Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Mission Accomplished
- Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- “pushing nature past its limits”
- Compassion For Terrorists
- Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- Maldives Underwater By 2050
- Woke Grok
- Grok Explains Gender
- Humans Like Warmer Climates
- Homophobic Greenhouse Gases
- Grok Explains The Effects Of CO2
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2027
- Red Hot Australia
- EPA : 17.5 Degrees Warming By 2050
- “Winter temperatures colder than last ice age
- Big Oil Saved The Whales
- Guardian 100% Inheritance Tax
- Kerry, Blinken, Hillary And Jefferson
- “Climate Change Indicators: Heat Waves”
- Combating Bad Weather With Green Energy
- Flooding Mar-a-Lago
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2020
- Colorless, Odorless CO2
Recent Comments
- Mike on Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- Timo, not that one! on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Bill on Ice-Free Arctic By 2027
- Gamecock on “pushing nature past its limits”
- Gamecock on “pushing nature past its limits”
- William on Mission Accomplished
- Gordon Vigurs on Mission Accomplished
- Disillusioned on Mission Accomplished
- Bob G on Mission Accomplished
- James Snook on Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
Anyone who says arctic sea-ice hasn’t been recovering in the last 5 years is a flat out liar.
I don’t label anyone with the D-word, unlike alarmists; either someone is telling the truth, or they ain’t.
Obviously you do not live in the high arctic. Anyone who lives there and sees you comment knows you have no clue about which you talk about.
Please remeber there are 2 parts of ice that extent does not tell. Thickness and continuity. Extent means that there is at least 15% of the ocean covered by some kind of ice. Exapmly if 50% of extent was all covered and 50% was only 15% covered that means in realty only 57.5% of the extent area actually is covered by ice. The other side is the thickness. Satellites can not even get that purfect because if you get a wind the jams lots of ice into ridges, to the satellite it appears thick in reality it could be ice that can break apart very easily and melt very fast. As a hint of how bad things are. look at the extent in February and you would know that most of that ice is very thin and will dissappear quickly.
Go to Baffin Island and then report here how great the Arctic ice is.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/05/07/cryosat-arctic-ice-same-thickness-as-1940/
Are you suggesting that people live on pack ice?
Lets set Dave N back to the year 1993. Dave would have looked back at “ice extent” and said “Anyone who has said ice extent has not been recovering for the past 5 years is lying.” Oops. Dave would have been wrong as future years show. Dave, of course, would have said the same in 2000 about the past 4 years, but alas, he would have been wrong again. Now he is saying the same foolish thing.
Dave, I have a suggestion…check out long term trends, rather than just 5 years. And you don’t need to do any additional research…just look at the graph above.
what good is a death spiral if you can’t depend on it?
Mark should take lessons from Katherine and call it a Weirding Spiral. These people are suffering the consenquenses or their own words