The hockey theory is finally proven. The Arctic has 700,000,000 more hockey rinks (468 m²) of ice today that it did a year ago.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- 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
- EPA Climate Change Arrest
- Nothing Nuclear Winter Can’t Fix
- “We Are From The Government And We Are Here To Help”
- Blinken Not Happy Yet
- Chief Executive Kamala
- “Investigated And Discredited”
- Ice-Free Arctic Warning
Recent Comments
- Peter Carroll on Woke Grok
- Luigi on Ice-Free Arctic By 2027
- Greg in NZ on Maldives Underwater By 2050
- conrad ziefle on Woke Grok
- conrad ziefle on Maldives Underwater By 2050
- arn on Woke Grok
- Tommyb on Ice-Free Arctic By 2027
- Archie on Woke Grok
- Gamecock on Woke Grok
- arn on Homophobic Greenhouse Gases
Does that convert to hockey sticks ?
If you lay a hockey stick down on the ice, it covers a certain portion of the ice.
It would take thousands more to cover the rink.
If that is 10,000 (just a guess) then the Arctic gains would convert to 7,000,000,000,000 (7 trillion) hockey sticks.
Now that is a number even obummer would recognize.
700 million is a lot but did you include thickness if not it is actual more then 700 million hockey rinks. Hockey rinks are only about 3″ thick the so the arctic ice is about 2 feet+ thick average where there is more coverage then last year at this time. That comes out to 10,800,000,000 more hockey rinks floating in the Arctic.
equal to 10,800,000,000 hockey rinks of ice in volume of more ice then last year at this time.
Cute, but hardly advances the discussion.
Neither does the IPCC, who are NOT cute, and have cost us trillions. When will you criticize them? Why do you hate humans do?
‘So’, not ‘do’, on the end.
gee, what part of 468 square meters times 700,000,000 don’t you understand?
You’re new to this, aren’t you? Have you taken the time to review the reporting and predictions of AGW true believers over the past 25 years? You are like a freshly minted lieutenant who shows up on the battlefield and starts lecturing the grizzled Sargent about the tactics you learned in your Jr year at the academy. You look foolish, and everyone would be sniggering behind your back if the didn’t realize you could get them all killed with your ignorance. Do you really think all the nonsense you spout hasn’t been vetted on these pages for years? Vetted and found wanting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:65_Myr_Climate_Change.png
They tell me you like wiki.
What’s the square cubic feet?Enough to cover all of United States with about 6″ covering of ice?
Perfect fit.
JAXA showing min on the 12th at 5.0 (Ver 1) and 4.81 (Ver 2). Will see if that holds depending on wind and compaction.
http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/revision_v2.html
Shock news: Forbes says the Guardian, Nutticellie and Meier are FOS.
Put a fork in it. CAGW is cooked. And so is the carbon tax scam.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/09/12/remember-all-those-breathy-predictions-about-an-ice-free-arctic-by-2015-nevermind/