Both poles have curves with rounded but flatish tops and spikey bottoms. Where the blip kicks in the Arctic downwards spike overwhelms the Antarctic smooth top.
Another way of looking at it, when the Antarctic signal is slowing down and starting to reverse, the Arctic is spiking downwards very quickly. It reverses and goes up just as quickly while the Antarctic signal has hardly moved.
Other things to note. The scales are not exactly the same for all graphs. Antarctic signal is squashed compared to the others. Also, the Antarctic signal is slightly skewed. It falls quicker than it rises.
My guess is it has something to do with the arctic is ALL float ice both in origin and in measurement, while the antarctic has a combination of float ice that originates as float ice and float ice that comes from expanding glaciers extending out into the ocean. Differing geography means differing results. In addition there is more net landmass in the northern hemisphe than the southern. I would assume this has some impact on weather patterns.
t’s no surprise to regular readers I am quite concerned about climate change. My concern on this issue is two-fold: one consists of the actual global consequences of the reality of global warming, and the other is the blatant manipulation of that reality by those who would deny it.
These two issues overlap mightily when it comes to Arctic sea ice. The ice around the North Pole is going away, and it’s doing so with alarming rapidity. I don’t mean the yearly cycle of melt in the summer and freeze in the winter, though that plays into this; I mean the long-term trend of declining amounts of ice. There are two ways to categorize the amount of ice: by measuring the extent (essentially the area of the ocean covered by ice, though in detail it’s a little more complicated) or using volume, which includes the thickness of the ice. Either way, though, the ice is dwindling away. That is a fact.
Of course, facts are malleable things when it comes to the deniosphere. One popular denier claim is that Arctic sea ice extent is higher in recent years than it was in 1989, therefore claims of it melting away are false.
This is so blatantly wrong that it’s hard to believe anyone could make that claim with a straight face. But make it they do, like Lawrence Soloman did in (surprise!) an OpEd in the Financial Post (which, like the Wall Street Journal, is a refuge for denialist claims). Soloman’s silliness is taken apart easily by Tamino on his blog. Harrison Schmitt has made this claim as well. It’s simple cherry picking your data, and a huge no-no when it comes to real science.
It is a matter of geography and technology. It takes time for the boats tugging ice from Antarctica to reach the North Pole.
Because the amount of ice is a LOCAL issue not a GLOBAL issue. It it were a global issue, as suggested, they would be synchronized.
duh... The winters are 6 months apart.
Have a double kick at the top, is it because Arctic ice starts growing before Antarctic ice starts melting, and why would they not be synchronized
http://www.climate4you.com/images/NSIDC%20GlobalArcticAntarctic%20SeaIceArea.gif
