FlightMan

Science Sea Ice Ends Year at Same Level as 1979
Michael Asher (Blog) - January 1, 2009 11:31 AM


Thirty years of sea ice data. The record begins at 1979, the year satellite observations began (Source: Arctic Research Center, University of Illinois)

Rapid growth spurt leaves amount of ice at levels seen 29 years ago.

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.
Ice levels had been tracking lower throughout much of 2008, but rapidly recovered in the last quarter. In fact, the rate of increase from September onward is the fastest rate of change on record, either upwards or downwards.
The data is being reported by the University of Illinois's Arctic Climate Research Center, and is derived from satellite observations of the Northern and Southern hemisphere polar regions.
Each year, millions of square kilometers of sea ice melt and refreeze. However, the mean ice anomaly -- defined as the seasonally-adjusted difference between the current value and the average from 1979-2000, varies much more slowly. That anomaly now stands at just under zero, a value identical to one recorded at the end of 1979, the year satellite record-keeping began.
Sea ice is floating and, unlike the massive ice sheets anchored to bedrock in Greenland and Antarctica, doesn't affect ocean levels. However, due to its transient nature, sea ice responds much faster to changes in temperature or precipitation and is therefore a useful barometer of changing conditions.
Earlier this year, predictions were rife that the North Pole could melt entirely in 2008. Instead, the Arctic ice saw a substantial recovery. Bill Chapman, a researcher with the UIUC's Arctic Center, tells DailyTech this was due in part to colder temperatures in the region. Chapman says wind patterns have also been weaker this year. Strong winds can slow ice formation as well as forcing ice into warmer waters where it will melt.
Why were predictions so wrong? Researchers had expected the newer sea ice, which is thinner, to be less resilient and melt easier. Instead, the thinner ice had less snow cover to insulate it from the bitterly cold air, and therefore grew much faster than expected, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center.
In May, concerns over disappearing sea ice led the U.S. to officially list the polar bear a threatened species, over objections from experts who claimed the animal's numbers were increasing.


Where's Gordon going to get his taxes from now?

Geezer

Here we go again............

Cue 12 pages of arguments

Geezer

FlightMan

People can argue all they like. You can't argue with facts.

TelBoy

When will the sceptics ever be happy?

Still, i'm comforted that this "proof" of the global tax scam comes in the form of the "fastest rate of change on record, either upwards or downwards." So everything's fine again.

coolangatta

Are you proposing that 'our' CO2 is, in fact, causing global cooling?
Seems fair enough as it's equally spurious. Balance in all arguments

Geezer

I must admit, one year of cold does not mean much in a warming trend, but then again, does 20 years of warming mean much in the scale of a 4.5 billion year climate system? Possibly not.

Whatever, having a cold crisp Christmas has been very nice!

However, I'm hoping for a return to warming for the summer

Geezer

TelBoy

I'm saying it's causing climate change. Unpredictability. Instability. If i had a quid for every tax scam "expert" who cites a cooling pattern as incontrovertible proof that the whole thing is a global conspiracy i could have retired long ago. But they'll keep coming. Just watch this thread develop.

Paul3446

Remember Telboy, the time you have to worry is when the climate doesn't change, this really would be a worry as it has never happened before.

Interesting that last year was the coldest this century in Britain too.

We also have a good covering of snow this morning, just like the old days!

Leslie

I think the reported fact that global temperatures have not increased for some ten years and have in fact recently decreased is pretty significant.

We do indeed have climate change, as has happened often enough over the years but I believe it to be cyclical and the GBW argument from the authorities has been a big con.

Interesting that those who are predicting a big post count on this thread were very quick to post on their own account. We are all entitled to give our opinions as well of course.

Les

Paul3446

Here's an interesting article, which basically says that when ice melts in the sea it releases iron, this creates green algae, which in turn traps co2 and then sinks to the bottom of the ocean. If this research turns out to be correct, then the earth has a natural way of balancing these things out after all. Who'd have thought it eh?

Green Algae Bloom Process Could Stop Global Warming : CleanTechnica

DCI Gene Hunt

Michael Jackson was right all the time! YouTube - Michael Jackson - Heal The World

CrisPDuk

This will be why all these new taxes are in the name of 'Climate Change' rather than the original 'Global Warming'

TelBoy

Even though the IPCC (guess what the CC stands for) has always been called the IPCC. Give me strength.

coolangatta

TelBoy, I know from reading some of your previous threads/posts that you are not the troll type. Take that as intended, a compliment, if you will.
I'm not a mathematician, but have a healthy respect for/knowledge of numbers and cause and effect.
I would dearly like some of our major 'brains' to get heavily involved in this debate. I don't mean statements like the 'dooms day' theories we've so far had from the likes of Professor Hawking (respect due despite this), but hard, 'cold' numbers that prove the warming theory.
We believe our scientists when it comes to the 'big bang' and other theories because those are backed by numbers that are pretty strong.
I'm yet to see anything close to real numbers that add up to human affect climate change.

Paul3446

How is that relevant, they aren't purely a body that looks at warming, they would be panicking just as much if the earth was cooling.

They are a climate change body that have been warning about global warming, which appears to have suddenly stopped happening.

Paul3446

Interesting stat:

According to the US National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), the average temperature of the global land surface in January 2008 was below the 20th century mean (-0.02°F/-0.01°C) for the first time since 1982.

TelBoy

I think you'll find that has already happened. Many have concluded that man is inextricably linked with climate change. It's the armchair experts who don't like paying £450 a year car tax who refuse to believe it. Funnily enough.

TelBoy

And we have a WINNER!!!!


Deary me.

TelBoy

Prove me wrong if you can, but as far as i've been aware, the IPCC have responded to the data they've been presented with, rather than banging on one particular drum dogmatically. Of course they know there are cooling anomalies out there, they're not stupid. Does that mean they're any less concerned about the causes of those changes? Nope. Next?

coolangatta

Who, where, and when?
Are they independent? Or do they have an axe or bank account to grind?
Show me a study with the numbers, without an input/influence/paymaster of some greedy government or lobby group and I'll be happy to read it thoroughly.

CrisPDuk

And funnily enough, there is also plenty of evidence to illustrate that all this has happened before, way before Man even walked the earth, that 100 years is no time at all in climate terms, that global temperatures have been both higher and lower than they are now, and that the Earth's proximity to the Sun has a greater effect on global temperature than Man is ever likely too.

But none of that evidence fits the doom-mongers message, so tends not to get the same media attention


PS: I drive a 1.2 Nissan Micra, so I don't fall into the £450 tax bracket, but I am one of those who objects to my hard earned salary being taken from me to finance pie in the sky enviromental projects based on spurious science

TelBoy

Crispy, i think you'd have to go a long way to find a scientist with his head sufficiently far up his **** not to realise that climate change has been, and will continue, to occur. And despite ALL that, they STILL think man has something to answer for in the present cycle. Amazing, eh?

PeteBrant

For ****s sake. If you don't beleive in it, do something about it rather than ****ing moaning about it on the internet. This argument has been had at least 100 times here, and its always the same people saying the same thing.

TelBoy

Including YOU telling people not to discuss it, lol. Irony, you gotta love it.

Geezer

Oh come on, no matter whether you believe in AGW or not, the current road taxing system is a disgrace and nothing to do with helping the planet. Someone doing 20k miles a year in a low emissions car is still doing more 'environmental damage' than a person only doing 5-10k miles a year, and the person with the high emissions car is already contributing more if they do the same miles as they use more petrol.

It's laughable! Nearly as bad as the congestion charge.........

Geezer

TelBoy

Not defending it, Geezer. But what i'm saying is that many people's opinions about the subject are a function of the taxation policies of the government, and not much else.

CrisPDuk

I didn't say that climate change wasn't occurring, that is indisputable, change is what the climate does, constantly.

What I am disputing however, is this current obsession with half-arsed junk 'science' which claims that the present cycle is almost completely the result of the actions of Man

Unfortunately the actions of the present government with regard to taxation in general can't fail to reinforce those opinions, and until we get a government that recognises that incentive works far more effective than penalty those attitudes are (quite rightly) not going to change

Paul3446

Quote:
"And we have a WINNER!!!!

Deary me."


Yes, a winner of the "coldest January in America since 1982 competition".

Just think how much CO2 we have pumped out since 1982 and yet we have the coldest January since then!

Just 2 weeks ago I read that the Arctic sea ice would soon all be gone, now it's back to the same level it was at in 1979, despite all that CO2.

How do you explain this Tel?

TelBoy

It's a pointless question. The only thing that would convince you would be a year on year increase until the oceans were boiling themselves dry.