Arctic Ice

[Old Rocks]

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag

Still running below two sigma.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag

Still running below two sigma.

Chinese soot the most likely cause

 

[jc456]

same ClimateScience.com site:

 

[CrusaderFrank]

same ClimateScience.com site:

That's not what OR chart shows.

Odd.

 

[jc456]

one more from ClimateScience.com;

 

[Billy_Bob]

April 2015 compared to previous years

Figure 3. Monthly April ice extent for 1979 to 2015 shows a decline of 2.4% per decade relative to the 1981 to 2010 average.

Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center

Looks like the decline is continuing.

credit Climate Science.com

Evidence Of Thicker Spring Sea Ice In Arctic

"11.05.2015 09:18 Age: 22 days

Direct measurements of sea ice thickness by satellite confirm computer model analysis in suggesting Spring sea ice volumes in the Arctic have to some extent recovered from their record low"

Translation: THE MODELS FAILED.... Again..

 

[CrusaderFrank]

one more from ClimateScience.com;

Why does Old Rocks chart have the ice shrinking?

 

[Billy_Bob]

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 2014 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.
Polar Science Center PIOMAS Arctic Sea Ice Volume Reanalysis

The 'recovery' is well within the range of normal variability. The slope of that line is not normal variability. When there is enough recovery that the slope of that line is in the other direction, then there will be something to celebrate.

Now that it is inconvenient you believe in NATURAL VARIATION? Oh and the upward (ice increase) trend for the last 4 years, why are you ignoring it?

 

[Billy_Bob]

one more from ClimateScience.com;

Why does Old Rocks chart have the ice shrinking?

His chart doesn't show shrinking.. He just ignores the upward trend..

 

[jc456]

one more from ClimateScience.com;

Why does Old Rocks chart have the ice shrinking?

I wish I had an answer. I do so like how he and his ilks love to tell me I never present any material, and when I do most likely contradicts their data. But this graph does appear to show normal ice for the last seven to eight years anyway. BTW, they never claimed it was fully recovered.

 

[jc456]

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 2014 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.
Polar Science Center PIOMAS Arctic Sea Ice Volume Reanalysis

The 'recovery' is well within the range of normal variability. The slope of that line is not normal variability. When there is enough recovery that the slope of that line is in the other direction, then there will be something to celebrate.

Now that it is inconvenient you believe in NATURAL VARIATION? Oh and the upward (ice increase) trend for the last 4 years, why are you ignoring it?

and is in line with the graphs I posted. This one has a really telling uptick.

 

[Billy_Bob]

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 2014 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.
Polar Science Center PIOMAS Arctic Sea Ice Volume Reanalysis

The 'recovery' is well within the range of normal variability. The slope of that line is not normal variability. When there is enough recovery that the slope of that line is in the other direction, then there will be something to celebrate.

Now that it is inconvenient you believe in NATURAL VARIATION? Oh and the upward (ice increase) trend for the last 4 years, why are you ignoring it?

and is in line with the graphs I posted. This one has a really telling uptick.

When they took actual reading this spring, showing the models were getting it very wrong leads me to suspect that thier was intentional data manipulations within the models going on. That is why the team went up to see what was really going on, they questioned the model output that was processing the data from the satellites. Look for a serious correction soon and it wont be favorable to alarmists.

 

[Old Rocks]

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 2014 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.
Polar Science Center PIOMAS Arctic Sea Ice Volume Reanalysis

The 'recovery' is well within the range of normal variability. The slope of that line is not normal variability. When there is enough recovery that the slope of that line is in the other direction, then there will be something to celebrate.

Now that it is inconvenient you believe in NATURAL VARIATION? Oh and the upward (ice increase) trend for the last 4 years, why are you ignoring it?

and is in line with the graphs I posted. This one has a really telling uptick.

May 2015 compared to previous years

Figure 3. Monthly May ice extent for 1979 to 2015 shows a decline of 2.33% per decade relative to the 1981 to 2010 average.

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag

And this one a really telling downtick. And both are in the range of natural varibility, natural variability within a rapid decline.

 

[Old Rocks]

Natural variation is the normal ups and downs. When those normal ups and downs are imposed on a long term graph that is all down, or up, then the slope is not natural. I know that considering something other than simple black and white is beyond your ken, but most can understant that.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Natural variation is the normal ups and downs. When those normal ups and downs are imposed on a long term graph that is all down, or up, then the slope is not natural. I know that considering something other than simple black and white is beyond your ken, but most can understant that.

Ice melts.

Wow

 

[jc456]

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 2014 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.
Polar Science Center PIOMAS Arctic Sea Ice Volume Reanalysis

The 'recovery' is well within the range of normal variability. The slope of that line is not normal variability. When there is enough recovery that the slope of that line is in the other direction, then there will be something to celebrate.

Now that it is inconvenient you believe in NATURAL VARIATION? Oh and the upward (ice increase) trend for the last 4 years, why are you ignoring it?

and is in line with the graphs I posted. This one has a really telling uptick.

May 2015 compared to previous years

Figure 3. Monthly May ice extent for 1979 to 2015 shows a decline of 2.33% per decade relative to the 1981 to 2010 average.

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag

And this one a really telling downtick. And both are in the range of natural varibility, natural variability within a rapid decline.

dude, again arctic ice extent ClimateScience.com

Your graph doesn't agree with this one.

 

[PredFan]

Arctic Ice was a sno-cone I used to eat when I was a kid. I liked the blue one because you never saw any blue food. Probably they were all the same: sugar flavored.

 

[jc456]

Arctic Ice was a sno-cone I used to eat when I was a kid. I liked the blue one because you never saw any blue food. Probably they were all the same: sugar flavored.

Slurpee, give you a brain freeze, loved them.

 

[Crick]

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 2014 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.
Polar Science Center PIOMAS Arctic Sea Ice Volume Reanalysis

The 'recovery' is well within the range of normal variability. The slope of that line is not normal variability. When there is enough recovery that the slope of that line is in the other direction, then there will be something to celebrate.

Now that it is inconvenient you believe in NATURAL VARIATION? Oh and the upward (ice increase) trend for the last 4 years, why are you ignoring it?

and is in line with the graphs I posted. This one has a really telling uptick.

May 2015 compared to previous years

Figure 3. Monthly May ice extent for 1979 to 2015 shows a decline of 2.33% per decade relative to the 1981 to 2010 average.

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag

And this one a really telling downtick. And both are in the range of natural varibility, natural variability within a rapid decline.

dude, again arctic ice extent ClimateScience.com

Your graph doesn't agree with this one.

Did you think that any of these graphs show Arctic ice extents stable or recovering?

 

[jc456]

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 2014 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.
Polar Science Center PIOMAS Arctic Sea Ice Volume Reanalysis

The 'recovery' is well within the range of normal variability. The slope of that line is not normal variability. When there is enough recovery that the slope of that line is in the other direction, then there will be something to celebrate.

Now that it is inconvenient you believe in NATURAL VARIATION? Oh and the upward (ice increase) trend for the last 4 years, why are you ignoring it?

and is in line with the graphs I posted. This one has a really telling uptick.

May 2015 compared to previous years

Figure 3. Monthly May ice extent for 1979 to 2015 shows a decline of 2.33% per decade relative to the 1981 to 2010 average.

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag

And this one a really telling downtick. And both are in the range of natural varibility, natural variability within a rapid decline.

dude, again arctic ice extent ClimateScience.com

Your graph doesn't agree with this one.

Did you think that any of these graphs show Arctic ice extents stable or recovering?

Hmm, the titles stated recovery! Hmmm