Yes, it’s summmer in the Southern Hemisphere again. Last year I complained to the UK’s ITN News about a series of climate alarmist reports including one showing glaciers melting in the Antarctic, without mentioning the ‘S’ word. 2007 was the year that Antarctic Sea Ice reached a record high since satellite measurements began, around 1979. Yes, I know that Arctic Sea Ice was at a record low and I have blogged about several peer reviewed papers that cite unusual natural contributory factors to the record low (since satellite measurements began).
Anyway, back to the Antarctic. There are reports that the ice sheet is shrinking at a faster rate, based on research led by Eric Rignot, of the Radar Science and Engineering Section at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. Dr. Rignot attributed the shrinkage in the ice sheet to an upwelling of warm waters along the Antarctic coast, which is causing some glaciers to flow more rapidly into the ocean. Of course, this must be due to global warming, which must be caused by man. Meanwhile, mid-summer in the Southern Hemisphere Ice extent remains well (one million square kilometers) above the 28 year average and an impressive 3 million square kilometers above last year at this time!
There is clearly a lot of year to year variability in the record but the demise of the Antarctic icecap seems to be anything but imminent. Most of the warming and melt in recent years has been in the vicinity of the Antarctic Peninsula, a small portion of the Antarctic which reaches above the Antarctic Circle and is a choke-point for the circumpolar ocean currents, and is more susceptible to variations. There’s also an active subsea volcano in the area, perhaps leading to the warm water upwelling in the study. Who knows!?
Thanks to Joseph D’Aleo of ICECAP NSIDC graphs for southern hemispheric ice extent are here and here.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
Google “Antarctic ice sheet shrinking at faster rate 2008” > 221,000 hits
Google “Joseph D’Aleo 2008” > 2,700 hits
Jennifermarohasy.com/blog: 25,000 hits for 15th January.
http://www.mygreenpeacebuddies.com/can-polar-ice-sustain-global-warming-25.html
I’ve written a post about the Polar Ice in my blog in light of new discoveries, love to hear your opinion.
Cup Beans – We covered that here:
http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/002679.html
Interesting, but not definitive or conclusive.
Did Dr. Rignot fail to mention or include in his thoughts the impact of ENSO on Antarctica?
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/releases/2002/release_2002_54.html
http://www.scar.org/information/elnino/
http://www.scar.org/information/elnino/El_Nino.pdf
Seems that the relationship between ENSO and Southern Ocean SST and Antarctic climate exists, but it isn’t clearly defined. I haven’t found anything more recent, but I’ll keep looking. What impact could ENSO have on the Antarctic ice sheet–changes in precipitation, changes in Southern Ocean temperature?
My ice cubes stayed frozen when they were in the freezer, but they started melting when I took them out. I think it’s global warming.
I predicted that the Antarctic sea ice would melt come summer, sometime back in September.
Yes I know.
That makes me a genius.
Now, we are getting snow in Atlanta. I blame this on trading carbon offsets.
Ms Marohasy,it was shown the other evening on the ABC that we are going through a natural process with the ice melting.It has to be asked though if were speeding the process up?
Paul, have you considered that the extent of sea-ice last winter was because of additional flow off Antarctica? Perhaps the glaciers were adding additional ice to the sea ice.
I think you are stretching the truth to suggest that the extra sea-ice last winter somehow makes up for the melt in the Arctic.
Implying a subsea volcano has somehow increased the ice loss in that area, with no evidence, is not very good science. Why mention it if you have no data.
Anne,
I prefer Jen or Jennifer, but if you want to be formal then Dr Marohasy would be most appropriate.
Also, I have given up watching television – there are more reliable sources of information.
But anyway, perhaps you should direct your question to Paul Biggs … if you look carefully you will see that he posted the above note.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.365.jpg
Currently the ice sheet is only 1 million km2 above last year, which is not particularly significant. It was 3 million km2 near the end of October.
Sorry, it is 1 million km2 more than the mean for 1979-2000. It’s actually at about the same area it was at this time last year.
Nathan – “It’s actually at about the same area it was at this time last year.”
But how thick it it?
I don’t know. I haven’t seen any estimates of thickness of ice around Antarctica, although I had read that there was a theory that warmer waters were thinning the ice and enabling the glaciers to slide faster.
I got the last thing wrong, posted the wrong graph. I was trying to demonstrate that Paul was incorrect asserting it was 3 million km2, when it’s actually about 1.5 million. Damn those quick fingers.
Nothing disappoints the true believer, makes him/her more crestfallen, than evidence that the global av. temperature may not be rising as precipitously as predicted, that the Antarctic ice sheet may not be melting, that the seas may not be rising as rapidly or hurricanes more frequent or intense, droughts worse than previously experienced etc. – that it is not the end of civilization as we know it.
I’m a bit confused?
“it is 1 million km2 more than the mean for 1979-2000”
Is it growing, shrinking, static or just changing as it ever did?
Gavin
Check “National Post” May 4 2007
The Ice Core Man.
“It’s actually at about the same area it was at this time last year.”
No — according to the 1 year plot at Cryosphere it’s ~1.5M km^2 greater this year vs last and ~1M km^2 over the 1979-2000 anomaly.
Regarding almost anything climate year over year — who cares? Give me 3 full solar cycles in most cases before it’s material, whereas the usual AGW suspects on this blog get panty-bunched if ice is late in reforming in the fall (vs spring melt).
Is it growing, shrinking, static or just changing as it ever did?
It set a absolute maximum record in SEP’07 for the measured 1979-present period, and an maximum anomaly record in end of 2007. So what do you think?
Whatever the ice sheets are doing – there is sweet FA we can do to about it.
Paul B, ‘Whatever the ice sheets are doing – there is sweet FA we can do to about it’ – but you do seem to be across this stuff or at least prepared to decide on less than perfect evidence. What do you see as the chances of growing, shrinking, static , say over the next few decades. And then going beyond the denial of uncertainty espoused by poor sweet Fanny A, what do you really see as the chances we can do something about it. Tell me, what are you sceptical about when it comes to your reportoire?
Ray; re “Ice core man”: Thanks for your consideration. Not sure what you expected me to find except Lawrence Solomon writes about fudgey stuff.
Mate; I spent a long time seeking core truths in fresh rumors. It was part of my job, discovering errors in big system management. Also reading between the lines becomes second nature while minding technology exported from the US and other places.
Industrial experience helps a lot. Grounding your references (inside & outside) with fresh data becomes more about survival than building respect for the figure gatherers. Rule one: Ask the bloke at the coal face before drawing conclusions.
In R/L we hardly ever rely on the media. Note too academics mostly work in cocoons.
Mccall. I corrected my earlier post about the ice extent. I hit the wrong button on the cryosphere website.
Try investigating if this is a one-off event or part of a trend. Looking over the 30 odd years of data you can see the Antarctic has been pretty much static as far as ice-extent. Compare with the Arctic which has been declining for a while.
AGW models don’t project the Antarctic melting anytime soon, mainly because of the circum-polar current which acts to keep it cold.
We have had three solar cycles. We have just entered solar cycle 24 (on Jan 8th?). We are at solar minimum now.
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/current_anom_south.jpg
“Looking over the 30 odd years of data you can see the Antarctic has been pretty much static as far as ice-extent.”
You obviously have trouble computing linear regression of above link. The extent trend is up over the period, although the SEP’07 record is an outlier from that trend.
“We are at solar minimum now.”
So … Dr Hansen also disingenuously implied that this means something. Do you actually think a solar minimum is coincident with global avg temp lows?
Correction: global average temperature anomaly lows?
No one has ever denied that the sun is THE most important factor in the Earth’s climate. The problem is that the variation in temperature is too big to be accounted for by variations in the sun’s output.
And yes the years at Solar minimum tend to be cooler. It could be one reason why 2007 was cooler than 2005. Wait and see what happens between 2010 and 2013 at solar max.
Mccall, if you can see an upward trend, then that’s fine. However, compare that grpah to the Arctic. What’s more significant? What has the greater trend?
re: “What’s more significant?”
The antarctic by far — arctic melt does not directly affect sea level! With climate history on my side, I will even take the bet that the arctic minimum extent for 2008 will not even be in the lowest 3 of the so called “current warm period,” 1979-present — data to come from anybody but Dr Hansen’s GISS (an organization which deserves a full audit).
re:”It could be one reason why 2007 was cooler than 2005.”
Depending on latency on a 70*% water-covered planet, 2007 could be cooler than 2005 because the 2005 had less TSI than 2003! The warmest time of the day is not 12:00 (13:00 DST) … the warmest time of the year is not 21-JUN in N. Hemisphere … the warmest time on earth of a Schwabe cycle is not necessarily when the TSI is at maximum of the cycle.
re: “The problem is that the variation in temperature is too big to be accounted for by variations in the sun’s output.”
Consensus AGW opinion, perhaps … but that is what we will find out as the anomalies regress to the mean over the next 10 years or so. By that time, catastophic AGW just might be exposed as a fraudulent hypothesis? It’s quite possible that the alarmist “tipping point” isn’t!
Re: Arctic melt — refers to the ice cap (not ice sheets, especially Greenland, within the arctic circle). Significance is also is determined by volume of ice itself, where the antarctic circle dwarfs the arctic! Regardless it’s the non-floating ice that is the most dangerous to sea levels.