carinthians Latest Arctic Reports

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

All those spouting 'recovery' up there may wish to watch the next 3 months closely.

Oh we will GW...and same goes for those 'spouting' armageddon meltdown

BFTP

[oldsnowywizard]

the massive drop is due to the return to mean normal ice concentration levels in Baffin.. until recently there was nearly 200k sq kms of ice above the mean.. quite impressive, not at all suprising this has reduced as conditions in this area are constantly changing. The impact is though that sea surface temps in that area are much colder than normal.. accordin to ncoda around -5 degrees anomoly. now with the sun coming up things will get interesting.. i guess we are all hoping that not as much sea ice goes this summer.... still some very cold temps around the artic though so a while to go until the main bulk will start to melt.. probably around May time.

[Gray-Wolf]

Any reason why C.T. are showing such a precipitous drop in Arctic ice levels over the last few days or has their 'needle' stuck on the graph?

[Gray-Wolf]

Any reason why C.T. are showing such a precipitous drop in Arctic ice levels over the last few days or has their 'needle' stuck on the graph?

Blinkin' edit's gone!

Here's C.T.'s plot with a couple of lines added by myself

seems we are already ahead of the game (if we believe in C.T. that is!) by over a month!!!

Positive signs of recovery or a hint at worse than last year?

EDIT: to me it appears to be the kind of drop off you'd expect when a thin skin of ice met up with spring.............

Edited February 25, 2008 by Gray-Wolf

[BrickFielder]

I think they probably have a bit of a problem with their hudson bay chart it shows a rapid drop off but the satellite pictures show no melt yet. One or the other must be suspect?

Charts Here

Actually I tend to use the NSIDC figures myself.

NSIDC Sea Ice Index

[Gray-Wolf]

Thanks B.F.! ,I'll have a peep at the sat. images myself and see what's what!

[Gray-Wolf]

Though cloud blighted all the images for the past few days show contiguous ice (no fracturing) so there does seem to be a problem with C.T. (again!). Thanks again B.F.!

[Gray-Wolf]

SpaceWeather reported yeaterday that last weeks Lunar eclipse was up to 1,000 times brighter than a typical 'Dark Eclipse' due to the clarity of the stratosphere at present (all the ash has fallen back to earth). Will the increase in 'power' of then sun have had an impact on last years record melt and will we see the process continue this season aided by this 'stronger sun'?

[karyo]

SpaceWeather reported yeaterday that last weeks Lunar eclipse was up to 1,000 times brighter than a typical 'Dark Eclipse' due to the clarity of the stratosphere at present (all the ash has fallen back to earth). Will the increase in 'power' of then sun have had an impact on last years record melt and will we see the process continue this season aided by this 'stronger sun'?

Or is the sun weakening? See the thread regarding the lack of sunspot activity making schientists think that the sun strength is on a downward trend!

Karyo

[trevw]

would have said you are talking about differing aspects of sun 'strength' one the actual output levels of the sun, the other the percentage of the suns output reaching the surface/lower atmosphere..

maybe your opposing trends will cancel out.. :-)

[Gray-Wolf]

After checking out Hudson Bay the other day (with the MODIS sat.s) I realised that we have enough daylight now to at least see images of the edges (but not centre) of the pack ice. Very fragmented, some areas more than others but all disrupted.

Looks like we may be in for a very rapid drop off of ice extent this year.........

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

After checking out Hudson Bay the other day (with the MODIS sat.s) I realised that we have enough daylight now to at least see images of the edges (but not centre) of the pack ice. Very fragmented, some areas more than others but all disrupted.

Looks like we may be in for a very rapid drop off of ice extent this year.........

Where in hell are you getting that idea from GW? Ice is much thicker therethan last year so no overhype please. It is still bitterly cold there too......

BFTP

[BrickFielder]

Recent Satellite picture

You can clearly see some of the multi year ice but it does not look too bad over the Hudson ,so I am not convinced at the moment.

Sea Ice link site

[Yorkshire Snow]

After checking out Hudson Bay the other day (with the MODIS sat.s) I realised that we have enough daylight now to at least see images of the edges (but not centre) of the pack ice. Very fragmented, some areas more than others but all disrupted.

Looks like we may be in for a very rapid drop off of ice extent this year.........

I have to say that I generally enjoy your posts GW, your passion and knowledge for the subject is obviously large ...... But this constant drumming of impending doom regarding the arctic and antarctic ice is beginning to become a little tiresome and also somewhat out of kilter with present reality.

At this very moment, the ice in this area looks in better shape than last year (not that hard I know), and ice is still likely to be forming over the next few weeks .....

Lets wait until the end of the summer before sounding the disaster alarm ?

Y.S

[Gray-Wolf]

I have to say that I generally enjoy your posts GW, your passion and knowledge for the subject is obviously large ...... But this constant drumming of impending doom regarding the arctic and antarctic ice is beginning to become a little tiresome and also somewhat out of kilter with present reality.

At this very moment, the ice in this area looks in better shape than last year (not that hard I know), and ice is still likely to be forming over the next few weeks .....

Lets wait until the end of the summer before sounding the disaster alarm ?

Y.S

Sorry my bud from over the hill!

Though I have no wish to disconcert anyone we are in very interesting times and, no ,the ice is not in good condition. Though ice extents may be similar to last years (it's bloomin' cold up there over winter!!) the thickness of ice is the issue (and not the extent) and it is this that is the greater worry.

Thin ice fragments and shatters far easier than the old 'multiyear' and what I saw today was a lot of shattered, single year ice (sea swell will do it if it is high enough). The larger the exposed surface area of ice the faster it melts (why we smash the ice in the freezer into smaller lumps to speed up the defrost) also the mobility of small chunks is greater than contiguous pack so any 'circulation', like last years, will just flush it all out into the North Atlantic on the Arctic drift current (as we saw over the past 15yrs).

If this is troubling then i could say "whoopee!, all is well, no fret nor worries......"

Whatever............

Ho Hum.

Where in hell are you getting that idea from GW? Ice is much thicker therethan last year so no overhype please. It is still bitterly cold there too......

BFTP

http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/realtime/2008058/

Put up or shut up BFTP.

It's all there, get to the area's visible then drop to 250m resolution and tell me again it's in good shape.

[Yorkshiresnows]

Sorry my bud from over the hill!

Though I have no wish to disconcert anyone we are in very interesting times and, no ,the ice is not in good condition. Though ice extents may be similar to last years (it's bloomin' cold up there over winter!!) the thickness of ice is the issue (and not the extent) and it is this that is the greater worry.

Thin ice fragments and shatters far easier than the old 'multiyear' and what I saw today was a lot of shattered, single year ice (sea swell will do it if it is high enough). The larger the exposed surface area of ice the faster it melts (why we smash the ice in the freezer into smaller lumps to speed up the defrost) also the mobility of small chunks is greater than contiguous pack so any 'circulation', like last years, will just flush it all out into the North Atlantic on the Arctic drift current (as we saw over the past 15yrs).

If this is troubling then i could say "whoopee!, all is well, no fret nor worries......"

Whatever............

Ho Hum.

G.W,

You misunderstand my earlier comment. I also believe that our situation (regarding human impact on the climate) is somewhat perilous, ... I am just not so sure that the situation (at the moment) is quite as dire as you are arguing.

This year looks to be dominated by La Nina conditions (at least until mid summer) and indeed if the various forecasts are to be believed it is likely we are to enter a La Nina rather than El Nino cycle. This would then suggest a cooler episode. Cold air is bottled up at the pole and I see nothing at the moment to suggest an early heat input into this region?

Of course this is by no means certain and perhaps you are correct .... time will of course tell.

Cheers

Y.S

http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/realtime/2008058/

Put up or shut up BFTP.

It's all there, get to the area's visible then drop to 250m resolution and tell me again it's in good shape.

[oldsnowywizard]

GW there is absoluetly no need to be that rude. kindly post an image of hudson and then kindly post Brickfielders alternative image and then lets compare please without emotion. you may well be right. I would say though that the hudson froze over weeks earlier than normal and there has been failry consitent low temps in that area.. ergo it may be the case that the sea ice here is in a better condition? but lets check out the evidence from a few sites first.. ;-)

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Sorry my bud from over the hill!

Though I have no wish to disconcert anyone we are in very interesting times and, no ,the ice is not in good condition. Though ice extents may be similar to last years (it's bloomin' cold up there over winter!!) the thickness of ice is the issue (and not the extent) and it is this that is the greater worry.

Thin ice fragments and shatters far easier than the old 'multiyear' and what I saw today was a lot of shattered, single year ice (sea swell will do it if it is high enough). The larger the exposed surface area of ice the faster it melts (why we smash the ice in the freezer into smaller lumps to speed up the defrost) also the mobility of small chunks is greater than contiguous pack so any 'circulation', like last years, will just flush it all out into the North Atlantic on the Arctic drift current (as we saw over the past 15yrs).

If this is troubling then i could say "whoopee!, all is well, no fret nor worries......"

Whatever............

Ho Hum.

http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/realtime/2008058/

Put up or shut up BFTP.

It's all there, get to the area's visible then drop to 250m resolution and tell me again it's in good shape.

GW

You see what you see

here

This is what I'll put up And yes your doom and gloom is not only tiresome but incredibly inaccurate.

BFTP

[BrickFielder]

Had a quick look at the modis satellite pictures and I did notice a break up of the pack across the southern portion of the bay about two days ago most probably due to wind conditions ,but it looks as if it is re freezing now. Not sure whether this happens normally around this time of year though?

Where the ice should be

Following shows the break up 2 days ago I think ?

Edited February 28, 2008 by BrickFielder

[Polar Continental]

Yes the Arctic ice pack is in constant motion, wind and water movement causes the ice to crack periodically, these cracks often open wide enough to form large areas of open water called Polynyas, occasionally long wide open channels occur, these are called leads, when they close up again, hummocks are formed as slabs of ice pile up on top of each other, these can almost become mountainous, if anyone saw Top Gear when they drove a 4x4 to the Pole, they thought it was curtains for the adventure, but they did eventually manage to drive round them.

Paul

[osmposm]

http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/realtime/2008058/

Put up or shut up BFTP.

It's all there, get to the area's visible then drop to 250m resolution and tell me again it's in good shape.

For those of us confused at which of the 293 images on that webpage are relevant, the way to do it (as I eventually figured out) is to look in detail at the two world maps at the top left of the main page, note from them for each of the two satellites (Terris/Aqua) the time shown for the close points on the satellite's track to Hudson Bay (or wherever you want). Then go back to the array of photos, each of which has a time ID, and click on the times you noted before.

For today that is 0230 & 1735 for Terra, and 0810/0815 & 1745/1750 for Aqua. 0230 for Terra is missing, as are 0810 & 0815 for Aqua. Additionally 1750 for Aqua turns out to be too far north (you can see the area covered as a red box on the circular image on the left of the page showing each individual picture). The two useful images today thus turn out to be 1735 for Terra, and 1745 for Aqua.

Of course, if GW really wanted to inform and persuade all of us (as opposed to having a private argument with Blast - whose language, it has to be said, has also been unnecessarily hot) he could have just posted the link to the right images, or the images themselves, as suggested by OSW.

Personally I don't know what to conclude from looking at these pics of Hudson Bay's ice, as I have nothing to compare them with. Yes, there are currently lots of cracks to be seen, particularly at the northern end. But as BrickF's link explains, the majority of the ice is mobile pack ice (and of course is always almost all single-year); so as Polar C says, varying amounts of cracks and gaps are presumably perfectly normal as the pack is pushed around by the wind/currents.

Edited February 29, 2008 by osmposm

[Mr Sleet]

N Hemisphere ice doing extraordinarily well, still increasing. Total global sea ice area now back to 1979 levels.

Edited March 8, 2008 by Mr Sleet

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Of course, if GW really wanted to inform and persuade all of us (as opposed to having a private argument with Blast - whose language, it has to be said, has also been unnecessarily hot)

Lucky that there is an incredible ice recovery then to cool things down Considering where we were last year I think most would agree that the 'recovery' has been remarkable. There's more to come too IMO with the Gleissberg minima to come. I was reading an article by one of the boffins and he stated that ice ages in the past have 'kicked in' when the northern ocean became almost ice free. Food for thought.

BFTP

Edited March 9, 2008 by BLAST FROM THE PAST

[oldsnowywizard]

i think there might be something in that.... im wondering what impact the melt water from Baffin will have.. could it make the gulf stream a little less potent? certainly some cold anomolies present at the moment..

[Mr Sleet]

Looking at the CT site , NH ice still increasing , remarkably. SH ice increasing rapidly. Global sea ice area looking set to break through highest level since 1979.

Gray Wolf has gone very very quiet I notice. :o