Is the Arctic icecap now larger than in 1971?


Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right or below. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

This story compares a 1971 National Geographic map of the Arctic Ocean and its icecap with modern satellite data, and finds that the icecap is actually significantly larger now.

Take a look. Then come back to read my analysis.

Back? Okay. First, we are presently in the midst of summer in the Arctic, so the icecap shown on the modern map should shrink somewhat this year. Second, it is not clear what time of year the National Geographic map portrays. Is it maximum ice during the winter? Or they average for the year?

These questions however avoid the bigger point here, which is that there doesn’t really appear to be any significant change overall to the Arctic icecap in the past half century. The icecap had seen some major shrinkage during the first decade of the 21st century, but in recent years it has begun recovering. So much for the many past predictions by global warming activists that the Arctic will be ice free in summer because of global warming, by 2008, 2014, or 2018.

Share

10 comments

  • LocalFluff

    I read that a couple of years ago the ice cap of the Antarctic was right on the average since satellite measurements of it began in the 1960s.

    Sweden is of course extreme, here the climate doomsday is the only thing all politicians, bureaucrats, journalists and school teachers talk about. All real problems in society are completely ignored, since a couple of decades everything is always only about the climate doomsday. Industry, agriculture, transports, energy are all severely punished by massive regulation. Every time a factory or a port is closed down all media and all politicians are cheering their success. All city councils focus on sabotaging car traffic with 18 mph speed limits and reconstructing streets to bicycle lanes. The landscape is littered by ugly wind mills (although all electricity comes from nuke and hydro with zero CO2 emissions) and people are freezing indoors at winter because heating is thought to be something very evil. Ditches are being dug as preparation for the deluge, although the land is still raising itself since the ice of the ice age withdrew.

    So it is very hard for everyone to confess that they’ve all been fooled by the climate doomsday fraud and have focused everything in their life on it. CO2 emissions have only had positive effects on wild life since the world is greening thanks to it, and farm land is shrinking thanks to higher productivity. No temperature increase at all for 20 years and growing ice caps and leading climate scientists like Santers now saying that there is no global warming because their models have sever errors in them. People try to ignore that, they are mentally addicted of believing in the climate doomsday no matter what. Politicians like it because they are too incompetent to do anything about any real problems in society and everyone only being focused only on this fraud kind of hides that.

  • LocalFluff

    A real climate conundrum is the faint young Sun paradox. Astrophysicists say that the Sun must’ve been 30% cooler when it was young, but Earth’s geological record doesn’t support that. And in recent years when it has been shown that early Mars also had liquid water, although it is 50% further away, it is compounded.

    Tabby’s star is dimming again, confirmed by two ground telescopes:
    https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41704.0
    I thought there was something wrong with Kepler’s data, maybe a software bug or a joker who changed the data in the archive. But seems to be weird for real. No one has any good suggestions and I’ve even ran out of bad ones. The star is a normal mainstream star more Sun like than most stars. Out of the 150,000 stars Kepler look at, one could’ve been involved in some freak accident during the last billion years. There has to be some unlikely things out there.

    No Doppler shift observed, so it is not wobbling by some planets’s gravity. So rather than transits, it looks more like an internal variability. The dips aren’t formed like transits with flat bottoms anyway. We should be glad that the Sun isn’t behaving like this.

  • Edward

    LocalFluff wrote: “So it is very hard for everyone to confess that they’ve all been fooled by the climate doomsday fraud and have focused everything in their life on it.

    Piltdown Man was hard to disprove, too, and there was far less emotional commitment to it.

  • Cotour

    I listened to this very enthusiastic self proclaimed Global warming / Climate Scientist in an interview the other night. She is apparently the new face of reason and one of the front people for the movement / science.

    Katherine Hayhoe: http://katharinehayhoe.com/wp2016/

    As I remember this is what she said related to climate models. “Climate models are based in science.” (Her point was therefore what the models say are going to happen will in fact happen as the models predict.)

    She also stated that the sea level will rise by “several feet” by the end of the century. ( As I remember a yearly predicted rise of I think it was .15 inches per year would result in 83 remaining years X .15 inches = 12.45 ft. est.)

    Q: How many of the climate models in the past 20 years have been accurate in 1. Predicting global temperature increase and 2. sea level rise ?

  • Cotour: Hayhoe is a full-fledged junk scientists. See this collection of posts from Tony Heller, outlining her many, many, many absurd predictions of disaster, none of which have come true.

    Also, your math is wrong again. (Did you fail algebra? [joke relating to another thread]). 0.15 inches for 83 years equals 12.45 inches, not feet.

  • Cotour

    Yes, to me she came across as the happy face female of the movement, the “How dare you not believe me or doubt me, I am a Climate Scientist!” (And I am a woman). She said she used to be an astro physicist before climbing on the climate change train.

    I was quite amused when she with confidence proclaimed “Climate models are based in science!”. As if to say, do not dare argue with me. As I recalled the massive controversy that surrounds climate modeling and the failure of all of their collective accuracy that I have read about right here every day.

    Funny, yes inches, I would have fallen out of bed if she claimed 12 + feet.

    I said, I played chess and was too distracted by a different kind of “Bra” (and it was not algebra) in my youth :)

  • Judy

    Cotour –

    And here I though that algebra referred to a certain type of lingerie with math equation printed on it! :)

  • wayne

    Cotour/Judy–
    HAR.
    I’m dying to say something…. but I’ll spare everyone.
    -under the amusing apocryphal math factoid anecdote File:
    There’s a short clip (which I can’t find) from one of Dr. Leonard Susskind’s Physics lectures where he explains (off handedly) the origin of “brackets” as used in math equations. You enclose a quantity/variable within a “bra” and a “ket,” 2 separate ‘things,’ which apparently morphed into the modern usage we know as “bracket.”

  • Cotour

    Ah, yes Judy, those alge bras and the individuals that inhabit them still distract me, just not as much now :)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *