Northwest Passage choked with ice

I though that place was supposed to be ice free every summer . Last winter has had a real effect on the northern hemisphere. I wonder if this winter will be just as long and cold?

I hope it isn't as wet. Ottawa had over 200mms of rain in July. We get that kind of precipitation during the winter and it will mean a lot of shoveling.

Maybe the ice-free summers of 2007 & 2008 were the exception and not the new rule, as opposed to what the global warming bed-wetters want everyone to believe.

I think I can explain it to you, but you have to understand this is an explanation from a global warming skeptic, so it's most likely biased. No apologies. Most of this stuff is from one side, or the other. You must choose what you find makes most sense to you.

There is no such thing as an ice-free summer to this point on the satellite record (about 30 years). The Gore brigade predicts the coming of such phenomena soon. If the're as accurate with that prediction as they have been with all their others, don't be packing your swimwear for a summer trip to Northern Greenland.

Here's a graph of sea ice extent.



See that red line? That's us, more or less right now in 2009. The gold line is 2008. This year when you see the red line dip below the gold line you'll hear a bunch of hysterical mainstream articles about the melting arctic. That's where the confusion comes in, and why you think there's an ice-free arctic right now.

Really though, all the fuss is about what happens from mid-august to mid-september.

You see the the light green line that dips down towards the bottom in September? That's 2007. That's the bad guy. That was a record low for the satellite record (about 30 years). Last year a little ice came back, but not so much you can make a point.

Curiously enough most of the ice that goes during this latter period of the melt season is a result of winds, currents, and such, not warm temperatures. Last year you'll notice there was lots of ice, until the beginning of August. There was a major storm in the arctic. It broke up the ice, and sent it south to melt.

OK back to the red line. You see how it's dipped below the gold 2008 line for the present. If that line continues down between 2008, and 2007, you'll see a hair-pulling frenzy of melting arctic stories in the media. If it swings over, and finishes between 2008 and 2005, you'll hear crickets.

Now me I'm predicting the latter. Apparently what's happened this year is winds have pushed north, compacting the ice. I think maybe there's more ice up there than what you saw last year, you just don't see it on the graph. It's calculated somewhere, I just can't remember where. I could be wrong.

If you want to follow this graph, it's updated daily.

http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/ext ... Extent.png

Thanks for the analogy and the link, I'll keep my eye on it and will be listening for the crickets!

I, for one, am glad to see that the passage is choked and shipping made impassable. Gives us more time to Canadian ice-breakers up there patrolling OUR waters.

Looks like we might still be hearing a symphony of crickets!

Hell it will take 15 yrs to build our ice breakers, and by then the will be as obsolete as our Subs

I think you mean Slush crushers, since because of climate change and financial restraints Canada no longer requires real Ice Breakers.

Sorta like the real safe subs we got .

Actually start listening for them right about now.

This next week is the one that matters. You notice how the 2009 line is now starting to level between 2008, and 2005? It's starting to look like that's the way this year's arctic melt is going to finish.

So what that means is there was a record low of sea ice extent in 2007 for the 30 year satellite record. Since that time the sea ice in the arctic has seen more ice each year. The arctic ice pack is growing.

They can no longer talk about steadily diminishing arctic sea ice extent, because that's not what's happening. The ice is increasing. And I'm pretty sure, yes, that means thickness as well.

After 2007, they were talking about perennial ice, and saying that was what mattered. Perennial ice is the ice that remains at the end of the season, and lasts the year. In 2008 though the perennial ice started to return, so in 2009, at the beginning of this melt they were talking about multi-year ice, and saying that was the ice that mattered. Next year there will be more multi-year ice. So what sort of ice will they be telling us is the ice that matters next year? I think they've run out of ice types, and with them the the last bit of real-world support for the idea of a dangerously warming earth.

BTW, here's a link to a story posted here on Aug. 9.

http://www.canadaka.net/link.php?id=47637

Enjoy. That was the last time they'll ever get away with suggesting that sort of fraudulent bullshit.

You can thank the previous government for the second hand subs. A stellar procurement.

Amazing what one cold winter can do to sea ice, one more cold one and everything could be back to normal.

There's something I forgot to equate though. The Copenhagen conference, sometimes called Kyoto II, is coming up. This pretty much insures an influx of preposterous claims from the mainstream media. Among them will be continued claims of a melting arctic. They will simply rely on reader, or viewer ignorance, and reluctance to double-check the claims. Why not? It's worked in the past.