From Marc Morano:
UPDATE: Monday, October 1, 2007 – Record SH sea ice maximum and NH sea ice minimum
Just when you thought this season’s cryosphere couldn’t be more strange …. The Southern Hemisphere sea ice area narrowly surpassed the previous historic maximum of 16.03 million sq. km to 16.17 million sq. km. The observed sea ice record in the Southern Hemisphere (1979-present) is not as long as the Northern Hemisphere. Prior to the satellite era, direct observations of the SH sea ice edge were sporadic.
The NH sea ice area reached an historic minimum on September 16, 2007 (2.92 million sq. km), representing a 27% drop in sea ice coverage compared to the previous (2005) record NH ice minimum.
We have updated our high resolution animation of this year’s sea ice retreat (01/01/2007 – 09/23/2007). WARNING – This quicktime animation is very large at 200Mb, but it illustrates nicely the temporal evolution of this year’s sea ice. Animation: 2007 sea ice minimum animation
Follow this link for some background information on historic sea ice minima.
Also note that Antarctic is NOT following climate models.
A February 2007 study reveals Antarctica is not following predicted global warming models. Excerpt: “A new report on climate over the world’s southernmost continent shows that temperatures during the late 20th century did not climb as had been predicted by many global climate models.” The research was led by David Bromwich, professor of professor of atmospheric sciences in the Department of Geography, and researcher with the Byrd Polar Research Center at Ohio State University. [See: Antarctic temperatures disagree with climate model predictions]
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
“Bromwich said that the increase in the ozone hole above the central Antarctic continent may also be affecting temperatures on the mainland. “If you have less ozone, there’s less absorption of the ultraviolet light and the stratosphere doesn’t warm as much.”
That would mean that winter-like conditions would remain later in the spring than normal, lowering temperatures.
“In some sense, we might have competing effects going on in Antarctica where there is low-level CO2 warming but that may be swamped by the effects of ozone depletion,” he said. “The year 2006 was the all-time maximum for ozone depletion over the Antarctic.”
Bromwich said the disagreement between climate model predictions and the snowfall and temperature records doesn’t necessarily mean that the models are wrong.
“It isn’t surprising that these models are not doing as well in these remote parts of the world. These are global models and shouldn’t be expected to be equally exact for all locations,” he said. ”
A considered, calm and well reasoned assessment of the situation.
(Do I sound like Carter yet?).
We didn’t fix the Ozone hole then?
Not yet. Science says quite a ways to go (doesn’t it).
“The results of this study are in major disagreement with recent conclusions of various modeling and field work studies, which find good agreement only when using the extrapolated cross sections of Burkholder et al. The calculated photolysisrate differs between the two studies by a factor of about 9. This difference will be further enhanced at higher solar zenith angles. Because photolysis of ClOOCl is the rate limiting step in the loss of polar ozone, the adoption in atmospheric models of the cross sections determined in the present study will lead to a large reduction in the calculated chemical ozone depletion. New photolytic and/or reactive pathways will be required to obtain closer agreement between models and measurements.”
http://pubs.acs.org/cgibin/abstract.cgi/jpcafh/2007/111/i20/abs/jp067660w.html
J. Phys. Chem. A, 111 (20), 4322 -4332, 2007
“Bromwich said the disagreement between climate model predictions and the snowfall and temperature records doesn’t necessarily mean that the models are wrong.”
Nor does the inconsistency invalidate the whole AGW hypothesis.
So why do the AGW reactionaries act as if it does and refuse to deal rationally and impersonally with contradictory and inconsistent information?
You are your own worst enemies…..