Happy New Year to you sir. Data. On the Charctic interactive web page from which your sea ice extent graph was obtained, please look at the individual year data for 2007 and compare to 2021. Then display each year since 2007 individually along with 2007. This data does not show a diminishing trend since about 2007. Before that, yes.
Ah...welcome back. I was largely off line over the holidays, and for some reason Substack doesn't tell me when there are comments, so I just now saw this! I'd argue that the truncation of a complete data set is not fair use. There's a lot of noise in the temperature data, so that'll lead to noise in the ice extent. Variations are the norm, and the trends are, well, disturbing.
Thank you for the reply. You say "bring data." Here is all the daily data in the NSIDC record in one plot. It looks like the overall trend has flattened out since about 2007. It is not "fair use" to draw a straight line diminishing trend from earlier in the record and expect the behavior of the natural system to conform. https://www.dropbox.com/s/683v8x041fr8dtd/NSIDC_daily_to_3-22-22R.jpeg?dl=0
Ah. I wouldn't expect it to be a straight line. Would you? The issue, as I see it, is that the precision of the data has improved over time, but there's inherent noise in the complex system that makes interpretation challenging. Year-over-year variation is pretty high.
To my eye, at least, it seems that the amplitude of the variation has increased over time, which would be consistent with the steady-state beginning to become unstable. That, in my mind, would be indicative of impending climate change (you'll appreciate, perhaps, that I think the term is over-used and over-hyped--true climate change won't be controversial, but it will be extremely disruptive when it happens).
I would not expect the overall trend to be a straight line. I would expect the long-term behavior to be more irregular and cyclic, as non-satellite history depicts it, as in:
But you said in this issue 30 of your series, "Over the 40-odd years covered by the data, the trough in September has gotten deeper, such that, if the trend continues, in the next 40 years or so, there will be no ice at all at the North Pole for at least part of the year." The Arctic sea ice extent was not disturbed from a "steady-state beginning." And if it has already flattened out, it is consistent with the history.
OK. So we're in agreement, I think, that it's not going to be universally accepted that the Arctic sea ice (and Antarctic for that matter) is going to completely disappear at some point in the future until it actually does. The best anyone can do is to venture a rational guess based on historical data. But that doesn't mean that all guesses are equal.
Happy New Year to you sir. Data. On the Charctic interactive web page from which your sea ice extent graph was obtained, please look at the individual year data for 2007 and compare to 2021. Then display each year since 2007 individually along with 2007. This data does not show a diminishing trend since about 2007. Before that, yes.
Ah...welcome back. I was largely off line over the holidays, and for some reason Substack doesn't tell me when there are comments, so I just now saw this! I'd argue that the truncation of a complete data set is not fair use. There's a lot of noise in the temperature data, so that'll lead to noise in the ice extent. Variations are the norm, and the trends are, well, disturbing.
Thank you for the reply. You say "bring data." Here is all the daily data in the NSIDC record in one plot. It looks like the overall trend has flattened out since about 2007. It is not "fair use" to draw a straight line diminishing trend from earlier in the record and expect the behavior of the natural system to conform. https://www.dropbox.com/s/683v8x041fr8dtd/NSIDC_daily_to_3-22-22R.jpeg?dl=0
Ah. I wouldn't expect it to be a straight line. Would you? The issue, as I see it, is that the precision of the data has improved over time, but there's inherent noise in the complex system that makes interpretation challenging. Year-over-year variation is pretty high.
To my eye, at least, it seems that the amplitude of the variation has increased over time, which would be consistent with the steady-state beginning to become unstable. That, in my mind, would be indicative of impending climate change (you'll appreciate, perhaps, that I think the term is over-used and over-hyped--true climate change won't be controversial, but it will be extremely disruptive when it happens).
I would not expect the overall trend to be a straight line. I would expect the long-term behavior to be more irregular and cyclic, as non-satellite history depicts it, as in:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/jk6ihtjjzdgj4vm/DOE_Arctic_sea_ice_1985.jpg?dl=0
But you said in this issue 30 of your series, "Over the 40-odd years covered by the data, the trough in September has gotten deeper, such that, if the trend continues, in the next 40 years or so, there will be no ice at all at the North Pole for at least part of the year." The Arctic sea ice extent was not disturbed from a "steady-state beginning." And if it has already flattened out, it is consistent with the history.
OK. So we're in agreement, I think, that it's not going to be universally accepted that the Arctic sea ice (and Antarctic for that matter) is going to completely disappear at some point in the future until it actually does. The best anyone can do is to venture a rational guess based on historical data. But that doesn't mean that all guesses are equal.