Maximum Sea Ice Fifth Lowest on Record

[Chris]

March 30, 2009

Arctic sea ice extent reached its maximum extent for the year, marking the beginning of the melt season. This year’s maximum was the fifth lowest in the satellite record. NSIDC will release a more detailed analysis of winter sea ice conditions during the second week of April.

On February 28, Arctic sea ice reached its maximum extent for the year, at 15.14 million square kilometers (5.85 million square miles). The maximum extent was 720,000 square kilometers (278,000 square miles) below the 1979 to 2000 average of 15.86 million square kilometers (6.12 million square miles), making it the fifth-lowest maximum extent in the satellite record. The six lowest maximum extents since 1979 have all occurred in the last six years (2004 to 2009).

Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Statistical unimportant. The Space age did not start until 1957 and it was a while after that before we had any satalites up there free to map sea ice levels.

But lets be Generous, shall we? Lets say 1965, that means you have records for 44 years. And the first 15 or so were during a cooling period.

Afraid 44 years of recorded data is pretty much meaningless when in regards to the EARTH and her cycles.

 

[Old Rocks]

Statistical unimportant. The Space age did not start until 1957 and it was a while after that before we had any satalites up there free to map sea ice levels.

But lets be Generous, shall we? Lets say 1965, that means you have records for 44 years. And the first 15 or so were during a cooling period.

Afraid 44 years of recorded data is pretty much meaningless when in regards to the EARTH and her cycles.

No, when you have a reduction in the ice to the extent that we have seen in the last six years, you are getting a huge feedback effect. What you are saying is that you have owned a ten year old car for two years. And it just started using a quart of oil a week for the last six weeks, but it is not significant, because you don't know for sure how much oil it used in the eight years you did not own it.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Statistical unimportant. The Space age did not start until 1957 and it was a while after that before we had any satalites up there free to map sea ice levels.

But lets be Generous, shall we? Lets say 1965, that means you have records for 44 years. And the first 15 or so were during a cooling period.

Afraid 44 years of recorded data is pretty much meaningless when in regards to the EARTH and her cycles.

No, when you have a reduction in the ice to the extent that we have seen in the last six years, you are getting a huge feedback effect. What you are saying is that you have owned a ten year old car for two years. And it just started using a quart of oil a week for the last six weeks, but it is not significant, because you don't know for sure how much oil it used in the eight years you did not own it.

Wrong again. The Earth operates in cycles. No One has measured those cycles, no one knows what is "normal" so a sampling of 44 years out of Millions is statisticly irrelevant. The claim that we have the 5 of 6 lowest levels means nothing when the record is only 44 years long. And at least 10 to 15 of those 44 years was during a KNOWN cooling period.

For example we know for a fact about a thousand years ago Greenland was not ice covered at all, I wonder what the poles ice cover was during that warming period? Which is relevant because it was during a time that man existed and effected man.

 

[Sinatra]

Statistical unimportant. The Space age did not start until 1957 and it was a while after that before we had any satalites up there free to map sea ice levels.

But lets be Generous, shall we? Lets say 1965, that means you have records for 44 years. And the first 15 or so were during a cooling period.

Afraid 44 years of recorded data is pretty much meaningless when in regards to the EARTH and her cycles.

No, when you have a reduction in the ice to the extent that we have seen in the last six years, you are getting a huge feedback effect. What you are saying is that you have owned a ten year old car for two years. And it just started using a quart of oil a week for the last six weeks, but it is not significant, because you don't know for sure how much oil it used in the eight years you did not own it.

Wrong again. The Earth operates in cycles. No One has measured those cycles, no one knows what is "normal" so a sampling of 44 years out of Millions is statisticly irrelevant. The claim that we have the 5 of 6 lowest levels means nothing when the record is only 44 years long. And at least 10 to 15 of those 44 years was during a KNOWN cooling period.

For example we know for a fact about a thousand years ago Greenland was not ice covered at all, I wonder what the poles ice cover was during that warming period? Which is relevant because it was during a time that man existed and effected man.

Well done - you have easily dismantled the premise of the doom n gloom arguement as it pertains to this thread...

 

[PoliticalChic]

March 30, 2009

Arctic sea ice extent reached its maximum extent for the year, marking the beginning of the melt season. This year’s maximum was the fifth lowest in the satellite record. NSIDC will release a more detailed analysis of winter sea ice conditions during the second week of April.

On February 28, Arctic sea ice reached its maximum extent for the year, at 15.14 million square kilometers (5.85 million square miles). The maximum extent was 720,000 square kilometers (278,000 square miles) below the 1979 to 2000 average of 15.86 million square kilometers (6.12 million square miles), making it the fifth-lowest maximum extent in the satellite record. The six lowest maximum extents since 1979 have all occurred in the last six years (2004 to 2009).

Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis

"Amid record cold temperatures and snow that just seems to be falling everywhere and anywhere, sea ice ends 2008 where it began: in 1979. 1979 was the first year of satellite sea ice observations. The best part of the article (link below) is that scientists predicted a complete melt of the north pole in 2008 because they felt thin ice would melt faster than older, thicker and more established ice. Instead, according to the article, the thin ice had less snow cover to insulate it, allowing for bitterly cold air to freeze it and, hence, it grew faster. Nature:1, Climate Science: 0."
Sea Ice Back to 1979 Levels | Skeptics Global Warming

"Thanks to a rapid rebound in recent months, global sea ice levels now equal those seen 29 years ago, when the year 1979 also drew to a close. "
DailyTech - Sea Ice Ends Year at Same Level as 1979

Oh, no! I guess this means that Prissy is going to give me anothrer neg rep!!!!

 

[Chris]

It's tough when the facts don't fit your world view.

My sympathies......

 

[Sinatra]

March 30, 2009

Arctic sea ice extent reached its maximum extent for the year, marking the beginning of the melt season. This year’s maximum was the fifth lowest in the satellite record. NSIDC will release a more detailed analysis of winter sea ice conditions during the second week of April.

On February 28, Arctic sea ice reached its maximum extent for the year, at 15.14 million square kilometers (5.85 million square miles). The maximum extent was 720,000 square kilometers (278,000 square miles) below the 1979 to 2000 average of 15.86 million square kilometers (6.12 million square miles), making it the fifth-lowest maximum extent in the satellite record. The six lowest maximum extents since 1979 have all occurred in the last six years (2004 to 2009).

Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis

"Amid record cold temperatures and snow that just seems to be falling everywhere and anywhere, sea ice ends 2008 where it began: in 1979. 1979 was the first year of satellite sea ice observations. The best part of the article (link below) is that scientists predicted a complete melt of the north pole in 2008 because they felt thin ice would melt faster than older, thicker and more established ice. Instead, according to the article, the thin ice had less snow cover to insulate it, allowing for bitterly cold air to freeze it and, hence, it grew faster. Nature:1, Climate Science: 0."
Sea Ice Back to 1979 Levels | Skeptics Global Warming

"Thanks to a rapid rebound in recent months, global sea ice levels now equal those seen 29 years ago, when the year 1979 also drew to a close. "
DailyTech - Sea Ice Ends Year at Same Level as 1979

Oh, no! I guess this means that Prissy is going to give me anothrer neg rep!!!!

NO.

The ice is melting. It is melting and we are all GOING TO DIE.

Why don't you get that?

Plus, Beck is really cool - maybe even cool enough to combat global warming. Yes, clearly that should be the plan...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GNcpuQePPA]YouTube - Beck - Lost Cause: Revised Version[/ame]

 

[Chris]

Sinatra, do you think the sun is going to cool as we head toward the peak of the solar cycle 5 years from now?

 

[edthecynic]

March 30, 2009

Arctic sea ice extent reached its maximum extent for the year, marking the beginning of the melt season. This year’s maximum was the fifth lowest in the satellite record. NSIDC will release a more detailed analysis of winter sea ice conditions during the second week of April.

On February 28, Arctic sea ice reached its maximum extent for the year, at 15.14 million square kilometers (5.85 million square miles). The maximum extent was 720,000 square kilometers (278,000 square miles) below the 1979 to 2000 average of 15.86 million square kilometers (6.12 million square miles), making it the fifth-lowest maximum extent in the satellite record. The six lowest maximum extents since 1979 have all occurred in the last six years (2004 to 2009).

Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis

"Amid record cold temperatures and snow that just seems to be falling everywhere

What a load of crap!!! CON$ either don't know how or don't care about researching their sources.

 

[Sinatra]

Sinatra, do you think the sun is going to cool as we head toward the peak of the solar cycle 5 years from now?

If we play more Beck, than quite likely yes...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GNcpuQePPA]YouTube - Beck - Lost Cause: Revised Version[/ame]

 

[KittenKoder]

March 30, 2009

Arctic sea ice extent reached its maximum extent for the year, marking the beginning of the melt season. This year’s maximum was the fifth lowest in the satellite record. NSIDC will release a more detailed analysis of winter sea ice conditions during the second week of April.

On February 28, Arctic sea ice reached its maximum extent for the year, at 15.14 million square kilometers (5.85 million square miles). The maximum extent was 720,000 square kilometers (278,000 square miles) below the 1979 to 2000 average of 15.86 million square kilometers (6.12 million square miles), making it the fifth-lowest maximum extent in the satellite record. The six lowest maximum extents since 1979 have all occurred in the last six years (2004 to 2009).

Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis

Um ... fine, here, the only possible solution to all these environmental issues is to reduce the population, we have already reduced pollution output to a minimum (everything we have done to do so has only increased it in reality but let's play devil's advocate here). So, that being true, how do we reduce the population since it's the ONLY way we can avoid this doomsday prophecy?

 

[PoliticalChic]

It's tough when the facts don't fit your world view.

My sympathies......

Funny coming from that Pillsbury Doughboy outfit.

Must be even tougher when you have no life, no friends, on clue.

 

[Chris]

It's tough when the facts don't fit your world view.

My sympathies......

Funny coming from that Pillsbury Doughboy outfit.

Must be even tougher when you have no life, no friends, on clue.

Personal insults are the last resort of someone with no facts.

Again, my sympathies....

 

[JohnStOnge]

Personal insults are the last resort of someone with no facts.

Again, my sympathies....

A fact: The Satellite record represents an extremely small proportion of the history of the planet.

 

[KittenKoder]

Personal insults are the last resort of someone with no facts.

Again, my sympathies....

A fact: The Satellite record represents an extremely small proportion of the history of the planet.

Nice to know you at least know something about science .... but I already pointed this out to the moronic environzis, they won't listen.

 

[del]

Personal insults are the last resort of someone with no facts.

Again, my sympathies....

A fact: The Satellite record represents an extremely small proportion of the history of the planet.

Nice to know you at least know something about science .... but I already pointed this out to the moronic environzis, they won't listen.

you mean five ten millionths of a percent isn't a valid sample?

 

[Old Rocks]

A fact: The Satellite record represents an extremely small proportion of the history of the planet.

Nice to know you at least know something about science .... but I already pointed this out to the moronic environzis, they won't listen.

you mean five ten millionths of a percent isn't a valid sample?

Interesting. For at least two billion years of this planets history, the atmosphere was not even breathable for us. From that time to about five hundred million years ago, there was little life on land, and what was in the ocean was very primative. We have been here, as a species, for only about two hundred thousand years. In that time, we have seen two continental glacieations and two intercontinental periods. The warming we are seeing today is unique in that it occurs during the interglacial period. Yap on all you wish with silly math, but it is our children and grandchildren that will have to deal with the problem that we have created.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Nice to know you at least know something about science .... but I already pointed this out to the moronic environzis, they won't listen.

you mean five ten millionths of a percent isn't a valid sample?

Interesting. For at least two billion years of this planets history, the atmosphere was not even breathable for us. From that time to about five hundred million years ago, there was little life on land, and what was in the ocean was very primative. We have been here, as a species, for only about two hundred thousand years. In that time, we have seen two continental glacieations and two intercontinental periods. The warming we are seeing today is unique in that it occurs during the interglacial period. Yap on all you wish with silly math, but it is our children and grandchildren that will have to deal with the problem that we have created.

The only one "yapping" is you and your cohorts.

 

[KittenKoder]

Nice to know you at least know something about science .... but I already pointed this out to the moronic environzis, they won't listen.

you mean five ten millionths of a percent isn't a valid sample?

Interesting. For at least two billion years of this planets history, the atmosphere was not even breathable for us. From that time to about five hundred million years ago, there was little life on land, and what was in the ocean was very primative. We have been here, as a species, for only about two hundred thousand years. In that time, we have seen two continental glacieations and two intercontinental periods. The warming we are seeing today is unique in that it occurs during the interglacial period. Yap on all you wish with silly math, but it is our children and grandchildren that will have to deal with the problem that we have created.

and .... ? Doesn't mean that there weren't instances of what we see today (which it's snowing AGAIN in Seattle) many times before, so you still don't prove it's natural. As a matter of fact, if it did happen before, how much you want to bet it's the reason life appeared here in the first place.