Mr Sleet

I appreciate others defending me but I really didn't take offence at GW's post or Devs response which was full of winks etc which tells me where he is coming from. I'm sure Dev and GW are really nice guys (despite their stance on AGW )

Almost unnoticed, SH ice is storming ahead, a new record looks a distinct probability.

Cheers Chris. That seems plausible.

I need evidence. Save what you find as you go, then post it up !

Indeed TWS I will come and eat humble pie if I'm wrong, have no fear Genuine question to all and sundry . I'm going to challenge what seems to be an assumption that " multiyear ice " is somehow more resistent to melting than single year ice. For a given thickness, I don't see why that should be the case. Anyone have any hard evidence on this ? Facts please, not opinions

This seems quite a key post in this debate. Could you post up your evidence ? Save us guys spending hours trying to find it B)

You are right. The rate of melt is slower than last year . Attempts to discredit Cryosphere Today suggest that some commentators on here are becoming a little worried about their predictions B)

You are second guessing whether or not the NW passage will open up this year. Take your own advice- wait and see.

Why don't you take your own advice to Snowbear and wait and see ?

In fact if you looked at the graph I posted a few days ago the ruminant population has indeed increased greatly in recent years, although the methane level in the atmosphere has increased very little since 1990.

I could be David Cameron, of that great party soon to return to power.

And I could still be the next Prime Minister.

Well if you are relying on the Press for a fair opinion then good luck to you.

OSN You make a very good point. When all is said and done the NH sea ice is down about 1 m sqkm and the SH ice area is up about 1msq.km. Putting the global tally right on the average line. Regarding thicknesses, others have posted that first year ice thicknesses are 100-200 cm ( Russian sources) which I think is good and above normal. On one of the enviro threads someone is frothing about the state of Hudson bay ice, but as that is always one year ice it looks absolutely normal ! I think there would have to be a calamitous drop in ice area now (much faster than 2007 ) to beat the 2007 minimum.

You can show anything you want by sleight of hand /careful selection of scales. You would make a great politician GW

http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=h...l%3Den%26sa%3DN There is very good correlation between rising ruminant population and methane levels, which stopped rising in the late 1990's. Despite the authors rather dodgy attempt to claim otherwise. Also says that the IPCC have acknowledged that in 2007 methane levels appeared to have plateaued.

But the other 95% of what he said could be right ?

Carinthian, I look forward to your excellent posts bringing us all back into line when needed... Your comments regarding conditions up there are why I don't think the 2007 minimum will be beaten this year, and will herald the recovery in multiyear ice as the planet cools in subsequent years. Chris you make a very important point there, one that ( even) I had not seen

Well in my opinion it is a foregone conclusion The first year ice doesn't seem to be melting any faster than the multiyear ice that went up to this point in 2007. Lets wait and see, I will eat my words if it goes below the 2007 minimum.

Yes, really . There was a steep decline for 2 weeks in the middle of April which has long since levelled out. You need to look at the gradient from last year from this point onwards, and we will need to exceed that to beat last years minimum assuming that the minimum will be reached in the middle of August, as in 2007.

Hi TWS; Reason I am so confident is that it would need a considerably steeper decline than even last year to beat the record. It's a foregone conclusion Not sure about Svalbard....

I think an ice area minimum comfortably exceeding last years minimum is now a foregone conclusion.

Would that be a "Cardinal sin" then ?