarmingskeptics.info/thread-1996-post-12675.html#pid12675

      The Chart makes clear you warmists are being silly.

      • Andy says:

        And I reply again from the original author on this stupid misquoting of his work

        thanks for your email and making me aware about this online news citing our study not in a correct way. The author has even changed one of our main figures by adding „20th Century“ and „Little Ice Age (LIA)“. In our paper we say no word about the most recent past as our age model is not good enough to identify specific warm or cold periods (e.g., the Medieval Warm Period and theLIA) are the 20th Century. Looking at the original figure in our paper (see attachment) we clearly indicate that out last exact age fix point is about 3500 years BP and that above it’s simply inter-(extra-)polation. The last couple of hundred of years might even be missing in our record!! In other words, our paper is dealing with the long-term Holocene cooling and increase of sea ice observed in many circum-Arctic sediment cores, a change that coincided with the decrease in solar insolation. In addition, the inflow of Pacific Water is important for the local/regional sea-ice formation in the Chukchi Sea. Main focus of our study was to get more insight into the processes influencing the natural variability of past sea ice changes. This knowledge of natural climate variability is certainly important for distinguishing between natural and anthropogenic processes controlling the most recent climate change. In my understanding, the recent extreme increase in man-driven CO2 is certainly a main factor controlling the recent global warming.

        Looking again at this news article that does not cite our work correctly, I have to say that I should have mention in the introduction of our last article more clearly the influence of CO2 on climate change as we have done in several other articles of our work. In one of our most recent work dealing with past Arctic sea ice in the Miocene, for example, we have shown that ice-free summers were only possible under quite high CO2 concentrations of about 450 ppm (a value that we may reach in the near future). This article I have also attached to my email.

        Best regards,
        Ruediger Stein

        • AndyG55 says:

          “In other words, our paper is dealing with the long-term Holocene cooling and increase of sea ice observed in many circum-Arctic sediment cores”

          Thank you Mr Stein. !!

          Then he goes on the try to cover his butt , by making in-supportable statements. Seems he is also saying that the zero sea ice from many parts of the earlier Holocene must have been because of CO2 levels of 450ppm.

          roflmao… now where did that high CO2 level come from… SUV’s ???

          Now take your foot out of your mouth for once, griff#2

        • sunsettommy says:

          I have posted a link to this comment at No Tricks Zone,maybe a reply will come?

        • sunsettommy says:

          Quoting Mr. Stein:

          “thanks for your email and making me aware about this online news citing our study not in a correct way. The author has even changed one of our main figures by adding „20th Century“ and „Little Ice Age (LIA)“. In our paper we say no word about the most recent past as our age model is not good enough to identify specific warm or cold periods (e.g., the Medieval Warm Period and theLIA) are the 20th Century.”

          But of course it doesn’t change the fact that the chart itself was not changed,just the ADDED labeling, he complains about.

          • AndyG55 says:

            The last 500 years of the graph is above the rest of the Holocene

            500 year in 10000 year is 5%

            So the graph is immediately reinforcing the FACT that the Arctic sea ice extent has been LOWER than current for 95% of the Holocene.

            No little arrows needed to guide people to the VERY obvious time periods. But if the confuse griff#2, that’s just bad luck. You can’t plan for idiocy.

        • sunsettommy says:

          Andy,

          you never answered my question:

          “Ok and we should be worried, because?”

          You go on to post an obviously edited comment from Mr. Stein instead,thinking that would clear it all up. But his chart conclusions is still his and his abstract statement is still his.

          He complains,

          “The author has even changed one of our main figures by adding „20th Century“ and „Little Ice Age (LIA)“.”

          Sure, but it never contradicted his chart at all. His lines goes all the way to year ZERO.

          He goes on with this contradiction however,since his own chart doesn’t indicate it that way as it goes all the way to the present time,where those words 20th Century and LIA was added to

          “In our paper we say no word about the most recent past as our age model is not good enough to identify specific warm or cold periods (e.g., the Medieval Warm Period and theLIA) are the 20th Century.”

          You made what point again……….?

    • RAH says:

      Andy
      If the NCEP CSFv2 is even close to correct then the Arctic is NOT where global warming is going to be this summer. You’ll have to look somewhere else.

      • Andy says:

        Firstly it is not summer yet and secondly I don’t ever look for global warming when it comes to watching ice extents. I just look at ice extents and then want to know why, scientifically.

        Thanks

        Andy

        • AndyG55 says:

          But you DON’T want to know.

          You have not the slightest interest in knowing anything about the AMO etc..

          You have proven that you wish to remain wilfully ignorant.

        • RAH says:

          Sure your looking for global warming. Because the only time Arctic ice is notable to you when you decide to post here is when you think it’s melting or is going to melt or is what you perceive as down. The only ones really interested are those doing actual research, or have operational reasons for interests. Other than that the only reason people here and on any climate blog comment on arctic ice extent or about anything else to do with the arctic is because those that promote climate change or AGW say that the Arctic is a key node and have been predicting a virtually ice free Arctic for a couple of decades or so.

    • AndyG55 says:

      YAWN !!!

      • AndyG55 says:

        I’ll repeat, because you seem very hard of understanding.

        Arctic sea ice extent is HIGHER than it has been for some 90-95% of the Holocene. !!

        Go it, bozo !!

        • Andy says:

          two very scientific replies.

          well done

          Andy

          • AndyG55 says:

            You really are impervious to facts, aren’t you little child.

          • sunsettommy says:

            “two very scientific replies.

            well done”

            Andy tries to look smart here with that empty reply, but he didn’t provide a counterpoint to this specific statement.

            “Arctic sea ice extent is HIGHER than it has been for some 90-95% of the Holocene. !!”

            What is holding you back?

    • AndyG55 says:

      “Either way this time of year is not a good time to judge the summer minimum”

      Ok , little boy….. run off until September.

      No-one will miss your rabid sea ice worrier posts.

      Except for the display of your abject and wilful ignorance of any historic context….

      ….. which is really quite funny.

  9. Andy says:

    Just in case two people missed it, I’ll repeat it again

    Original article

    http://notrickszone.com/2017/03/02/new-paper-indicates-there-is-more-arctic-sea-ice-now-than-for-nearly-all-of-the-last-10000-years/#sthash.83TOGAYe.dpbs

    response from author

    thanks for your email and making me aware about this online news citing our study not in a correct way. The author has even changed one of our main figures by adding „20th Century“ and „Little Ice Age (LIA)“. In our paper we say no word about the most recent past as our age model is not good enough to identify specific warm or cold periods (e.g., the Medieval Warm Period and theLIA) are the 20th Century. Looking at the original figure in our paper (see attachment) we clearly indicate that out last exact age fix point is about 3500 years BP and that above it’s simply inter-(extra-)polation. The last couple of hundred of years might even be missing in our record!! In other words, our paper is dealing with the long-term Holocene cooling and increase of sea ice observed in many circum-Arctic sediment cores, a change that coincided with the decrease in solar insolation. In addition, the inflow of Pacific Water is important for the local/regional sea-ice formation in the Chukchi Sea. Main focus of our study was to get more insight into the processes influencing the natural variability of past sea ice changes. This knowledge of natural climate variability is certainly important for distinguishing between natural and anthropogenic processes controlling the most recent climate change. In my understanding, the recent extreme increase in man-driven CO2 is certainly a main factor controlling the recent global warming.

    Looking again at this news article that does not cite our work correctly, I have to say that I should have mention in the introduction of our last article more clearly the influence of CO2 on climate change as we have done in several other articles of our work. In one of our most recent work dealing with past Arctic sea ice in the Miocene, for example, we have shown that ice-free summers were only possible under quite high CO2 concentrations of about 450 ppm (a value that we may reach in the near future). This article I have also attached to my email.

    Best regards,
    Ruediger Stein

    Basically the web blogger altered his graphs to show something the scientific post was nothing to do with, for the bloggers own spin on it. From a website called Notrickszone… lol

    STOP QUOTING IT TO TRY AND MAKE IT BE TRUE, IT’S NOT

    End of story.

    Back to the Arctic …..

    Andy

    • AndyG55 says:

      “we have shown that ice-free summers were only possible under quite high CO2 concentrations of about 450 ppm ”

      Trouble is that many papers show that there was often ice free Arctic summers through the first 2/3 or so of the Holocene.

      Must have been those early Holocene SUV’s ;-)

      You truly are digging a rabbit hole for yourself, griff#2.

      • sunsettommy says:

        His 450ppm early Holocene claim doesn’t show up here in the following databases:

        GEOCARB,

        EPICA C core

        or here,

        GISP2.

        Hmmm…..

        Meanwhile I find this tidbit:

        “Ice cores from Greenland are rarely used in CO2 reconstructions. The maximum usable Greenland record only dates as far back as ~130,000 years ago (Eemian/Sangamonian); the deeper ice has been deformed. The Greenland ice cores do tend to have a higher resolution than the Antarctic cores because there is a higher snow accumulation rate in Greenland. Funny thing about the Greenland cores: They show much higher CO2 levels (330-350 ppmv) during Holocene warm periods and Pleistocene interstadials. The Dye 3 ice core shows an average CO2 level of 331 ppmv (+/-17) during the Preboreal Oscillation (~11,500 years ago). ”

        and,

        “When stomata-derived CO2 (red) is compared to ice core-derived CO2 (blue), the stomata generally show much more variability in the atmospheric CO2 level and often show levels much higher than the ice cores…”

        https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/12/26/co2-ice-cores-vs-plant-stomata/

        They didn’t get over 400 ppm

        https://i0.wp.com/i90.photobucket.com/albums/k247/dhm1353/Climate%20Change/CO2SI.png

        • AndyG55 says:

          Yep, its a bit bizarre, isn’t it.

          Many papers show that early Holocene was often summer ice free.

          Stein says this can only happen when aCO2>450ppm.
          (with absolutely zero evidence.. just his “understanding”)

          Yet there were no coal fired power plants or SUV’s back then. ;-)

      • sunsettommy says:

        His own abstract doesn’t mention CO2 being a cause of greatly reduced sea ice levels early to mid holocene,he says it was long term decreasing insolation, changes in surface water and heat flow from the Pacific into the Arctic Ocean.

        This is what Mr. Stein stated:

        http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jqs.2929/abstract

        “ABSTRACT

        In this study, we present new detailed biomarker-based sea ice records from two sediment cores recovered in the Chukchi Sea and the East Siberian Sea. These new biomarker data may provide new insights on processes controlling recent and past sea ice changes. The biomarker proxy records show (i) minimum sea ice extent during the Early Holocene, (ii) a prominent Mid-Holocene short-term high-amplitude variability in sea ice, primary production and Pacific-Water inflow, and (iii) significantly increased sea ice extent during the last ca. 4.5k cal a BP. This Late Holocene trend in sea ice change in the Chukchi and East Siberian Seas seems to be contemporaneous with similar changes in sea ice extent recorded from other Arctic marginal seas. The main factors controlling the millennial variability in sea ice (and surface-water productivity) are probably changes in surface water and heat flow from the Pacific into the Arctic Ocean as well as the long-term decrease in summer insolation. The short-term centennial variability observed in the high-resolution Middle Holocene record is probably related to solar forcing. Our new data on Holocene sea ice variability may contribute to synoptic reconstructions of regional to global Holocene climate change based on terrestrial and marine archives.”

        The cause?

        “The main factors controlling the millennial variability in sea ice (and surface-water productivity) are probably changes in surface water and heat flow from the Pacific into the Arctic Ocean as well as the long-term decrease in summer insolation. The short-term centennial variability observed in the high-resolution Middle Holocene record is probably related to solar forcing.”

        Not a word about CO2 at all.

        He talks about 450 ppm in the MIOCENE time frame:

        “In one of our most recent work dealing with past Arctic sea ice in the Miocene, for example, we have shown that ice-free summers were only possible under quite high CO2 concentrations of about 450 ppm”

        But of course there were already years on no summer ice in THIS early party interglacial period while CO2 levels were BELOW 300 ppm the entire time.

        Dr. Meier himself said so citing one of many science papers on the region:

        “Can the Arctic really become sea ice-free during summer?

        It has been suggested that the Arctic really can’t lose all its sea ice during summer because there isn’t enough energy to melt all of the ice in the short summer. There are a couple of reasons why this thinking is faulty.

        First, we know the Arctic can potentially lose all its sea ice during summer because it has done so in the past. Examination of several proxy records (e.g., sediment cores) of sea ice indicate ice-free or near ice-free summer conditions for at least some time during the period of 15,000 to 5,000 years ago (Polyak et al., 2010) when Arctic temperatures were not much warmer than today.”

        https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/14/nsidcs-dr-walt-meier-part-2/

        All while CO2 was below 300 ppm the entire time.

        OOOooops!!!

        • sunsettommy says:

          Here is a comment for dumb warmists out there about summer sea ice:

          ” PeterB in Indianapolis
          July 14, 2010 at 12:32 pm

          Jakers,

          As Walt pointed out in his paper, there is pretty strong evidence that the arctic may have indeed been ice-free during some times in the period of 15,000 to 5000 years ago. He also says at that time it was NOT MUCH WARMER THAN NOW (which means it WAS INDEED warmer than now.

          Since there was no man-made CO2 15,000 to 5000 years ago, this ice-free condition in the Arctic only be attributed to… wait for it… NATURAL VARIABILITY.

          The term “natural variability” is not mystical in any way, shape or form. Climate CHANGES. It always HAS changed, and it always WILL change, and this will happen regardless of what human beings do. We MAY have some influence on the direction and/or magnitude of climate change, but that has yet to be conclusively proven. So far all climate change from 1850-present is well within the previous range of documented climate changes. For example, Walt does acknowledge that it was indeed warmer (albeit not much warmer) at least at some period or periods of time from 15,000 to 5000 years ago compared to now.”

          https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/14/nsidcs-dr-walt-meier-part-2/#comment-430352

          Really……,

          snicker.

          • Griff says:

            You are failing to recognise that the Earth’s orbit in the early holcene was such that the summer arctic received more insolation…

            thus melting the ice.

            Now we see the same effect WITHOUT the orbnital influence.

          • AndyG55 says:

            griff.

            you are just FAILING !!

            You have NOTHING

            CO2 was lowest in early Holocene, temperature was warmest

            CO2 is highest now.. temperature is near its lowest.

            GET USED TO THE FACTS.

            They won’t hurt you unless you let them. !!

          • sunsettommy says:

            Griff,

            that was a SCIENTIST who stated that it was ice free or nearly so early in the Holocene. Since as Andy, pointed out CO2 levels was around the 260 ppm level at the time, CO2 was not the cause at all.

            It is true that Insolation was higher then, but so what!

            Here is a recently published chart showing that currently show the Arctic sea ice are near the peak levels of the entire Holocene:

            http://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Arctic-Sea-Ice-Holocene-Stein-17-768×496.jpg

          • sunsettommy says:

            Griff,

            here is the link to a number of published papers,maybe you go there to explain why we should ignore the science:

            New Paper Indicates There Is More Arctic Sea Ice Now Than For Nearly All Of The Last 10,000 Years

            http://notrickszone.com/2017/03/02/new-paper-indicates-there-is-more-arctic-sea-ice-now-than-for-nearly-all-of-the-last-10000-years/#sthash.83TOGAYe.E8muXVjO.dpbs

          • sunsettommy says:

            Williamson, 1975

            http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00063657509476459
            Between 1000 and 1300 average summer temperatures were about 1°C higher than today, with the mean annual temperature higher by perhaps 4°C in a largely ice-free Arctic. Eric the Red, a renowned world citizen of that time, has been much maligned as the first progressive publicity man for giving Greenland a false image in order to attract settlers; but in truth, the southwest of that vast country was warmer and greener by far than at any time until the Fieldfares Turdus pilaris arrived there in the mid-1930s. The sea-temperature of the Atlantic was higher than it has been since, and there appears to have been none or very little ice to hinder the Vikings’ communications between Iceland, Greenland, Newfoundland and Labrador (Mowat 1965). Indeed Brooks (1926) considers that the polar ice-cap may have disappeared entirely during the summer months, to build anew each winter.
            =================================
            From No Tricks Zone blog

    • AndyG55 says:

      Show us where the DATA has been changed on Stein’s graph.

      Are you saying the added notations are not pointing to their correct periods.. perhaps you would like to correct that for us.

    • gator69 says:

      “we have shown that ice-free summers were only possible under quite high CO2 concentrations of about 450 ppm ”

      What a ridiculous statement. It sounds more like the utterance of a used car salesman than a scientist. Regardless of his vocation, he is a huckster selling something, and any intelligent and rational being would do best to simply walk away.

      • sunsettommy says:

        gator,

        he was talking about something much further in the past,all the way back to….., MIOCENE.

        That is from 23 MILLION to 5 MILLION years ago,which means means NONE of the last 2.6 million years of the North Polar region cyclic GLACIATION period was in force,which is why his claim is misleading since back then there were NO Summer ice,because it was TOO WARM then,as he himself stated in his paper I posted below:

        ” the researchers found that six to ten million years ago the central Arctic was completely ice-free during summer and sea-surface temperature reached values of 4 to 9 degrees Celsius.”

        It was not surprising when the waters are well above freezing during the summer months.

        The quote below is from Andy,who got it from Mr. Stein:

        ” In one of our most recent work dealing with past Arctic sea ice in the Miocene, for example, we have shown that ice-free summers were only possible under quite high CO2 concentrations of about 450 ppm (a value that we may reach in the near future). This article I have also attached to my email.”

        Found his paper that has his 450 pmm claim in it,but it is based on a MODEL,which means it is not specific:

        From the Alfred-Wegener Institute

        Six to ten million years ago: Ice-free summers at the North Pole

        “These new findings of the Arctic Ocean climate history reconstructed from sediment data, are further corroborated by climate simulations, as was shown by the AWI modellers who participated in this study. This only applies, however, if we assume a relatively high carbon dioxide content in the atmosphere of 450 ppm. If the climate models were run using a significantly lower carbon dioxide content of about 280 ppm, as some studies postulate for the late Miocene, then an ice-free Arctic cannot be simulated. Whether the carbon dioxide content in the Miocene was indeed relatively high or whether the sensitivity of the model is too weak to simulate the magnitude of high-latitude warming in a warmer than modern climate, is currently subject to further international research.”

        Ruediger Stein, Kirsten Fahl, Michael Schreck, Gregor Knorr, Frank Niessen, Matthias Forwick, Catalina Gebhardt, Laura Jensen, Michael Kaminski, Achim Kopf, Jens Matthiessen, Wilfried Jokat, and Gerrit Lohmann: Evidence for ice-free summers in the late Miocene central Arctic Ocean, Nature Communications 7: 11148, doi:10.1038/ncomms11148.

        https://www.awi.de/nc/en/about-us/service/press/press-release/vor-sechs-bis-zehn-millionen-jahren-gab-es-im-sommer-kein-meereis-am-nordpol.html

        • sunsettommy says:

          He just stated in his own words that there couldn’t be any summer ice when the water is between 4-9C at the time,which is well above freezing.

          ” the researchers found that six to ten million years ago the central Arctic was completely ice-free during summer and sea-surface temperature reached values of 4 to 9 degrees Celsius.”

          yet he goes into speculation,when he says:

          “…are further corroborated by climate simulations, as was shown by the AWI modellers who participated in this study. This only applies, however, if we assume a relatively high carbon dioxide content in the atmosphere of 450 ppm. If the climate models were run using a significantly lower carbon dioxide content of about 280 ppm, as some studies postulate for the late Miocene, then an ice-free Arctic cannot be simulated. ”

          https://www.awi.de/nc/en/about-us/service/press/press-release/vor-sechs-bis-zehn-millionen-jahren-gab-es-im-sommer-kein-meereis-am-nordpol.html

          ASSUME,SIMULATED…..

          His CO2 is built on assumptions and modeling simulation parameters. Not a convincing case to build on.

          The data he used show it was simply too warm during the summer months,but doesn’t point to CO2 as the cause at all.

          “….sediment cores on the western slope of the Lomonosov Ridge, a large undersea mountain range in the central Arctic.”

        • You quoted a paper with Gerrit Lohmann (last author as usual since he is an incompetent scientist so didn’t actually contribute anything) and AWI on it. It thus has no credibility. See

          http://RealClimatologists.org/Principles/Corrupt_German_Climate_Science/

          While you are there read through the rest of

          http://RealClimatologists.org

  10. Andy says:

    From the article

    “Of note, the paper makes no reference to carbon dioxide or anthropogenic forcing as factors modulating Arctic sea ice”

    From the author

    “In my understanding, the recent extreme increase in man-driven CO2 is certainly a main factor controlling the recent global warming.

    Looking again at this news article that does not cite our work correctly, I have to say that I should have mention in the introduction of our last article more clearly the influence of CO2 on climate change as we have done in several other articles of our work.”

    • AndyG55 says:

      “In my understanding,..” ??

      So he steps away from the data he puts in his paper..

      to just “his understanding…… no science at all..

      … probably because he knows he is talking to a rabid AGW cultist.

    • sunsettommy says:

      His damage control is really weak………

      His own ABSTRACT says NOTHING about CO2 at all;

      Here it is again for YOU,Andy:

      “ABSTRACT

      In this study, we present new detailed biomarker-based sea ice records from two sediment cores recovered in the Chukchi Sea and the East Siberian Sea. These new biomarker data may provide new insights on processes controlling recent and past sea ice changes. The biomarker proxy records show (i) minimum sea ice extent during the Early Holocene, (ii) a prominent Mid-Holocene short-term high-amplitude variability in sea ice, primary production and Pacific-Water inflow, and (iii) significantly increased sea ice extent during the last ca. 4.5k cal a BP. This Late Holocene trend in sea ice change in the Chukchi and East Siberian Seas seems to be contemporaneous with similar changes in sea ice extent recorded from other Arctic marginal seas. The main factors controlling the millennial variability in sea ice (and surface-water productivity) are probably changes in surface water and heat flow from the Pacific into the Arctic Ocean as well as the long-term decrease in summer insolation. The short-term centennial variability observed in the high-resolution Middle Holocene record is probably related to solar forcing. Our new data on Holocene sea ice variability may contribute to synoptic reconstructions of regional to global Holocene climate change based on terrestrial and marine archives.”

      http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jqs.2929/abstract

      Emphasizing his statement on a postulated cause:

      “The main factors controlling the millennial variability in sea ice (and surface-water productivity) are probably changes in surface water and heat flow from the Pacific into the Arctic Ocean as well as the long-term decrease in summer insolation. The short-term centennial variability observed in the high-resolution Middle Holocene record is probably related to solar forcing.”

      I hear the sounds of you digging a hole…….., a deep hole.

      • Griff says:

        “as well as the long-term decrease in summer insolation”

        Please check what insolation means… and look up Milankovitch cycles.

        After the Earth’s orbit shifted after the early holocene, the amount of insolation decreased, thus the ice was not melted, so increased.

        • AndyG55 says:

          Poor griff has zero comprehension of time periods.

          Milankovitch cycles are over 100’s of thousands of years, not the short 10,00 years of the Holocene.

          Or are you trying to that they are responsible for the current period , which is only just above the coldest period in the last 10,000 years.

          You are at the bottom of a very deep well, griff, but you just keep digging. So funny ! :-)

        • sunsettommy says:

          Griff,

          that was a SCIENTIST who made that statement. He is correct since insolation has slowly decreased from the high point very early in the Holocene.

          It is YOU who needs to look it up.

    • sunsettommy says:

      “The new models are found in the report “Snow, Water, Ice, Permafrost in the Arctic,” or SWIPA, which is authored by eight countries who have territory in the Arctic Circle as well as observers, including China and India.”

      Bwahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

      How many models have been used in the past, that have been wrong?

Leave a Reply to Cam Cancel 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.