http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/n_plot.png
NSIDC often publishes this graph showing that the Arctic is doomed. What they aren’t showing is that their data set started right at the peak for the last century.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Al Gore’s Arctic Forecast
- Mann Says He Was Correct
- “under the Intermediate Scenario”
- “under the Intermediate Scenario”
- “carbon emissions may have now peaked”
- Record Arctic Sea Ice Growth
- “4th Hottest Summer”
- Killing Joshua Trees To Save Them
- NASA Sea Level
- “getting smaller”
- “Permanent Shift” In Antarctic Sea Ice
- Rapidly Accelerating Sea Level Rise
- Technology Advances
- “The Hour Of Decision”
- “fair & equitable”
- Michael Mann Continues His War
- Time Travelling Satellites
- Time Traveling Satellites
- Adult Content On X
- The Climate Of 1923
- Arctic Report Card
- Green Colorado
- Hottest Summer Ever
- “Sea ice could be gone by 2012, scientists warn”
- Record CO2 Growth
Recent Comments
- Mike Peinsipp on Mann Says He Was Correct
- Mike Peinsipp on Mann Says He Was Correct
- Disillusioned on Al Gore’s Arctic Forecast
- Disillusioned on Mann Says He Was Correct
- Gamecock on Mann Says He Was Correct
- toorightmate on Mann Says He Was Correct
- Robert Denby on Mann Says He Was Correct
- Michael Abbott on “under the Intermediate Scenario”
- _Jim on Mann Says He Was Correct
- _Jim on Mann Says He Was Correct
This confirms what I wrote a month ago…there is only so much space for Arctic sea ice, and it was all taken up in the 1970s
No doubt, in fact, I’d be very concerned if the Arctic extended beyond its “high water” mark. We could then have discussions about the coming ice age.
We are still running into the problem of volume vs surface area. The total volume of the ice is a much more important data point than the extent.
The problem with that is there is NO way to get that accurate either! Volume would be WAG just like area is now! Both measurements reflect what is already known by logical people, the amount of ice in the Arctic is not stable and has never been. Measuring either is a waste of money and the only benefit is to navigation in the region as it has no bearing on global climate!
The real problem is making Wild Guesses about any possible trend!
Hmm, Steve had a post a few days ago about how we have more multi-year ice than recently. But, I agree with Mike, arctic ice is a waste of time and is a red herring for the alarmists. If it melts, so what? It mostly melts in the summer anyway. The light distribution from the sun is minimal during the summer, so the albedo effect is negligible. When the arctic has it’s most ice, the sun doesn’t shine, so there’s no albedo anyway. Further, if we buy into the CAGW premise, a melted arctic has an opportunity to out-gas or sink CO2 while a frozen one will not. Also, there’s energy(heat) release with a melted arctic which doesn’t occur with a frozen arctic. The point is, while arctic ice may or may not be a proxy for warming, it has very little impact on our climate as a whole.
Only one thing is missing….MODELS! Not a mention. Back in the good old days, why, they reckoned with results. They dithered with data. They manipulated with measurements….oops, they still do that, don’t they… They could still speculate about sulfates, though.
CO2 was just a gleam in Hansen’s eye, unborn yet festering like a boil soon to be lanced.
Nothing like starting your data set at 1979, the height of an anomalously cold period. Much of the so called “warming” being claimed by alarmists is just a rebound from that cold period back to the long term normals prior to 1960.
Pingback: 24 Hours of Climate Reality: Gore-a-thon – Hour 10 | Watts Up With That?
Pingback: The rsing tide? – Yes, of political damage « 100 DAYS – Claiming Back New Zealand