1. According to data available at the link below:
10/14/08 Arctic sea ice extent: 6.987 million sq. km.
10/14/07 Arctic sea ice extent: 5.488 million sq. km.
IJIS Web Site
2. The alarmists/fraudsters at the National Snow and Ice Data Center seem strangely uninterested in pointing out this ice growth.
3. Note what NSIDC had to say as of 5/5/08
10/14/08 Arctic sea ice extent: 6.987 million sq. km.
10/14/07 Arctic sea ice extent: 5.488 million sq. km.
IJIS Web Site
2. The alarmists/fraudsters at the National Snow and Ice Data Center seem strangely uninterested in pointing out this ice growth.
3. Note what NSIDC had to say as of 5/5/08
As discussed in our April analysis, the ice cover this spring shows an unusually large proportion of young, thin first-year ice; about 30% of first-year ice typically survives the summer melt season, while 75% of the older ice survives. For a simple estimate of the likelihood of breaking last year's September record, we can apply survival rates from past years to this year's April ice cover. This gives us 25 different estimates, one for each year that we have reliable ice-age data (see Figure 4). To avoid beating the September 2007 record low, more than 50% of this year’s first-year ice would have to survive; this has only happened once in the last 25 years, in 1996. If we apply the survival rates averaged over all years to current conditions, the end-of-summer extent would be 3.59 million square kilometers (1.39 million square miles). With survival rates similar to those in 2007, the minimum for the 2008 season would be only 2.22 million square kilometers (0.86 million square miles). By comparison the record low extent, set last September, was 4.28 million square kilometers (1.65 million square miles).
3 comments:
When it comes to ice, because this is a leap year, you may need to compare october 13, 2008 with october 14th 2007.
To be more exact it would be necessary to compare 2007-10-14 12:00:00 with 2008-10-13 18:00:00. The results would be very similar, imho.
Everyone who thinks this is any evidence to counter AGW needs to figure out the difference between weather and climate.
Post a Comment