Climate experts say that 90% of Arctic sea ice has melted, which is why it is at a ten year high for the date.
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
- 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”
- Jehzsa on “pushing nature past its limits”
- arn on Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- dm on Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- dm on “pushing nature past its limits”
We know that climate runs in many different cycle lengths, so why would we exclude seven years of Arctic ice data from the mean? It is beyond ridiculous that these frauds continue to act as if anything that happened after 2006 is not part of a cycle, and can therefor be excluded.
Have as many meaningless means as you like, but let’s have at least have one that honestly and accurately reports the Arctic as it has been observed. They have a billion different models, so what exactly is the problem?
They like to keep the illusion of lower than average ice cover going?
Gives their theory a very thin film of respectability.
What missing ice?
Notice that the rate of decrease of the Arctic ice this year is also the slower of the last 7 years (all years plotted)…
Brings the hope of a relatively large summer ice cover this year.
Arctic ice can’t be at a 10 year high – McKibben tweeted that its been below the average for the past 143 months (according to his expert, Jeff Masters).