So, Lat points our attention to this …….
Arctic ice ‘grew by a third’ after cool summer in 2013
It’s quite an apologist’ work! Through the article, I’ll interject with my thoughts on the absurd assertions.
The volume of Arctic sea ice increased by around a third after an unusually cool summer in 2013.
Researchers say the growth continued in 2014 and more than compensated for losses recorded in the three previous years.
The scientists involved believe changes in summer temperatures have greater impacts on ice than thought.
What? For years we’ve been force fed the notion that our Arctic ice is dependent upon the air temperatures of the Arctic. I’ve written several posts demonstrating the opposite, as has hundreds or thousands of other people. The air temps are not nearly as important as the ocean temps and currents as to the impact on the arctic ice extent and volume.
But they say 2013 was a one-off and that climate change will continue to shrink the ice in the decades ahead.
The Arctic region has warmed more than most other parts of the planet over the past 30 years.
Satellite observations have documented a decrease of around 40% in the extent of sea ice cover in the Arctic since 1980.
Well, perhaps, yes, that’s true, but, that’s not what we’re talking about. We’re discussing very recent years, not 30 years ago. Let’s assume air temps are related to ice volume/extent. Here are the “Satellite observations of the air temps at the Arctic.
But while the extent of the retreating ice has been well recorded, the key indicator that scientists want to understand is the loss of sea ice volume.
Well, heck, if we’re going to introduce “extent”, let’s look at it over the same time period!
Yep, temps/arctic ice ….. something …..
Researchers have been able to use data gathered by Europe’s Cryosat satellite over the past five years to answer this question.
Researchers setting up camp on sea ice in the Lincoln Sea, north of Greenland
This polar monitoring spacecraft has a sophisticated radar system that allows scientists to accurately estimate the volume.
Yeh, well, okay, they now believe they can “accurately estimate the volume”. I’m not sure what “accurately estimate” even means. Within what precision?
The researchers used 88 million measurements of sea ice thickness from Cryosat and found that between 2010 and 2012, the volume of sea ice went down by 14%.
They published their initial findings at the end of 2013 – but have now refined and updated them to include data from 2014 as well.
Relative to the average of the period between 2010 and 2012, the scientists found that there was a 33% increase in sea ice volume in 2013, while in 2014 there was still a quarter more sea ice than there was between 2010 and 2012.
“We looked at various climate forcing factors, we looked at the snow loading, we looked at wind convergence and the melt season length of the previous summer,” lead author Rachel Tilling, from University College London, told BBC News.
“We found that the the highest correlation by far was with the melt season length – and over the summer of 2013, it was the coolest of the five years we have seen, and we believe that’s why there was more multi-year ice left at the end of summer.”
Well, sis, that makes you an idiot. Not just an idiot, but, an absolute and profound idiot. The overwhelming majority of sea ice volume exists underneath the surface and air. It exists in the seas and oceans, beneath the surface and air. Why would you look at “wind convergence” without first looking at the currents’ convergence? …… Wait!!!! Don’t tell me, Rachel!!! I already know. It’s because you’re an absolute and profound idiot, or, a very vile regular idiot.
The researchers found the colder temperatures allowed more multi-year ice to persist north-west of Greenland because there were simply fewer days when it could melt. Temperature records indicate that the summer was about 5% cooler than 2012.
5% cooler!!!! That’s beautiful!!!! …….. I wonder, what temperature scale they were using? Kelvins, perhaps? They should be if they wished to be taken seriously. In Kelvins, freezing is 273.15. 5% of 273.15 is ~ 13.5. Let’s see if 2013 was indeed 5% cooler than 2012 ……..
Here’s 2012 Arctic temps ….
Here’s 2013 ….
Yeh …. but, no. There were some very brief points in time when the Arctic was 5% cooler in 2013 (in Kelvins) than 2012. But, on the whole, there’s no chance in heck that comes to 5%, not anywhere close, and especially not during the melt season. It’s complete and utter jibberish these lunatics are spewing.
The scientists believe that the more accurate measurements that they have now published show that sea ice is more sensitive to changes than previously thought. They argue that while some could see this as a positive, when temperatures are cooler it leads to an increase in sea ice, it could also be a negative when the mercury goes up.
“It would suggest that sea ice is more resilient perhaps – if you get one year of cooler temperatures, we’ve almost wound the clock back a few years on this gradual decline that’s been happening over decades,” said Rachel Tilling.
“The long-term trend of the ice volume is downwards and the long-term trend of the temperatures in the Arctic is upwards and this finding doesn’t give us any reason to disbelieve that – as far as we can tell it’s just one anomalous year.”
The “long-term trend” …. based upon a technology which has been utilized for all of 5 years.
The updated data has been published in the journal Nature Geoscience.
Notes!!!!!!! Yes, I just did a couple of math/statistical no-no’s. That’s because there’s a prevailing statistical thought about comparing like things. That is to say, if some warmist takes exception as to how I presented information, then, they have to explain why it’s okay for them, and not for me. Bring it and share with the class!
Can anyone explain to me about 5% of temperature??????
Funny how carefully they avoid to state inconvenient facts and pervert the sentences to suit the narrative?
“The researchers used 88 million measurements of sea ice thickness from Cryosat and found that between 2010 and 2012, the volume of sea ice went down by 14%. ”
“They published their initial findings at the end of 2013 – but have now refined and updated them to include data from 2014 as well.
Relative to the average of the period between 2010 and 2012, the scientists found that there was a 33% increase in sea ice volume in 2013, while in 2014 there was still a quarter more sea ice than there was between 2010 and 2012”
There is nowhere the clear statement: during the 5 cryosat years lifespan the sea ice volume increased.
If the volume decreased 14% the first 2 years (100 to 86) increased 33 in 2014 relative to the average 2010-2012 – that would be from 86 to 123 in the 2010 value.
“and it is still 25% more” then 2010-2012 average. 2010/2012 average is 93% of 2010 value.
25% more is 116 % of 2010 value.
How can one present so unclear the simple line:
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
??? did I make a mistake somewhere???
Why does one have to make these calculations to come to the conclusion?
If it would have been a decrease it would blink on the title like 3% decrease in 5 years, we are doomed.
How do they explain 16 % increase in 5 years? It was only an outlier that… “we’ve almost wound the clock back a few years on this gradual decline”
Do you know how to make a geologist laugh?
Have a “climate expert” talk about “the long-term trend”.
These children wouldn’t know a long term trend if it hit them in the ice!
exactly…..let me point something out that’s not that obvious
When the same arctic ice….decreased by 1/3…..it was the end of the world
All climate scientists can do is extend a trend…
Speaking of babbling, two studies in the news today that contradict each other.
For the many products that are not related to sex, using sex to sell them does not work. It can even backfire. A recent University of Wisconsin study shows that audiences view ads 10% less favorably if they use sex to sell un-sexy products.
Gross explained that marketers in the modern era have realized the effectiveness of using sexual images to sell products, and that they continue to employ this tactic in an effort to pedal whatever they are marketing.
More settled science.
If I was looking to buy, your ad from a couple days ago probably would have decided which model of dishwasher I’d go with. 🙂
“European Court Of Human Rights” forces Italy to allow homosexuals to marry.
We seem to be suffering from autocratic courts both side of the atlantic. Well that particular court also promoted illegal immigration and hurdles to send illegals back wherever they could. Probably Pan-Europeans, well make that certainly. Reason enough alone to quit the EU.
Check out these clueless muppets, and marvel at their belief that gayness is common…
Reblogged this on Climate Ponderings.