Unseasonal ice extent in Arctic Basin

WAY above the mean. Above the mean by 500,000 sq km (193,000 square miles).

Northern Hemisphere Sea Ice - 6 Jul 2016
Northern Hemisphere Sea Ice – 6 Jul 2016

According to this chart, it is far above the mean:

Here are other graphs from the University of Illinois:Arctic Basin Sea Ice Area -6Jul2016

In the graph, the top (black) line shows an increase in sea ice extent of 6 % (from 4 to 4 1/4) from March to about May 10.

The red line at the bottom of the same graph confirms that March 2016 was below the 1979-2009 mean for that month & that March to July is above the mean by half a million square kilometers (193,000 square miles).

This confirms the UNSEASONAL ice extent in the Arctic Basin, which should be decreasing by July and isn’t.


Bering Sea ice
Also above the mean.

Barents Sea ice
Although it has been below the mean for quite some time, it is now nearly half a million square kilometers above the mean and still climbing.

Sea of Okhotsk sea ice
Now  .4 million square kilometers above the historical mean.

Beaufort Sea ice
Now .12 million square kilometers above the mean.

Baffin/Newfoundland Sea ice
Nearly .9 million square kilometers above the mean.

All of the following are U of IL and from the same website as above:


Chukchi Sea ice
Now .3 million square kilometers above median.

Canadian Archipelago Sea Ice
Now .2 million square kilometers above median for July.

Hudson Bay Sea Ice
Now at .9 million square kilometers above median.

Greenland Sea Ice
Now at .5 million square kilometers above median.

Thanks to Penelope Powell for most of these links
Thanks to Keith Power for the Northern Hemisphere graph

“Why is NSIDC reporting the extent of the Arctic ice completely differently; are they lying about it?” asks Penelope. “Agencies of the govt have been lying about the climate all along. U of IL appears to be rhetorically going along w man-made global warming; their site is full of warmist propaganda. Are they nevertheless accurately reporting the data? Sure looks like it.”


20 thoughts on “Unseasonal ice extent in Arctic Basin”

  1. “Special Sensor Microwave Imager and Sounder (SSMIS) on the Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP) F-17 satellite that provides passive microwave brightness temperatures (and derived Arctic and Antarctic sea ice products) has been providing spurious data since beginning of April 2016”

    • Where do any of these organizations get their data if not from satellites ?

      Satellites are possibly not as good as everyone seems to think.

      I used to measure temperatures of food storage facilities using a thermometer worth thousands of dollars 20 years ago.

      It required certification half yearly to confirm its accuracy for legal purposes.

      It is slightly more difficult to certify the accuracy of any satellite – bit more difficult than couriering the thermometer to the distributor.

    • I wouldn’t blame the satellite, but rather those interpreting its data… as the data doesn’t lie, only its interpreters do.

      As for that first chart, it looks really choppy, the ‘teeter-totter’ affect of a changing EM field, from what I remember of a study a decade or so ago, which occurs when the EM poles get ready to flip.

    • Bingo. The satellite has been problematic for quite some time now and only recently has come back online after having been out of commission since April. WUWT’s Sea Ice Page, as well as Sunshine Hours’ wordpress daily Arctic sea ice graph show the discrepancies. Current extent shows it to be 8.78 million sq km, fourth lowest on record.

    • Absolutely – however a few weeks ago the sattelite feed that NSIDC were using said that the extent was less than it actually is and new data has been recruited and “normalised”. New data shows extent as still below average but the poor data has not been corrected which is annoying. Is any of it true? Who knows? What is the accuracy etc….

    • Or, it’s reporting the data accurately and they are labeling as spurious, because it contradicts their agenda.

    • Kyle, NSIDC has just begun using a military satellite instead of the one which they said was giving “spurious” data. The military satellite is giving them the expected seasonal melting, according to NSIDC site.
      However U of IL, altho rhetorically staying on the warmist propaganda is reporting data clearly showing that the entire Arctic is not undergoing a Spring-time melt. Two areas, the Arctic Basin and Barentz Sea have actually increased ice extent since the March high point. The other areas included within the Arctic sea ice measurement are, as of July not melting. Here, look at just this one graph to get the idea.

  2. But but but here’s the new report,- the wamesyeearEvahhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3679450/Forecasters-predict-hot-wet-wild-summer-NOAA-says-America-sweated-warmest-June-record.html A lot of you said this would happen.

  3. Arctic Sea Ice Extent
    The Northern Hemisphere Sea Ice coverage
    Northern Hemisphere Sea Ice extent

    Total sea ice extent on the northern hemisphere during the past years, including climate mean; plus/minus 2 standard deviations. The ice extent values are calculated from the ice type data from the Ocean and Sea Ice, Satellite Application Facility (OSISAF), where areas with ice concentration higher than 15% are classified as ice.

    The total area of sea ice is the sum of First Year Ice (FYI), Multi Year Ice (MYI) and the area of ambiguous ice types, from the OSISAF ice type product. The total sea ice extent can differ slightly from other sea ice extent estimates. Possible differences between this sea ice extent estimate and others are most likely caused by differences in algorithms and definitions.
    New graphs

    We have improved the algorithms calculating sea ice concentration and extent. Consequently, on June 28, 2016, we updated the graphs of ice extent with new data of higher quality. In particular, calculation of ice concentration in coastal zones have been improved, but also calculation of ice concentration in the Arctic ocean is improved with this new setup.

    The sea ice extent data from 1979 till today is composed by a Climate Data Record (CDR, OSI-409a), an Interim CDR providing updates with one month delay to the CDR (ICDR, OSI-430) and an operational setup that calculates sea ice extent for the period between the ICDR and today. Further, the algorithms behing these three products are now more consistent than the previous processing chain.

    This switch to new algorithms has led to small changes in the trends of sea ice extent since the first year of the data set, but it has not changed the general picture of ice extent decline.

  4. I have to agree with Martyn’s assessment above, this is a malfunctioning sensor which is showing a false positive outlier, which stands far outside scientific possibility. If we saw this at the end of summer , then yes, but not now in the melt season.

    Robert, you should strongly consider removing this story until further investigation is completed to maintain the integrity of the other news that is recorded on your site

    • Cameron, LOOK at the SECOND graph on each of U of IL links.
      The graphs that were posted don’t show the month by month extent.

  5. yeah some errors in a satellite and I know one of the main mobs swapped over to another source
    but what got me??
    its your SUMMER 😉
    such as it is up nth
    a LOT less heat than cold BUT the msm only reporting the few places with heatwaves and ignoring the rest
    business…word used with intent… as normal

  6. Use DMI…don’t trust the US agencies to report anything…it’s sad but true the dollar in the US can get whatever bullsh*t printed… I’d be particularly interested if there’s any Russian information on the sea ice…they aren’t perpetuating the AGW lie

  7. I never look at or trust the NSIDC- they paint areas that are above normal as “normal” and areas that are normal as “below normal.” Very misleading. They have been doing this for many years and are NOT reliable at all.

Comments are closed.