Sea Ice Extent – Day 244

  Global_Sea_Ice_Extent_Zoomed_2015_Day_244_1981-2010 Antarctic_Sea_Ice_Extent_Zoomed_2015_Day_244_1981-2010 Arctic_Sea_Ice_Extent_Zoomed_2015_Day_244_1981-2010

South / North



  1. Arctic sea ice has fallen to the second lowest extension and seems to keep its way down. Furthermore, it continues to stay very fragile in Beaufort and there are strong positive anomalies in sea temperature nearly across the whole Arctic area.

    On the other side, the Antarctica sea ice continues to increase its area after the “hiatus” that has lasted for weeks.


  2. I wish I understood more about the dynamics between Arctic and Antarctic sea ice as measured by PIOMAS and areal extent, because there are some weird things that show up which NOAA and NASA simply do not want to analyze or discuss. For instance, the PIOMAS volume graph below shows that around 2011 there is a consistent step-up in Arctic sea ice volume:

    At the same time right around 2011 as well, Antarctic sea ice extent grew incredibly fast and consistently:

    2010 was a fairly strong La Niña year, but there is no parallel correlation with the super El Niño of 1997-98 that would reflect a drop in Arctic sea ice, In fact, from 1997-2007 Arctic sea ice volume shows very little intra- and inter-annual variability, although the trend is obviously down. What were the Arctic winds like during that time frame? Clearly it wasn’t the El Niño at play for the next decade … or was it? If it was, by what mechanism did the EPAC atmospheric release of thermal accumulation affect storms and winds in the Arctic to limit variability? And what would that portend for this year’s El Niño brewing in the CPAC/EPAC regions?

    Is it due to the solar progression decline of SC24? No, because there’s no indication of correlation with the peak of the solar cycle:

    Is it TSI? Possibly, but the problem lies in an inconsistent reconstruction of various measurements and methodologies, so take from it what you will:

    The point of all this is that despite the doom and gloom predicted by Al Gore and the IPCC, we’re not seeing the world run away into a boiling cesspool. In fact, one could postulate that the exact opposite is happening. Something beginning around 2000 influenced global temperatures as to limit any increase despite (a) constant readjustment of temperature records by NOAA and others (b) ever-increasing proxies being added to the overall data pool and (c) acknowledging that 40% of all CO2 emitted since 1750 has occurred during the 21st century. What is the lag time for CO2 downward IR influencing surface temperatures? Can CO2 account for the recent hiatus in global temperatures as acknowledged by NOAA/NASA’s own monthly and annual temperature records? If “internal variability” offsets the increase in warming caused by CO2, which specific variables are they referring to, and how much more anomalous than average are they? It would seem that a perfect storm of God knows what has conspired together to offset the effects of CO2, or the climate sensitivity of CO2 is far less than postulated. Either way, identifying the changes to the Arctic climate between 1997-2007 and again from 2011-present would be useful in parsing out the why so central to predicting future climate.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s