"Arctic sea ice at fifth lowest annual maximum

April 2, 2014

Arctic sea ice reached its annual maximum extent on March 21, after a brief surge in extent mid-month. Overall the 2014 Arctic maximum was the fifth lowest in the 1978 to 2014 record. Antarctic sea ice reached its annual minimum on February 23, and was the fourth highest Antarctic minimum in the satellite record. While this continues a strong pattern of greater-than-average sea ice extent in Antarctica for the past two years, Antarctic sea ice remains more variable year-to-year than the Arctic.'

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

How close will the summer ice minimum be to a record this September? As the article says, that is very hard to predict, but it will be far lower than any ice minima recorded in the 80's and 90's. There is a little more multi-year ice ATM, as 2013 wasn't close to a record minimum, but it would only take a summer of settled weather to melt that out again. Last year was a very unusually stormy year in the Arctic and that caused ice not to melt as quickly as in recent years.

On Sunday, 6 April 2014 09:56:37 UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:
"Arctic sea ice at fifth lowest annual maximum



April 2, 2014



Arctic sea ice reached its annual maximum extent on March 21, after a brief surge in extent mid-month. Overall the 2014 Arctic maximum was the fifth lowest in the 1978 to 2014 record. Antarctic sea ice reached its annual minimum on February 23, and was the fourth highest Antarctic minimum in the satellite record. While this continues a strong pattern of greater-than-average sea ice extent in Antarctica for the past two years, Antarctic sea ice remains more variable year-to-year than the Arctic.'



http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/



How close will the summer ice minimum be to a record this September? As the article says, that is very hard to predict, but it will be far lower than any ice minima recorded in the 80's and 90's. There is a little more multi-year ice ATM, as 2013 wasn't close to a record minimum, but it would only take a summer of settled weather to melt that out again. Last year was a very unusually stormy year in the Arctic and that caused ice not to melt as quickly as in recent years.




Yes and Antarctic record levels begin in earnest yet again

http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/i...timeseries.png

It's also very important to note that the arctic ice is within normal deviations whilst the Antarctic ice has gone of the reservation as far and the standard deviations are concerned

What do you make of that Dullish; as an long time deviant you should be qualified to answer.

Same as you have been told dozens of times. It's no-one'a fault but your own that you are *still* ignorant of the differences. shakes head

On Sunday, 6 April 2014 12:43:51 UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:
Same as you have been told dozens of times. It's no-one'a fault but your own that you are *still* ignorant of the differences. shakes head

Maybe you should take the time as you make the sea ice posts , just exactly why record positive beyond standard deviation sea ice in the SH doesn't matter and is in fact a sign of global warming, or so I believe that's what you are saying.

I'm popping now out to get the shopping and expect your reply up and posted by the time I return.

On Sunday, 6 April 2014 12:49:45 UTC+1, Lawrence Jenkins wrote:
On Sunday, 6 April 2014 12:43:51 UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:

Same as you have been told dozens of times. It's no-one'a fault but your own that you are *still* ignorant of the differences. shakes head



Maybe you should take the time as you make the sea ice posts , just exactly why record positive beyond standard deviation sea ice in the SH doesn't matter and is in fact a sign of global warming, or so I believe that's what you are saying.



I'm popping now out to get the shopping and expect your reply up and posted by the time I return.



No reply yet?

shakes head don't know why but I shakes head

On Sunday, April 6, 2014 2:44:30 PM UTC+1, Lawrence Jenkins wrote:
On Sunday, 6 April 2014 12:49:45 UTC+1, Lawrence Jenkins wrote:

On Sunday, 6 April 2014 12:43:51 UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:



Same as you have been told dozens of times. It's no-one'a fault but your own that you are *still* ignorant of the differences. shakes head







Maybe you should take the time as you make the sea ice posts , just exactly why record positive beyond standard deviation sea ice in the SH doesn't matter and is in fact a sign of global warming, or so I believe that's what you are saying.







I'm popping now out to get the shopping and expect your reply up and posted by the time I return.







No reply yet?



shakes head don't know why but I shakes head

What, you missed this?

"Same as you have been told dozens of times. It's no-one'a fault but your own that you are *still* ignorant of the differences."

You could cure your ignorance, but after so many times being told, it's clear you are incapable of doing so.

These graphs that I've just updated might amuse the two of you...

http://xmetman.wordpress.com/oceans/...a-ice-extents/

There's no doubt that at least in the Arctic, sea ice has been declining steadily.

On Sunday, 6 April 2014 15:11:57 UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:
On Sunday, April 6, 2014 2:44:30 PM UTC+1, Lawrence Jenkins wrote:

On Sunday, 6 April 2014 12:49:45 UTC+1, Lawrence Jenkins wrote:



On Sunday, 6 April 2014 12:43:51 UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:







Same as you have been told dozens of times. It's no-one'a fault but your own that you are *still* ignorant of the differences. shakes head















Maybe you should take the time as you make the sea ice posts , just exactly why record positive beyond standard deviation sea ice in the SH doesn't matter and is in fact a sign of global warming, or so I believe that's what you are saying.















I'm popping now out to get the shopping and expect your reply up and posted by the time I return.















No reply yet?







shakes head don't know why but I shakes head



What, you missed this?



"Same as you have been told dozens of times. It's no-one'a fault but your own that you are *still* ignorant of the differences."



You could cure your ignorance, but after so many times being told, it's clear you are incapable of doing so.



Still no reply.....are you 'avin' a graph?

On Sunday, 6 April 2014 15:37:11 UTC+1, exmetman wrote:
These graphs that I've just updated might amuse the two of you...



http://xmetman.wordpress.com/oceans/...a-ice-extents/



There's no doubt that at least in the Arctic, sea ice has been declining steadily.

Bruce only one hemisphere do you have some sort of bi-polar disorder

On Sunday, April 6, 2014 4:14:22 PM UTC+1, Lawrence Jenkins wrote:
On Sunday, 6 April 2014 15:11:57 UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:

On Sunday, April 6, 2014 2:44:30 PM UTC+1, Lawrence Jenkins wrote:



On Sunday, 6 April 2014 12:49:45 UTC+1, Lawrence Jenkins wrote:







On Sunday, 6 April 2014 12:43:51 UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:















Same as you have been told dozens of times. It's no-one'a fault but your own that you are *still* ignorant of the differences. shakes head































Maybe you should take the time as you make the sea ice posts , just exactly why record positive beyond standard deviation sea ice in the SH doesn't matter and is in fact a sign of global warming, or so I believe that's what you are saying.































I'm popping now out to get the shopping and expect your reply up and posted by the time I return.































No reply yet?















shakes head don't know why but I shakes head







What, you missed this?







"Same as you have been told dozens of times. It's no-one'a fault but your own that you are *still* ignorant of the differences."







You could cure your ignorance, but after so many times being told, it's clear you are incapable of doing so.







Still no reply.....are you 'avin' a graph?

You've had two already and you've been told the reasons for the Arctic/Antarctic differences dozens of times. Someone was kind enough to explain it to you again after the last NSIDC update and there is no way I'm telling you again, as it would have no effect. You'd still continue to think that because Antarctic ice is not reducing, GW can't somehow be happening and therein lies your problem.

And yes, I am having a laugh at your continued ignorance on the subject.