Arctic Ice - it's here , there and everywhere

[principled]

I wanted to add a comment about Artic ice on one of Marhesa's threads, but it appears to be closed.
On Tuesday I flew from London to Vancouver. The flight path passes over Iceland and then the lower part of Greenland.
Being April (meltiong season) and having read so much about the rapidly retreating ice sheet, I expected to see broken ice sheets intersposed with open sea. How wrong. In the approx 3 hrs we took to fly over the sea between Greenland and the northern reaches of Canada there was one unbroken sheet of sea ice and no water in sight.
I know that this observation is not scientific and I have no way of measuring the thickness of the ice I saw, but it puts into prespective some of the doom and gloom that is being propogated by the AGW lobby, which seems to IMPLY that the ice has almost gone! After all, southern Greenland is quite a few miles from the North pole!
P

[eamonnshute]

You can see the current state of the ice here:

arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/NEWIMAGES/arctic.seaice.color.000.png

Since the ice only started to retreat a few weeks ago you should not be surprised that the sea is frozen. Have another look at the end of summer, when the NW passage will be open!

This shows that the extent is significantly less than the long-term average:

arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/recent365.anom.region.4.html

[nickcosmosonde]

Well, it would be, wouldn't it? We've just reached the end of the 42-year warm cycle - a particular cycle that had the most active sun on record, moreover.

[nickrr]

... but it puts into prespective some of the doom and gloom that is being propogated by the AGW lobby.

No it doesn't, because:

this observation is not scientific and I have no way of measuring the thickness of the ice I saw

[mak2]

Ice is affected by many other factors as well as temperature.

It is not a reliable indicator of global warming.

[louise]

from wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/sea-ice-page/

[StuartG]

One mans take on...
Arctic Ice May 2011 - Update #1
By Patrick Lockerby | May 18th 2011 07:48 PM
'Chatterbox'
www.science20.com/chatter_box/arctic_ice_may_2011_update_1-79030
Well His arguments seem logical enough, until the last paragraph, where He says...
"Human influences on climate have provoked a climbing temperature increase."
That I see is a 'leap of faith', OK if you're preaching to the converted, but even if it can be agreed that "Human influences on climate have provoked a climbing temperature increase." then to what extent, and is it enough, or are seeing another 'Mother Nature' warming period?
StuartG

[marchesarosa]

Would Louise care to explain the basis on which she selected this particular graph of Northern hemisphere ice (from the Danish Meteorological Institute Centre for Ocean and Ice showing Sea ice extent 15% or greater) from the 17 images available on the WUWT Sea Ice reference page?

here wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/sea-ice-page/

[louise]

A newly published paper states that ice discharge from certain ice sheets (Greenland and Antarctic) is accelerating.

from www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2011/2011GL047304.shtml

Accelerating ice loss from the fastest Greenland and Antarctic glaciers

Ice discharge from the fastest glaciers draining the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets – Jakobshavn Isbrae (JI) and Pine Island Glacier (PIG)– continues to increase, and is now more than double that needed to balance snowfall in their catchment basins. Velocity increase probably resulted from decreased buttressing from thinning (and, for JI, breakup) of their floating ice tongues, and from reduced basal drag as grounding lines on both glaciers retreat. JI flows directly into the ocean as it becomes afloat, and here creep rates are proportional to the cube of bed depth. Rapid thinning of the PIG ice shelf increases the likelihood of its breakup, and subsequent rapid increase in discharge velocity. Results from a simple model indicate that JI velocities should almost double to >20 km a−1 by 2015, with velocities on PIG increasing to >10 km a−1 after breakup of its ice shelf. These high velocities would probably be sustained over many decades as the glaciers retreat within their long, very deep troughs. Resulting sea-level rise would average about 1.5 mm a−1.

[If Joanna would prefer to have this post under sea-level as that is part of the consequences then I am happy for it to be moved]

[marchesarosa]

Th Truthpeddler says


None of this modeling or predicting or remote sensing matters one iota. All one has to do is measure the actual trend in rising sea levels. There is no acceleration. And sea levels are supposed to be rising. We are in an interglacial and they ALWAYS rise in an interglacial. If you don’t like rising sea levels you will certainly not like the alternative–much of the Northen Hemisphere covered with a half mile thick sheet of ice! Everyone enjoy the interglacial while it lasts.

[clh]

Let's not duplicate threads, please.



arctic sea ice in progress


www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm

[marchesarosa]

We are in an interglacial, aren't we? Periods of ice melt are not unusual but the CAUSE is moot! Have you seen my nice Arctic reports and photographs here?

radio4scienceboards.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=witter&action=display&thread=599

They go back a little further than 1979.

[Joanne Byers]

I have amalgamated two threads dealing with the same topic to make referencing easier.

[nickrr]

We are in an interglacial, aren't we? Periods of ice melt are not unusual but the CAUSE is moot!

nsidc.org/icelights/

Over the thirty-year satellite record, sea ice has shown a dramatic decline. In September, generally the lowest month of the year for Arctic sea ice extent, sea ice has dropped by more than 30 percent since 1979

To drop by 30% over a few decades seems unusual to me. Have you evidence that this sort of decline is normal? (By the way a few photos don't count as evidence). Unless it can be shown that this is normal behaviour for sea ice (which I know it hasn't) then the only prudent approach is to take it at face value.

And the cause is only moot if you think that "virtually certain" and "moot" mean the same thing.

[marchesarosa]

I am afraid that informed historical eye witness reports are infinitely preferable to alarmist scare-mongering based on a mere three decades of figures. That's only half a PDO oscillation! That's only three sunspot cycles. Get a grip.

" seems unusual to me" - the history of climate is more than the sum of YOUR petty CO2 philosophy, horatio.