arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/timeseries.south.anom.1979-2008
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Time Of Observation Bias
- Climate Scamming For Profit
- Climate Scamming For Profit
- Back To The Future
- “records going back to 1961”
- Analyzing Rainfall At Asheville
- Historical Weather Analysis With Visitech
- “American Summers Are Starting to Feel Like Winter”
- Joker And Midnight Toker
- Cheering Crowds
- Understanding Flood Mechanisms
- Extreme Weather
- 70C At Lisbon
- Grok Defending The Climate Scam
- “Earlier Than Usual”
- Perfect Correlation
- Elon’s Hockey Stick
- Latest Climate News
- “Climate dread is everywhere”
- “The Atmosphere Is ‘Thirstier.’”
- Skynet Becomes Self Aware
- “We Have To Vote For It So That You Can See What’s In It”
- Diversity Is Our Strength
- “even within the lifetime of our children”
- 60 Years Of Progress in London
Recent Comments
- Francis Barnett on Back To The Future
- conrad ziefle on Time Of Observation Bias
- Crashex on Time Of Observation Bias
- conrad ziefle on Time Of Observation Bias
- conrad ziefle on Time Of Observation Bias
- Mike on Climate Scamming For Profit
- conrad ziefle on Time Of Observation Bias
- Francis Barnett on Climate Scamming For Profit
- Bob G on Time Of Observation Bias
- arn on Climate Scamming For Profit
Penguins won’t know what liquid water is…
It’s currently 31% above normal (if my math skills are not failing me) , which seems like a lot. Our Dutch Met Office (KNMI) reported last week that this increase is caused by global warming. The news about this research is currently on their front page (in Dutch) :
http://www.knmi.nl/cms/content/112833/raadsel_meer_zeeijs_antarctica_opgelost
If it was below normal, they would also blame it on global warming. There is no possible condition which they would not blame on global warming.
They’d do the same if it was happening in the Arctic. People are not that stupid to believe that kind of BS.
Dave I hate to disagree with you but your faith in people is misplaced.
I’m no atmospheric physicist, but I would still appreciate if someone could define “normal” so there is a baseline to measure against. I got tired of asking after the 500th time and getting no answer or having my questions deleted.
Like much in climate science, it’s arbitrary isn’t it? You pick a 30 year period and decide that’s your baseline for normal.
odds: 3.27E+150. It’s climate science.
The Jurassic climate must have seemed pretty normal for a while there to your average Diplodocus. I wonder if they bought and sold Ceratosaurus credits or something.
The new ‘normal’. đŸ˜‰
“Normal” dates allll the way back to 1979 when the satellites started to monitor it. It seems that the historic accounts of an ice free polar region were just made up to scare people.