Yes, I should read more before I ask such questions, I just found the other thread :) Thanks!

Is Petermann calving again? Or is it shadows or something? http://lance-modis.eosdis.nasa.gov/imagery/subsets/?subset=Arctic_r03c03.2012257.terra.367.250m

"showing progressive recovery of the anomaly" ...yes, it might now be less than 3 standard deviations below the (sharply declining) linear trend. I don't know whether George Phillies intended it this way, but when I see the word "recovery" in this context I seem to automatically interpret it as denial/wishful thinking. Either that or ironic humor.

Hmm, yes, I hadn't considered the depth of the water there. In fact I hadn't considered much of anything at all, except the vision in my mind of steam billowing off the oozing lava :)

"These ridges don't often produce big earthquakes like this." Maybe we're about to get a new volcanic island! Who gets it? Norway maybe? I'm kidding of course, I have no clue whether an earthquake like this would have anything to do with an eruption...but there are a lot of volcanic islands around there...and it would be exciting :-)

Neven said: "BTW, I wonder when the media is going to pick up on this..." Here in the US, my guess is: only after a record low extent is reached, media will _briefly_ pick up on it, complete with commentary from a prominent "skeptic" about how it doesn't really mean anything since the arctic low is, after all "just weather" and not "climate."