Green shows ice present in 2013 but not present in 2012. Red shows the opposite.
In the original bitmap – Yellow – 24,123 pixels Green – 19,405 pixels Red – 2,017 pixels
2013 – 43,528 pixels 2012 – 26,140 pixels = 67% increase.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Up Is Down
- The Clean Energy Boom
- Climate Change In Spain
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- COP29 Preview
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- A Giant Eyesore
- CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- Rats Jumping Off The Climate Ship
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Spoiled Children
- Great Lakes Storm Of November 11, 1835
- Harris To Win Iowa
- Angry Democrats
- November 9, 1913 Storm
- Science Magazine Explains Trump Supporters
Recent Comments
- Bob G on Up Is Down
- dm on The Clean Energy Boom
- arn on Up Is Down
- Bob G on Up Is Down
- arn on Climate Change In Spain
- conrad ziefle on The Clock Is Ticking
- conrad ziefle on Climate Change In Spain
- conrad ziefle on Climate Change In Spain
- conrad ziefle on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- arn on The Clock Is Ticking
Rotten, Decaying, Melting Ice:
http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh?fm=09&fd=14&fy=2012&sm=09&sd=14&sy=2013
May have hit bottom late last week. JAXA 5.0 (Ver 1), 4.8 (Ver 2) on 9/12. NSIDC 5.1 on 9/13, NIC 5.5 on 9/14. MASIE not updated yet. NANSEN looks up, but DMI showed down tick yesterday.
Are you able to see the Nansen? I have not been able to get to their site for over a week now.
Just looked at graph on WUWT sea ice page. Hard to get on NANSEN site for some reason.
Canada showing lots of new ice.
Parry Channel
http://ice-glaces.ec.gc.ca/prods/WIS137SD/20130916134000_WIS137SD_0007267827.gif
Beaufort
http://ice-glaces.ec.gc.ca/prods/WIS140SD/20130915021500_WIS140SD_0007265737.gif
You know you can’t do this right? NSDIC told you this back in 2008. You have to take into account the stereographic projection, otherwise your figure is almost entirely meaningless. Its ridiculous that you do this primitive pixel counting when IJIS provides the numbers freely, which you can use. Why do something so sloppy and inaccurate over that?
As a measure of percentage change can you explain why this method wouldn’t be reasonably accurate?
I appreciate you’ve whined a lot, but have offered nothing remotely rational in your complaint.
The accuracy depends on the exact nature of the transform, and the distribution of the ice, for Steven to justify his method he would be the one that would have to find out this information. The way a stereographic projection works is by mapping a 3D surface onto a 2D plane. It is mathematically impossible to preserve both area elements and angles, hence there will be a distortion which depends on the X and Y coordinates. Exactly what this distortion is depends on the specifications of the projection. Don’t you think it would be more rational to use IJIS’s sophisticated algorithm instead of this guessing method which may be prone to unnecessary error.
You really can’t just count pixels like this! Because of the projection, not all the pixels are the same size. You have to first calculate the area correction factor, it’ll be something like: ((1+sin(x))/(1+sin(y)))^2 where x and y are the pixel’s latitude and the projection’s standard parallel.
All engineering has error tolerances. DMI reports a 70% increase. Cryosphere Today reports a 60% increase. My calculation is in between those two.
All methods introduce errors. Adults understand this, but academics don’t.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/09/16/pixel-counting-teensy-weensy-alarmist-brains/
You can crawl back into your hole now, little mouse.
LOL, are you saying the ice hasn’t increased over last year?
The lunatics put out the maps as their products. It’s entirely proper and legitimate for Steve to demonstrate the changes in the same way the lunatics do. It provides excellent context. A singular map without another for comparison is meaningless. Overlaying the two is quite good for these purposes.
atowermadeofbullshit knows that the increase in sea ice is all wrong and can’t be real since his models say its impossible. The hiatus in temperature rise for the past 15 or 17 years is all wrong too … again the magic models have said temps can only go up. All weather is now climate change – models say so. atowerfullofbullshit will be fun to have around this winter … entire northern portion of the North American continent is below freezing tonight 😉
http://www.intellicast.com/Global/Temperature/Current.aspx?region=namer
That has nothing whatsoever to do with anything I said. How is the global temperature record even remotely relevant to using an error prone method to evaluate sea ice area.
Experts say the Arctic is ice-free in 2013. Counting zero pixels should be really easy.
But wait! What is the meaning of sea ice? You guys are fighting over how many angels can watch TV at the same time. I have never seen anything to suggest that the extent of Arctic sea ice has any relevance to my life at all. Personally, I wish there were far less.