Looks like confirmation of the end of downward drift. http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png

Hear Hear K.Z. Good post. I am a dyed in wool warmy, I'm convinced by the evidence, but when I see people who are skeptics who make reasonable comments being denigrated it makes me ashamed of my own side. There is an argument that says the term denier is not an insult, it is an apt description. It's the same argument people used to justify racist term. The golden rule is that if someone does not like the label you give them, don't use it. It is the decision of the recipient, not the user as to whether a term is good or bad. Ultimately the idea that there are only two sorts of people, skeptics and believers is nonsense, there is a wide spectrum of beliefs and to suggest that there are only two is reductionist thinking, black or white, with us or against us and all that damaging ideology.

Perhaps this is the cause of the 'Glaciers forming in Scotland" debate? I have not seen this with my own eyes, but I can confirm there are no similar conditions in Snowdonia. The BBC are usually pretty accurate, are we saying they have got this completely wrong? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-28885119

Interesting to see that as the Arctic rebounds to a less critical level for the time being, that the climate in the UK has reverted to it's usual endless wet and windy days of Autumn with the inevitable strings of low pressure areas queing up to dump rain on this sodden island. The correlation between Arctic ice extent and Eurasian weather from a subjective perspective looks stronger every year. Ps. I note I've been down graded to a 'Facebook user ', hopefully I will get it fixed again. Gareth

I've noticed a correlation between a melting Arctic and an increase in lying snow in Northern Eurasia. It has been suggested that this is related to a warmer atmosphere carrying greater amounts of water vapour leading to increased snow fall. If this process continues (and there is no sign of the Arctic recovering anytime soon) would this increased snow cover affect the albido of Eurasia? And if so, what would be the effects? Complex I know but any directions to papers on this or info would be really welcome.

Tenney states: The 'stadium wave' and Pitcairn man are about on par with each other. Philip posts : AFU, I don't see any signs of the mean dismissal that makes you sad, certainly not with regard to the Curry/Wyatt paper. People have expressed interest, have offered non-ad hominem reasons to question it, and have expressed wariness. That third point, I would say, is absolutely proper. If, like Curry, you have been spouting ultracrepidarian nonsense for years, Gareth responds: I rest my case, thank you both.

Apologies Jim, I've just realised that AFU is me, I'm not sure why it did not print my name as I have contributed to this blog on a few occasions (Garethman) My interest in JC is that she explores issues that challenge my thinking. I may not agree with everything she says, but she seems to agree that climate change has a major human induced element, but also believes there are other factors. Fair enough, time will tell. While the current trend in climate change is patently induced by humans, I don't think it is clear whether background variation enhances or reduces that effect. I think we agree that just because human induced climate change is obvious (to me at least) it does not mean all the other natural variations have stopped, they are just masked or or overwhelmed as it were. I also believe that further study is healthy, even if it runs against my beliefs. Lets face it, none of us forecast this hiatus, I know of no models which predicted it, and as a result it seems reasonable to suggest we are missing something. You may not like JDs paper, but at least she is trying and not sitting back suggesting all is sorted. She does not appear to suffer from magical thinking in other words.

I always think it's terribly sad when a study is immediately condemned on the basis of not whether it has been peer reviewed, or methodology, or objectiveness, but on the basis of who wrote it. It's the classic open goal displayed by supporters of the consensus (which includes myself) to anything which may challenge entrenched beliefs. It sometimes feels like the other side of the denials' coin. Good to see you back by the way and hope the house looks good!

Looks like we have hit the minima, the graph has levelled while the NSIDC has been offline. Who guessed right? http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png

Oh for Pete's sake it's the Daily Mail, it's not supposed to be truthful or accurate, it's fantasy for the right wing conspiracists. You'll be expecting them to be objective on immigration next! Now if it were the Guardian making statements that suggested there had been a pause or recovery in the Arctic that would be something to sit up and discuss. But by discussing the Daily Mail you are indulging in the intellectual equivalent of reviewing Viz or the Beano.

Interesting Guardian article, marred only by their increasingly ruthless level of censorship. The posts that have been blocked may be trolls, but if they are there seems to be a huge amount of them and I would occasionally like to see what is so horrendous about what they say. The majority of the first posts were all censored which is getting a bit dysfunctional. As a life long Guardian reader it saddens me to see free speech being so ruthlessly curtailed, it's getting worse than Skeptical Science, I wonder if there is some sort of connection? The other issue that was flagged up is the apparent complete difference in the conditions in Arctic compared to Antarctic. I agree, they are poles apart , but sometimes I believe the similarities are overlooked. If we take the Greenland ice cap as a mini-conitinent serving the role of the Antarctic continent, we see that it has a permanent (more or less) ice cap which extends out across it's adjacent ocean each winter, and melts back towards the coast in the Summer in the same way as Antarctic sea ice. Obviously the Arctic sea ice does not completely melt in the same way as the Antarctic sea ice (at least not yet!), but sees a similar process. I'm aware there are substantial geographic differences, but we should beware of continually dismissing them as having nothing in common.

While I agree with most of the opinions seen in this thread, I do think calling the current level”the 9th lowest’ leaves supporters of climate change open to allegations of bias. After all if we express results in terms of league tables the 9th lowest can also be expressed as the highest in a given set of 9 years. The ice continues to melt, league tables distract from that fact.

I have noted over years of observation that a simple rule, while crude is remarkably accurate, is that if temperatures are below normal in Europe, they will be above normal in the Arctic. If the cold weather continues in Europe, expect a record low ice cover in the Arctic this summer.

I also think we may well have already reached a maximum, which will some some serious implications for lowest level. Will we see an ice free summer polar arctic for the first time this 2012.