From herethat tooting is for several reasons:
a) the replies at that time were very offending and aggressive even though many things were obvious and show to be that now and did so before
b) there is a saying that as one shouts into the woods the echo comes back and considering this general wisdom
the tooting is quite moderate IMO, while i think it's absolutely necessary that some people remember in the future who is said what ( your own words and proposal ) and who has an "eye" for the bigger picture.
what counts is what is right, not who is right but then if some people are often spot on they should not be met with offending comments over and over again.
These offending comments simply didn't exist unless you're bbr2314 and got into an argument about HYCOM as a model, so I don't know what you're talking about. I've been following this forum closelsy for several months, and I've participated more when the atmosphere was less poisonous with all the putting down of other forum posters more recently (not mainly from you)
if this is about finding the most accurate predictions and facts it cannot be wrong to toot that horn from time to time. i for my part know exactly what i wrote and it came to happen over and over again and further will.
since i'm not a scientist perhaps is simple locic, observation and an open eye for the multitude of factors instead of concentrating on on model or another and build an opinion on weekly or even worse, daily numbers and events.
I don't really understand what you're trying to say here, because most of us don't tend to concentrate on a single model but rather do indeed look at the big picture and form our predictions based on that. And daily numbers aren't such a bad thing to look at when you understand why they are doing what they're doing because the sea ice is so greatly affected by the weather going on above it (as I bet everyone can most definitely see this week to an extreme).
Personally I'd like to see more explanation of the thought processes behind these predictions as that is far more interesting to me than simply declaring "we're going to lose a million km² of ice this week!" or "we're going to go ice free this september!"
i find it a interesting that when we were attacked for saying what is showing to be close now nobody felt
the need to take those statements into consideration but now interestingly some are very quick to
put another stamp again.
first one gets bashed for the bluntness to go agains the mainstream and then when it happens is bashed again
for remind the bashers that the tone at that time was not appropriate.
I'm pretty sure that no one (well, maybe one person) was able to accurately predict how this melting season would go weatherwise, with a hot late April and May, cool and cloudy June and July, and then strong storms to disperse and melt large amounts of ice in August. Whoever made a prediction that this season wouldn't continue its strong melting trend and then have a strong finish in May/April should get a pat on their back IMO.
And I later said it was splitting in three... I don't want to toot my horn but I have been pretty correct overall and the jury is still out re: 1M KM2 or less this yr (i.e ice-free).
For ice-free conditions:
Using current NSIDC numbers provided by Wipneus, from now until September 25 would require an average drop of 110742 km².
Using current IJIS numbers provided by Espen, from now until September 25 would require an average drop of 105677 km².
Unfortunately I can't calculate this for AMSR2 because I can't find the exact extent/area numbers for it.
Now while it
does have a
very slim chance of happening, the only reasonable way I could see this happening is if sub-970 lows continued to be churned out like it was nothing and then towards the end of the melting season a hurricane remnant (Hurricane Faith 1966 anyone?) entered the Arctic, bringing huge amounts of heat and wind with it.
Something like these
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Debbie_%281969%29https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2b/Faithinsertmap.png
[edit: a deep "High" in 8 days would accomplish very little, and would actually help the ice recover. Incidence angles above about 75N are going to be low enough it's not going to capture enough sunlight to balance out outgoing radiation. No clouds would mean nothing to hold down that outgoing radiation.]
surface temperatures matter more than radiation balance (and above zero temperatures on this thin ice wouldn't help it very much)
http://imgur.com/a/6MOa2