Date Anomaly Area 2013.1589 0.3236561 16.2882099arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/timeseries.global.anom.1979-2008
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Quadrupled Border Crossings
- “Ranked most liberal compared to All Senators”
- Hottest Day Ever
- Radical Communist Donald Harris
- Same Weather As Always
- “Climate Change Is Killing People”
- Fifty Years Ago Today
- Miami Drowning
- Blocked By Ice
- Will He Be Disappointed?
- Don’t Be A Conspiracy Theorist
- Washington Post Spy Analyst
- Summer Heat And Burn Area
- Climate Heresy
- “I do not want to hear about the 1930s”
- “33 storms”
- Something New In North Dakota
- Survival Of The Planet
- “baseless far-right conspiracy theory”
- The BBC
- Biden Uniting America
- Firearms Safety Rules For Actors
- Science Banned In France
- Global Warming in Nevada
- Saving The Climate With Soy
Recent Comments
- Bob G on Quadrupled Border Crossings
- arn on Quadrupled Border Crossings
- Bob G on Quadrupled Border Crossings
- Gamecock on Radical Communist Donald Harris
- Luigi on Hottest Day Ever
- Disillusioned on “Ranked most liberal compared to All Senators”
- Bob G on Hottest Day Ever
- Bob G on “Ranked most liberal compared to All Senators”
- Bob G on “Ranked most liberal compared to All Senators”
- arn on “Ranked most liberal compared to All Senators”
Lol, well, sure that’s one way of putting it! 😀 Brevity, there’s no replacing it’s effectiveness. I went through much more bother saying the same thing.
Unfortunately, in a changing climate this is exactly the kind of thing we can expect.
That is complete bullshit. The whole basis of CAGW theory is feedbacks, with one of the largest being albedo (ice) loss at the poles.
heh – a very large number times zero is still zero.
Whatever happens is exactly what was expected…
The model says so.
Aldous,
the climate is ALWAYS in a state of change thus your statement is silly.
Aldous,
Have you read about Arctic amplification? Secondly, your nonsense about changing climate is exactly that. The climate ALWAYS changes. Why didn’t you use global warming?
Steve,
O/T and FYI.
More temperature fiddling highlighted
http://joannenova.com.au/2013/03/not-the-hottest-ever-summer-for-most-australians-in-sydney-melbourne-or-brisbane-not-extreme-heatwaves-either/
It was a relatively nice summer given the fact that the previous year’s was so cold and wet. Sometimes you get lucky.
I remember 1972, my first visit to Oz, and in Melbourne the temperature was 80C or above every day for the late autumn month of May. I don’t believe that this has been repeated since, even though 1972 was right in the middle of the “mini Ice age.”
Hi Steve,
NSIDC displays a 15.6 million km2 february mean for 1979-2000 range. I downloaded their data, excluded months where there were less than 14 days recorded and computed these datas : I got a 15.47 million km2 mean for this period.
I got a bigger difference for january, they displayed 15.1 million km2 and I got 14.63.
I think they artificially enlarge past ice sheet extent so the present one appears smaller.
Can you confirm my results ?
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/
I was writting about North Hemisphere datas, Arctic ice sheet !
I think they compensate for the Arctic satellite visibility hole around the pole
They compensate always in the same direction, I’m not comfortable with “datas” obtained not only by mesurement but by using some esoterics models…
(I’m French, my english is perfectible)