NOAA Continue To Pump Out Arctic Lies
By Paul Homewood
More junk science from the Arctic alarmists at NOAA:
The Arctic Ocean once froze reliably every year. Those days are over.
Arctic sea ice extent has been measured by satellites since the 1970s. And scientists can sample ice cores, permafrost records, and tree rings to make some assumptions about the sea ice extent going back 1,500 years. And when you put that all on a chart, well, it looks a little scary.
In December, NOAA released its latest annual Arctic Report Card, which analyzes the state of the frozen ocean at the top of our world. Overall, it’s not good.
“The Arctic is going through the most unprecedented transition in human history,” Jeremy Mathis, director of NOAA’s Arctic research program, said at a press conference. “This year’s observations confirm that the Arctic shows no signs of returning to the reliably frozen state it was in just a decade ago.”
The report, which you can read in full here, compiles trends that scientists have been seeing for years. The Arctic is warming at twice the rate of the rest of the world. And 2017 saw a new record low for the maximum sea ice extent (i.e., how much of the Arctic ocean freezes in the coldest depths of winter).
That huge drop-off at the end? That’s “the largest magnitude decline in sea ice, and the greatest sustained rate in sea ice decline in that 1,500-year record,” said Emily Osborne, the NOAA scientist who compiled the data for the chart.
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/12/12/16767152/arctic-sea-ice-extent-chart
The chart is supposed to show summer sea ice minima, as described here.
As we know from DMI, sea ice extent has stabilised in summer, and has slightly increased since 2007.
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icecover_30y.uk.php
It has also got considerable thicker in the last decade as well:
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icethickness/thk.uk.php
It is claimed that, “the Arctic is warming at twice the rate of the rest of the world.”
In fact, Arctic temperatures have varied little in the last decade:
Temperatures recently are no higher than in the 1930s and 40s. The cycle we can see is connected with the AMO.
The claim that, the Arctic is warming at twice the rate of the rest of the world, is simply a reflection of the upward part of the cycle. Changes in Arctic temperatures are invariably amplified, either warming faster or cooling faster.
On longer time scales there is nothing at all unusual about Arctic temperatures:
As for the Greenland ice sheet, also touted in the report, nothing unusual is happening:
http://www.dmi.dk/en/groenland/maalinger/greenland-ice-sheet-surface-mass-budget/
The Arctic Report Card comes from NOAA’s Arctic Program, which needs to continue pumping out scary propaganda to keep its funding coming in.
Trackbacks
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
“As for the Greenland ice sheet, also touted in the report, nothing unusual is happening:”
Well it was a bit unusual in 2016-17 when the SMB growth tracked well over 2 std. deviations above the mean or eight months.
Sooner or later the chickens are going to come home to roost for the liars at NOAA.
x 1000.
What will likely happen is that this mass increase will be attributed to… Global warming. Warming means more precipitation, which falls as snow on the Greenland Icecap. And I could actually get behind such an explanation, the summer temperatures up there average about 10 below, so we need 10 celsius warming to melt it, meantime there is more snow.
The problem is they have been and still are saying that the Greenland ice sheet is losing mass when the exact opposite is happening. That is a flat out LIE!
Melting big time:
http://churchillpolarbears.org/2018/02/arctic-weather-brrrrreaking-records/
“Rankin Inlet, Nunavut gets cold in the winter. Located on the northwestern shore of the Hudson Bay at 62 degrees and between Chesterfield Inlet and Arviat, the town is definitely in a remote yet exposed region. Weather is just a part of life and recently the weather has been colder than cold.
Schools in the south get “snow days” though when you get to the 60-degree latitudes school closures are “cold days”…usually accompanied by some snow as well. When temperatures fall to -60C with the windchill or more than just about everyone will stay home and not risk going outside and expose skin. For the past few days, schools have cautiously remained closed.
“I don’t remember the last time we actually closed due to weather. This is a bit of an extreme,” said Mike Osmond, chair of the Rankin Inlet District Education Authority.
Temperatures are getting to –40 C before the windchill and when the winds are factored in, it feels colder than –60 C.
“You’ve got blustery winds with some of the coldest temperatures that people have ever experienced,” said David Phillips, senior climatologist with Environment Canada, adding that his charts say skin freezes in two minutes at –55 C.”
we just don’t get cold like we used to.
now, all we get is global warming cold ‘n’ the experts say it’s getting warmer – just you wait out this ‘global warming cold’, huh then you’ll see said Noaa the idiot lap dog.
They are known as ‘warming holes’ – somewhere the heat has fallen through leaving just the cold bit. Yes, I know, it is drivel but then what about climate science fiction isn’t?
UAH NoPol temps this century… 2015-2017 El Nino the only warming, decaying quickly
It is really quite shameless, 50% agenda led and 50% money led.
And lets not forget that the current level of Arctic sea ice is very much on the high side of normal for the Holocene,
So much so that in the two main areas of expansion Chukchi and towards Iceland, current levels are higher than they have been for some 90-95% of the last 10,000 year.
An oldie, but still a good ‘un:
;-))
“This year’s observations confirm that the Arctic shows no signs of returning to the reliably frozen state it was in just a decade ago.”
But if you take the shaded areas in the graph (which I assume are “error bars”, and take points atr random within those areas (i.e. don’t assume that the actual data follows the shape given), then the arctic ice is in constant transition.
For example, around 600, if the top of the error shading is right and then soon after the bottom of the error shading is right, there is a massive fall. These people don’t seem to understand their own graphs.
“…the reliable frozen state…”
This ugly phrase strikes one as the sort of blundering precis a not-very-bright student, who is late with his home-work assignment, makes of his incomprehensible textbook, in the twenty minutes which the school-bus takes to go from his house to the day-time scholastic prison.
Been there, done that, only in my case it was a jolting train. “Pray tell me David why, when I give you ten sentences to translate from English to German, you never manage more than four and a half – deformed – scratches…?” “‘Cos I have to do my maths at the same time.”
By the way, here are two iron laws of “climate science.”
Data from the past which does not support the current orthodoxy was incompetently gathered or analyzed.
The science is always settled; except when a still more frightening scenario can be written.
Where is lovely Kate Humble in her fur-lined parka when you need her?
Keeping a polar warm and well fed?
Once again, more scary climate stuff but no discussion, mention nor recommendation as to what “we” can do about it. Perhaps they know the answers is NOTHING meaningful.
The NOAA chart is actually not from NOAA. Is is a reproduction of Kinnard et. al. 2011 in Nature 479: 509-512. Patwalled, but the abstract suffices to show junk science. Kinnard ised circumpolar TERRESTIAL temp proxies (tree rings, lake varves) to guesstimate sea ice extent. No sea ice proxies at all. To which garbage the satellite era actual extents were incorrectly appended on a faux y axis scale. Worse than Mann’s hockey stick.
“I suggest you adopt our old mate’s Nature trick of adding in the actual measurements after 1979 to exaggerate the decline.”
&
“No-one to my knowledge has ever spliced satellite measurements of sea-ice cover onto a graph of low resolution sea-ice proxies.”
A bit economic with la verite to says we have satellite data since the 70s when it is 1979 and closer to just the 80s.
Donald has plenty to work on for the next 3 years and for the 4 after that.
Sorry you are wrong the data started in the early 70s and used to be shown by the IPCC, but it did not tell the correct story, so they dropped the first 8 years.
Go to this video by Tony Heller and look at about 7 minutes.
AC – Many people have seen the graph of pre 1979 ice in the IPCC-FAR report
Figure 7.20: (a) Northern Hemisphere, and (b) Southern
Hemisphere sea-ice extent anomalies. Data from NOAA (USA).
Did you know it came with a discussion?
7.8.2 Sea-ice Extent and Thickness
Especially importantly, satellite observations have been used to map sea-ice extent routinely since the early 1970s. The American Navy Joint Ice Center has produced weekly charts which have been digitised by NOAA. These data are summarized in Figure 7.20 which is based on analyses carried out on a 1° latitude x 2.5° longitude grid. Sea-ice is defined to be present when its concentration exceeds 10% (Ropelewski, 1983). Since about 1976 the areal extent of sea-ice in the Northern Hemisphere has varied about a constant climatological level but in 1972-1975 sea-ice extent was significantly less.
So from IPCC, starting at a high point on the left side of the chart falsifies the slope.
OT but interesting.
Joe Bastardi and the guys at Weatherbell are saying March is going to be colder and wetter than average and both the US and European models now agree. But what Joe is saying is that the weather patterns forecast for March this year are pretty much identical to those that occurred in March of 1962. In early March of 1962 the mid Atlantic states suffered the worst winter storm to hit there during that century. It was a dozy, as bad as a major hurricane strike. This was back when the atmospheric CO2 level was at 320 ppm.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ash_Wednesday_Storm_of_1962
You know that if something like that storm hits in March (or any other time) that the ambulance chasers will be out in force AFTER THE FACT blaming it on “climate change” and so now you know that the repeat of the very conditions that led to that storm have already been forecast by legitimate meteorologists.
My concern is that it’s only a short hop from propagandising to believing your own propoganda, then to outright fraud in order to maintain it, especially when you have a ‘free pass’ from the government and media. For an agency with a monopoly on data collection and presentation, who also seem comfortable publically making unsubstantiated assertions, this would seem to be more a likelihood than a possibility.
And more a near-certainty than a likelihood, given NOAA’s previous form…
Whistleblower reports data tampering at NOAA
http://www.cfact.org/2017/02/07/29373/
“Likelihood”
The above post thread is confirmation of egregious tampering and fixing.
Here’s their graph of Arctic temp anomaly – SAT – http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/Portals/7/EasyGalleryImages/8/373/overland-Fig1.png
A few years ago after the New Orleans Hurricane the NOAA announced that there would be many more hurricanes to follow!!! That event has yet to occur! The NOAA only has an agenda.for Global warming. The NOAA is full of bull manure! Jim Mueller
Isn’t it convenient that all this warming is in the Arctic where there are practically no people to contradict what is claimed by the climate scientists and their media toadies?