No Trend In Arctic Sea Ice For Twelve Years


Meanwhile, the New York Times says the “old ice is disappearing.”

In the Arctic, the Old Ice Is Disappearing – The New York Times

This is impressive, because nine years ago experts said the old ice was effectively gone. Apparently it has gone lower than zero since then.

Multiyear Arctic ice is effectively gone: expert | Reuters

Almost all of the current ice has survived for one year, and is now multi-year ice.

N_20180930_extn_v3.0.png (420×500)

There is nothing happening in the Arctic. The usual barrage of lies by climate scientists and the press is happening in climate controlled offices at much lower latitudes.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to No Trend In Arctic Sea Ice For Twelve Years

  1. Norilsk says:

    I want Griff’s explanation to why the sea ice has surged to the Canadian Arctic Coast beyond the average line.

    • Charles Higley says:

      I love the Reuters segment shown above. Do they not know that the NW Passage has been open 74 of the last 116 years? It’s been open more often that it has been closed. Blocked ships for centuries? I think not.

      • Phil. says:

        Judging by the number of crossings in one year that seems rather high. First time was 1944 and it hasn’t been open every year since then, many of the earlier crossings were by ice breakers so the Passage may not have been open. The first crossing by a yacht was in 1976.

    • Norilsk says:

      Since Griff didn’t show up, I’ll tell you why. When I stood on the frozen Arctic Ocean at Tuktoyaktuk last December, I said the Lord will have Dominion from coast to coast to coast and that Jesus is Lord of Canada. God will confound the wisdom of the wise.

    • Griff says:

      It is quite evident if you check the Hycom drift data.

  2. Stewart Pid says:

    Tony / folks … look at this – Griff is really a dumbass Bear working at Lake Louise!!–s-winter-gear-swap-2018-10-10.php
    Also take a look at the webcams & all the white GLO-BULL warming falling today in the Rockies :-)

  3. Phil. says:

    It’s a load of broken up ice being pushed around by winds and currents.
    Here’s yesterday’s view of it from Worldview:

  4. Spiritus Mundi says:

    Griff is living rent free in so many peoples’ head. Best to ignore trolls and the mentally unstable.

  5. bwegher says:

    The trend line is a line that follows a linear least square fit. Any line made using real data can have a slope of zero, that’s not the same as “no trend”
    A real trend line will also have some real confidence intervals. Leading to a need for statistical analysis.
    Applied to real data composing a time plot to determine if that trend line has a slope of zero then is compared to a mathematical line of zero slope.
    The null hypothesis can then be formed to determine if the data have a slope that is statistically different from zero.
    Any line that has “no trend” is by definition a line with no slope, and statistical analysis has no solution.
    The time plot of the data as shown is dominated by a sinusoidal pattern, so more advanced techniques may or may not be useful. If there were at least thirty independent oscillations in the sine-wave, or thirty years of data, you might have a justification for using a linear approximation with some statistical validity.

    • tonyheller says:

      In other words, there is no trend and the predictions were wrong.

      • bwegher says:

        No. I said the trend was zero. There is a difference. Anyone who has attended a class that teaches first year statistics will actually understand this fact.

        • Colorado Wellington says:


          Thanks for explaining the difference to us. I just learned that for decades I was deluding myself about a critical piece of data in Earth sciences.

          Every year I evaluate the start of meteorological spring in the northern hemisphere and I plot the data. So far it has always been March 1 and I assumed incorrectly that there was no trend to the date.

          Now I know that my analysis was fatally flawed and all along there was a clearly identifiable trend of zero. It makes a huge difference to my understanding of the issue. I’m grateful that someone who attended first year of statistics class pointed my error to me.

  6. gregole says:

    No trend.


    If you see a trend, please provide me the start date of the trend.


  7. Griff says:

    complete nonsense, again.

    do check the web for criticism of using Maisie for year on year comparisons.

    Meanwhile JAXA extent actually DROPPED on October 1st.

    • spike55 says:

      So glad you put a title on all your posts.

      Saves anyone taking them seriously.

      One day of wind blow biased data.

      The criticism only comes from those that know it is more accurate and don’t like its results.

      Anyway, SO WHAT. Volume is increasing rapidly..

      And the extent is still FAR higher than it has been for 90+% of the last 10,000 years.

      Or are you going to continue to DENY the FACTS of climate change ?????

      It seems that DENIAL is the only thing that can keep your chicken-little Arctic sea ice PANIC going . !!

Leave a Reply

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