Hate to call the bull, but the stats show 1979 to 2000 when the 70's slight cooling trend caused an ice age panic. So would the ice be melting? YESS!!

Are we slightly warming up? Yes, as part of the natural cycle.

Is is caused by my car? NO, not just no HECK NO!

There is a curious debate on this topic at TalkClimateChange, with the global warming denialists conviced that arctic ice is always shriking and expanding (amongst other arguments) despite this very alarming news. See here:

http://talkclimatechange.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=109&start=0&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

So the Northwest Passage was open for what, a week? Gee, what are the chances this happened previously and there simply wasn't an intrepid explorer around to observe it?

Brett, it sounds as if we need a post on why the Antarctic trend is not climatologically significant. For starters, we can observe that the Antarctic sea ice largely disappears each summer, but that this has no lingering impact on the adjacent ice sheets. The present decline of the Arctic sea ice, OTOH, is closely linked to increased melt of the Greenland ice sheet. Ironically, it is the latter that might pose the greatest threat to the West Antarctic ice sheet (this is the part that's grounded below sea level) by providing an initial destabilizing pulse of sea level rise.

In the last century or two, Tom? Pretty slim. There are settlements up there. Also, the passage was completely open for more like a month, which is a lot considering that there's no record of it ever being open to that extent.

There was no ice age panic, Jeff. There were a few speculative news stories. See here (and follow the links) for a thorough exposition.

We have to close our new pool this weekend up here in NH :(

We bought it in order to CELEBRATE the earth getting warmer. Guess we botched that one.

I was thinking of continuing the celebration next year by investing in and planting numerous coconut and pineapple trees. Mmmm, fresh pina coladas as I drift away. Can't wait. But first, in order to make room and ensure year round pool fun, I have to go clear cut and burn those pesky, anti-global warming conifers.

I'm kidding, take it easy. On a serious note, have you hugged your tree today? That love really helps them grow faster, even more than the warming itself.

Happy weekend. Pats 34, Bills 9.

There are well known issues with the use of passive microwave to try and assess areal extent. The biggest issues are in the summer, when a combination of geometry, surface melt ponds and atmospheric conditions conspire to cause underreporting in areas where concentration is between 15 and 70%. Naturally, those processing the raw data will apply "adjustments" in an attempt to correct for this. Interestingly, at NSIDC and Cryosphere Today, some sort of change in the adjustment algorithm seems to have been applied, without any sort of detailed explanation, earlier this calendar year.

Yet another thing in need of deep auditing.

It's never enough for GW deniers! When will you realise we have a problem? When? After the whole North Pole melts? After the first year with no snow in Moscow? After a Cat-5 hurricane makes landfall in California or any other unusual place?

It's never enough for you... If the NW passage is ice-free, it doesn't matter, as long as it's 0.001 degree cooler than average in New York. Hey, who cares if the snow at Mt. Kilimanjaro is melting? It was gloomy and cool in London last week... or hey, GW can't be happening, beacuse it snowed in Buenos Aires after 80 years. Meanwhile, all glaciers are melting, but this can't prove GW, as long as it's relatively cool where I live.

I believe GW is a problem... and i'm not saying "the sky is falling, we're all going to die today" but I think we should do somethnig. What to do first? Well, first of all, stop denying all the evidence presented everywhere on planet Earth; that's the first step.

The present decline of the Arctic sea ice, OTOH, is closely linked to increased melt of the Greenland ice sheet

Nice try, Steve Bloom. Greenland sea ice has been close to normal most of the summer. The melt is from the other side of the Arctic.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/recent365.anom.region.5.html

Recent studies have shown that up to 94% of the arctic warm up is due to soot.
http://www.physorg.com/news100354399.html

The extent of sea ice melting in the arctic this summer was very significant and remarkable in that not only was the 2005 record broken, but it was broken by such a great extent.

The differance in Antarctica on the other hand is barely discernable and could easily be within the amount of error for the measurement. In other words, not statistically significant.

From what I have read, what is happening in the Arctic is also exceeding the amount of melting predicted by most or possibly all climate models in the IPCC report. The prime suspect for this are ocean currents. It appears that warm currents from the north pacific are entering the arctic ocean and providing the warmth to melt the ice. I do not believe it is clear right now if those currents are getting stronger or if the amount of ice forming during the winter is so thin that it simply melts quicker.

Anyhow, we are in the midst of a tipping point for the arctic. Climate models have long predicted that as greenhouse warming takes hold, the arctic will warm faster than the rest of the world. This is referred to as arctic amplification.

Not a reason for panic, but a signal that the pace of change is quickening.

As a society, we would do well to anticipitate these changes in order to minimize the negatives and take advantage of the positives. For example, Russia and Canada will likely have large areas of land that will gain in agricultural productivity within the next 20 years.

Rich,

If you need any palms for next year to go with your pool in NH I've got 'em. What would you like? Coconuts, the most economically important crop in the tropical and subtropical climates, African oil palms so you can make your own biodiesel and trans free cooking oils, or peach palms which produces a peach flavored fruit and provides sustainable heart of palm for central and south American people?

Bring on the warming. It'll be the most exciting and productive years of the human race and for all of Earth's creatures! Remember it's the COLD that kills! And most importantly to remember... Have fun here on the forum. It's discussion that leads to discovery, not the UN.

BTW Oiz. I AM the MAN!

Ice melt is clearly a bad thing. Please bring back the good old days when Canada, New York, Detroit, Chicago and Boston were under 5,000 feet of ice.
http://www.iceagenow.com/Extent_of_Glaciation-1.jpg

It was all that mammoth flatulence that ruined the fun.

Steve Bloom - so you can supply us with the detailed observations of the natives over the past two centuries?

I trust your knowledge in this area is greater than your knowledge concerning environmental tobacco smoke.

Interesting, something is causing the artic to melt and the antartic to freeze?

South cooling + north warming x 2= scnw2/ AGW= AGSCN + cly - agn= SCCLY + E = ESCCLY then unscramble= CYCLES.

Cycle is my best guess, but come on. We are dealing with 27? years of records here. That's not enough time, not at all. I don't care what anyone says. Someone once showed me a chart of artic sea ice in the past 100 years but at the bottom it said that only 27 years were observed and the rest was calculated by computer. The computer does what you want, nothing more, nothing less. That chart was useless to me, just like 16 days out on the GFS. (which is a much shorter time interval, by a little less than 73 years)

Sorry to stray off topic, but evidence is mounting that global warming enhances cyclone's damaging winds and flooding rains.

Here is a good article from Scientific American on the subject.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=1&articleID=26648CBA-E7F2-99DF-3CB0746D5B44B707

In 2007 the tropical storm season has been fairly normal in many respects. Only 3 hurricanes have been recorded (versus average 3 to 4) but two were category 5 storms, and that is highly unusual. Forecasts of hurricane activity by NOAA and Bill Gray continue to forecast substantially above normal activity in the Atlantic.

Observing the events thus far, the incredibly intense convective activity in the Indian Ocean from May to July was an important and totally overlooked factor. The subsequent heavy rains and flooding in India and China were no doubt related. The fact that Atlantic hurricane activity is influenced by events in the Indian Ocean seems to be overlooked by the hurricane forecasters.

A recent news report in the Press Register outlines some sources of confusion related to just how well the past record is known. It cites work by Landsea that relied on numbers of land-falling storms as a way to calibrate the Atlantic hurricane record, and which concluded that there may be an undercount of 3.2 storms per year prior to 1966. The most recent Eos Transactions has two articles that follow up and point out why use of land-falling storms is misleading [Holland 2007; Eos 88 (36) 348-349] and that the conclusions of increased activity do not change anyway [Mann et al., 2007; Eos 88 (36) 349-350].

The Holland article points out that there are good reasons why the fraction of storms making landfall should change, both because of natural variations and especially if the climate changes. The Mann et al. article adopts the Landsea-suggested changes for the past as a what if test and goes on to show that even a substantial underestimate of early 20th century storms does not change the significance of the increase in activity since 1994. Nor does it change the strong relationship with observed sea surface temperatures (SSTs) in the region; the SSTs have a much more reliable observational record and have clearly increased.

http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/

How long have sea ice records been kept? Climate change is going on and will go on despite man being here or not. Polar bears survived the last warming and will survive this one, however little it is. .7 degrees in 100 years isn't much.
Dave P

Reply: These records which are based on satellite imagery are about 30 years old.

Emiliano,

The earth has been warm before without us contributing, yet it's still alive with life, chugging along, not missing a beat.

The warmer the greenhouse, the more green and lush is the life. Look inside an actual greenhouse. Vibrant! Warmth is the key to that greenhouse. The earth is our greenhouse.

The earth doesn't need to be saved. Wasting trillions of dollars to "save the earth" will be the biggest fleecing of global economics in the long and not so fragile history of the earth. I can here you now, "we would be investing in earth, that is a great cause!"

Well, compare it to digging a big hole in the ground. Take your wallet, drop it in and fill it back up with dirt. Feel better? Good for you. But the earth doesn't care. It will breakdown and recycle your wallet and turn it into energy to create more life. The only difference is that your wallet will be gone.

The carbon in CO2 will return to earth as carbon, which will eventually turn back into energy giving life. Do you think humans invented recyling? Please, the earth has been doing it forever. It is a self sufficient recycling machine. Why? Water. Water is the key to life. It is the vehicle for bringing life. So water going from a solid to liquid state is the natural progression of expanding our greenhouse.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for efficient energy. If we are patient, don't jump to outlandish conclusions, and let the growing demand EVOLVE, it will happen, without imposing taxes and regulations. More and more people are jumping on the efficient energy band wagon anyway, so chill.

Bottom line. The earth has no wants, needs or expectations. Only you do.

Arctic melting, Antarctic freezing, Global warming by definition is the average of all these local events.
The best measure of this Global effect is sea level rise.
Sea levels are rising now at about the same rate they have been since the LIA.
There is no Dramatic Acceleration in Global warming.
The planet is steadily and thankfully recovering from a natural cool period in a natural cycle.
Unfortunately, that fact does not fetch research funding anywhere near as well as � Wholly crap, the arctic is getting livable, we are all going to die.. �

5 Most Deadly Hurricanes in US History

1. Galveston, Texas 1900 - Cat4 - September 1900 - TX - deaths: 8,000-12,000 (est)
2. Florida 1928 - Cat4 - September 1928 - FL - deaths: 1,836
3. Florida and Texas 1919 - Cat4 - September 1919 - FL, TX - deaths: 600-900 (est)
4. New England 1938 - Cat3 - September 1938 - Long Island, NY; MS, CT - deaths: about 600
5. Florida Keys 1935 - Cat5 - Labor Day weekend 1935 - FL Keys - deaths: 423

http://uspolitics.about.com/od/electionissues/a/2005_hurricane_3.htm

Reply: what's your point Patrick? Brett

Hurricane Camille was the third tropical cyclone and second hurricane of the 1969 Atlantic hurricane season. Camille was the second of three Category 5 hurricanes to make landfall in the United States during the 20th century, which it did near the mouth of the Mississippi River on the night of August 17, resulting in catastrophic damage. Camille was the only Atlantic hurricane with official winds reported to reach 190 mph until Allen equaled that number in 1980.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Camille

This is an amazing amount of melt change in two years. It has me wondering if man-made greenhouse gases and dark particles from vehicles and industry are contributing to the rapidity of this change in the Arctic. I think yes. Has the man-made greenhouse/albedo precluded a record maximum ice extent in the Antarctic? It's certainly possible. In saying this I'm subscribing to the view that much of this change is natural.

This post perfectly describes why deniers should just be ignored. Even if AGW someday became accepted the same way gravity is accepted, deniers would turn around and tell us how much benefit we'd get from a warming world. They are politically-driven animals who have nothing constructive to offer in this debate.

Deniers are really like the whiny kids in the backseat of your car. They're constantly screaming at the top of their lungs, in the hopes of distracting you or getting you to pay attention to them.

Palm Grower,

LMAO. I have no doubt that you could hook me up. I'll keep you in mind.

It is nice to see various forms of blogs here. I appreciate Brett taking the time to read and post them, even the ones that veer a little off topic.

This is by far the best blogging site on the net.

OK, enough sucking up, I have to go prepare my sled for the upcoming winter.

Mark,

"Deniers are really like the whiny kids in the backseat of your car. They're constantly screaming at the top of their lungs, in the hopes of distracting you or getting you to pay attention to them."

Mark, I feel the same way about you. It's called point of view.

Brett,

I was responding to Andrew's claim that Hurricanes are getting stronger. I doubt if the people in Galveston in 1900 would have agreed.

Reply: what you listed was the 5 most deadliest hurricanes, not necessarily the strongest. Back in those days people did not get nearly as good or any warnings about an incoming storm. A much improved watch and warning system nowadays has saved a lot of lives. Brett

http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Landsea/landsea-eos-may012007.pdf

the first year with no snow in Moscow? After a Cat-5 hurricane makes landfall in California or any other unusual place?

Emiliano,

Two winters ago Russia had so much snow tha