Saturday, April 9, 2011

Thick Arctic Ice increasing for 3 years per NSIDC, $cientific American has access to same data but says the OPPO$ITE

4/8/11, "Scientific American vs NSIDC," Real Science, S. Goddard

4/7/11, "Government Shutdown Would Put Arctic Study on Ice," Scientific American

"Over the past several years, the proportion of older, thicker Arctic sea ice has fallen, leaving polar waters dominated by thinner ice* that forms in the fall and melts in the summer."...(last paragraph, page 1) (*see end of this post re "thin ice")

  • Following is NSIDC actual ice chart and data:


4/5/11, "Ice extent low at start of melt season; ice age increases over last year," NSIDC

"New data on ice age shows that the amount of older, thicker ice has increased slightly over last year."...(item in first paragraph, but it's actually increased for 3 years per NSIDC chart below, 'Figure 5' near bottom of page on NSIDC site). "Older ice has been increasing for the last three years. Apparently SA lacks access to the Internet"


*Regarding 'thin ice'

*Researchers found they were mistaken in believing 'thin ice' would melt more easily, as in SA article item above. This notion about thin ice has been proven false according to NSID (citation below). There is so much money at stake that apparently some people want the facts kept quiet.

Arctic Sea ice maintains 30 year level, Arctic Research Center

  • "Thirty years of sea ice data. The record begins at 1979, the year satellite observations began (Source: Arctic Research Center, University of Illinois)"

"Why were predictions so wrong? Researchers had expected the newer sea ice,

  • which is thinner, to be less resilient and melt easier.
Instead, the thinner ice had less snow cover to insulate it from the bitterly cold air,

1/1/09, "Sea Ice ends year at same level as 1979,"

"Rapid growth spurt leaves amount of ice at levels seen 29 years ago," Daily Tech, M. Asher

P.S. The Scientific American article title expresses concern about a "government shutdown." This topic is only in the news because Obama chose not to pass a budget in October 2010 when he had majorities in both the House (overwhelmingly) and the Senate. Did Scientific American wonder then why the American people were treated so cavalierly while their country was in such crisis?



via Tom Nelson

No comments: