As expected a few days ago: October 2008 has seen the fastest Arctic sea ice extent growth ever recorded. According to the data published by IARC-JAXA, the amount of growth has reached 3,481,575 square kilometers for the month, or 112,319 sq km per day on average.
The previous maximum was October 2007, with 3,330,937 sq km for the month and 107,450 sq km per day on average. Record shrinkage remains July 2007, with 2,913,593 sq km lost and 93,987 sq km per day on average.
Growth should be starting levelling off now. November values could be as high as 2,179,844 sq km (2002) or as low as 964,688 sq km (2006).
UPDATE NOV 6: I should have known it. OF COURSE the above is an indication that Climate Change is upon us. Read this comment by Georg Hoffman at Tamino’s:
So I would make the specific prevision that 1) a seasonal cycle will show up in sea ice data and 2) due to 1) the october/november increase and the may/june decrease of seaice will become bigger and faster. I might check that with CMIP model data but I am pretty sure that this is what the model show
Here’s a link for the “CMIP model“. It never ceases to amaze me how elastic AGW theory truly is.
I blame global warming.
Natural cycles….natural cycles….natural cycles….
Quel surprise!
It won’t be for long, once the “New Order” is established in the appropriate scientific quarters, I wonder how long before we read, “satellite errors found to be over-reading sea-ice extent by at least 10%, & under-estimating sea-ice loss by same. US government calls for major overhaul of climate satellites for re-adjustment & re-calibration in order to save planet!”
Let us hope reason prevails & true science will out!
September 2008 Met Office were predicting that UK’s winter would yet again be above average temperatures & be very mild again. Didn’t see that snow coming last month though until the last moment, just after thay suggested that this winter might just be cooler than has been of late. I wonder why?
fat chance, Alan. Read the update above. Somebody’s found a way to justify the October freeze-ups within AGW orthodoxy. Next!
[...] Arctic Sea Ice Extent: In October 2008, Fastest Ever Growth Can you imagine the headlines if the establishment was interested in creating global cooling alarm? __________________ ~Paradox "In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ~ George Orwell Join The Revolution [...]
If we are warming -it’s our fault.
If we are cooling- it’s our fault.
We can’t win either way.
They will continue their drive for a world carbon tax as an excuse to set up world government and corporate globalisation. ..and now with world president Obama -the climate catastrophists are shaking with excitment in anticipation.
Roland – At the moment, I cannot see how Obama can reconcile his politics with catastrophism. It’ll be interesting to see how things evolve.
[...] October 2008 Possibly Set for Record Sea Ice Extent Increase Rate 24 10 2008 UPDATE NOV 10: October 2008 did show the fastest ever growth in sea ice extent [...]
Re: Your Nov. 10 post that October 2008 has seen the fastest Arctic sea ice extent growth ever recorded. On that same date, however, the National Snow and Ice Data Center posted: “At its fastest point on October 15, the 2008 ice growth exceeded the 2007 growth rate….The near-record daily growth rate slowed toward the end of the month and has now fallen below the 2007 growth rate.” Are you looking at the same data? Or measuring in some different way? How can the monthly growth rate be a record if the daily growth rate for the month is not?
October 2008 is set to break all records in the daily rate of increase in sea ice extent in the Arctic, that’s why.
Eddie
I have computed the monthly growths, ie from the first to the last day of the month. If you look at the daily data there is lots of variability (including some suspicious autumnal retreats…). Or perhaps I did not understand your question?
Lol, interesting how the nsidc.org explain this scientifically and in accordance with their models and scientific reality. I knew that someone would try and explain this as a climate change fallacy but nisdc.org have nullified your argument straight away.
the LOL is all mine, Pete. What do we do with a “scientific reality” that is impossible to find at fault? tsk tsk
ou are so right no lie I love this its all so true
[...] Arctic Sea Ice Extent: In October 2008, Fastest Ever Growth [...]
[...] Arctic Sea Ice Extent: In October 2008, Fastest Ever Growth [...]
[...] Arctic Sea Ice Extent: In October 2008, Fastest Ever Growth [...]
[...] Arctic Sea Ice Extent: In October 2008, Fastest Ever Growth [...]
I hate globalization. I hate the new world order.
[...] thick ice conditions! McClatchy seemed to miss a couple of details from the last few weeks like: October 2008, Fastest Ice Growth Ever and 200 Whales trapped in Canadian Artic [...]
[...] glace en Arctique couvrait 30% plus de superficie qu’à la même période l’an passé, une superficie de la taille de l’Allemagne, chose pas vue depuis 1979, certains scientifiques alliés avec le GIEC ont été pris à manipuler [...]
I occasionally have discussions with another actuarial friend of mine who is convinced of AGW theory. To his credit, he’s at least put thought into it and looked at data and all that. I disagree with his conclusions, but we have good discussions.
In my practice I have successfully thrived in my profession with a fairly simple approach to otherwise complex analysis and models: simple and logical gives better overall results than complex and illogical.
I apply this thinking to all these different climate change discussions. There are a lot of stats and models and explanations thrown out to help explain what is going on. But this all adds to complexity and usually is an attempt to fit data into preconceived notions.
Last year, as a I pointed out to him that it makes sense that global temps have been cooling over the last few years at the same time that ice extent in the arctic was decreasing, he threw out all sorts of data and models to argue the point.
My admittedly simple thought on this is that if really warm air cools but is still above the freezing point, then ice will melt. Thus, it will take a little bit to reach that minimum. We know that the Arctic regionally warmed more than the rest of the globe over quite some time. It has been cooling lately, but overall anomalies are still above normal. But it is a regional phenomenon and that looks like it may be coming into balance. Then, when the ice really came back strong and I heard all about how it’s thin, I argued that we could reasonably expect a high melt in 2008, but the ice “season” would be a little longer, it wouldn’t be as much as 2007, and this is all because it will take a few years to unwind all this heat energy. Each year that we see the ice come back in the winter stronger than the year before is an indication that the heat energy is dissipating. 2009 melt will likely be above normal, but probably not as stepp as 2008. All this is really simple, logical, physics and does not take complex models to understand.
The model the commenter discusses at Tamino would have suggested 2008 melt be at least as large as 2007, I believe. 2007 was a huge swing. 2008 will be a large swing, but less than 2007. 2009 will likely be less yet. This is NOT acting according to the models. This is acting exactly as something that has reached its peak and is now trekking down the other side of the mountain. We’re still near the peak and still higher than most of the rest of the mountain which is our recent historical record. It will take years for those who rely on their models to recognize this.
Hey smart alecs – who’s looking silly now eh?
A couple of months on, and it looks like the real scientists are right – you skeptics can’t tell weather from climate. Sure there was a spurt in extent in October – but never mind the width, feel the thickness – that ice is getting thinner every year, and it’s the total mass that counts in the race to total melt-down.
What’s more, the increase in extent has slowed so much that we are now behind where we were at this time last year – with far less total mass.
Down here at the southern end of Earth we are currently frying – there is no doubt that Earth is in deep schmuck, and there is very little hope that you silly opinionated buggers will come on side in time for us to save the planet….
The end is nigh!
The power of democracy: global cooling is directly related to elect more Democrats to U.S. political offices. Man really does control the weather. Wow! I thought it was all hooey. Maybe we can expect the second-coming if we start electing more atheists …
[...] of cooling weather) Al Gore, are seeing their prophecies of doom dissolve. Now that big ice grows, big winter is bad (like last year), cold temperatures hit record levels, and global mean surface [...]
You’re going to upset Al Gore’s apple cart! He will cut your carbon off!
Now that the climate itself cools down, catastrophists predicting death and destruction unless Dem-Libs control every aspect of society are looking more and more like … (unprintable) !
Found this page a little late.
I dont know if you “should have known” but once you are informed you actually could check what the models say. But that would imply a little work and a little thinking of course.
Instead you go on with stupid postings.
With babbelfish you will discover that others did the work for you
http://www.scienceblogs.de/primaklima/2009/06/die-mar-vom-rasend-schnellen-meereiswachsen-und-dem-was-die-modelle-vorhersagen-teil-ii.php
“Run! Run! It’s making reasonable, fact-based arguments!”
Thank you for stopping by, Georg Hoffman. Schuldbewusstsein, anybody? For once, I had left wide open the possibility that your text had to be taken seriously. I added no negative comment to it…what else do you want from me?
Happily though, you are aware of the meaning of “a little thinking”. That will help you understand my point in including your quote, point that I shall expand briefly.
As I said, it never ceases to amaze me how elastic AGW theory truly is. Literally, whatever is observed, one can always find a researcher and a model backing up the connection between the observation and global warming.
I say, if you truly care about your line of work you should make the point of what distinguishes it from the tons of rubbish listed in websites like Numberwatch.
Believe it or not, I am perfectly confident you are very serious about your work. But it is not my problem if your articles have to contend for space among an incredible series of out-of-this-world pro-AGW claims.
Anyway, I will include PrimaKlima in my list of climate blogs. It takes ages to me to type meaningful German phrases, but I should be able to read it.
“I added no negative comment to it…what else do you want from me?” You posted the CMIP site, just check it. It took me 2 hours.