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
- AI Doublespeak
- AI Doublespeak
- Net Zero Intelligence
- “The Green Party dropped nearly 9 per cent”
- Fake Record Heat In India
- RFK Jr’s Plan For $12 Gas
- Hockey Match
- Hockey Match
- Giving Proper Credit
- Conspiracy Theory!
- “No One Is Above The Law”
- CNN Experts Discuss Medicine
- Looking For Their Lost Keys
- Rapid Climate Change
- CBS News 1982 : One Fourth Of Florida To Drown
- Affordable Transportation
- “Why Scientific Fraud Is Suddenly Everywhere”
- She Hates Her State
- Climate Friendly War
- Office Of Climate Change And Health Equity And Environmental Justice
- “100% Non-Carbon By 2030”
- 1991 : United Nations Calls For Genocide
- Mainstream Fascism In Academia
- California Finds A New Way To Drive Businesses Out
- Powerful Climate Mathematics
Recent Comments
- Gator on AI Doublespeak
- Conrad Ziefle on AI Doublespeak
- Sonny on AI Doublespeak
- Sonny on AI Doublespeak
- Conrad Ziefle on AI Doublespeak
- Conrad Ziefle on AI Doublespeak
- Russell Cook on AI Doublespeak
- Denis Rushworth on Net Zero Intelligence
- Disillusioned on AI Doublespeak
- arn on AI Doublespeak
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)