Latest Antarctic Ice Reports

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

Honestly, this is so unexpected it's crazy. I don't know what to make of it.

1.5 million extra square miles of sea ice. Wow.

That's almost scary. How can this happen?

[oldsnowywizard]

i wont post the chart again as its refreshed above!! this could be quite amazing....

currently we are just over 2 millions sq kms above this time last year!! :lol: :lol:

we are almost 1.5 million sq kms above the mean!!!

there are 2.5 months left of the melting season left in Antartica. Based on a very rough judgement and against last years melt rate..

from 8 million sq kms this time last year the loss was 6million sq kms... at the present level that could equate to 10-6 = a minimum of 4 million sq kms.... of course it may not happen... there could be plume of warm air, however.. it certainly looks interesting though!!

[Optimus Prime]

there could be plume of warm air, however.. it certainly looks interesting though!!

I might be wrong but I generally think plumes of arm air in the Antarctic are almost impossible due to the scale and location of the country (there being no continents surrounding it) The only way it'll warm up are if the seas surrounding it are warming at a rate so they start eroding the edges of the cold in the main districts possibly putting pressure on the main cold or simply the cold gets less cold.

It's not really surprising the Antarctic loses less ice relative to the mean then the Arctic.

[oldsnowywizard]

hi OP, i guess i was trying to add a bit of caution to how exciting the current situation is down there.... but yes warm plumes arent that likely in antarctica...

anyway further to the post above.. according to CT....Im sure they will post a data problem soon as surely this cant be right???!

a pretty impressive 1.5millions sq kms above the mean...!! not only that but at the moment the rate of decline has also slowed down..

we also appear to be over 2 million sq kms better off that this time last year..

this qute frankly is awesome stuff if accurate!

maybe te arctic fresh water in the summer went down to the other pole? there has to be some kind of impact from pole to pole..

still some very cold temps down there as well...

http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/map/images/fnl/sfc...er_01b.fnl.html

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

2006

2007

*rubs eyes again in disbelief*

Edited December 13, 2007 by AtlanticFlamethrower

[Mr Sleet]

hi OP, i guess i was trying to add a bit of caution to how exciting the current situation is down there.... but yes warm plumes arent that likely in antarctica...

anyway further to the post above.. according to CT....Im sure they will post a data problem soon as surely this cant be right???!

a pretty impressive 1.5millions sq kms above the mean...!! :huh: not only that but at the moment the rate of decline has also slowed down..

we also appear to be over 2 million sq kms better off that this time last year..

this qute frankly is awesome stuff if accurate!

maybe te arctic fresh water in the summer went down to the other pole? there has to be some kind of impact from pole to pole..

still some very cold temps down there as well...

http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/map/images/fnl/sfc...er_01b.fnl.html

Well as Stratos Ferric likes to remind us, there is only so much cold to go around, it works the other way as well, there is only so much warmth to go around .... warming N Pole seems to mean cooling S Pole ...

[Gray-Wolf]

I've resisted posting images to refute the C.T. extents as it seems pointless (many folk would seem to prefer what they're told and not what they can see)

I'm with Robert Gumbine on this one. Expected ice extent growth (due to the 'new' novel conditions down South since the 80's) doesn't outstrip the basal ablation (due to warmer seas) that we have witnessed over the past 5 years (unless you're a C.T. disciple) .

The same applies this year and there is no way that you can reconcile what you see from what you are told to see. Apart from Weddell this winters ice is gone ( unless you prefer second han 'tampered data' to having a look yourself).

[Gray-Wolf]

I would again invite folk to use

http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/realtime/2007348/

or

http://amrc.ssec.wisc.edu/iceberg.html

or

http://www.nsidc.org/data/iceshelves_images/index.html

to access for themselves just how correct/erroneous the C.T. info is.

To me it appears that only Weddell has a fair percentage of ice left and the rest is gone. Don't trust me, trust yourselves and your own eyes.

for instance, why still 'no data' from the areas visible from Mcmurdo (below)

http://polar.ncep.noaa.gov/seaice/Ross.html

when todays overflight shows us ?

[oldsnowywizard]

GW , only having a quick look through those sites it seems that they concentrate on the coastal areas of the land more so than ice at sea.. i may be wrong of course.. the images above that AFT posted clearly show a marked difference in sea ice concentration. Agreed around the coastal fringes the ocean is coming through and the sea ice in the images shown is very much broken up.. im not sure how CT measure ice concentration, however are you saying that there is in fact no difference between now and this time last year?

i know CT make mistakes but they do provide useful comparisions... do you have any other site that maps out concentration?

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

Who funds Robert Grumbie's research?

What observable evidence is there for basal ablation? This year there have been negative temperature anomalies to match the negative SST anomalies.

Sounds a bit like somebody is grasping at icicles.

The photographs look exactly like the cryosphere/berlin illustrations.

Edited December 14, 2007 by AtlanticFlamethrower

[oldsnowywizard]

comparing the current date since 1995.. by visiting http://polar.ncep.noaa.gov/seaice/Analyses.html and viewing the archives...

IMO 2007 seems to have much more ice and better concentrations levels than certainly the images i viewed, 1995, 2005 2006...

according to CT the anomoly is dropping and by all means it could quite easily drop to normal levels.. but there are still negative anomoly temps across antarctica.. and o degree surface temps are still forecast to remain across most of the sea ice areas next week...

Edited December 15, 2007 by oldsnowywizard

[Gray-Wolf]

Nice big berg on the images today

Ive added Cyprus to the same scale to give an idea of it's size. You need to take my word for it (as the full images seem to knacker A.F.'s computer so he's asked me not to post full images) but it is in an ocean full of 'ice scum' (as you can see bottom right).

The Berg is situated in the East of the Ross Sea but the way things are moving there it seems to have come up from the BAS area around Pine island.

More later.

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

If the summer melt proceeds as normal with 2 million kilometers extra sea ice we should expect more large icebergs than usual.

It will be fun to see how large they can get and how far out to sea they drift! I wonder what the records are...

It remains to be seen how much the melt will catch up with the extra sea ice or whether we can keep a positive anomaly all summer.

GW - my laptop can handle the largest image file sizes. However there are still people who do not have 1. broadband or 2. fast computer. so it is a common courtesy to provide images of multiple sizes when on has something important to show.

Given image size convertors exist online at hosting sites like imageshack my demand was not exactly outrageous.

[Gray-Wolf]

A.F. , if you think that is sea ice then riddle me this, where's all the rest??? the berg is shelf ice/glacial ice. No ice survives that isn't multiyear that far out at sea this late in the year (as the image shows). Would you really expect a plate of 1m thick 'single year ice' ,nearly half the size of Cyprus ,would remain intact that far out????

Methinks you need a rethink!

[Gray-Wolf]

Oh ,and from the Hadley centre we have;

Professor Jones said, "2007 was warmer in the Northern Hemisphere, where the year ranks second warmest, than the Southern Hemisphere, where it ranks ninth warmest."

Met Office Climate Scientist David Parker added, "This year has also seen sea-ice extent in the Northern Hemisphere below average in each month of 2007, with record minima sea-ice reported in July, August and September. In the Southern Hemisphere, sea-ice coverage has remained close to average."

Hmmmmm, close to average......

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

Glacial ice is produced all the time, as are icebergs. Nice looking 'berg, perhaps the cooler conditions this year will mean it gets further away from Antarctica than usual before breaking up?

"Close to average" is quite clearly a global warming euphemism for record-breaking sea ice anomaly.

[Gray-Wolf]

"Close to average" is quite clearly a global warming euphemism for record-breaking sea ice anomaly.

LOL!

I think I've spotted another berg whilst looking how the other was doing. The origional one seems to be drifting up towards NZ (it's now at the rear,middle of the Ross sea) and must be in some kind of 'steering current' as it's moved miles since yesterday. If, in 3 days or so, it's kept up this pace then we'll have the round of "Icebergs off South Island" news reports. Last years bergs were the first in 70 odd years and were posted as 'infrequent visitors' to NZ. Two years running? not that infrequent eh?

Both images are cloud blighted and both are to the same scale as yesterdays image.

Edited December 17, 2007 by Gray-Wolf

[Gray-Wolf]

I keep on seaching for this 'record breaking cold' across Antarctica but keep coming up, month on month, with the likes of above!! The Arctic is showing what 'Warmer,ice free seas' over summer can bring to the 'onset of the winter freeze' Very worrying.

I still think that the south is undergoing rapid transformation too but we must wait for the stats to show those who don't trust their own eyes, LOL

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

Gray-Wolf only a small portion of the Antarctic is photographed. How do you suggest we monitor the Antarctic that is not photographed?

It's the Southern Hemisphere sea ice chart's turn to be taken down from the Cryosphere site.

Northern Hemisphere sea ice chart is back up, and looks like it may have been readjusted downwards.

It's annoying when they keep on adjusting the figures with no explanation. We are their audience, right? Talk to us, Cryosphere.

I wonder what the Southern Hemisphere chart will look like in a few days.

Edited December 19, 2007 by AtlanticFlamethrower

[Gray-Wolf]

There is ,full and varied, coverage of Antartica 24hrs a day,365 days a year A.F. (Infra red for night/dark months) but seeing as we into 24hr a day 'light'.

You have;

http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/realtime/2007353/

and

http://amrc.ssec.wisc.edu/iceberg.html

and

http://www.polarview.aq/latestimages.php

and

http://iup.physik.uni-bremen.de:8084/amsr/amsre.html

and

http://www.nsidc.org/data/iceshelves_images/index.html

and many more if you chase around the links

Edited December 19, 2007 by Gray-Wolf

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

It's not full coverage. It's about 40% if I remember the diagram of coverage extent.

Also, the photographs are not archived in an accessible way as the computer generated images based on the artificial eye in the sky.

You can't blame people for talking the easy option and currently the only option with 100% coverage - if not in as high resolution as the photograph.

[West is Best]

Oh ,and from the Hadley centre we have;

Yep, well, as someone who has a friend working there let's just say that the Hadley centre is not, cough, exactly unbiased :wacko:

[Gray-Wolf]

Yep, well, as someone who has a friend working there let's just say that the Hadley centre is not, cough, exactly unbiased

Must be in cohoots with Nasa then....the above anoms (apart from putting over 40% of E.A.I.S. in the temp range that 'assures' ice sheet ablation) seems to back up this warming Antarctic.

A.F. You are dead wrong about 'Coverage', I suggest you check your sources. Why would we choose to make 'orbits' that miss out areas of the globe (if that is possible on the orbits the Terra/Aqua platforms). Are you sure you are not mistaking visible spectrum abscence over night images (just like the meto 'visible spectrum images' dissapear over night time).

EDIT: Notice how the Penninsula (the area with the most rapid ablation) seems to be the coldest region with most all other areas showing positive anoms!

EDIT,EDIT: Don't you remember Gumbine's desription of how 'ice concentration graphics were made? Sat images being pawed ove and 'guestimates of total coverage grid by grid being made? with masks not regularly updated? I do and that being the case where do they get their images for your 'blank 40%' (or do they just make it up so they can pass it on to C.T. to queer their images????

Edited December 20, 2007 by Gray-Wolf

[Gray-Wolf]

If your tired of C.T.'s unrepresentative coverage here is a composite of Antarctica yesterday. Hard to see tghe ice eh? some fringing pack is still visible but if you compare ross and weddell with C.T.'s image you'll see why I'm so irked by them!

Edited December 22, 2007 by Gray-Wolf

[oldsnowywizard]

GW, it would appear that its not just CT though... this is from http://polar.ncep.noaa.gov/seaice/Analyses.html if you check out the southern hemisphere image you will see that they have similar concentrations!

maybe there is an ice conspiracy?

Edited December 22, 2007 by oldsnowywizard