5 ms·

The worst IPCC predictions on arctic ice melting are totally incorrect. https://static.skepticalscience.com/graphics/sea_ice_prediction.jpg https://static.skep

by arbol 7y ago

The worst IPCC predictions on arctic ice melting are totally incorrect. https://static.skepticalscience.com/graphics/sea_ice_prediction.jpg https://static.skepticalscience.com/graphics/sea_ice_predict... Therefore the effect of climate change could be far greater than their worst predictions.

ceejayoz 7y ago
IIRC, that's because the IPCC's "worst case" winds up being the worst case everyone can agree is possible. So it winds up being more moderate than the actual worst cases.
- arbol 7y ago
  However the number was agreed upon, the arctic ice reality is very bad for humanity and possibly catastrophic. If I was an insurer and the Earth was a house, I would not be offering a policy.
fwip 7y ago
Because I found this interesting, I dug a bit further, and here's what I found. This graph only has observed data out to 2009. I'm unable to find a graphic with updated data, but this year the September minimum was 4.15 million, or about tied with that lowest point on the graph. I am also not sure of what revisions (if any) have been made to those IPCC projections.
- mjw1007 7y ago
  https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/arctic-sea-ice/ https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/arctic-sea-ice/ has September minimum figures up to 2018, and you've already found 2019.
brandmeyer 7y ago
I'm familiar with that graph; I used to have it posted on my wall with a great big "You are here" arrow on it. Its pretty dishonest to post today, though. Its based on models that are obsolete, and is missing 6 more years of arctic ice extent. Using an anomalous minimum is just as bad as the deniers use of an anomalous maximum temperature from an El Nino year. There's plenty of reason to be alarmed at the state of the climate and cryosphere, but it is important to be honest about it. See also https://sites.google.com/site/arcticseaicegraphs/ https://sites.google.com/site/arcticseaicegraphs/ https://greatwhitecon.info/resources/arctic-sea-ice-graphs/ https://greatwhitecon.info/resources/arctic-sea-ice-graphs/ https://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2012/09/models-are-improving-but-can-they-catch-up.html https://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2012/09/models-are-improving...
- mjw1007 7y ago
  I think you're assuming that the low point on that graph is the 2012 low outlier. It isn't, it's 2007. The graph would look much worse if stopped in 2012.
  - brandmeyer 7y ago
    The third link I submitted has the variant of this that stops just after 2012.
kgwgk 7y ago
Fun fact: one of the drivers of warming in the Artic region is the decrease in pollution due to “clean air” policies in Europe. https://www.nature.com/articles/ngeo2673 https://www.nature.com/articles/ngeo2673

by arbol 7y ago

ceejayoz 7y ago

IIRC, that's because the IPCC's "worst case" winds up being the worst case everyone can agree is possible. So it winds up being more moderate than the actual worst cases.

arbol 7y ago
However the number was agreed upon, the arctic ice reality is very bad for humanity and possibly catastrophic. If I was an insurer and the Earth was a house, I would not be offering a policy.

fwip 7y ago

Because I found this interesting, I dug a bit further, and here's what I found. This graph only has observed data out to 2009. I'm unable to find a graphic with updated data, but this year the September minimum was 4.15 million, or about tied with that lowest point on the graph. I am also not sure of what revisions (if any) have been made to those IPCC projections.

mjw1007 7y ago
https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/arctic-sea-ice/ https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/arctic-sea-ice/ has September minimum figures up to 2018, and you've already found 2019.

brandmeyer 7y ago

I'm familiar with that graph; I used to have it posted on my wall with a great big "You are here" arrow on it. Its pretty dishonest to post today, though. Its based on models that are obsolete, and is missing 6 more years of arctic ice extent. Using an anomalous minimum is just as bad as the deniers use of an anomalous maximum temperature from an El Nino year. There's plenty of reason to be alarmed at the state of the climate and cryosphere, but it is important to be honest about it. See also https://sites.google.com/site/arcticseaicegraphs/ https://sites.google.com/site/arcticseaicegraphs/ https://greatwhitecon.info/resources/arctic-sea-ice-graphs/ https://greatwhitecon.info/resources/arctic-sea-ice-graphs/ https://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2012/09/models-are-improving-but-can-they-catch-up.html https://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2012/09/models-are-improving...

mjw1007 7y ago
I think you're assuming that the low point on that graph is the 2012 low outlier. It isn't, it's 2007. The graph would look much worse if stopped in 2012.
- brandmeyer 7y ago
  The third link I submitted has the variant of this that stops just after 2012.

kgwgk 7y ago

Fun fact: one of the drivers of warming in the Artic region is the decrease in pollution due to “clean air” policies in Europe. https://www.nature.com/articles/ngeo2673 https://www.nature.com/articles/ngeo2673