|
Post by kiwistonewall on Feb 19, 2010 3:37:49 GMT
Commentary for the charts: Top Left: Extent: Ice extent currently same as 2008 & ahead of 2005,2006 & 2007 I suspect extent will shortly be ahead of 2009. Top Right: 15 day smoothed growth. Currently, the ice extent is growing very fast for this time of year, with only 2004 growing faster (And 2004 was slowing down) Bottom: Anomaly - is now about the same as recent years. I still think that the extent will grow to more than 14.5 million sq kms late in the season. Ice growth will be strong, as less ice is moving out of the arctic circle, the main reason we see less extent- less ice is exiting. The other factor is that there is seldom much ice extent growth when there is major cold activity further south. There is only so much cold to go around. - Or, when its cold somewhere, its warmer somewhere else! Where ice is growing (rather than being pushed) we see advanced growth - Baltic and around Alaska. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Feb 19, 2010 18:20:18 GMT
I thought I would post this link for all the supporters of IPCC AR4 prognostications on arctic and antarctic ice to read. "So, the peer reviewed literature, both extant at the time of the AR4 as well as published since the release of the AR4, shows that there has been a significant increase in the extent of sea ice around Antarctica since the time of the first satellite observations observed in the late 1970s. And yet the AR4 somehow “assessed” the evidence and determined not only that the increase was only half the rate established in the peer-reviewed literature, but also that it was statistically insignificant as well. And thus, the increase in sea ice in the Antarctic was downplayed in preference to highlighting the observed decline in sea ice in the Arctic.
It is little wonder why, considering that the AR4 found that “Sea ice is projected to shrink in both the Arctic and Antarctic under all SRES scenarios.”"wattsupwiththat.com/2010/02/17/ipcc-gate-du-jour-antarctic-sea-ice-increase-underestimated-by-50/
|
|
|
Post by kiwistonewall on Feb 19, 2010 22:10:09 GMT
This is a BIG year for Arctic ice. The areas marked COLD on the attached chart are well ahead of mean. The Baltic is unaffected by ocean currents, and is showing the real cool of this winter. The Bering straits are also well ahead. The Sea of Okhotsk is growing fast and should reach mean in a week or two. The Barents is similarly showing rapid ice growth. We can conclude that the ice thickness over the central Arctic basin is also increasing in depth. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by hairball on Feb 20, 2010 1:34:20 GMT
|
|
gfw
Level 2 Rank
Posts: 55
|
Post by gfw on Feb 21, 2010 18:06:45 GMT
Great call by the way Kiwi, the ice expanded hugely between the 17th and 18th, just after you said it was about to. ... and has reversed direction from the 18th to the 20th. (Current Jaxa number is 13,928,594 km 2 - February 20, 2010.) These short term wiggles don't mean much. Looking at the overall shape of the arc, it should crack 14M, but I don't expect it to pass 14.25M.
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Feb 22, 2010 1:34:17 GMT
|
|
|
Post by kiwistonewall on Feb 23, 2010 3:40:18 GMT
Commentary for the charts: Top Left: Extent: Ice extent currently same as 2009. Top Right: 15 day smoothed growth. Currently, the ice extent is growing very fast for this time of year, with only 2003 growing faster. Bottom: Anomaly -same as 2009 Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Feb 23, 2010 17:16:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by jurinko on Feb 23, 2010 22:25:09 GMT
ROOS always tailed forward, you remember the reverse in late August when it pointed even up? It is just some kind of smoothing. DMI and JAXA are more precise and jagged.
|
|
|
Post by kiwistonewall on Feb 24, 2010 0:45:57 GMT
ROOS has 2008 way below 2009, and JAXA has the opposite. Interesting. There appears to be little correlation between the two.
|
|
gfw
Level 2 Rank
Posts: 55
|
Post by gfw on Feb 24, 2010 22:25:17 GMT
Jaxa is toying with this thread's poll 13,998,906 km 2 (February 23, 2010)
|
|
|
Post by kiwistonewall on Feb 25, 2010 2:49:19 GMT
The last 15 days of growth have been the largest for any of the JAXA years. (Highest smoothed 15 day growth.)
Most ice extent areas are at or ahead of the mean (79-2000) except that Newfoundland/St Lawrence is way below the mean, and way below last year. I assume that is a result of ENSO/NAO etc.
|
|
|
Post by hairball on Feb 25, 2010 4:58:42 GMT
14,009,844 km2 (February 24, 2010)
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Feb 25, 2010 9:10:13 GMT
ROOS has 2008 way below 2009, and JAXA has the opposite. Interesting. There appears to be little correlation between the two. Kiwi, am I missing something or is that stating the bleeding obvious?
|
|
|
Post by kiwistonewall on Feb 25, 2010 10:26:08 GMT
ROOS has 2008 way below 2009, and JAXA has the opposite. Interesting. There appears to be little correlation between the two. Kiwi, am I missing something or is that stating the bleeding obvious? My point is that while you would expect the absolute magnitude to be different between different satellites and algorithms that analyze the data, still you would expect that the years would at least be in the same order! So something is seriously amiss somewhere.
|
|