One of the graphs from the link above in post #56
Some comments: The Arctic ice area and ice extent (two slightly different measures of the sea ice) are both higher at this point of the year then they were at the same date the two previous years.
Both ice-area and ice-extent are just outside 1 standard deviation less than the average for the period 1979-2007. However, both measures are well within two standard deviations below the mean (which is usually then not considered statistically significant.) Presently, the Arcitc ice-area and ice-extent seems to be closing in on the mean.
The large loss of sea-ice occurred during the summer 2007, and also during the summer 2008, but to a slightly smaller extent.
The summer of 2006 was exceptional - not for its heat north of the polar circle(!) but because of unusual direction of the currents. The AGW proponents immediately made predictions that the ice in the Arctic would be gone within years. The fact that it rebounded very quickly and the following winter there was more ice than the winter before was neither here nor there according to the "warmists". The new "baby ice" would not be able to sustain the warming during the summer and it would all disappear.
Well, they were partly right. The thinner new ice did melt more rapidly, but it still did not reach the same nadir as the year before. So, the next summer the "baby ice of yesteryear" is no longer baby ice but adolescent ice - and if there are no exceptional cicrcumstances, the minimum amount of ice during the summer will be even larger than last summer, I think.
But then, what do I know? I don't make money from carbon dioxide indulgencies.
Again, in my opinion Al Gore is a letter day Johan Tetzel.
One of the graphs from the link above in post #56
PS: If you read my post #56, also check out the site wattsupwiththat.com
Apparently the ice- extent was almost the same as the average for the observation period when yesterday it was changed by -500 000 sq km without any explanations.