Expansion Of Thick Arctic Sea Ice Over The Past Eleven Years

There has been a large expansion in the area of the Arctic covered by thick sea ice over the past eleven years. Nearly two thirds of the Arctic Ocean is now covered with ice more than two meters thick.

 

2007           2018

http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icethickness/txt/IceVol.txt

The Washington Post somehow forgot to mention this, and says we are all doomed.

The Arctic Ocean has lost 95 percent of its oldest ice — a startling sign

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to Expansion Of Thick Arctic Sea Ice Over The Past Eleven Years

  1. feathers says:

    They (the warmists) needed to draw attention to “old ice” since “new ice” is expanding far beyond their expectations.

  2. Lasse says:

    The Russian chart:
    http://www.aari.ru/odata/_d0015.php?lang=1&mod=0
    No big change during the last 10 Years.

  3. steve case says:

    Oh yes, Sea Ice Extent. The IPCC reports over the years have manipulated the data. First off it goes back to 1973 as Tony has pointed out many times. Currently they only graph it since 1979. The pre-1979 time line has been dropped off. Well it’s interesting, the pre-1979 data was graphed for the first three assessment reports FAR SAR and TAR
    So a collection of those graphs of Arctic Sea Ice Extent is in order:
    https://i.postimg.cc/zv4549gB/image.png
    Trend lines for the FAR SAR and TAR have been added graphically for comparison. By the time the TAR (Third Assessment Report)was published, the data for the pre-1979 time line had been changed to show a decline. the Orwellian rewriting of data seems to be a hallmark of climate science.

    • steve case says:

      I think Tony has put up posts that show that Sea Ice Extent has been documented earlier than 1973. I’m just disorganized enough not to be able to fine it.

    • DD More says:

      Steve , Many people have seen the graph of pre 1979 ice in the IPCC-FAR report

      https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/image87.png

      Figure 7.20: (a) Northern Hemisphere, and (b) Southern Hemisphere sea-ice extent anomalies. Data from NOAA (USA).

      Did you know it came with a discussion?

      7.8.2 Sea-ice Extent and Thickness
      Especially importantly, satellite observations have been used to map sea-ice extent routinely since the early 1970s. The American Navy Joint Ice Center has produced weekly charts which have been digitised by NOAA. These data are summarized in Figure 7.20 which is based on analyses carried out on a 1° latitude x 2.5° longitude grid. Sea-ice is defined to be present when its concentration exceeds 10% (Ropelewski, 1983). Since about 1976 the areal extent of sea-ice in the Northern Hemisphere has varied about a constant climatological level but in 1972-1975 sea-ice extent was significantly less.

      So from IPCC, starting at a high point on the left side of the chart falsifies the slope.
      *****************

      March 2, 1975 & the Trib is confirming that:

      The current start of Arctic Sea ice is a high point. In the last decade, the Arctic ice and snow cap has expanded 12 per cent,

      There was a ‘Little Ice Age’. No scientist is forecasting a full-scale Ice Age soon, but some predict that in a few decades there might be little ice ages like the ones which plagued Europe with severe winters from 1430 to 1850.

      “Wilson Smith, you missed another one.”

    • Steven Fraser says:

      steve case: I have my own screencaps of those charts. There is an annotation below the graph in the TAR (page 125), which says this:
      ————
      Figure 2.14: Monthly Arctic sea-ice extent anomalies, 1973 to 2000, relative to 1973 to 1996. The data are a blend of updated Walsh (Walsh, 1978) Goddard Space Flight Center satellite passive microwave (Scanning Multichannel Microwave Radiometer (SMMR) and and Special Sensor Microwave/Imager (SSM/I)) derived data (Cavalieri et al,. 1997) and National Centers for Environmental Prediction satellite passive microwave derived data (Grumbine, 1996). Updated digitised ice data for the Great Lakes are also included (Assel, 1983).
      ————-
      Its worthy of some comments.

      First, the chart goes through 2000, however all the cited papers are from 1997 or before. This disproves the IPCC claim that only peer-reviewed published results are used as source.

      Second, its not possible to tell how the ‘blend’ was made, for example, where the junctures and overlaps between the various methods are located.

      Third, and IMO most critically for the comparisons with earlier charts: the ‘Great Lakes’ are included. A close comparison with the FAR and SAR graphs (which you provide) shows that the earlier years of low values are no longer graphed as they previously were, as the Great Lakes values reported in the 1983 paper were included, and the subsequent years (after the report) cannot contain these values.

      The paper is available at
      https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/10.1175/1520-0493%281985%29113%3C0291%3ACOGLWW%3E2.0.CO%3B2

      It was submitted in January, 1984; Finalized in September, 1984 and published in March of 1985. Its particular focus was to identify how the Great Lakes Ice was quite different (lower) in 1983 than in prior years, and the associated causes (El Nino weather patterns) and effects. The paper does not calculate the Lake Ice % anomaly. The closest it comes is to list the Lake Ice % values from 1963-1983. However, it does so on a yearly basis, not monthly, making the merging of these values into the SAR Monthly chart problematic at best to understand, and there is no chart remotely like the one in the TAR.

      I hope this is helpful.

      • steve case says:

        Steven Fraser says:
        December 13, 2018 at 5:00 am
        …and there is no chart remotely like the one in the TAR.

        Thanks – that speaks to what I am saying.

  4. Anon says:

    In a catastrophically warming climate Wintertime Arctic Sea Ice Growth Slows Long-term Decline: NASA

    https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2018/wintertime-arctic-sea-ice-growth-slows-long-term-decline-nasa

    This could be the Warming Hole again:

    The bizarre ‘warming hole’ that defies climate change in the US by causing some areas to get COLDER instead of hotter

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5392183/The-bizarre-warming-hole-defies-climate-change.html

  5. Psalmon says:

    So they are back to the Old ice game…this is the ultimate rigged science game…nobody can definitively say that is 3 year old ice…so many ways to fudge numbers. More junk science.

    • AZ1971 says:

      Agreed. Not only that, but the precipitous decline post-2007 was due to prolonged and sustained wind fetching, not warmer Arctic temperatures. They love to ignore the actual phenomenon in favour of promoting their ideological cult.

    • Anon says:

      Everything is Reversed Now:

      1] No Ice Free Arctic – Growing Arctic
      2] No End of Snow – Increased Snow
      3] No Increase of Hurricanes – Hurricane Drought
      4] No Sea Level Rise – Due to Increase Snow in Antarctica
      5] No 18 Year Pause – Satellites Mal-
      6] No Tipping Point in 2020 – Due to Models Over Predicting (now 2050)
      7] No Permanent Drought in TX or CA as Warmer Air Holds more Moisture
      8] Hurricanes – Faster & More Powerful => Slower, Weaker & Inundating.
      9] Islands Disappearing now Growing
      10] Warming Hole – Produces Freezing Temperatures
      11] World Getting Windier (2011) now Winds are Stilling
      12] Coral Dying now Resilient

      I wonder if the trend reversal will continue with the other stuff, like coffee tasting better, beer being more plentiful, less famines and migrations, Third World prosperity and World Peace, etc ?

      It is something to think about.

  6. sunsettommy says:

    The article written by Loony Mooney is dishonest and misleading, notice how they ignored the rest of the Interglacial period?

  7. Thomas Kennedy says:

    WUWT had a story recently whereby NASA were claiming that global warming was causing an increase in Arctic ice:

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/12/11/nasa-global-warming-promotes-arctic-sea-ice-growth/

    Orwelian doublespeak is now the normal in “climate science” circles

  8. Paul Homewood says:

    1979 was after a decade or more of the coldest period in the Arctic since the early 20thC

    https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/dmi.gif

    Hardly surprising sea ice was up

    • Lance says:

      I worked in the High Arctic in 1979-80….Eureka set the North American Record cold month in Feb ’79 (I arrived in March thankfully)…-47.9C mean….
      and yes, we had very thick ice in the Fjord as we measured it monthly (even have the photo to prove it)…yes, it was a very cold time….and it was still known as the global cooling timeframe…

  9. Gamecock says:

    How does this impact ME?

    It doesn’t.

    How does it impact anyone else?

    It doesn’t.

  10. DD More says:

    Over the past three decades of global warming, the oldest and thickest ice in the Arctic has declined by a stunning 95 percent,

    And
    Over the past three decades of LIVING, the oldest and MOST AGED POPULATION in FLORIDA has declined by a stunning 95 percent. THEY DIED, HOWEVER YOUNGER PEOPLE HAVE NOW BECOME THE OLDEST.

    Be berry, berry aufwaid.

    • Anon says:

      At the end of this story, the ice extent will no doubt be back where it was during the last iteration of the AMO, but this time with younger ice. (facepalm)

  11. Mr Sir says:

    Overall though, the ice thickness from 2003-2007 is still higher than the ice thickness from 2014-2017.

    • Gator says:

      Cherry picking again Little Man?

      A more meaningful statement would be that there is currently more ice in the Arctic than the average of the past 9000 years. Why don’t you ever mention that?

    • Gamecock says:

      “Overall though, the ice thickness from 2003-2007 is still higher than the ice thickness from 2014-2017.”

      Which killed how many people?

  12. Grilled Tomatoes says:

    The NSIDC has ice extent creeping deep into the Bering Strait and the Hudson Bay is showing completely ice covered. There’s definitely a gap in the east but as I like to ask alarmists, how much Arctic sea ice do we need???

  13. Mick J says:

    In related news, this site may have been mentioned hereabouts before but in case not. Presentation of early ice extent maps 1893-1961 originally sourced from DMI.
    http://hidethedecline.eu/pages/posts/arctic-sea-ice-data-collected-by-dmi-1893-1961-259.php

    Mick.

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.