Are Glacier Earthquakes Shaking Greenland? Scientists, WaPo Seeing Only What They Want To See

By Ed Caryl

The Washington Post just published an alarmist article titled: Giant earthquakes are shaking Greenland — and scientists just figured out the disturbing reason why. The article claimed that earthquakes were caused by icebergs calving off the Helheim Glacier, and that these were increasing because of increased outflow from this glacier. Here is the glacier in question, on the East side of Greenland opposite Iceland.

Helheim Glacier

 Figure 1 is the location of Helheim Glacier. Source: Apple maps.

Here is a map of all the earthquakes that have occurred in this region since January 1st, 1980.

Greenland Earthquakes

 Figure 2 is a map of the earthquakes that have occurred in this region since 1980. Source link.

Earthquakes vs Years

Figure 3 is a date versus magnitude plot of all those earthquakes.

Only one of these 15 earthquakes is directly associated with Helheim Glacier, the last one. All the others were scattered all over the region, a few under or at the edge of the ice, most at sea or on land away from the ice.

They also occurred in two clusters, four in the early 1990s, then an eight year pause, then the rest in the eight years between 2002 and 2010. None have occurred since. There is nothing unusual to be seen here. Move along…

This is an example of scientists seeing what they wish to see. Instead of a full investigation, they just assumed that any earthquakes in the region were originating at Helheim Glacier, and because they stopped looking in 2010, they assumed that the earthquakes were continuing.

Instead of investigating a longer time period, they assumed that the period of their study was significant. None of their assumptions were true.

Greenland Temperatures Weaken Theory CO2 Drives Climate

By Ed Caryl

In my last article, we discussed the Greenland ice core temperature record. In this article we will discuss the Greenland thermometer record. All the long record thermometer readings are from villages and stations on the coast. Some of these records go back to the early 1800’s, though GISTemp only posts records going back to 1880.

Here is plot of seven stations. Annual averages were downloaded from GISTemp and converted to annual anomalies using the 1951 to 1965 average for each as the baseline, the only years all seven stations had in common.

Greenland Temperature

Figure 1 plots seven Greenland temperature records, their average (the thin black trace), and a five-year centered average of the average (wide bright blue trace).

This result agrees with other papers that were found, for example Box et al 2009. Considering that land surface station records warm an average 40% greater than the global land-ocean average, and that Northern Latitude stations warm an average 40% higher than the global land-ocean average, with Arctic stations averaging higher than that, it makes sense that this combination of surface stations in the northern latitudes will warm at twice the rate of the global average.

Box Fig 11

Figure 2 is from Box et al 2009, figure 11.

Jason Box’s paper shows that temperatures before 1880 were generally warmer than the decade after 1880, only about one to one and a half degrees colder than at present. The interesting thing is the step-change in temperature between 1920 and 1930. Greenland temperatures stepped upward by two degrees in this decade, the same step as in the 1990 to 2000 decade. But there was no rise in CO2 in those years. Both intervals are preceded by volcanic activity, as shown in Box’s figure 11. The volcanic activity is blamed for the cooling.

But there was cooling for four decades after 1930 without any major volcanoes. If the lack of volcanic activity is to be blamed for the steps upward in temperature, but temperature declined for four decades without volcanoes, what is left for CO2?

There are several logical twists and turns illustrated here. If volcanic eruptions are blamed for the cooling periods, especially in Greenland, with lack of eruptions blamed for warming, only some of the cooling dips are explained. The other cooling episodes are presumably because of ocean current/temperature cycles or the sun. This leaves only a single one decade warming period, from 1995 to 2005, that can possibly be blamed on CO2, though it still could be from those other reasons. That period is really a step at 1998 which we know was due to the El Niño of that year. This is pretty thin gruel on which to float climate calamity.

German Analysis: Near Record Level Antarctic Sea Ice Shows Nothing Climatically Unusual At South Pole!

Yesterday Ed Caryl showed us that the Greenland ice core shows there’s nothing unusual going on with our climate around Greenland. Today geologist Sebastian Lüning and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt tells us the same for the other end of the Earth.
=================================

The development of the Antarctic Sea ice before the satellite era in 1979

By Dr. Sebastian Lüning, Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt
[Translated/edited by P Gosselin]

Antarctic sea ice has truly surprised science. Contradicting the models, it has continuously grown since 1979 during a time that the climate models were only able to find scenarios of receding ice.

Today we would like to take a look back before the satellite time. How did the South Pole develop during the time when satellites were unable to continuously and completely monitor sea ice movement?

Information can be gathered for example from old satellite photos made during the pioneering phases of satellites. On 29 August 2014 the University of Colorado Boulder reported on an amazing discovery of old Nimbus photos:

And the Antarctic blew us away,” he said. In 1964, sea ice extent in the Antarctic was the largest ever recorded, according to Nimbus image analysis. Two years later, there was a record low for sea ice in the Antarctic, and in 1969 Nimbus imagery, sea ice appears to have reached its maximum extent earliest on record.”

In 1964 Antarctic sea ice was hugely expanded, while to the contrary in 1966 it retreated massively. And in 1969 the sea ice had returned once again close to record high levels. This is an enormous amount of natural variability.

A team of scientists led by Tingting Fan used the premise of growing sea ice since 1979 as a reason for investigating the climatic conditions in the southern ocean. Here scientists found that the oceans had cooled over the previous 35 years, which fits well with the notion of expanding sea ice. During the 1950-1978 period, on the other hand, the southern ocean warmed up. This was the basis for a long-term ice retreat during that phase. The paper appeared in the April 2014 Geophysical Research Letters. The abstract writes:

Recent Antarctic sea ice trends in the context of Southern Ocean surface climate variations since 1950
This study compares the distribution of surface climate trends over the Southern Ocean in austral summer between 1979–2011 and 1950–1978, using a wide variety of data sets including uninterpolated gridded marine archives, land station data, reanalysis, and satellite products. Apart from the Antarctic Peninsula and adjacent regions, sea surface temperatures and surface air temperatures decreased during 1979–2011, consistent with the expansion of Antarctic sea ice. In contrast, the Southern Ocean and coastal Antarctica warmed during 1950–1978. Sea level pressure (SLP) and zonal wind trends provide additional evidence for a sign reversal between the two periods, with cooling (warming) accompanied by stronger (weaker) westerlies and lower (higher) SLP at polar latitudes in the early (late) period. Such physically consistent trends across a range of independently measured parameters provide robust evidence for multidecadal climate variability over the Southern Ocean and place the recent Antarctic sea ice trends into a broader context.”

Already in November 2013 a group led by Loïc Barbara published a reconstruction of the sea ice in the area of Antarctic Peninsula in the journal of Quaternary Science Reviews. Between 1935-1950 the ice receded, and after that there is no recognizable trend. Instead the sea ice fluctuated back and forth over years and decades. The paper’s abstract follows:

Diatoms and biomarkers evidence for major changes in sea ice conditions prior the instrumental period in Antarctic Peninsula
The Antarctic Peninsula (AP) has been identified as one of the most rapidly warming region on Earth. Satellite monitoring currently allows for a detailed understanding of the relationship between sea ice extent and duration and atmospheric and oceanic circulations in this region. However, our knowledge on ocean–ice–atmosphere interactions is still relatively poor for the period extending beyond the last 30 years. Here, we describe environmental conditions in Northwestern and Northeastern Antarctic Peninsula areas over the last century using diatom census counts and diatom specific biomarkers (HBIs) in two marine sediment multicores (MTC-38C and -18A, respectively). Diatom census counts and HBIs show abrupt changes between 1935 and 1950, marked by ocean warming and sea ice retreat in both sides of the AP. Since 1950, inferred environmental conditions do not provide evidence for any trend related to the recent warming but demonstrate a pronounced variability on pluri-annual to decadal time scale. We propose that multi-decadal sea ice variations over the last century are forced by the recent warming, while the annual-to-decadal variability is mainly governed by synoptic and regional wind fields in relation with the position and intensity of the atmospheric low-pressure trough around the AP. However, the positive shift of the SAM since the last two decades cannot explain the regional trend observed in this study, probably due to the effect of local processes on the response of our biological proxies.”

In May 2014 a team led by Kate Sinclair published a reconstruction of sea ice from the Ross Sea in the Geophysical Research Letters. Between 1880 and 1950 the ice was apparently stable. From 1950-1990 the ice receded, varied beginning in 1993, but took on an increasing trend, which continues today. The abstract:

Twentieth century sea-ice trends in the Ross Sea from a high-resolution, coastal ice-core record
We present the first proxy record of sea-ice area (SIA) in the Ross Sea, Antarctica, from a 130 year coastal ice-core record. High-resolution deuterium excess data show prevailing stable SIA from the 1880s until the 1950s, a 2–5% reduction from the mid-1950s to the early-1990s, and a 5% increase after 1993. Additional support for this reconstruction is derived from ice-core methanesulphonic acid concentrations and whaling records. While SIA has continued to decline around much of the West Antarctic coastline since the 1950s, concurrent with increasing air and ocean temperatures, the underlying trend is masked in the Ross Sea by a switch to positive SIA anomalies since the early-1990s. This increase is associated with a strengthening of southerly winds and the enhanced northward advection of sea ice.”

We conclude our look at the Antarctic sea ice with an anecdote that appeared in the December 2014 in the Geophysical Research Letters. In the paper authors Jeff Ridley and Helene Hewett claimed that the sea ice trend in the Anatarctic indeed would be irreversible as a result of climate warming. That would of course mean that the increase of the last 35 years would never be reversed. Yet, to the contrary, Arctic sea ice trends are supposed to be reversible. Apparently the authors are anticipating an increase in north polar sea ice. Absolutely curious. Here’s the abstract of the paper:

A mechanism for lack of sea ice reversibility in the Southern Ocean
We find evidence that ocean processes during global warming may result in irreversible changes to the Antarctic sea ice, whereas the Arctic sea ice changes appear to be reversible. Increased forcing gives rise to strong heat uptake in the Southern Ocean, and existing pathways provide an increased transport of heat to the Weddell Sea. As atmospheric concentrations of CO2 are returned to preindustrial levels, the Antarctic ice extent at first recovers, but a rapid change in the position of the an ocean front in the South Atlantic maintains the heat transport into the Weddell Sea. A cooling surface initiates deep convection, accessing the stored heat, resulting in a substantial loss of sea ice, which has not recovered after a further 150 years at preindustrial CO2.”

Analysis Shows Current Warming Is NOT Unprecedented …It Is Not Even “Unusual”!

UPDATE: New paper: http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.de/2015/06/new-paper-shows-n-greenland-was-warmer.html
=====================================

By Ed Caryl

The climate calamity crowd claims that the warming we experienced in the Twentieth Century is unprecedented… it has never happened before in human history. Because we didn’t have thermometers until about 300 years ago, and even then records exist from just a few locations, it is difficult to prove that this is not so.

The only reliable temperature record we have with continuous reasonable resolution data is the ice core oxygen isotope data from Greenland. I downloaded the GISP2 data and did a point-by-point difference calculation, computing the warming and cooling trend between each data point, and produced this plot.

GISP2 change rate

Figure 1 is a plot (blue) of the GISP2 temperature data and the calculated warming or cooling (red) between each point expressed as change (warming or cooling) per decade. The horizontal scale is in years before present. Because Excel places zero on the left side and counts up to the right, the present is on the left.

There have been 73 warming periods…

Temperatures in the Holocene have been quite volatile. Excel counts in this data 73 warming periods of at least 0.1 degrees per decade, and 80 cooling periods of that same amount. The time resolution of the points in the data are from about six years to about twenty years, so many of these warming and cooling periods are short. But some span a century or longer as we will see in figure 2.

I processed the HADCRUT4 data set to six year resolution to simulate the ice core data here. The highest warming was in the six year period from 1975 to 1981, a rate of 0.27°C/decade. There were two periods in the ice core data with higher warming rates, one was in 1370 BCE where in a 12 year period the warming rate was 0.357°C/decade. This period was bracketed by similar length periods with 0.25 and 0.16°C/decade warming periods. This 34-year period saw a warming of nearly a degree (0.98°C) far exceeding the warming in the late Twentieth Century.

Another period 8200 years ago (6200BCE) saw a 1.667°C warming in 71 years. The people around at that time must have been truly panicked at the rapid climate change and probably blamed it on the invention of beer.

Here is a chart of the ice core temperature and HADCRUT4 together as an anomaly plot using the same baseline period, spliced at 1850-55, the only years they have in common.

GISP2 & HADCRUT4 Anomalies

Figure 2 is a plot of the ice core (GISP2) and HADCRUT4 as an anomaly plot. The vertical scale is in degrees C. The horizontal scale is calendar years with the present on the right.

HADCRUT4 is the thermometer-measured, small, red, “Hockey-stick” at the right side. All the excitement is about half of that red uptick. The big question: Is it natural, or CO2?

In Figure 2, many heating and cooling periods with high magnitude and longer duration than the current warming are seen. The two periods described above are seen at 1400BCE and 6200BCE, but there are others scattered across the plot. The current warming appears puny in comparison and only half of that is in any way attributable to CO2.

Greenland tells a lot

Some detractors have tried to make the point that Greenland ice core data only reflects Greenland temperatures. This isn’t quite correct on several counts. Oxygen isotope fractionation acts at three places: the area of evaporation and the points of condensation and precipitation. These phenomena are latitude dependent and the evaporation area is diffuse. So the ice core data reflects temperature at Greenland’s latitude.

Another point (though it only applies to the first 3000 years on this chart) is that during the Ice Age, the ice sheets removed so much fresh water from the oceans that it increased the salinity of the remainder, affecting surface oxygen isotope levels. This is also factored into the temperature calculation (link). Also, the ice core temperature data is averaged over the years represented at each section of core. This temperature represents climate over those years and not weather. The last point is that heat exchange between Greenland latitudes and the oceans, and thus the rest of the globe, insures that Greenland temperature cannot be far from reflecting global temperature.

A larger point is that the current warming is not unusual. Even greater warming has occurred many times in the last 11,000 years. It has been as much as two degrees warmer than now three times in the last 10,000 years. More important, warming episodes are followed by cooling episodes that can be disastrous for mankind. The long-term trend for the last 3000 years of the Holocene has been cooling. We are slowly sliding into the next long cold at about half a degree C per millennium.

The Excel spreadsheet used to generate the figures and calculations is here.

Global Warming Scientists Perish In The Arctic …A Lethal Publicity Stunt In Servitude Of Sensationalist Science?

On the folly scale, the following story is right up there with the Antarctic Ship of Fools.

Unfortunately this one ended in a terrible tragedy.

Cornelissen

Global warming researchers Marc Cornelissen and Philip de Roo believed to have perished in the Arctic. Photo Twitter.

The online Spiegel here reports that two Dutch researchers, Marc Cornelissen, 46, and Philip de Roo, 30, are assumed to have died in the Arctic. “They wanted to collect data about the melting ice cover.”

According to Cornelissen’s Twitter site, the pair began their expedition in late March. By early April they has set off on skis across Arctic sea ice accompanied by a husky. They had been posting daily reports at Twitter.

ResoluteAt times Cornelissen tweeted of unusually warm temperatures and even posted audios claiming to be skiing in shorts.

On April 29 things took a turn for the worse and the pair sent out an SOS while traveling near Bathurst Island, approximately 200 kilometers north of Resolute Bay.

On April 30 Cornelissen’s Twitter site posted that the two were missing.

Spiegel writes that it is suspected that one of the pair fell through “thin ice” and that their situation went unknown for a week. A Canadian search party found one body but the other member of the party remains missing. It is assumed that he has perished. Only the husky dog survived.

The site Cold Facts here posted a report stating that the ice conditions there were “very poor”. The two researchers are said to have been experts in their fields. Question: Why were the two trekking on ice conditions described as “very poor”? Shouldn’t experts know better?

Also it needs to be asked if the decision to send out two researchers on foot in dangerous and highly unpredictable conditions was a grossly negligent one. Who approved this? Today modern satellite altimetry and aerial instrumentation can measure ice conditions more far accurately, safely, and efficiently. Why send out two men on foot on thin ice when the Arctic melt season is well under way?

Personally I think the expedition smacks more of a piss-poorly judged publicity stunt by activists, and much less a scientific expedition to explore the unknown. This looks to be highly dim-witted and reckless adventurism in servitude of sensationalist science. There needs to be an independent inquiry into this accident.

Negligence in harsh conditions often carries a lethal price. Unfortunately some of us still have to learn the hard way.

No Sign Of Warming: Global Sea Ice Well Below Normal Only 4 Of Last 36 Years…Normal Over Last 2.5 Years!

NoTricksZone is finally back online after having been unavailable for some 32 or so hours.

Apparently a WordPress version update “had faultily written the htaccess file“, the host company has just informed me. Don’t ask me what that is supposed to mean.  At any rate, the problem seems to be resolved, and we’re well back in the “denial” business. :)

I’m short on time today and so this post will be a short one.

Awhile back I wrote a piece here about global sea ice. When one examines the chart objectively, one finds no sign of any global warming – assuming that it is an indication of global temperature as the warmists like to tell us (especially when sea ice shrinks).

global sea_ice_area_4 2015

Global sea ice shows no sign of any global warming. Source: arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/dpuf.

Again we note that sea ice has been normal for over 2 years now. Antarctica has been constantly above normal for a long period of 3 years – something that is unprecedented and a record since satellite measurements began.

And when one really looks honestly and objectively at the above chart above, we see that global sea ice has been markedly below normal only about 4 of 36 years: half of 2006, 2007, half of 2010, 2011 and half of 2012. That’s 3.5 years – but we can round it up to four whole years out of 36.

One could argue 2002 should be included, but the amount is not significantly below normal. In 2008 there was only a sharp but brief dip.  The last 4 years have seen a strong upward trend. Four years of course is too short to draw any conclusions (except when the ice melts).

The bottom line: Global sea ice shows no signs of a globe that is experiencing galloping warming.

 

Data Plainly Show No Correlation Between Atmospheric CO2 Concentrations And Global Sea Ice!

The poles, we are told, are supposed to be the tell-tale barometer of global warming. No place is supposed to warm up as quickly as the poles.

And because there are practically no thermometers to speak of at both the North and South poles, we need a better way of getting an idea of how temperature is behaving at these remote yet “sensitive” regions of our planet.

Because ice melts when it’s warmer and freezes when it’s colder, polar sea ice cover could act as a good measurement tool in place of the mercury thermometer. Not only does it indicate air temperatures, but also water temperatures beneath the ice. It can be argued that sea ice extent is indeed a better way of measuring overall temperature than mercury thermometers. Fortunately NASA has been taking satellite excellent photos of both poles since 1979 and thus we have an accurate record of sea ice spanning 35 years.

As CO2 rises, global warming is claimed to be enhanced, and thus the poles should be warming, disproportionately many scientists claim, compared to other regions like those located near the equator. We should see it in the global sea ice record.

The following is a plot of CO2 vs global sea ice extent since 1979:

CO2 vs sea ice

 Graphic formed by combining WoodForTrees CO2 plot and the U. of Illinois sea ice anomaly plot.

The above chart shows that today’s global sea ice is basically at the same level as it was 35 years ago, back when CO2 was below 350 ppm. Moreover the overall trend is flat. There’s no correlation. CO2 has not caused sea ice to melt like it has been claimed to do. Not even close! The melting that did occur was very short in duration, less than 5 years, from 2005 to 2008.

The whole scare of a polar meltdown has been nothing but a huge load of bovine manure. The whole thing has been nothing but widespread hysteria in the collective paranoid mind of a society fanned by high tech, highly funded swindlers and a complicit media class.

The whole global warming scare arguably has been a power grab by an elitist cabal of lying bureaucrats who have deluded themselves into thinking they have all the answers and solutions.

It’s high time that the new generation of politicians start calling it out.

 

Sustainable Postponements…Germany’s Alfred Wegener Institute Pushes “Ice-Free Arctic” Back To 2050!

In 2009 Al Gore predicted an ice-free Arctic by 2014. It never materialized – not even close.

Not to be outdone, John Kerry upped the ante and boldly proclaimed an ice-free Arctic by 2013. That too was utter nonsense.

In 2010 oceanography researcher Wieslaw Maslowski claimed: “Near ice-free summer Arctic might become a reality much sooner than GCMs predict“. This was reported in the press as “US Navy predicts summer ice free Arctic by 2016“.

Louis Fortier, scientific director of ArcticNet, a Canadian research network, said the sea ice was melting faster than predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

An earlier National Climate Assessment report wrote that models that best match historical trends project a nearly ice-free Arctic in the summer by the 2030s.

Other real experts were less dramatic with their predictions. For example in 2009 Overland & Wang predicted that there would be an ice-free Arctic in the summer by 2037. A 2006 paper by Marika Holland et al. predicted “near ice-free September conditions by 2040″. Tony Heller, a.k.a. Steve Goddard, has an entire list of ice-free Arctic predictions.

Postponed again to 2050

Now polar conditions have stopped cooperating, and sea ice looks poised to defy the projections. A couple of days ago I wrote here about how natural cycles are now aligning to lead to more sea ice cover over the next one or two decades, and that global sea ice levels are back to normal levels – a fact that the end-of-world obsessors are finding difficult to come to terms with.

The recent sea ice developments even have the government-funded alarmist institutes now in a state of anyxiety. Already we are beginning to see them push back the predicted date of an ice-free Arctic. The latest example come from Germany’s prestigious, yet alarmist, Alfred Wegener Institute (AWI) for polar and ocean research – so reports Germany’s Deutschland Funk national public radio here in an interview with Christiane Habermalz, Arctic Ny Alesund station engineer of the AWI.

In the interview Habermalz insists that the Arctic is the “hot-spot” of global warming, and that sea ice is melting faster than expected (Fact: it isn’t at all). She claims that the Arctic is warming 1.3°C per decade, basing that on only two decades of data: from 1993 to present. She also did not hold back from giving the impression that the trend would continue unabated, but then adding:

…in any case during the Arctic summer more and more of the sea ice is melting further and there are increasingly greater ice-free zones. That is something that also the scientists here at Ny Alesund have said, and that when the melting of the sea ice continues the scenario of an ice-free pole by 2040/2050 is very likely.”

2050? That’s a far cry from what we’ve been hearing from other experts over the last years.

There are some interesting statements here. First Habermalz is implying that it will take a sustained 1.3°C per decade of Arctic warming for this to happen. But as most people who have read about the Arctic know, temperatures there go in cycles. The warm cycle has already reached its peak and so the temperature level there needed to melt the ice by 2030 will not be reached. Thus the 2040/50 ice-free scenario won’t happen as calculated by the AWI. (By ice-free, we mean over a number of years, and not a single outlier year, which cannot be excluded). The AWI knows it, and so now we are seeing a conscious postponement of an ice-free Arctic.

Of course expect the AWI and similar institutes to keep ringing the alarm bells, but at the same time quietly move the goalposts back as reality dawns.

Finally, what do the experts project this summer’s Arctic sea ice minimum to be this year? Joe Bastardi tells us at his Saturday Summary here at the 13:15 min mark:

2015 Arctic sea ice forecast

US government NCEP forecast for Arctic sea ice anomaly this year. Source: Weatherbell.

Obviously the AWI has gotten the message, and so now the Arctic horror predictions have been pushed back to a future time, one far enough into the future that by then everyone will have forgotten all the silly, hysterical predictions made during the 2000s.

 

Clear And Gathering Evidence Of Cooling: Three-Year Mean Antarctic Sea Ice Highest On Satellite Record!

Now that it’s spring, it’s as good a time as any to look at polar sea ice. Climate scientists have told us time and again that global warming would first be been at the Earth’s poles.

Well, if that is true, then we need to start worrying about cooling.

In the Arctic the following chart shows a clear stabilization taking place over the past 8 years with an upward trend over the last five years:

Source: Cryosphere Today, Arctic Climate Research, University of Illinois

It needs to be pointed out that there are many factors impacting sea ice. Among them are ocean currents and cycles, and prevailing weather patterns. In summary, however, the once feared “death spiral” remains totally absent.

Had the past five years been centered about the -1.75 million sq km anomaly in the Arctic, then the warmists may have had a point. But that is not the case as the Arctic sea ice is close to 1 million square kilometers above the alarm level.

A number of high-profile scientists and meteorologists also are now projecting growth in Arctic sea ice over the next 10-20 years as major oceanic oscillations shift to their cooler phases.

Record-smashing Antarctica, warming totally AWOL

If you are a global warming alarmist, then the situation is even more confounding at the south end of the Earth. Especially at the Earth’s southern pole is warming totally AWOL.

Antarctic sea ice 4 2015

Source: arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere

Because Antarctica is surrounded by water, trends there do behave differently then what goes on in the land-surrounded Arctic.

Consider the following stunning points about Antarctica:

1. Antarctic sea ice has been above normal for almost 3 years uninterrupted.
2. Three years uninterrupted above normal sea ice is unprecedented over the satellite record.
3. Record after record sea ice highs have been set during that period.
4. The trend for the last 10 years has been stunningly strong.
5. The long-term 30-year trend is strongly upwards.

From Antarctic sea ice trends, there’s absolutely no indication that there’s any warming going on down there. If scientists had been warning of cooling, they’d be having a much easier time today convincing the public.

Indeed Antarctica is the very place that AGW alarmist scientists don’t want anyone to look at. In fact today there’s almost no climate data they want you to see – only the “adjusted” surface temperatures that they themselves cook, manipulate and alter.

Global sea ice trend positive since 2006!

Finally charts and data on total global sea ice show absolutely no alarm. Global sea ice has been at a normal level for almost 3 years now. Overall the recent trend is upward, thus indicating cooling – and not warming:

Global sea ice 2015_4

Source: arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere

The above global sea ice anomaly chart shows that there was a brief downward trend from 2004 to 2012, but that loss has since been completely wiped out. The overall trend since 2006 is upwards. In fact the mean of the last 2 years is as high as it was 35 years ago.

Don’t listen to the doom and gloom of the government bought climate scientists. You can look at the data yourself. A good place to do this is over at Anthony Watts’s sea ice page here.

 

Georgia Tech Climatologist Curry: “No Sign Of Slowdown” In AMOC…Sees Atlantic “Arctic Sea Ice Recovery”, Hints Of Greenland Cooling

Michael Mann’s and Stefan Rahmstorf’s recent AMOC paper has been promptly and widely discredited since it came out, see here WUWT, WUWT, and NTZ. The sharp criticism has since picked up.

Veteran meteorologist Joe Bastardi for example blasted the paper in a comment at WUWT, calling the claims “nonsense” and reminded that renowned climatology expert William Gray had predicted what is now happening already 40 years ago.

Bastardi wrote that it is all part of the natural end-game of the Atlantic’s warm cycle. The veteran meteorologist rated the paper’s claims:

This idea borders on delusional, an attempt to self verify the idea that co2 is actually influencing the oceans, laughable since the heat capacity of the oceans is 1000x air, and co2 is only .04% of the air.”

Curry calls the paper’s methodology “remarkable”

The latest high profile climate scientist criticizing the work is Georgia Tech climatologist Judith Curry at her Climate Etc. site here. First she is unconvinced of the paper’s methodology of using climate model simulations and “Mannian proxy analysis” of decadal to millennial scale ocean circulations and internal variability in place of direct measurements, calling it “remarkable”.

She poses the rhetorical question:

So, who you gonna believe? Climate models and Mannian proxies, or direct and satellite observations of ocean circulation?

AMO is behind the changes

Curry says that the cooling of the high latitude North Atlantic can be traced back to the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO), which now appears to be at the start of its descent into its cool phase. She writes there is some evidence that the warm phase of the AMO already peaked circa 2007. Moreover she hints that the transition could be sharp, as was the case in the late 1990s.

Curry scoffs at the notion that climate change is likely behind the cooling of the North Atlantic. In her summary she writes (my emphasis).

What we are seeing in the high latitudes of the North Atlantic is natural variability, predominantly associated with the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation. Based open observational analyses, there is no sign of a slowdown in the Gulf Stream or the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation.

Now, I am very interested in the AMO, since it strongly influences Atlantic hurricanes, Arctic sea ice, and Greenland climate.  We are already seeing a recovery of the Atlantic sector of the Arctic sea ice, and some hints of cooling in Greenland.”

European Institute For Climate And Energy: Ocean Cycles Are Main Driver, No Relationship Between Arctic Sea Ice And European Winters!

Two days ago I wrote about the first part of an analysis (on Germany winter temperatures) by Kowatsch and Kämpfe appearing here at EIKE. Winter temperatures in Germany have been falling for a quarter of a century now. Much to my satisfaction, that post has been widely shared among social media.

Today I’m writing about the second part: What is the primary driver behind Europe’s variability, i.e. what causes periods of cold winters and periods of milder winters? The main drivers, Kowatsch and Kämpfe conclude, are oceanic cycles.

Figure 1 below shows a plot of German winters since 1881. Shown is the temperature lower curve and the number of days with westerly winds (upper curve) – along with their corresponding smoothed curves.

Figure 1: Germany’s mean winter temperature (lower blue curve) follows the course of the frequency of days with mild westerly winds (W, SW and NW, violet upper curve). Both are accompanied by a smoothed curve).

It’s no surprise that the more days a winter has with winds coming from the west (Atlantic), the milder the winters turn out to be. A correlation here does not surprise us. Here the mechanism that drives Europe’s winters is the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), which is the pressure difference between southwest Europe (Portugal to the Azores) and northwestern Europe (Iceland).

When the NAO is very positive it means there is a powerful Azores high and a powerful Icelandic low which serve to pump Atlantic air eastwards into Central Europe (Figure 2, right). If the Azores high and the Iceland low are both weak, then cold air from Eastern Europe or Siberia can make its way over across Europe and the winters tend to be much colder (Figure 2, left).

Figure 2: Prevailing weak NAO pattern shown left leads to cold Europe winters. Strong positive NAO pattern shown right leads to mild winters (Source: UKMO).

Next Figure 3 shows the NAO chart for the past winter, which was most of the time was highly positive, meaning many mild westerly winds swept in from the Atlantic and over Europe.

Figure 3: Winter 2014/15 saw an overwhelmingly positive NAO, thus producing a mild winter for Western and Central Europe.

So what drives the NAO air pressure difference? Kowatsch and Kämpfe have analyzed this and found there is a strong correlation between NAO and the Atlantic Multidecadal Osciallation (AMO). Figure 4 below shows the inverse relationship between the AMO and the winter-time westerly wind frequency over Europe:

Figure 4: The higher the AMO value, the less westerly weather that occurs.

Not only does the AMO drive the NAO, but it is also is a major factor driving Arctic sea ice extent. Arctic sea ice extent does not drive the winters over Europe, as some scientists have been hypothesizing over the recent years. Rather it is the AMO that is driving the Arctic sea ice and the European winters as well.

Although good satellite sea ice data records for the Arctic go back only 35 years, one sees a distinct relationship between the AMO and wintertime Arctic sea ice, see Figure 5 below:

Figure 5: As AMO values rise (green curve), sea ice area (blue) reduces significantly.

EIKE adds:

And there are clear indications that this relationship applies over the long-term as well. During the 1930s, i.e. during the last AMO positive phase, large melting of the sea ice and strong melting of the Greenland glaciers were observed.”

And when the severe winters of 2009/10 and 2012/13 caused the proponents of the global warming theory to scramble for an explanation, they concocted and put out the tale that “melting Arctic sea ice was disturbing the large scale circulation and thus favored winter cold at the middle latitudes“.

The scientists claimed that especially the low levels of Arctic sea ice in September were suddenly responsible for causing cold winters. Yet, the following chart shows no relationship at all:

Figure 14: The extent of September Arctic sea ice has no impact whatsoever on winter temperatures over Central Europe (Germany). Arctic sea ice cover in blue; Germany winter temperatures in red. The same is true for other times of the year (autumn ice cover or winter ice cover to winter temperatures show no relationship).

EIKE warns that the climate system is much more complicated than meets the eye: “Still the complicated and yet to be researched relationship between ocean currents, AMO, sea ice and large weather patterns have with a high probability an impact on Europe’s climate and weather, and there exists no easy explanations”. Studies have shown that solar activity also play a role in Europe’s winters.

At the end, Kowatsch and Kämpfe look at the (lack of) success that institute’s and experts have had in forecasting the winter of 2014/15. It shows that the science of forecasting is lacking terribly. Of the 7 forecasts examined, 2 were completely faulty, 3 were poor, and 2 were only about half correct and would not earn a grade any higher than a C -.

German Experts: New Paper By Gleisner Shows 2013 Cowtan And Way Arctic Data Hole Paper Was A Lemon

German experts Sebastian Lüning and Fritz Vahrenholt tell at their Die kalte Sonne site us why the 2013 Cowtan and Way paper has proven to be a flop.
========================================

Failed spectacularly: Arctic data hole theory for the warming pause collapses
By Sebastian Lüning and Fritz Vahrenholt
(Translated, edited by P Gosselin)

For quite some time climate scientists have been desperately seeking an explanation for the unexpected warming pause. On November 15, 2013 in the Süddeutsche Zeitung Christopher Schrader declared that the solution had been found: There was no pause; the data had only been missing from the Arctic.

Climate change without pause
According to the data, the earth had not warmed over the past years. However, this impression is likely related to missing data from the Arctic. And there the temperature appears to have risen much more strongly than the global average.[…] These [temperature] measurements have large holes: Approximately one sixth of the earth is not covered. Foremost in the Arctic there are not enough thermometers. But according to all signs it is warming considerably more quickly than the rest of the planet. An English and a Canadian scientist now show how this hole can be closed up with estimated values and how the supposed warming pause practically disappears. Kevin Cowtan of the University of York and Robert Way of the University of Ottawa refer to satellite data. […] Thus ultimately Cowtan and Way arrived at the result that the Arctic warmed eight times faster than the rest of the planet. Before that it had been thought that it was warming three times faster.”

Unfortunately Schrader did not mention that the two scientists were climate activists who were close to the IPCC-friendly Internet platform Skeptical Science. Yet, he still was unable to let slip out a couple of critical words about the two authors:

However the process is too complicated in order to find widespread recognition. Doubt will be stirred up among many because both authors have no name in climate science. Kevin Cowtan is a theoretical physicist and computer specialist at the Department of Chemistry at his University. Robert Way is still busy writing his doctorate dissertation.

It’s been a full year since the appearance of the dubious paper by Cowtan and Way, one that was highly praised by Stefan Rahmstorf. So just how was this pioneering paper received by the science community? On January 29, 2015 the answer from their colleagues appeared in the Geophysical Research Letters. The dodgy Arctic data fill-in model has failed spectacularly and has been soundly rejected. The answer to the pause is not to be found in the Arctic as Cowtan and Way suspected, rather it is to be found at the lower geographical geographical latitudes, as a team of scientists of the Danish Meteorological Institute in Copenhagen led by Hans Gleisner reports in a new publication. What follows is the paper’s abstract:

Recent global warming hiatus dominated by low-latitude temperature trends in surface and troposphere data
Over the last 15 years, global mean surface temperatures exhibit only weak trends. Recent studies have attempted to attribute this so called temperature hiatus to several causes, amongst them incomplete sampling of the rapidly warming Arctic region. We here examine zonal mean temperature trends in satellite-based tropospheric data sets (based on data from (Advanced) Microwave Sounding Unit and Global Navigation Satellite System Radio Occultation instruments) and in global surface temperatures (HadCRUT4). Omission of successively larger polar regions from the global mean temperature calculations, in both tropospheric and surface data sets, shows that data gaps at high latitudes cannot explain the observed differences between the hiatus and the prehiatus period. Instead, the dominating causes of the global temperature hiatus are found at low latitudes. The combined use of several independent data sets, representing completely different measurement techniques and sampling characteristics, strengthens the conclusions.

Joe Bastardi Schools Dr. Michael Mann On How To Read A Weather Chart … Heavy Snow “Is Because It’s Cold”

The Northeast USA is being socked by frightful cold and massive snow. The brutal New England winters are back and now we are witnessing last ditch efforts by disgraced climate scientists to blame the brutally cold winters on a warming planet (which in reality has not warmed in 18 years).

At his latest Saturday Summary at WeatherBell Analytics, chief meteorologist Joe Bastardi delivers a stinging critique of Michael Mann’s recent claims: “Sea surface temperatures off the coast of New England right now are at record levels, 11.5C (21F) warmer than normal in some locations.” Mann also claimed there’s two times more moisture in this warm air, and thus is responsible for the turbocharged snowy icebox winter Boston has been experiencing.

At his Saturday Summary Joe thoroughly demolishes these claims.

Falsehood 1: It’s 11.5°C warmer than normal “off Cape Cod”

Joe calls Mann’s assertions a mistake, and shows that the area of warm sea surface water “off the coast of Cape Cod” is in fact way off the coast. At the 2:25 mark Joe shows how the waters along the eastern seaboard “are close to normal” and that a small patch of 3°C above normal water is some 1000 kilometers off the coast, and that a larger patch of 5°C above normal water is in fact 2000 kilometers off the coast (see following figure):

SatSum 14 Feb 2015

Dr. Mann’s warm water is in fact 2000 kilometers “off the coast”. Cropped from WeatherBELL.

Joe tells his viewers, and Dr. Mann, at the 3.00 mark:

There’s no way that that moisture is getting fed back into New England.”

Climatologists need to learn how to read a weather chart

So why would a climatologist like Mann make such an absurd claim? Joe tells us that a climatologist making a statement does not understand how the weather works, and advises them to first learn how to read a weather chart (2:15) before making such statements.

Falsehood 2: Heavy snow due to warm sea surfaces

The real reason it snowed so much over New England, Joe explains, is because of the “tremendous horizontal temperature gradient” in the area where extremely cold Arctic air clashes with normal temperature maritime air (3:30). It’s the cold, stupid!

At 5:27 Joe explains:

Where this storm was embedded, it’s cooler. You cannot use the argument that we use for warm eddies, and hurricanes where we see some blow up over the warm eddy. You can’t use that with these.”

Falsehood 3: Two times higher water vapor in the air

At the 5:45 mark the veteran Penn State graduate meteorologist shows the water vapor situation in the region where the storm developed:

During this time of the snow blitz over New England, the mixing ratios, which is the water vapor, is below normal! It’s below normal! It’s not above normal! In the area that we’re targeting, this period that we’re looking at, that had all this snow, is below normal.”

Snow (surprise!) is due to cold

The reason why water vapor is so low is “because it’s so darn cold”. The heavy snowfalls are related to the extreme cold, and not the unrelated warm patch 2000 kilometers “off Cape Cod” (6:10).

At the 7:47 mark Joe summarizes on warmist climatolgists’ claims:

If they’d looked at this, they would have seen how bogus their argument is. There is nothing above normal in that area. What happened was that it was so darn cold that it creates a very strong horizontal temperature gradient. […] It’s not because it’s so much warmer and humid off the eastern seaboard; it’s the exact opposite reason in this particular case. […] It’s because it’s cold.”

At the 9:30 mark Joe shows a chart of the AMO which that he says “has major implications“. The AMO has dipped sharply downwards, and although the current PDO is warm, it will turn colder within a couple of years. Implication: don’t expect global warming anytime soon.

Also Joe explains how cold winters across the United States are predominantly dependent on the ENSO. In years of El Nino spikes, US winters do greatly tend to be colder.

In summary this year’s brutal New England winter has nothing to do with the bogus, made-up explanations being served up by climatologists who are desperate to salvage their disgraced science.

 

Climatologists’ Projections Defied…25-Year Trend For German Winters Shows Cooling! …”Snow Has Not Disappeared”

In 2014, Germany and parts of Europe will be seeing their warmest year ever since temperature recording began in earnest late in the 19th century. The media and alarmists are giddy about this, even though most of it is due to a global weather pattern that worked to deliver an almost steady stream of warm southerly air over the continent: especially early this year, over the autumn, and the end of the year. It’s all pattern related.

Moreover, as the warmists like to say when cold strikes, it’s just one year and does not in any way represent a trend.

Not long ago some climate scientists announced winters with snow would be a thing of the past in Europe. Global warming, they said, would be especially noticeable in the wintertime. But then in the late 2000s and early 2010s, a string of harsh winters gripped the old continent and the trend in Germany went downhill: colder and snowier winters.

Veteran journalist Ulli Kulke of Germany’s national daily Die Welt writes at his blog that the tendency over the last two and half decades – since before the first IPCC report was ever issued – has been slight cooling and no warming to speak of. He writes of Germany’s winters:

The winters between 2001 and 2010 were on average 0.1°C colder than the 1991 – 2000 decade. And the winters between 2011 and 2014 were also 0.1°C colder than the 2001-2010 decade. Even if we are talking only about tenths of a degree, the climate discussion is actually all about such magnitudes. So anyone who had the impression of hard winter times was not wrong. The tendency of winter temperatures has been downward over the past two and half decades, and not upwards. […] Snow has not disappeared.”

So with the general winter trend in Germany and Central Europe slightly downward, spooked climate scientists had to scramble to concoct an explanation. Kulke continues:

As the cold winters became undeniable, decisive institutes came up with the original idea of tracing the icy temperatures back to global warming. The reason for this was the disappearing Arctic sea ice around the North Pole. In a press release from the institute, Vladimir Petoukhov of Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research is quoted as having stated concerning a study of his: Disturbances in air currents, caused by the disappearance of ice ‘could increase the probability of the occurrence of extremely cold winters in Europe and North Asia by a factor of three’. In summary: ‘Hard winters such as last year’s or 2005/06 do not contradict global warming, rather they more so confirm it.’“

The Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Ocean Research also presented a similar paper. The warming Arctic, Kulke explains, was supposed to alter the pressure difference between the Azores and Iceland, and thus produce more favorable conditions for cold winters to take hold over Europe. Kulke calls the logic behind the theory weak, writing that there’s a lot of controversy swirling around it, especially in view that it was produced after the fact.

Kulke’s piece in general points out that the theories of the global warming scientists are not doing well when compared to real observations. For example he ends his piece with a look at the Arctic and global temperatures:

In addition it is turning out that the Arctic sea ice may increase in size. And as before the time-out taken by the global temperature increase continues on. No one knows how long it’s going to go on, even if this year a high will be reached because of an El Nino.”

Another blow to the models.

 

Ocean And Solar Cycles Show Arctic Sea Ice Will EXPAND Over The Next 3 Decades!

Due to time constraints, what follows is a shortened version of the original German blog article.
=================================

Danish Chinese scientists discover important relationship: Arctic sea ice development of the last 5000 years is controlled by solar activity

By Fritz Vahrenholt and Sebastian Lüning
(Translated/edited by P Gosselin)

Satellites began systematically measuring sea ice about 35 years ago. Such a data series is much too short to allow conclusions to be drawn concerning long-term trends. Thus it is necessary to use geological studies to trace back sea ice development far into the past. In October 2010 we reported on such a study and found that Baltic sea ice cover over the last 500 years has been coupled with solar activity. In October 2013, we also wrote another blog article on the subject (see our blog article “Arctic sea ice melted and grew in sync with the sun over the past 500 years“).

In June 2014 in the journal Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, a Danish-Chinese team published a paper led by Longbin Sha. They reconstructed sea ice over the past 500 years at a bay located in Western Greenland The result in shown in Figure 1 and shows that sea ice was in sync with solar activity. The authors also found that fluctuations in solar activity were an important factor of influence for changes in sea ice over the last 5000 years. What follows is the abstract of the paper:

Relatively warm conditions with a strong influence of the Irminger Current (IC) were indicated for the early part of the record (~ 5000–3860 cal. yr BP), corresponding in time to the latest part of the Holocene Thermal Maximum. Between 3860 and 1510 cal. yr BP, April SIC oscillated around the mean value (55%) and during the time interval 1510–1120 cal. yr BP and after 650 cal. yr BP was above the mean, indicating more extensive sea-ice cover in Disko Bugt. Agreement between reconstructed April SIC and changes in the diatom species suggests that the sea-ice condition in Disko Bugt was strongly influenced by variations in the relative strength of two components of the West Greenland Current, i.e. the cold East Greenland Current and the relatively warm IC. Further analysis of the reconstructed SIC record suggests that solar radiation may be an important forcing mechanism behind the historic sea-ice changes.”

Figure 1: Sea ice development of Western Greenland (bottom chart). Low peaks indicated in gray show sea ice increase while high peaks show reduced sea ice. The upper curve depicts solar activity. Source: Sha et al. 2014.

The scale shows that solar activity was the primary driving factor over centuries, while ocean cycles played an important role on a decadal scale. In January 2014 a Norwegian-German-US research team published a paper on this in the Geophysical Research Letters. The scientists found a clear natural rhythm of 60-90 years where the Arctic sea ice grew and shrank. The research showed that the sea ice cycles apparently were driven by the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO). As a result the authors also believe that the sea ice will grow once again in the years and decades, (see Figure 2).

Figure 2: AMO. Source: Wikipedia.

The following is the abstract of the study:

A signal of persistent Atlantic multidecadal variability in Arctic sea ice
Satellite data suggest an Arctic sea ice-climate system in rapid transformation, yet its long-term natural modes of variability are poorly known. Here we integrate and synthesize a set of multicentury historical records of Atlantic Arctic sea ice, supplemented with high-resolution paleoproxy records, each reflecting primarily winter/spring sea ice conditions. We establish a signal of pervasive and persistent multidecadal (~60–90 year) fluctuations that is most pronounced in the Greenland Sea and weakens further away. Covariability between sea ice and Atlantic multidecadal variability as represented by the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) index is evident during the instrumental record, including an abrupt change at the onset of the early twentieth century warming. Similar covariability through previous centuries is evident from comparison of the longest historical sea ice records and paleoproxy reconstructions of sea ice and the AMO. This observational evidence supports recent modeling studies that have suggested that Arctic sea ice is intrinsically linked to Atlantic multidecadal variability. This may have implications for understanding the recent negative trend in Arctic winter sea ice extent, although because the losses have been greater in summer, other processes and feedbacks are also important.”

In 2014 Paul Homewood wrote about this at WUWT. Homewood also sees cooling for the Arctic over the coming 30 years due to the AMO:

All these stations, ranging from western Greenland to Siberia, show essentially the same pattern, a warm period around 1940, comparable to now, and a much colder interlude in the  1960’s and 70’s. And, of course, these all closely follow the ups and downs of the AMO. There seems little doubt that the Arctic will be in for another cold period during the next 30 years or so, and that, as Judith Curry indicates, we will see a long term recovery of Arctic ice extent.”

For more information visit Tony Brown at WUWT.

 

“Caught Red-Handed”: German Scientists Expose GEOMAR Institute “Conscious Deception Of The Public” On Arctic Sea Ice Trend, Misleading International Media

The following by German scientists Fritz Vahrenholt and Sebastian Lüning exposes yet another classic example why we cannot trust climate institutes.
=======================================

Caught red-handed: Geomar omits crucial 1960s Arctic sea ice melt phase in press release

By Fritz Vahrenholt and Sebastian Lüning
(Translated/edited by P Gosselin)

The most well-known historical Arctic region melting period took place 1000 years ago when the Vikings sailed through the Arctic Ocean, which had little sea ice. Eventually they colonized Greenland and Iceland. Today no one wants to hear it because it doesn’t fit with the climate catastrophe storyline.

In 1887 the topic was less important. Back then the planet was emerging from the Little Ice Age and people were glad about the warming. Warm was good. There was no IPCC back then. For example in the New Zealand daily The Press on 8 November 1887 there was a story about the Viking journeys and a sharply reduced sea ice extent – something that would be unimaginable today (hat-tip Steve Goddard):

But one does not need to go back so far into history. Also between 1920 and 1940 there was a strong phase of melting in the north polar sea. Former Max-Planck director Lennart Bengtsson summarized the knowledge of the warm phase in the Journal of Climate in 2004. Already back then he saw a relationship with ocean cycles that influenced the climate with a 60-year period. What follows is the abstract of that paper:

The Early Twentieth-Century Warming in the Arctic—A Possible Mechanism
The huge warming of the Arctic that started in the early 1920s and lasted for almost two decades is one of the most spectacular climate events of the twentieth century. During the peak period 1930–40, the annually averaged temperature anomaly for the area 60°–90°N amounted to some 1.7°C. Whether this event is an example of an internal climate mode or is externally forced, such as by enhanced solar effects, is presently under debate. This study suggests that natural variability is a likely cause, with reduced sea ice cover being crucial for the warming. A robust sea ice–air temperature relationship was demonstrated by a set of four simulations with the atmospheric ECHAM model forced with observed SST and sea ice concentrations. An analysis of the spatial characteristics of the observed early twentieth-century surface air temperature anomaly revealed that it was associated with similar sea ice variations. Further investigation of the variability of Arctic surface temperature and sea ice cover was performed by analyzing data from a coupled ocean–atmosphere model. By analyzing climate anomalies in the model that are similar to those that occurred in the early twentieth century, it was found that the simulated temperature increase in the Arctic was related to enhanced wind-driven oceanic inflow into the Barents Sea with an associated sea ice retreat. The magnitude of the inflow is linked to the strength of westerlies into the Barents Sea. This study proposes a mechanism sustaining the enhanced westerly winds by a cyclonic atmospheric circulation in the Barents Sea region created by a strong surface heat flux over the ice-free areas. Observational data suggest a similar series of events during the early twentieth-century Arctic warming, including increasing westerly winds between Spitsbergen and Norway, reduced sea ice, and enhanced cyclonic circulation over the Barents Sea. At the same time, the North Atlantic Oscillation was weakening.”

Today in the press one hardly hears any mention of this melting phase. IPCC scientists would have us believe there has been only one single trend over the last 150 years, namely the steady death of Arctic sea ice.

In December 2013 in the journal PNAS a reconstruction of Arctic sea ice cover appeared for the past 650 years using algae as a proxy. The study was carried out by Jochen Halfar of the University of Toronto. Also involved in the study was Steffen Hetzinger of the Geomar Institute in Kiel, Germany. On November 19, 2013 a Geomar press release announced:

Since the end of the Little Ice Age around 1850, the archives of the red algae show a continuous decrease of the ice, a trend which continues through today. This decrease is stronger than anything we previously observed in the 650 year long history of the red algae record.“

The Austrian national daily Standard sounded the climate alarms, informing its readers:

For the first time a team of international scientists traced the development of sea ice in the Arctic all the way back to the Middle Ages. Here the scientists of the University of Groningen and others found out that the ice sheet has been melting continuously since the middle of the 19th century. They were helped by red algae which conserved the climate history of the last centuries. So far the data on the Arctic from satellites have gone back only to the late 1970s.”

The use of the word “continuously” leads us to understand that the ice is melting steadily, without any larger phases of ice growth in between. Only a very few readers have taken the time and effort to read the original paper. In press releases, authors certainly only tell the truth and nothing but the truth, right? One look at the publication, however, delivers a bitter disappointment. Figure 2b of the study shows the development of the sea ice curve for Newfoundland for the past 150 years in detail (Figure 1). The result: In the 1960s, in the pre-satellite era, sea ice had shrunk to levels seen today. However in the press release, that inconvenient condition never got mentioned.

Figure 1: The blue curve depicts the development of sea ice near Newfoundland for the past 150 years. High peaks indicate shrinking, low peaks depict growth. Source: Halfar et al 2013.

In the paper itself the authors correctly attribute the development to the impact of Atlantic ocean cycles:

Modeling studies have shown that the NAO exerts an influence on the spatial distribution of winter sea ice via wind-driven anomalies of sea-ice velocity, surface vertical heat flux, and possibly horizontal oceanic heat flux (7). There is strong observational evidence connecting Arctic sea-ice distribution with the positive NAO trend from the 1960s to the early 1990s.”

Conscious deception of the public

In the GEOMAR press release there is also not a word about the cyclic nature of sea ice. This is a conscious deception of the public. The ice is neither “shrinking continuously” nor is CO2 playing the only role as some scientists would like us to believe.

Does Steffen Hetzinger know what he is doing? He is a young man who probably is in search of a permanent position and thus has to play along with the climate panic game. Did the GEOMAR force him to write such a press release or what it his own idea to score big points with climate alarmism? One thing is clear: this has nothing to do with reputable science. Hardly a good way to begin a career.

What would the sea ice discussion be like today if systematic satellite-based measurement had begun already in 1960?

IPCC, German government removed 1960s melt

Measurements first began in 1979. The first IPCC report of 1990 was naively honest and openly revealed that shortly before satellite measurements began, there had been significantly less Arctic sea ice than there was during the measurement period beginning in 1979 (Figure 2). In the subsequent IPCC reports, they truncated the inconvenient start of the chart, thus taking it out of the readers’ view.

Figure 2: Development of Arctic sea ice from 1973-1990. Source: 1st IPCC Climate Report (1990).

Looking at the melt phase of the 1960s and 1970s shown in the above chart, one really has to wonder that the German Ministry of Environment is using a dubious IPCC chart which fails to show the melting of the 1960s (Figure 3).

Figure 3: IPCC chart that the German Federal Ministry of Environment has at its website for illustrating Arctic sea ice development. Shown is the supposedly “observed mean Arctic summer sea ice (July-September)”. Original source: IPCC.

The discovery of old Nimbus satellite images must have been very awkward for the Federal Ministry of Environment. The images document huge holes in the Arctic sea ice. Spiegel Online reported on November 4, 2014:

‘Nimbus': Nasa releases old satellite images
They were forgotten in NASA archives: Scientists discovered satellite images from the 1960s. A huge hole in the Arctic sea ice, large masses of snow, intact lakes – the images offer some surprises.”

Already on October 21, 2014, Mashable had reported on the unexpected gaping holes in the north polar sea ice:

The Nimbus data provides the earliest known view of Antarctica’s sea ice, which has made headlines recently for setting a record for the largest ice extent, and spotted large breaks in Arctic sea ice where none were thought to have occurred. The modern satellite record of sea ice in the Arctic and Antarctic starts in 1979, so the added data gives scientists a longer-term view that informs their understanding of present-day events. […]  Sea ice extents in the Arctic were much larger in the 1960s than they are now, Gallaher said, which is consistent with the global warming-induced decline in Arctic sea ice. Still, even in years with higher volume’s of sea ice, the satellite spotted ice-free areas near the North Pole that were 200 to 300 miles across. “We found holes in ice at North Pole that we didn’t expect to find,” he said. “It’s a big hole,” said Garrett Campbell, who also works on the Nimbus project from the NSIDC.”

 

The Great Cooling Of Arctic Sea Ice Projections: Having Been Burned, Scientists Far More Cautious With Projections

Dirk Notz of the Hamburg-based Max-Planck-Institute: Arctic sea ice could again expand in the coming decade

By Sebastian Lüning and Fritz Vahrenholt
(Translated/edited by P Gosselin)

Over the past 30 years Arctic sea ice has shrunk considerably. Although both in 2007 and 2012 negative records were reached, the ice recovered in the years that followed.

Former US Vice President and climate activist Al Gore was clearly impressed by the 2007 melt record and so in 2008 he declared the Arctic could be completely ice free by 2013. The year 2013 came and went, but the ice stayed. Using the same alarmist bullhorn, US Senator John Kerry also announced that the Arctic sea ice was set to melt away, read here:

The truth is that the threat we face is not an abstract concern for the future. It is already upon us and its effects are being felt worldwide, right now. Scientists project that the Arctic will be ice-free in the summer of 2013. Not in 2050, but four years from now.“

The idea of an ice-free Arctic from both politicians obviously had been whispered to them by IPCC scientists such as Wieslaw Maslowski. The BBC reported here on December 12, 2007:

Scientists in the US have presented one of the most dramatic forecasts yet for the disappearance of Arctic sea ice.
Their latest modelling studies indicate northern polar waters could be ice-free in summers within just 5-6 years. Professor Wieslaw Maslowski told an American Geophysical Union meeting that previous projections had underestimated the processes now driving ice loss.”

Looking back at these completely failed prognoses, one would at least expect a return to reason. But this has not been the case for some. There are still climate alarmist scientists who continue insisting that the Arctic sea ice only has a few years left. They’re dead sure. The same is true with the end-of-the-world. And when the predicted end of the world fails to happen, the goalposts get pushed back, or the focus switches to some other end-of-world scenario.

One of the more outspoken believers of the Arctic death spiral is Peter Wadhams of the University of Cambridge. In 2012 he announced to the world the prognosis that Arctic sea ice would disappear within four years. Today, two years later, the trend is in the opposite direction. It doesn’t look good for Wadhams and his prognosis. Now even some of the most obstinate alarmists think the same. For them the apocalyptic visions are really starting to get annoying. During a sea-ice conference in September 2014 in London, Gavin Schmidt had harsh words for Wadhams via Twitter:

“Some anticipation for Peter Wadhams. Audience members already crying,” “Wadhams still using graphs with ridiculous projections with no basis in physics,” “Wadhams now onto methane pulse of 50 GT. But no better justified than his previous statements,” and “Wadhams clearly states that there is no physics behind his extrapolations.”

The latest prognoses come from James Overland and Muyin Wang, who published them in the Geophysical Research Letters in May, 2013. Here they employ three prognosis approaches which look at the end of the ice in 2020, 2030 or 2040. What follows is the abstract:

When will the summer Arctic be nearly sea ice free?
The observed rapid loss of thick multiyear sea ice over the last 7 years and the September 2012 Arctic sea ice extent reduction of 49% relative to the 1979–2000 climatology are inconsistent with projections of a nearly sea ice-free summer Arctic from model estimates of 2070 and beyond made just a few years ago. Three recent approaches to predictions in the scientific literature are as follows: (1) extrapolation of sea ice volume data, (2) assuming several more rapid loss events such as 2007 and 2012, and (3) climate model projections. Time horizons for a nearly sea ice-free summer for these three approaches are roughly 2020 or earlier, 2030 ± 10 years, and 2040 or later. Loss estimates from models are based on a subset of the most rapid ensemble members. It is not possible to clearly choose one approach over another as this depends on the relative weights given to data versus models. Observations and citations support the conclusion that most global climate model results in the CMIP5 archive are too conservative in their sea ice projections. Recent data and expert opinion should be considered in addition to model results to advance the very likely timing for future sea ice loss to the first half of the 21st century, with a possibility of major loss within a decade or two.”

Other scientists have become more cautious, as they were burned too many times in the past with overly hasty projections. Sea ice scientist Dirk Notz of the Hamburg-based Max-Planck-Institute for Meteorology declared in September 2014, in response to a request made by Pierre Gosselin of notrickszone.com, that because of the variability over the coming decade the ice could just as well expand as it could shrink. Interestingly in the model graphics provided by Notz for the coming decades, there are no ice free polar seas to be seen. What follows is the exact wording of the notable e-mail from Notz to Gosselin:

Dear Pierre,

Thanks for being in touch, and sorry for the slow reply. I was at a meeting with surprisingly little internet access. Regarding the bet: I’d be very careful to place a bet in either direction, simply based on our understanding of the system from climate-model simulations. These basically say that on short time scales, such as from one decade to the next, internal variability can cause both an increase or a decrease of the ice coverage. To exemplify this, I’ve attached a slide that shows 30-year long trends from our climate-model simulations.

There you see 30-year long trends for different start dates in our simulations, which vary wildly. This would even more be the case for 10-year long trends. Hence, I wouldn’t put money on a further decrease of the ice cover in the years to come, nor on the opposite. I’ve also attached a plot showing two of the simulations with our Earth-System Model, which suggest that there might be slightly less sea ice in the next decade, but other simulations show a slight increase on these short time scales.

Hence, on time scales such as one decade, the ice cover could well increase a bit (as you are suggesting), but it might also decrease. This depends in my opinion primarily on weather patterns in individual summers – nothing we can predict at the moment. Having said this, however, one of the presentations at the meeting I’ve just been to by Andrey Proshutinsky went in the same direction as you’re suggesting, namely that because of ocean cycles there will be a recovery of sea ice in the years to come. However, I don’t believe this to be a very robust finding that I would put money on at the moment. It’s nevertheless certainly something that we’ll investigate more in the time to come. […] Please let me know if any further questions should come up.

Best wishes,

Dirk”

With all the long-term prognoses we are also naturally interested in how things will develop with Arctic sea ice over the coming year (2015). In her blog Judith Curry provided a forecast Blog in October 2014. She expects the ice in the summer of 2015 to at least reach the extent seen in 2014:

And finally, my prediction for 2015 sea ice minima. I predict minimum sea extent will be the same or greater than 2014, with a continued recovery of sea ice volume. I expect continued recovery in the Atlantic portion of the Arctic, with continued low sea ice extent in the Siberian Arctic. My decadal scale prediction is either no trend in sea ice minima or an increase (I do not expect continued decline in the coming decade).”

It doesn’t look good for Peter Wadhams and the followers of the climate-alarmism movement.

 

-60°F In Russia…So Cold That The Brake System Of Tupolev Tu-134 Jet Allegedly “Froze”!

A number of media outlets are reporting on how a Russian Tupolev jet “froze” at Igarka Airport in Siberia, some 3000 kilometers east of Moscow, 160 kilometers above the Arctic circle.

Igarka Siberia

The Russian RT News Agency here reports that the plane “froze to the ground“. Yet another report says that it was actually the plane’s brake system that froze in the horrible -60°F Siberian cold, and not the tires to the surface.

German Bild daily writes:

“At the village of Igarka, about 3000 kilometers east of Moscow, 74 passengers were waiting for the departure of their Tupolew Tu-134 to Krasnojarsk. But the plane did not take off – down to minus 52°C nothing worked: The brake system was frozen!”

But RT writes that “the ice-covered ground was the reason the plane couldn’t be moved

Technically and physically, I find it implausible that a plane would freeze to the ground, meaning it would have to have been first wet under the tires. Highly unlikely at such dreadful temperatures, even with the increased pressure from the weight of the plane. And wouldn’t such a problem occur routinely if that were the case?

The other question is what could happen to brake fluid or brake equipment at temperatures under -50°C? One could imagine things tending to gum up a bit.

Bild daily adds more details:

“Vladimir Artemenko, Technical Director of the airline, however denies that the jet’s braking system was frozen. “The aircraft was technically without faults’ he said. The local presecutor is now investigating for possible violations of maintenance regulations.”

Whatever caused the frozen jet, global warming doesn’t seem to have come to Igarka at all. What follows is a chart depicting mean November temperatures. As we see, the normal low for this date is around -26°C:

The daily average low (blue) and high (red) temperature with percentile bands (inner band from 25th to 75th percentile, outer band from 10th to 90th percentile). Source: weatherspark.com/averages/33842/11/Igarka-Krasnoyarsk-Krai-Russian-Federation

That makes a temperature of -52°C a heck of a lot colder than normal, not the sort of thing you’d expect from warming. In fact, looking at the chart, the chances of the temperature reaching -52°C up there in November are pretty slim.

 

35 Degrees Below Zero And Colder Spreads, Grips 2 Million Square Kilometers Swath Of Central Siberia

Not only is North America bracing for a possible near record-setting cold blast from the Arctic, but also Siberia has been reporting massive snow cover and widespread cold. It’s only the first half of November and the dead of winter is still two months away!

Siberian cold 10Nov2014

The CO2 blanket having no effect in Siberia. Image source: earth.nullschool.net729.

This, experts have been warning, bodes ill for the chances of a harsh winter over North America and Europe. Two weeks ago Siberan snow cover and cold was already close to record high levels. That situation has only gotten worse, the Big Wobble Almanac here writes:

Remember how evidence was mounting last month that early snowfall was accumulating across Siberia? And remember how there’s a theory that says this snowfall signals a cold winter? So in the two and a half weeks since, the news for the winter-haters has, unfortunately, only gotten worse.
About 14.1 million square kilometers of snow blanketed Siberia at the end of October, the second most in records going back to 1967, according to Rutgers snow lab.”

There are other signs that Europe could be facing a cold winer, although so far early on it has seen weeks of very mild weather. The online prfire writes:

The first migrating Siberian swans landed in Britain – heralding the belated arrival of winter. Each year around 300 Bewick swans flock to the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust reserve at Slimbridge, Glos after flying 2,500 from Arctic Russia. This year’s arrival – coinciding with the first cold snap of the season – is the latest for 45 years and more than two weeks ahead of usual. […]

The Bewicks – the smallest and rarest members of the swan family – live in Siberia during the summer. In winter they migrate west – aided by chilling easterly winds – to escape winter temperatures of -25 degrees C.

Bewick’s have migrated to Slimbridge every winter for 60 years and adult swans teach their young the route. Their arrival comes after weather experts predicted the harshest winter in 100 years. James Madden, forecaster for Exacta Weather, said last week: “The worst case and more plausible scenario could bring something on a similar par to the winter of 2009/10. ‘That was the coldest in 31 years, or an event close to 2010/11 which experienced the coldest December in 100 years.'”

 

Austrian Daily Reports: “Huge Ice Growth Surprises Climate Scientists” … “Like One Not Seen In Decades”!

Antarctica_NASA PhotoThe Austrian online Kronen Zeitung here has an article about something most German-language media outlets have been too red-faced to report on: The sudden growth in polar sea ice.

The Kronen Zeitung opens with:

A huge growth in ice at the poles has surprised scientists and is casting questions. Is global warming taking a break? […] For the prophets of climate change the new figures pose questions: At the poles of Mother Earth, in complete contradiction to prognoses of a complete polar melt, there is an ice growth like one not seen in decades.”

Almost the entire mainstream media has been quiet about this development. So it is refreshing to see that some media are reporting the “good” news that the planet is not warming alarmingly.

Antarctic ice growth “problem for penguins”

The Kronen Zeitung reports that Antarctic sea ice is growing at an average annual rate of 16,500 square kilometers since 2007. The case is pretty much the same for Arctic sea ice, the online Austrian daily reports.

The Kronen Zeitung also writes that the rapidly growing sea ice surrounding Antarctica is a “huge problem” for penguins, who need open water.

“Climate science turned on its head”

Moreover, the Kronen Zeitung mentions the surprise of the National Snow and Ice data Centre (NSIDC) in Colorado concerning the growth in the Arctic:

Scientists t the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) in Boulder (Colorado) in any case have to admit that instead of a global warming, a global cooling is taking place. […]

At the moment this development appears to have turned climate science on its head globally.”

The Kronen Zeitung then explains how the climate models have failed in that they predicted the very opposite to happen and that some scientists even desperately claimed that the measurements were wrong.

Max Planck scientists: “colder winters and cooler summers”

To explain what is happening, Kronen Zeitung turned to Professor Anastasios Tsonis of the University of Wisconsin. Tsonis says there are many factors at play. “Currents, winds, precipitation and foremost the upper and lower water layers.”

At the end of its article, Kronen Zeitung explains how the recent slowdown in overall solar activity may be playing a major role on the climate.

For years few sunspots could be observed. Colder winters and cooler summers could once again be the consequences, Max-Planck scientists say.”

Reported or not, the polar sea ice is there, and it cannot be ignored.

Hat-tip: Die kalte Sonne.