http://www.nunatsiaqonline.ca/
You can see the shocking conditions in the Arctic in the image below.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Ellen Flees To The UK
- HUD Climate Advisor
- Causes Of Increased Storminess
- Scientist Kamala Harris
- The End Of Polar Bears
- Cats And Hamsters Cause Hurricanes
- Democrats’ Campaign Of Joy
- New BBC Climate Expert
- 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- “the United States has suffered a “precipitous increase” in hurricane strikes”
- Thing Of The Past Returns
- “Impossible Heatwaves”
- Billion Dollar Electric Chargers
- “Not A Mandate”
- Up Is Down
- The Clean Energy Boom
- Climate Change In Spain
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
Recent Comments
- Robertvd on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Robertvd on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Bob G on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Bob G on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Gordon Vigurs on Causes Of Increased Storminess
- Ed on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Walter on Ellen Flees To The UK
- conrad ziefle on Causes Of Increased Storminess
- conrad ziefle on Scientist Kamala Harris
- conrad ziefle on Ellen Flees To The UK
again….
If it tied 2006, then there is no change at all
That is why the ice breakers have had one of their busiest years. The ice is just soooooo thin and fragile any ol ship can sail through it. Some one needs to explain the minimum sea ice theory to the ships that were stuck in thick ice and concerned about hulls beinc crushed by ice compacting against the hull due to wind! These satellite reconstructions only show which way the wind is blowing at a particular time.
If it wasn’t for the current climate of hysteria, would anyone know or care about the trivial differences?
It wasn’t a trivial difference last year around April when the extent matched the normal, then it was worth writing about in various denier blogs. When it was larger than prior it meant something, now when it is less, it isn’t.
That is why the blogosphere is sometimes worse than the MSM, too much cherry picking and weighting applied when it suits.
Andy
It was interesting as an indication of cold temperatures at low latitudes.
Andy, you’re better than that. The cherry-picking begins when people shout alarms at such stuff as “It’s the lowest it ever been on January the 15th! (or some such garbage.) Just like it was in 2006……which happened to be the greatest ice extent in the last 7 years! Last year held the highest ice extent in the recent record. Check it for yourself. See here. http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Area.png Turns out, it didn’t mean a hill of …….stuff. For people that care about the ice, there are 2 points in time that matter. The maximum and the minimum. All else has not much to do with either.
But, that’s only for people that care. I truly wish that all sea ice would melt, only so that so many people could get on with their lives and see that it does effect anything. Not even polar bears.
Who’s cherry picking?
doesn’t effect……
“Latitude” is spot-on. Just like “the hottest year on record” BS.
If (indeed) 2010 was statistically equivalent to 2005, and indistinguishable from 1998, then
NO STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT TEMPERATURE CHANGE HAS OCCURRED IN 12 YEARS.
duh
Yep, ice is soooooo wonderful- I would rather lie in it than warm, tropical, Hawaii sand. All my friends go to the Arctic on vacation (don’t yours?) rather than Florida, Mexico, Italy, Greece, Polynesia, etc……
How come the bird outside the window didn’t fly in the exact same direction this morning, I mean everything has to be the same doesn’t it?