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
- 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
- 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”
Arctic Sea Ice Area Is Normal
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
2008 sure has some erratic melting events. I wonder if these are related to large cyclonic wind storms?
Forecast for the next 6 weeks is looking cold for the arctic (and antarctic):
https://twitter.com/BigJoeBastardi/status/320540525302251521/photo/1
Arctic cold is caused by Arctic warming
I have to disagree, Arctic ice is anything but ‘normal’. It’s magical! 😉
You might like this
http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=83797
Ski-tastrophe deferred
Steve,
2013 is still below 2012 and that turned out to be anything but normal. And your use of “normal” is correct only if you wish to exclude all dates prior to 2002.
Normal is within one std deviation for anyone with an IQ over 30
Steve,
I will be interested to see what your term for “normal” will be in August.
I’d be interested to know why you are incapable of living in the present.
Steve,
I am not the one who references 1974 CIA reports or 100 year-old newspaper articles when speaking about Arctic ice. But I am the one who must repeatedly bring you back to what is relevant in the present and in the near future.
Shrinking ice volume in the Arctic and its effect upon the size of ocean area now capable of absorbing summer solar radiation is what is relevant.
“Shrinking ice volume in the Arctic and its effect upon the size of ocean area now capable of absorbing summer solar radiation is what is relevant.”
In terms of what is responsible for what is happening now, what has happened in the past is extremely relevant.
“Exactly how is a 1974 CIA planning paper about a coming ice age relevant to a discussion on Arctic ice in April of 2013?”
Interesting that you left out the most relevant part: about 100 year old Arctic ice articles, to which I was referring.
“And why is the size of ice extent (only 15% needs to be actual ice) when the sun is close to the horizon more important than size of open ocean when the sun is overhead?”
That has no relevance to what I said.
It’s quite ironic that you complain about relevance.
How do think the next 130 – 138 days will pan out?
Look at the temperatures around the block…
http://www.lawrencevilleweather.com/conditions/north-america
Maybe there’ll be a huge warm up of catastrophic proportions:)
Too…
You learn this stuff on, like, day 3 of any university level science course. It’s not too late for you though 😉
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation
You are TOO optimistic that he will learn what that is and how it applies to the topic.
I will be interested to see what your term for “normal” will be in 7013.
“…2013 is still below 2012 and that turned out to be anything but normal. And your use of “normal” is correct only if you wish to exclude all dates prior to 2002…”
And, at this time, 2013 is ABOVE 2007, 2008, and 2011.
BTW, the use of “normal” is decided by those who hold the data – in this case, according to the chart, “normal” is the period of 1979 to 2006.
How did 2002 enter into the discussion?
Steve,I think you will need to make a full post showing the real cause of the multiple ice loss in the 1990’s that led to the reduction of ice cover in the first decade of the century since there is far less older ice around to support the year old ice.
CAGW has nothing to do with the ice loss in the arctic.