According to HaCRUT, interior temperatures in Alaska have cooled a couple of degrees since 2004, and are now cooler than the 1880s.
-
Archives
-
Recent Posts
- 50 Billion Humans by 2032?
- Are you beginning to see that you’ve been lied to?
- Earth Day 1901
- Earth Day 1928
- NOAA : Cheating For 840 Months In A Row
- Jeff Masters : An American Traditionalist
- Michael Mann – The Human Proxy
- Ice Free Arctic Trajectory
- A Disturbing Trend In Atmospheric CO2
- 1950 Shock News : A Whole New Atmosphere
- Opinion : It Is Difficult To Enjoy Life When You Are Severely Neurotic
- Measure This …. Heidi
- 600% Permanent Drought Returns To The Southwest
- Put The Secret Service In Charge Of The Budget
- Weather Statistics For Mental Midgets
- Global Warming Sunday Sermon
- Time For A New Ice Age Scare?
- Why Hansen’s 1981 Predictions Have Come To The Surface
- Mann “Faces Off” All By Himself
- Congratulations To NOAA And Jeff Masters
- Mann-Made Climate Change In The Himalayas
- Three Days Of Normal Ice
- Site Was Hacked Yesterday
- Earth Day In The Capital Of Greenland
- Earth Day 65 Years Ago : Life Expectancy In Greenland Was 25 Years
Recent Comments
- Lazarus on 50 Billion Humans by 2032?
- Ken McMurtrie on Rapid Glacial Retreat At The Bottom Of The Hockey Stick
- suyts on 50 Billion Humans by 2032?
- Me on 50 Billion Humans by 2032?
- Peter Ellis on 50 Billion Humans by 2032?
- Ano on Are you beginning to see that you’ve been lied to?
- Peter Ellis on Are you beginning to see that you’ve been lied to?
- Peter Ellis on Are you beginning to see that you’ve been lied to?
- Steven Goddard on Are you beginning to see that you’ve been lied to?
- Lazarus on Leftists Increasingly Frightened By Free Speech And Debate
Partners

I regret to say this isn’t the most obvious graph I’ve seen lately. I also hope that the Y-axis is delta-T.
That’s our Phil!
Ah
Why is this Alaska temperature important? Why not focus on something that *is* important? For instance: The IPCC AR4 Global Circulation Models consistently *understated* arctic sea ice loss. The bias exhibited by the GCMs can only be due, in general terms, to either:
One area that has been investigated and addressed is cloud formation over newly open water, see The Boundary Layer Response to Recent Arctic Sea Ice Loss and Implications for High-Latitude Climate Feedbacks. Another area that is being addressed is sea ice mechanics and kinematics, see A new modeling framework for sea-ice mechanics based on elasto-brittle rheology and IPCC climate models do not capture Arctic sea ice drift acceleration: Consequences in terms of projected sea ice thinning and decline
In the meantime, the arctic sea-ice downward spiral continues. If you’ve read much about arctic sea ice you’ve probably run across the general rule that first year ice is 2m thick. Except that in 2009 it was measured at 1.7m, in 2010 that dropped to 1.6m, and in spring 2011 it was measured at 1.4m.
Some people are looking for a tipping point. Other people deny that a tipping point exists or can exist. What seems clear is that the last equilibrium state in the arctic was probably the early 1950s. It was then that the downward spiral began and, if anything, it has only accelerated in recent decades.
In this sense the tipping point has already occurred. What we’re looking for now is the new equilibrium point. Will it be an arctic free of ice year-round? Will it be a seasonally ice-free arctic? Or will it be an arctic that falls some measure shy of seasonally ice-free? And of equal interest, how long will it take to reach the new equilibrium?
As an amateur, arctic, arm-chair climatologist I’ve read dozens – if not hundreds – of peer-reviewed papers in the last 18 months. What I’ve learned is there’s always MORE to learn. Forget answers – I’d just like to know what the right questions are
That said, I think it’s important to consider 2007 not as a ‘perfect storm’ or an outlier. 2007 ushered in a new regime; the climate changed. We will not likely see the summer sea ice extent, area, or volume of 2006 again in our lifetimes. 6 short years ago, but it’s ancient history. I’m not sure if that qualifies as another tipping point, but if not it’s a distinction without a difference.
In the meantime, keep bringing up trivia and neglect the actual issues of interest.