Arctic Sea Ice Normal And Increasing Quickly

Arctic sea ice extent is in the normal range, rapidly increasing, and much larger than five or ten years ago.

Charctic Interactive Sea Ice Graph | Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis

This year’s melt was the smallest in a decade.

masie_4km_allyears_extent_sqkm.csv

This is (of course) the exact opposite of what the criminals known as “climate scientists” and “climate journalists” report to the public.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

27 Responses to Arctic Sea Ice Normal And Increasing Quickly

  1. jim says:

    I think it is good to remind people that melting ice DOES NOT show that man’s CO2 is causing serious global warming. Neither do storms, floods, drought and any other weather phenomenon.

    Thanks
    JK

  2. AndyG55 says:

    And just in case any little zero-knowledge troll accuses TH of cherry-picking MASIE.

    Here is the same calcs from NSIDC

    https://s19.postimg.org/ke0zsuttf/NSIDC_Ice_melt.png

  3. gator69 says:

    There is no “normal” for Arctic ice, only averages over time. Using the term “normal” to describe something allows that there are “abnormal” conditions. Nothing we see in climate or weather can be described as “abnormal”, unusual maybe, but there is no “normal” in climate or weather.

    • AndyG55 says:

      Correct.

      Over the very short satellite era, it is below the extremes of the late 1970’s, which were up there with the extremes of the Little Ice Age.

      But over the whole interglacial, it is above what it has been for some 90-95% of the last 10,000 years.

      Above the extent of the RWP,

      Above the extent of the MWP.

      https://s19.postimg.org/vgdnb299v/Arctic-_Sea-_Ice-_Holocene-_Stein-17.jpg

      • Andy DC says:

        The total absurdity is alarmists trying to claim that 1979 was normal and 2017 is abnormal, when in reality, the truth is the exact opposite. Just because you cherry picked your starting date during the coldest year since the Little Ice Age does not mean that the starting date was “normal”!

  4. AndyG55 says:

    TH, you also might like to look at the change in sea ice from Sept 1 to Sept 30 over the last 10 years. ;-)

  5. Rob says:

    I hope it stays above that 30 year average line next year so I can see the same silly garbage these nuts say every month/year or see if they change it to something else.

    • wolvesjoe says:

      Interesting commentary on the emergence and consolidation of counterintuitive trends in Arctic Sea ice. Counterintuitive to the dominant narrative that is.

      I have been following the debate on the Arctic Sea Ice Forum over the last six months or so. The group there pore over all available data, indices and models concerning Arctic Ice, and view the state of the ice as the number one indicator of AGW. As one of the main moderators of the website emphatically stated recently:

      https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1834.4050.html

      and actual quote:

      ‘Might try “Arctic amplification” on google scholar before posting more nonsense. Arctic sea ice is the leading indicator of climate change. That’s why we’re here. As its current seasonal absence trends to imminent effective disappearance, it will have massive mid-latitude — and indeed — global consequences for climate.’

      In general, this group of highly informed, even obsessively minded people saw this year as a likely contender for a new stage in the decline of summer ice, with the strong possibility of an open ocean. As reality has refused to accord with their predictions, a new modified narrative has been presented as Ron sets out in his blog. Extent of the summer ice is now seen as unimportant, whereas volume/thickness is the key indicator. Expect this meme to become part of the popular debate in due course.

      While such a modified interpretation of the ice may gain some temporary traction, and preserve the internal coherence of the AGW discourse, it points to how significant the trends in Arctic ice may become. Having posited the summer melt as the canary in the mineshaft, the best short-term signal of global warming, then logically increases in the extent of summer ice, the reduction of the melting season and so on, present a significant challenge to the whole edifice of AGW discourse, (for want of a better term).

      Over the next 18 months, if trends continue in their current direction, we may see a heightened politicisation of this issue.

      • AndyG55 says:

        Do they EVER mention the FACT that current levels of Arctic sea ice are in the TOP DECILE of extent for the last 10,000 years

        ie they are currently very much on the HIGH side of the Holocene extent ?

        Or are they still all CLIMATE CHANGE DENIERS !!

        • wolvesjoe says:

          No, absolutely not.

          The group in general are preoccupied with new types of data simulation to ascertain the state of the ice. This preoccupation with a mass of detail, (which is acknowledged increasingly by the group itself as problematic), allows for the generation of apparent insights and comparisons. Its a classic cant see the wood for the trees error of method.

          However the overall shift from looking at extent as a key indicator of the ice trends to volume has very much the look of a temporary stagepost in the decline and fall of a theory.

  6. Rah says:

    More important than the fact they are lying about current conditions is the fact that their hypothesis is being falsified before our eyes. The Arctic ice, and Greenland SMB is doing the opposite of what their hypothesis demands.

  7. Klaus Berger says:

    If I click on your link for DMI : Greenland Ice Sheet Surface Mass Budget – I get a warning, and I cannot connect to it. Hmm? Somebody don’t like us to see this. But I know you are right, Tony!

  8. sunsettommy says:

    Tony,

    Nick Stokes,took a crappy swing at you about your three “busted” posts,it was a reply to the previous comment:

    ” Nick Stokes
    October 4, 2017 at 3:36 am Edit

    “Really?”
    And your evidence is that something I said has pushed Tony Heller into his usual incoherent ranting. Just look at two items in that. I said that people circulate these graphs with no attempt at fact-checking. So his response is that he posts code, and so I am ignorant. But the point would then be, do those who circulate the graphs ever run Heller’s code? I’m betting no-one does.

    And as for this
    ” They are a simple numerical average of the USHCN monthly final minus the numerical average of the monthly raw temperatures, per year. Math doesn’t get any simpler than that. A third grader should be able to understand”
    It’s simple, and just wrong. There were (USHCN has been obsolete for years) 1218 stations in the final set. There were a varying number, usually somewhere around 900, in the raw set. He subtracts the average absolute temperatures, and says the result is due to adjustment. But they are different sets. The 900 raw stations may just, on average, be warmer or cooler places than the 1218 final. If there is inhomogeneity (lat, altitude etc) you either have to use the same set, or carefully correct for the difference. Else you get things like the Goddard spike.”

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/10/03/and-im-back-my-thanks-to-everyone/#comment-2627091

    LOLOLOLOLOL!!!

    • AndyG55 says:

      this graph from Nick and Zeke et al shows EXACTLY what everyone is saying

      Any warming since 1940 is a product of ADJUSTMENTS.

      Thanks Nick, Thanks Zeke. Nice to see you presenting the truth. :-)

      https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/ushcn-adjustments-by-method-12m-smooth3.png

    • tonyheller says:

      Perfect! He set himself up for part four, which will be the best yet!

      • sunsettommy says:

        Here is my reply to Nick,whining about the “Goddard Spike”.

        “sunsettommy
        October 4, 2017 at 12:23 pm Edit

        It is clear Nick never read Tony’s posts about you, since you said several things completely wrong about what Tony actually said. You also are avoiding his criticism posts about you,not a single post from you there.

        Meanwhile that “Goddard spike” blog post, has Tony thanking them for pointing it out:

        ” stevengoddard
        May 10, 2014 at 7:59 am

        Anthony,

        Thanks for the explanation of what caused the spike.

        The simplest approach of averaging all final minus all raw per year which I took shows the average adjustment per station year. More likely the adjustments should go the other direction due to UHI, which has been measured by the NWS as 8F in Phoenix and 4F in NYC.”

        How come YOU left this part out?

        You are destroying your credibility every time you do that.”

  9. Garyh845 says:

    And this . .

  10. John G. McLachlan says:

    Why has no one interviewed the alarmists, who claimed that there would be open water at the north pole and that snow would be a thing of the past, both by several years ago?

    Surely they can be invited to discuss their predictions and explain why increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide causes warming and freezing, at the same time and that their climate models are accurate depictions of physical reality.

  11. Douglas Kubler says:

    NSIDC has changed the scaling on the Arctic Sea Ice Extent chart, easy to see the effect.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGuQ_Ypg9eI

Leave a Reply to AndyG55 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.