We usually hear the most about Arctic Ice compared to anywhere else. With regards to sea levels, however it's not the most important.
That's because Arctic ice is mostly SEA ice. This area of the Arctic is NOT on land. So whether that area of SEA ice is ice or melted ice(water), they are both already in the ocean and displacing the same amount of water(adding the same amount to global sea levels).
Antarctic ice on the other hand is mostly over land. Same with Greenland ice. If it melts far inland, it just forms pools of water that refreeze when it gets colder again. However, along the edges or if the melt water had a channel/outlet that flows/drains into the ocean, then it does increase the mass of the ocean surrounding it.
ARCTIC SEA ICE:
https://climate.copernicus.eu/sea-ice-cover-november-2025
+++++++++++++++
https://nsidc.org/sea-ice-today
+++++++++++++=
Arctic ice dropped fast from the 1980s until 2012, when it hit the all time low/bottom at the end of the melt season. Since then, the trend has been mostly sideways without dropping lower than 2012 here 13 years later.
So there has not been a tipping point or accelerated melting as was predicted by the climate crisis story narrators. Al Gore and the IPCC won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 for lying about CO2, the climate, the polar bears, the sea levels and the Arctic ice. Gore predicted no more sea ice in the Summer's at that time, starting around 2013. The late Summer nadir in 2025, was still no lower than the record low of 2012, with no sign of all the ice melting.
However, the amount of sea ice in the Arctic remains close to those lows, with LESS recovery in the Winters.
ANTARCTIC (mostly land) ICE:
https://climate.copernicus.eu/sea-ice-cover-november-2025
++++++++++++
https://nsidc.org/sea-ice-today
The Antarctic ice is more fascinating. It was actually INCREASING from 2005 to around 2014 and setting record HIGHS, when the ARCTIC ice was setting record lows. This was extremely puzzling!!!
Since then, it's been the Antarctic ice that melted a great deal, while the Arctic ice has had much less melting.
There doesn't seem to be a clear explanation for this using just greenhouse gas warming from the increase of CO2 coming from humans.
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/snow-and-ice-extent/sea-ice/S/12
ENTIRE NORTHERN HEMISPHERE:
.png)
ENTIRE SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE:
.png)
++++++++++++++
ENTIRE PLANET EARTH:
.png)
If more ice is melting and flowing into the oceans, obviously this is contributing to the rise in sea levels which has accelerated higher recently, slightly ABOVE 1 inch/decade.
However, the oceans have been rising for almost 20,000 years since we warmed after the Wisconsin glacier.
Also, humans have been extracting massive amounts underground water from aquifers and wells which has turned into runoff that eventually flows into the oceans. This is a huge contributor the the recent rise in sea levels.
By metmike - July 23, 2025, 10:55 p.m.
The oceans are rising at just over an inch/decade. Just over a foot/century. Though that rate is accelerating a bit the increase will likely be less than 2 feet the next century. NOT the 10 feet that some people claim.
And much of this is a continuation of the NATURAL sea level increase since the last Ice Age ended.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Past_sea_level
Many higher latitudes are actually seeing glacier rebound, so the land is rising faster than the oceans.
https://www.whoi.edu/ocean-learning-hub/ocean-facts/sea-level-rises-when-land-sinks/
++++++++++++++++
Groundwater and the Rising Seas
https://www.neefusa.org/story/climate-change/groundwater-and-rising-seas
Sea levels are also increasing from thermal expansion.
I am having a hard time finding good discussions/data on how much runoff from aquifers and underground water sources are increasing sea levels. Apparently because the message gatekeepers don't want that inconvenient fact out there.
Contributions to Global Sea-Level Rise
I always love exposing the IPCC!
The sources that I used 10 years ago all removed the original title to this article below several years ago, so that its harder to find on the internet with a search.
Seriously, they did that. I watched it!
I reinserted the original title and copied the article below.
U.N. Predicts Disaster if Global Warming Not Checked
PETER JAMES SPIELMANN Associated Press June 29, 1989:
https://apnews.com/article/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0
UNITED NATIONS (AP) _ A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.
Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of ″eco- refugees,′ ′ threatening political chaos, said Noel Brown, director of the New York office of the U.N. Environment Program, or UNEP.
He said governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before it goes beyond human control.
As the warming melts polar icecaps, ocean levels will rise by up to three feet, enough to cover the Maldives and other flat island nations, Brown told The Associated Press in an interview on Wednesday.
Coastal regions will be inundated; one-sixth of Bangladesh could be flooded, displacing a fourth of its 90 million people. A fifth of Egypt’s arable land in the Nile Delta would be flooded, cutting off its food supply, according to a joint UNEP and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency study.
″Ecological refugees will become a major concern, and what’s worse is you may find that people can move to drier ground, but the soils and the natural resources may not support life. Africa doesn’t have to worry about land, but would you want to live in the Sahara?″ he said.
UNEP estimates it would cost the United States at least $100 billion to protect its east coast alone.
Shifting climate patterns would bring back 1930s Dust Bowl conditions to Canadian and U.S. wheatlands, while the Soviet Union could reap bumper crops if it adapts its agriculture in time, according to a study by UNEP and the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
Excess carbon dioxide is pouring into the atmosphere because of humanity’s use of fossil fuels and burning of rain forests, the study says. The atmosphere is retaining more heat than it radiates, much like a greenhouse.
+++++++++++++++
https://www.newspapers.com/article/philadelphia-daily-news-un-predicts-di/29369379/?locale=en-US
Instead of any of those really bad things happening, the biggest impact has been to green up the earth, causing a booming biosphere and increase food production by double digits because of the indisputable law of photosynthesis.
Death by GREENING!
Started by metmike - May 11, 2021, 2:31 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/69258/
+++++++++++++++++
Read here to see how Snopes, supposedly an objective and accurate fact checker gives a misleading "backstory" to make it appear as if the IPCC didn't really mean what they really did state in the article above instead of holding the IPCC accountable for their completely busted, horrible prediction in 1989.
Even implying that people like me that show these articles from the IPCC in 1989, showing the exact words and exact quotes are just "deniers" of the climate crisis trying to mischaracterize what was meant by the IPCC.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/nations-vanish-global-warming/
++++++++++++++++++
There is no misunderstanding. The IPCC and their minions were clearly trying to scare the doo doo out of people with their junk science predictions because of their political objective meant to vilify fossil fuels.
It's 36 years later with a long trail of completely failed climate crisis predictions during that time and they still haven't changed their "planet is doomed" type climate crisis predictions.
Even as planet earth moves deeper into the current climate OPTIMUM! With CO2 levels still just under half of the optimal level for the vast majority of life.
