NOAA shows about 25% more ice covered ocean than NSIDC.
Look for people to be making claims of record minimums with about 0.1% precision.
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
- Disillusioned on Mission Accomplished
- Bob G on Mission Accomplished
- James Snook on Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- czechlist on Mission Accomplished
- arn on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Disillusioned on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Gamecock on “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
- czechlist on “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
I expect the excuse to be “different calculation methods”, however I would at least expect something much closer between the two departments.
Perhaps someone who uses that excuse can enlighten as to why NOAA and NSIDC each work with such a difference.
Perhaps someone could explain why 2 departments, funded by the people, are doing exactly the same thaing twice.
Steve,
Just as I predicted: your previous posts using the dodgy NOAA data are a big steaming pile of donkey droppings. DO hope you’ll be going back to correct them!
137% MY ARSE!
Here’s some accurate data from the ever-reliable Cryosphere Today:
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/
As you can clearly see, if you hadn’t have chickened out of betting with me, you’d now owe me $5,000.
2012 is way the lowest ice area ever.
You lucky boy!
OK Jak, lets bet $10 million that the Arctic won’t be ice free this year.
If you hadn’t chickened out, I would be a multi-millionaire.
What a flaming maroon.
Didn’t you bet with someone else as well Steve for $50? Using JAXA extent?
Sounds a more sensible bet level. I hope you are going to pay up Steve!
Andy
And I hope you learn how to compare numbers. JAXA is not below the 2007 minimum, but feel free to make dumb comments.
Well, not right now – but it is still a good 3 weeks or so before the typical date of minimum extent. In 2007 almost 700,000 sq km of ice extent was lost between August 22 and the minimum. If a similar amount is lost this year it will beat 2007 by half a million sq km