Arctic sea ice thicker than it was 75 yrs ago

Seventy-five years ago, the ice measured 6½ feet thick.

North Pole Getting Warmer - 1940__________________________________________________________________________

And today?

Recent surveys found a modal thickness of 1.8 to two meters (6 ft to 6′-6″) in most regions of the Northwest Passage and mean thickness of between two and three meters (6′-6″ to 10 ft). o/

Thanks to Bill Sellers for these links

“President Obama was in Alaska last week and blamed Americans for melting glaciers, a process which has been going on since before America existed,” reminds us.

5 thoughts on “Arctic sea ice thicker than it was 75 yrs ago”

  1. It would appear that it isn’t thicker, but it hasn’t changed any, either, since the article says 6.5 feet then and now.

  2. 🙂 so? somewhere between 3 and 7 FEET of ice had melted in the follow on from the hugely hot 1930s..and…no one flooded/ cities were NOT underwater and the planet survived???
    the coastal areas are still there and so are the bloody reef and the islanders presently bitching about mms over a century seas wise.
    boy am I whizzing this one around:-)

    • Quote:
      “The coastal areas are still there and so are the bloody reef and the islanders presently bitching about mms over a century seas wise”.
      There were two periods of settlement:
      Ancient voyaging: from 50,000 to 25,000 BC people from Asia sailed simple rafts from island to island, reaching Near Oceania (Australia, New Guinea and the Solomon Islands). They traded in stone, hunted animals and gathered seafood and local plants.
      Recent voyaging: from 1200 BC seafarers sailed canoes further east, into Remote Oceania (Melanesia, Micronesia and Polynesia). The islands were much further apart and more difficult to find. Migrating voyagers kept in contact with their home islands through trading trips.
      The implications of this paper indicate a migration during a High Latitudes North and South ice expansion with Sea levels possibly 130M lower than they are now.
      For the first 6000 year of this interglacial it is very possible that most of the non volcanic Remote Oceania were under water during the first two major warm periods of this interglacial. The West is not to blame for the Sun’s bounty over the last 12000 years. If you populate a Sun tidal area during an Interglacial expect to get wet.
      Far lower cost to resettle Remote Oceania than trash the world economy over a bogus CO2 fraud designed to make a few Americans even richer than they are now.

  3. Just how reliable and representative were Nansen’s data in 1900? So, the ice-thickness now is about the same as in 1940 near the end of the previous cyclical warming. Since then to the mid 1970s there was global cooling (while atmospheric CO2 rising), before the recent 20 years’ global warming period.Hardly a third of the 75-odd years of CO2 emissions coincided with global warming. Some correlation!

  4. Comparing now to the 1940s is a good comparison because the 1920s-30s were really warm. Of course all those records will be lowered by a couple degrees remember that…the 1870s is just after the little ice age but to many 1860 resembles the end…I think this will bear out that the climate is indeed cyclical…jeez I wonder…is it the bicentennial cycle at work here with the sun…every 150-200 years the solar activity changes with intermittent peaks in the middle…I bet our weather now matches the 1870s…and the 1670s…some historian must know what the climate was like just after the civil war if it was warming rapidly…somebody must of recorded it in notes

Comments are closed.