http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png

http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries_thumb.png

'The daily sea ice extent images are sporadically displaying erroneous data. NSIDC is investigating with our satellite data providers.'

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2016/04/a-problem-with-the-f17-dmsp-satellite/

Yeh, some article was saying the instruments were supposedly past their use by date years ago!

The numbers did seem curiously low....

The main problem I see with sea ice is the chunks are too big to fit in your whisky glass.

Welcome to the Environment board, Bogie. Have a drink:

Wild cherry picking brandy with melting Arctic ice.
I offer it to all climate change deniers. I'm not saying that you fit the bill in that respect, or otherwise, but it helps cool people down in this time of rising global temperatures. 

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/474x/e2/09/19/e20919f46e362b55ec5e11d28d3ecc7a.jpg[/quote]

lee wrote on Apr 12^th, 2016 at 1:25pm:

'The daily sea ice extent images are sporadically displaying erroneous data. NSIDC is investigating with our satellite data providers.'

Of course there are checks and balances that indicate when the images sporadically play up.  It just means that they occasionally have to repeat runs until the check sums are correct. It doesn't affect the integrity of the data (if that's what you are quietly alluding to).

John_Taverner wrote on Apr 13^th, 2016 at 3:05pm:

lee wrote on Apr 12th, 2016 at 1:25pm: 'The daily sea ice extent images are sporadically displaying erroneous data. NSIDC is investigating with our satellite data providers.' Of course there are checks and balances that indicate when the images sporadically play up.  It just means that they occasionally have to repeat runs until the check sums are correct. It doesn't affect the integrity of the data (if that's what you are quietly alluding to).

John. you really are too paranoid. I merely passed on an interesting tit bit. It also appears to be affecting BoM.

You know - like the girl who went up to a man's apartment for a midnight snack.

lee wrote on Apr 13^th, 2016 at 3:20pm:

John. you really are too paranoid. I merely passed on an interesting tit bit. It also appears to be affecting BoM. .

Of course you did. I was just adding my slant to that interesting tit bit.

Relax, I would never accuse you of trying to cast doubt on climate data.


Quote:

Please note that our daily sea ice images, derived from microwave measurements, may show spurious pixels in areas where sea ice may not be present. These artifacts are generally caused by coastline effects, or less commonly by severe weather.

and

Quote:

Isolated areas of missing data occasionally occur in near-real-time sea ice data. The daily extent map shows any areas of missing data as dark gray regions, speckles, or spider web patterns. However, in the time series chart we account for the missing data by averaging the extent for that region from the day before and the day after the gap, a mathematical technique called interpolation. Interpolation is an appropriate approach because ice cover changes slowly.

bogarde73 wrote on Apr 13^th, 2016 at 2:39pm:

The main problem I see with sea ice is the chunks are too big to fit in your whisky glass.

Possibly too salty aswell!

John_Taverner wrote on Apr 13^th, 2016 at 2:57pm:

Welcome to the Environment board, Bogie. Have a drink: Wild cherry picking brandy with melting Arctic ice. I offer it to all climate change deniers. I'm not saying that you fit the bill in that respect, or otherwise, but it helps cool people down in this time of rising global temperatures.  https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/474x/e2/09/19/e20919f46e362b55ec5e11d28d3ecc7a.jpg

[/quote]
How salty is it seems to be the question?

What I like are the IPCC reconstructions of Arctic ice since 1900.

https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/unfccc/sbsta40/SB40_research_dialogue_hezel_wgI.pdf

Pretty flat out to 1980.

Makes you wonder how those lost bombers in Greenland got to be 260 feet down in the ice. Of course it is only sea ice, Greenland may be an anomaly.

Or

Maybe the hot engines melted all that ice.

lee wrote on Apr 14^th, 2016 at 12:53pm:

Makes you wonder how those lost bombers in Greenland got to be 260 feet down in the ice.

Not really, considering that the Greenland Ice sheet receives about a metre of snow every year. If you knew how glaciers work you would realise that objects can still get buried in retreating glaciers.

Or is this just another of your rather gutlessly cryptic attempts to throw a bit of doubt around hoping that some of it might stick.

Why has Greenland's MELT SEASON commenced 6 weeks early this year?

Gee this Min Ice Age phenomena is very confusing isnt it ladies and gentlemen

Perhaps lee and his partner jethro need to submit joint apologies and implement self ban periods of the order of 3 to 4 months

Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 15^th, 2016 at 2:23am:

Why has Greenland's MELT SEASON commenced 6 weeks early this year? Gee this Min Ice Age phenomena is very confusing isnt it ladies and gentlemen Perhaps lee and his partner jethro need to submit joint apologies and implement self ban periods of the order of 3 to 4 months

So the extent of sea ice is normal -

no apology required there.

( Antarctica is showing a lot of extra sea ice. )

Bobby. wrote on Apr 15^th, 2016 at 7:15am:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 15th, 2016 at 2:23am: Why has Greenland's MELT SEASON commenced 6 weeks early this year? Gee this Min Ice Age phenomena is very confusing isnt it ladies and gentlemen Perhaps lee and his partner jethro need to submit joint apologies and implement self ban periods of the order of 3 to 4 months So the extent of sea ice is normal - no apology required there. ( Antarctica is showing a lot of extra sea ice. )

Would you expect the Greenland MELT season to commence 6 weeks early during a Mini Freak Ice Age?

Mr Sir Bobby, according to my records your written apology  61B/1 is in arrears

John_Taverner wrote on Apr 14^th, 2016 at 8:20am:

lee wrote on Apr 13th, 2016 at 3:20pm: John. you really are too paranoid. I merely passed on an interesting tit bit. It also appears to be affecting BoM. . Of course you did. I was just adding my slant to that interesting tit bit. Relax, I would never accuse you of trying to cast doubt on climate data. Quote: Please note that our daily sea ice images, derived from microwave measurements, may show spurious pixels in areas where sea ice may not be present. These artifacts are generally caused by coastline effects, or less commonly by severe weather. and [quote] Isolated areas of missing data occasionally occur in near-real-time sea ice data. The daily extent map shows any areas of missing data as dark gray regions, speckles, or spider web patterns. However, in the time series chart we account for the missing data by averaging the extent for that region from the day before and the day after the gap, a mathematical technique called interpolation. Interpolation is an appropriate approach because ice cover changes slowly.

[/quote]


Very good John.

'The  terminology  related  to  the  aerial  coverage  of  sea  ice  is  closely  linked  to  the observational techniques. Satellite remote  sensing  algorithms  yield  the  fraction  of  the ocean  surface  covered  by  sea  ice  in  a  pixel  of  a  certain  size  (the  size  depends  on  the remote sensing instrument). Sea ice concentration (SIC) is defined as the fraction  covered by sea ice, and sea ice extent is defined as the cumulative area of all  pixels having at least 10%  or 15% SIC. The  threshold  of  10% (World  Meteorological  Organization,  1970) originates  from  pre-satellite  era,  when  the  concentration  was  estimated  for  the  area covered  by visual  observations.  The  15%  threshold  is  commonly  applied  by  the  remote sensing  community  and,  among  others,  the  U.S.  National  Snow  and  Ice  Data  Center (Parkinson and Cavalieri, 2008). Sea ice area is the cumulative sum of the product of the pixel ice  concentration  and pixel area  for  all pixels having  at  least  15% (or  10%) ice concentration.

http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/future/bib/Vihma_accepted_in_Surv_Geophys.pdf

You disagree?

Bobby. wrote on Apr 15^th, 2016 at 7:15am:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 15th, 2016 at 2:23am: Why has Greenland's MELT SEASON commenced 6 weeks early this year? Gee this Min Ice Age phenomena is very confusing isnt it ladies and gentlemen Perhaps lee and his partner jethro need to submit joint apologies and implement self ban periods of the order of 3 to 4 months So the extent of sea ice is normal - no apology required there. ( Antarctica is showing a lot of extra sea ice. )

The arctic is showing false data!

The Antarctic is doing super weird stuff!

So you cut and pasted something that you don't understand, and ask me if I agree with it?

Here's something that you should understand. It's a picture. 

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/WorldOfChange/images/sea_ice/npseaice_woc_201603.jpg

While you're fretting over small detail in the hope of introducing more confusion, ships are sailing from Asia to Europe via the Arctic.

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/10/27/asia-pacific/cosco-announces-arctic-shipping-route-europe/#.VxBSwrJ97PU

Now what was your point?

http://d1udmfvw0p7cd2.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/f-china-arctic-a-20151028.jpg

The_Barnacle wrote on Apr 14^th, 2016 at 10:21pm:

Not really, considering that the Greenland Ice sheet receives about a metre of snow every year. If you knew how glaciers work you would realise that objects can still get buried in retreating glaciers.

So since 1942 70 metres. Minus Greenland melt. Plus any compaction due to bombers pancaking, (no sign of plane breakup).

According to reports signs of Roman mines, old villages are exposed by retreating glaciers.

'State-owned industry giant COSCO has only twice sent a vessel through the Northeast Passage, once in 2013 and again this year.'

From your link.

http://d1udmfvw0p7cd2.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/f-china-arctic-a-20151028.jpg

The picture must have been taken from the accompanying ice-breaker not mentioned in the story.

So what was your point?

BTW lovely pictures of two diametrically opposed points in time.

You do realise the size of the pixels does matter?

lee wrote on Apr 15^th, 2016 at 3:42pm:

The_Barnacle wrote on Apr 14th, 2016 at 10:21pm: Not really, considering that the Greenland Ice sheet receives about a metre of snow every year. If you knew how glaciers work you would realise that objects can still get buried in retreating glaciers. So since 1942 70 metres. Minus Greenland melt. Plus any compaction due to bombers pancaking, (no sign of plane breakup). According to reports signs of Roman mines, old villages are exposed by retreating glaciers.

Buddy, do you work in a Perth accounting firm?

;D ;D ;D

lee wrote on Apr 15^th, 2016 at 3:46pm:

'State-owned industry giant COSCO has only twice sent a vessel through the Northeast Passage, once in 2013 and again this year.'

Yes. It has been possible this decade for the first time in recorded history.

Lee, why don't you join the excellent Flat Earth Thread. It_is_the_light plays the game of disinformation much better than you. You might pick up some tips.


Quote:

BTW lovely pictures of two diametrically opposed points in time.

Seasons. You know? Like Summer and Winter.

John_Taverner wrote on Apr 15^th, 2016 at 5:49pm:

Yes. It has been possible this decade for the first time in recorded history.

What marks recorded history for the North polar route?'

'The Portuguese navigator David Melgueiro - according to some sources - would have made the first Northeast Passage complete crossing, from east to west, in 1660. The first confirmed complete passage, from west to east, was made by the Finnish-Swedish explorer Adolf Erik Nordenskiöld, in 1878.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northeast_Passage

Only wiki, I know.

'Adolf Erik Nordenskiöld became a world famous, legendary figure when he succeeded in sailing from Europe to Asia in 1878 - 1879 aboard the Vega by the northern route, the 'North-east Passage'. '

http://www.kansallisbiografia.fi/english/?id=3569

Professor your such an alarmist shmuck that always wants to get lost in the details, diverting attention away from the bottom line.

There is nothing unusual about the Arctic ice shrinking and increasing looks like its been happening for years.

You know Greenland....??

September 1957 - arctic decreases by 40%
http://i41.tinypic.com/2w6yrlg.jpg

May 1947 - arctic melting
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/22429983?searchTerm=climate%20change&searchLimits=

November 1922 - arctic melting
http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/mwr/050/mwr-050-11-0589a.pdf

Breaking news this morning revealed that 93% of the Great Barrier Reef is already affected by coral bleaching.
http://riaus.tv/videos/reef-bleaching

surely Professor Justin Marshall doesn't know and understand more than the great supreme lee?

Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 20^th, 2016 at 10:56pm:

Breaking news this morning revealed that 93% of the Great Barrier Reef is already affected by coral bleaching. http://riaus.tv/videos/reef-bleaching surely Professor Justin Marshall doesn't know and understand more than the great supreme lee?

You mean the bloke who works with John Cook of Skeptical Science "fame"? :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

I guess you missed these headlines, right next to Greenland. Record-busting spring snowstorm in Newfoundland and Newfoundland blindsided by blizzard

globalnews.ca/video/2652286/newfoundland-battered-by-storm-record-snowfall/

thetelegram.com/News/Local/2016-04-21/article-4504269/April-snowstorm-in-St.-Johns-metro-breaks-record-set-in-1955/1

If you look at DMI real time ice monitoring stations across Greenland over the 12 month period, you will find this year is on the high side of the 1990-2013 base line average.

2015 also blew away ice record growth. El Nino ends and La Nina begins later this year.

beta.dmi.dk/en/groenland/maalinger/greenland-ice-sheet-surface-mass-budget/

lee wrote on Apr 20^th, 2016 at 11:00pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 20th, 2016 at 10:56pm: Breaking news this morning revealed that 93% of the Great Barrier Reef is already affected by coral bleaching. http://riaus.tv/videos/reef-bleaching surely Professor Justin Marshall doesn't know and understand more than the great supreme lee? You mean the bloke who works with John Cook of Skeptical Science "fame"? :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

you may need to apologise to Professor Marshall personally and follow that up with a documented written apology to him and his family.

lee, is there a limit to your public issuance of deceit and hatred for the worlds children?

Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 25^th, 2016 at 12:20am:

you may need to apologise to Professor Marshall personally and follow that up with a documented written apology to him and his family.

Really> Why may I need to?

ADAPT2030 wrote on Apr 25^th, 2016 at 12:15am:

If you look at DMI real time ice monitoring stations across Greenland over the 12 month period, you will find this year is on the high side of the 1990-2013 base line average. 2015 also blew away ice record growth. El Nino ends and La Nina begins later this year. beta.dmi.dk/en/groenland/maalinger/greenland-ice-sheet-surface-mass-budget/

Is that confirmed?