From Sunshine Hours:
The IPCC climate models, of which the IPCC has ad-hoc 95% confidence despite being falsified at 98%+ statistical confidence levels, laughably predicted a big decline in Antarctic sea ice, larger than Arctic sea ice.
Oh, and this hockey stick has also recently been discovered:
Ice "Extent" is not very meaningful. It only describes the area of ice in two dimensions. It's just where the ice is... not how much. Ice "Mass" describes the actual amount of ice. The ice mass is declining and that is very meaningful. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/08/140820110538.htmReplyDelete
Extent is in fact quite useful and correlates with surrounding ocean and atmospheric temperatures. The data on ice mass is VERY short term and your conclusions about ice mass debunked here:Delete
There is no doubt extent is greater in Antarctica but that is likely due to ozone depletion (Gillet 2003, Thompson 2002, Turner 2009) and fresh water land-ice melt on saltwater. (Zhang 2007, Bintanga et al. 2013)ReplyDelete
The writer of the article is not in agreement with the referenced papers.They confirm mass loss.
" West Antarctic Ice Sheet and the Antarctic Peninsula, on the far west of the continent, are rapidly losing volume, East Antarctica is gaining volume – though at a moderate rate that doesn’t compensate the losses on the other side of the continent"
"The key element is the activity of humans who, since the beginning of the industrial revolution (around 1750), started to affect the natural environment on global scale:"
The second article's reference Cryosphere.net only recommends a new methodology also indicates mass loss. "The Antarctic Ice Sheet is the largest potential source of future sea-level rise. "Mass loss has been increasing over the last two decades in the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS), but with significant discrepancies between estimates, especially for the Antarctic Peninsula."
"likely due to ozone depletion"Delete
Oh please, why would depletion of a greenhouse gas cause cause record high levels of Antarctic sea ice?
I could care less what the liars from COP19 think
I've read the Cryosphere paper and state the reasons why there is no alarming meltdown of Antarctica here:
data on ice mass is VERY short term and your conclusions about ice mass debunked here:
Believe whatever you like.Delete
Non-annular atmospheric circulation change induced by stratospheric ozone depletion and its role in the recent increase of Antarctic sea ice extent
"Over the time frame February 2003–October 2009, the corresponding ice mass change showed an average value of −100 ± 44 Gt yr−1 (EA: 5 ± 38, WA: −105 ± 22), consistent with other recent estimates in the literature, with regional mass loss mostly concentrated in WA."