Arctic sea ice thicker now than in 1955

Arctic sea ice thicker now than in 1955

And yet, and yet, CO2 levels were far lower than they are today. 

According to a new paper in the Journal of Geophysical Research, the observed mean thickness of the sea ice in the region north of (Arctic) Svalbard was substantially thinner (0.94 m) in 1955 than it has been in recent years (~1.6 m, 2015/2017).

Probably won’t see this in the lame stream media.

Study: Arctic Sea Ice Was Thinner In 1955 Than In years 2015-2017

Graph Source: Rösel et al., 2018

Thanks to Don Brown for these links

11 thoughts on “Arctic sea ice thicker now than in 1955”

  1. Please readers……..send this to the UK DAILY MAIL in numbers.
    We need several people to send this report to the Daily Mail [ which sells about 4 million copies daily] so that FACTS such as these get mainstream publicity.
    Just Google “Daily Mail, London” to get details. It is a very influential newspaper in the UK ,so its reports engender debate.
    This is a VERY IMPORTANT report, because all we read about is melting Arctic ice and “global warming”.

  2. the people now are also thicker than then too..
    recent research shows drops in IQ levels globally
    all the toxic chem and the lousy education system designed to do just that.
    throw in mercury n aluminium 50doses for usa kids before 4yr old and wonder why?

  3. The legacy media seem to be in cahoots with the warmists and with governments to cover up inconvenient stories. Are they scared of losing a source of press releases to fill their pages/bulletins? In the UK there is a major story on why all the big energy companies have raised electricity prices, being that they are the main ones liable for global warming taxes. But nothing is said and they are happy to run evil company stories instead of highlighting how the increases match increased costs due to government policy.

    • “The legacy media seem to be in cahoots with the warmists and with governments……”

      The legacy media is a tool of the .1% . Nothing gets published without approval from the Ministry of Truth. The government is also controlled by the .1%! We have the illusion of actually electing government officials but in reality the choice has been made for us. Every one in a while things go wrong and a leader is actually chosen by the people. Then, all hell breaks loose. Trump is a good example of this.

  4. with the BBC and guardian newspaper being the biggest pair of AGW fake new propagandists.
    At least people choose to buy the guardian, with the BBC is paied for via a Tax levie backed up with criminal sanctions.
    The BBC has an entire Environmental editorial team all pumping out stories on AGW CO2, which tax payers have been forced to fund.

  5. In order to make current sea-ice levels look lower Alarmists need to suppress the historical record of warm arctic summers in the past. One way they do this is to “in-fill” areas on old maps where we have zero data with “100% sea-ice”, when there is no reason not to suppose there was just as much broken up summer sea-ice, and open water, in the past as there is today.

    You probably have seen the pictures of the submarine that found open water to surface in back during the 1950’s.

    In 2014 WUWT had an early “Nimbus” satellite picture showing a large area of open water north of Alaska in 1969.

    “Fletcher’s Ice Island” served as a floating arctic-airbase for a quarter century, and it was always too slushy there to land planes in the summer. I found two pictures of a DC-3 that crashed up there in the 1950’s, and the second picture (from the 1970’s I think) shows so much ice had melted that the DC-3 is way up on a pedestal:

    Actually the current news should not be that there is less sea-ice, but more. How much more? The DMI “volume” graph suggests there is 4500 km³ more ice this year than last year. But the media? Crickets.

  6. Its total volume that matters, not thickness.

    Climate change deniers are always displaying misunderstanding.

    • Of course Brian… and before, new ice didn’t count, wasn’t thick old ice… which is it??

Comments are closed.