People have accused me of cherry-picking Arctic ice extent. The idea being that ice may be pervasive now, but the trend is way down.
That is like saying that you have been rapidly drawing down your bank account and are almost bankrupt, but your balance just happens to be above average right now.
Makes sense if you have the IQ of a turnip.
If you’re looking at noisy data – and by that I mean the trends tend to change direction on decadal scales – examples include: glacier melt, mass balance changes, and sea ice, then really unless you look at the *whole* record whatever you cite, you can be accused of cherry picking. (And the problem with trying to cite the *whole* record is that we may not have the data for the whole record to begin with.)
But at the end of the day, after 60+ years of catastrophic global warming (as the IPCC tells us it became a significant climate driver after 1950), for the south poler region to be above normal and the north poler region to be normal, well, it doesn’t give the case for alarm much credibility.
Lol, the poor devils have talked themselves right into a circle of fail. It’s their abject stupidity wot donnit!
Let’s not let facts get in the way!
Steve – been wondering where you were because of the old site update on 22 April made me think that was the ‘live’ one.
If you have access to that site it’d help if you could put a post at top pointing to stevengoddard.wordpress.com
All the best!
I haven’t had a chance to congratulate you about your return from the dead. I felt a physical stab of shock when I read the email. Then I thought “aged 81”? – just a minute, and a check on this blog revealed that you must have been posting post mortem.
You don’t look a day over 21 in your blog banner (I won’t commit to which of the two up there I take to be your likeness).. Live long and prosper.
2007 was cited as the year of woe–a huge decrease in arctic sea ice. Because there was a bias in thought, there was already a predetermined cause assumed. If that part of the science community which gave that attribution had acknowledged an equivalent increase in sea ice in the southern hemisphere, there might have been much to learn about the earths currents.
Has anyone read or heard of studies based on those observations?
It’s all noise in the grand scheme of things. Considering that we are in an interglacial period, and overdue for another ice age, I welcome a little melting ice. The alternative blows.
You’ve got the sign of the feedback wrong (a common failing in “consensus” science. The alternative sucks.