Arctic ice trends

Crick

Gold Member
May 10, 2014
27,861
5,280
290
N/A
asina_N_stddev_timeseries.png

monthly_ice_NH_11.png
 
  • 2014 AGU Fall Meeting

  • C11D-03CryoSat-2 observes Arctic sea ice volume recovery, after anomalously low melting in summer 2013

  • Pa
    Monday, December 15, 201408:30 AM - 08:45 AM
    • Moscone West
    • 3007
Despite a well-documented ~40% decline in summer Arctic sea ice extent since the late 1970’s, it has been difficult to estimate trends in sea ice volume because thickness observations have been spatially incomplete and temporally sporadic. While numerical models suggest that the decline in extent has been accompanied by a reduction in volume, there is considerable disagreement over the rate at which this has occurred. We present the first complete assessment of trends in northern hemisphere sea ice thickness and volume using 4 years of measurements from CryoSat-2. Between autumn 2010 and spring 2013, there was a 14% and 5% reduction in autumn and spring Arctic sea ice volume, respectively, in keeping with the long-term decline in extent. However, since then there has been a marked 41% and 9% recovery in autumn and spring sea ice volume, respectively, more than offsetting losses of the previous three years. The recovery was driven by the retention of thick ice around north Greenland and Canada during summer 2013 which, in turn, was associated with a 6% drop in the number of days on which melting occurred – climatic conditions more typical of the early 1990’s. Such a sharp increase in volume after just one cool summer indicates that the Arctic sea ice pack may be more resilient than has been previously considered.

Polar Science Center PIOMAS Arctic Sea Ice Volume Reanalysis





Fig.1 Arctic sea ice volume anomaly from PIOMAS updated once a month. Daily Sea Ice volume anomalies for each day are computed relative to the 1979 to 2011 average for that day of the year. Tickmarks on time axis refer to 1st day of year. The trend for the period 1979- present is shown in blue. Shaded areas show one and two standard deviations from the trend. Error bars indicate the uncertainty of the monthly anomaly plotted once per year.

Yes, the volume has increased in the last two years. However, if you look at the chart from the University of Washington, you can see that the present upward increase is hardly the largest such increase on record, and, in ensuing years, the downward trend continued.
 
lets face it......the alarmist view on sea ice has long since been dismissed by most people..........they heard all of the nutty-ass predictions 15.........20 years ago, all of which fell flat on their face.
 
Real scientists on the Arctic issues.



Here is some real science on arctic issues...So according to real science, how does the arctic look now, compared to most of the past 10,000 years. What you are pushing isn't real science..it is pseudoscientific cherry picking designed to support an alarmist narrative. Real science is about finding the truth..you aren't interested in that or you would be looking at the long term picture rather than a cherry picked snapshot of time which is the only thing that will support the alarmist narrative.

greenland-gisp2-ice-core-last-10000-years.png
 
Astounding. You accuse us of cherry picking and then display the one core that shows a descending trend. Besides, no one would go to an ice core to examine a trend of the last century and a half. You are such a sack of shit.

003.jpg

stacks-image-5f8ffb5-798x546.png

004.jpg

Vostok_420ky_4curves_insolation_to_2004.jpg

stacks-image-12432a4-798x546.png
 

Forum List

Back
Top