« Polls 2012: daily and monthly minimum | Main | PIOMAS June 2012 »

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Ned Ward

Very nice, crandles.

Over at WUWT, Anthony Watts has also posted his official prediction for ARCUS:

"Since there was a tie between the 4.8-4.9 and the 5.0-5.1, values, the median value of 4.9 million square kilometers was chosen for submission."

In comments, Peter Ellis rightly points out that the median of those two ranges is actually 4.95, not 4.9.

Frequent WUWT commenter Pamela Gray is having trouble following Peter's math:

"hmmm. I see three numbers Anthony listed when deciding which one to send it, 4.8, 4.9, and 5.0. The median of those three numbers (not the mean, and not the mode), would be 4.9. So Peter, where do you see 4.95?"

FWIW, I like Peter's suggestion that Anthony chose to round the number down in an attempt to reduce the embarrassment of once again over-predicting sea ice extent.

But it's also possible that Anthony just miscalculated the median.

Neven

Good to see you submit again to SEARCH, crandles. You and Larry are the pride of the ASI blog. :-)

So although the statistical scheme below gives 4.29 which is in the 4.25 to 4.5 range, it is close to the border and in the poll I have gone for 4-4.25 for NSIDC average extent and 2.8 to 3 for area. i.e next to bottom categories for both.

I voted one notch higher on both polls (4.25-4.5 for NSIDC monthly minimum extent, and 3.0-3.2 for CT daily minimum area), but considering the latest PIOMAS update I might change those before the end of the month.

Stevemosher.wordpress.com

hehe.

nice crandles. 4.29

That's the bet I have in over at Lucia's

crandles

Great minds or fools never differ? ;-)

Account Deleted

http://psc.apl.washington.edu/lindsay/Prediction/2012/September_ice_extent_2012.html
2012 Prediction Season

End of May 2012: This prediction is made with model data from May 2012. The best single predictor is the fraction of the area with open water or ice less than 1.0 m thick, G1.0. This predictor explains 79% of the variance. The predicted extent in September is 4.06 +/- 0.42 million square kilometers (orange star below). If the prediction is accurate it will be a new record low (the 2007 record low was 4.3 M sq km), however the previous record is within the error bars of the prediction. The region most influential in making the prediction this year is an area stretchng from the eastern Beaufort Sea and also in the Kara Sea (right map in the figure) where there is a greater than normal fraction of thin ice (middle map) and the G1.0 variable has a significant correlation with the September ice extent (left map). The top figure shows the time series of the observed September ice extent (solid line), the predictions of the satistical method for past years (cyan diamonds), and the prediction for this year (orange star and error bars). The error bars are the standard deviation of the error in the fit of the regression. The trend line (dashed) and the prediction of the trend line (black star) are also shown.

Lord Soth

I find it interesting that even the climate deniers are even reporting numbers below the 5 million sq km mark.

There has been a large export of ice out of fran strait so far this year, and if it keeps up, the north pole could find itself under first year ice, by the end of the summer.

Any bets on a melt out to the pole, for 2012 ?

Stevemosher.wordpress.com


ha crandles, i like to think great minds.
Last year sure looked like a record breaker in the making and I considered it to be fluke that the record didnt fall. This year the ice looks worse, so I cant imagine fluking out two years in a row. With the "right" weather the record could be crushed.

At some point I want to chat about your regression as I want to steal it for some unrelated work.. see you at the finish line

Daniel Bailey

"Any bets on a melt out to the pole, for 2012?"

Given that the ice thicknesses in the vicinity of the NP have been about sub-2 meters thicknesses of late, and given that melt-out typically is about 1.6-1.8 meters (IIRC), than I put it at 50/50.

With the vagaries of weather reigning fickly omnipotent.

Kalle GZ

3.0-3.2 Area 4.5-4.75 extent.

I don't see a big melt year coming for the ice. The Arctic overall looks healthier then the last 2 years.

However, those open water areas in the Canadian Archipelago, the Beaufort Sea, and the Laptev Sea are making me a bit scared, if they continue to grow huge and affect the shape of the Arctic I see a lower minimum then what I predicted.

Daniel Bailey

"The Arctic overall looks healthier then the last 2 years."
Is this the same Arctic the rest of us are watching? Or are you just Poe-ing us?

Jim_pettit

If really pushed, I'd suggest that SIA will be right at 7 million km2 by the first of July, 4 million km2 by the first of August, and 3 million km2 by the first of September. Add a drop from there of anywhere from 100k to 400k km2, and there's your record. SIE should, of course, follow a similar curve.

It fills me with a mix of awe, wonder, and dread that as soon as, say, five years from now we may be sitting here predicting a new SIA record of a few hundred thousand km2, or an SIE record of a million km2 or so. That is, if there's that much ice left by then...

Apocalypse4Real

I went with SIA of 2.8-3.0 and SIE of 4.0-4.25. I anticipate that current warming and SIA decline will accelerate.

The Hudson is under a torch right now, the Bering and Chukchi melt out seem on track (temps range from 7 to 19 C in the area at the moment).

It is currently 16 C at Pevek Airport, Russia on the East Siberian Sea, and there is no drop below freezing through 16 June.

Tiksi airport on the Laptev is expected to remain above freezing through 16 June.

Mike Constable

I see a slab of ice has broken off by Barrow, just leaves a narrow coastal strip with melt pools? Wonder if the break-up forecast for the fast-ice will start before it all goes!

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)