No global warming here!
Sunshinehours reports that the Antarctic Sea Ice Extent for September 19th, 2014 is 20.11297 million square kilometers,
which is 1,535,000 sq km above the 1981-2010 climatological mean.
Another 58,000 sq km. was added since yesterday, making it the 7th All-Time Record in 7 Days.
This new record is 610,000 sq km higher than the previous daily record. The red line represents 2014 data.
Data for Day 261. Data source: ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/south/daily/data/
A look at the data presented by NSIDC as it would be from space if there were no clouds:
More data on the WUWT Sea Ice page
UPDATE: Andres Valencia reports in comments:
The University of Bremen (The new satellite “Shizuku”, AMSR2 sensor) will have to rescale their plots:
Thanks, Ken, for confirming that the AGW fable is a fairy-tale.
Here’s the rest of the story:
Pingback: Antarctic Sea Ice Extent sets new record, pierces 20 million square kilometer barrier | Gaia Gazette
For the UN’s latest Climate Conference opening in NYC on Monday, some might ask exactly “Who won WWII and formed the United Nations sixty-nine years ago?”
This is faulty, you need to look at volume of Ice not area. If the Ice is getting warmer and melt, it will naturally move outwards but its total volume may decrease. So unless you actually measure volume this tells us nothing. And the pulsating behaviour due to seasons, makes it even less usable measurement, as we have no information of how much ice is converted to water in warm season and how much water is gained back to ice in cold season. If the measurements would be in volume we would have a way to approximate lost and gained energy.
Volume itself is not really a good measurement of energy in form of temperature. If it’s done properly it should be measured in Watts. If you gain energy it becomes warmer if you lose energy it gets colder. It’s that simple. The trick is how to measure it. I’ve seen no one who even try to do that. Some do measure Volume and they usually tell a different story than those measuring Area.
Volume is certainly a useful indicator for the amount of energy, absorbed by the ice mass to cause it to melt, and I suppose lost to the environment when the ice is formed.
Nevertheless, if we are comparing the same criteria over time, the comparisons are still valid.
I am not sure about melting ice creating more area, that needs looking into.
Surely glaciers expand in area when the ice volume increases.
Regardless of the technical theory, it seems that the “warmists” are quite comfortable with equating less ice area to ‘loss of ice due to “global warming”‘ so they cannot logically have it both ways!
I think Energy is measured in “Joules”, Watts/second.
Thanks for commenting, js.