Green shows the increase in sea ice since 2012. The Pope’s climate adviser says that the Arctic has been ice-free since 2013.
BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013’
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- COP29 Preview
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- A Giant Eyesore
- CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- Rats Jumping Off The Climate Ship
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Spoiled Children
- Great Lakes Storm Of November 11, 1835
- Harris To Win Iowa
- Angry Democrats
- November 9, 1913 Storm
- Science Magazine Explains Trump Supporters
- Obliterating Bill Gates
- Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
- The End Of Everything
Recent Comments
- Gordon Vigurs on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- Disillusioned on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- Disillusioned on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Francis Barnett on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- dm on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- arn on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- Tel on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- Gamecock on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- conrad ziefle on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- conrad ziefle on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
You quote the Biased Broadcasting Company …
Basically Bull Crap! Is what I call it. It is so sad really. During WW II BBC Radio was universally praised among the soldiers of the Allies for it’s factual and honest reporting even when things were going badly for the war effort. From the many contemporaneous accounts it is apparent most of the allied troops, including the million of American troops exposed to it, thought it had the most accurate Newscasts in the world.
it is indeed sad. they have gone from being the prime source of factual information around the world to a left wing advocacy group.
The honest, BBC employees of WWII, are now long dead ; along with their integrity.
This level of propaganda today, was originally attributed to Nazi Germany of WWII.
Just what were we fighting for again ?
(millions)
Holy See ice, it’s a popesickle!
GROANnnnn….
Here is another good one.
His AOUT page is also rather interesting.
A bit more history on the various attacks on banksters by the same guy
http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/16638
I don’t recall ever seeing that in history books, at least not the info about hanging the Wall Street Banksters.
WIKI has nothing and this is what I found:
Some threatened to hang bankers who wouldn’t pay out. The President realizing the serious nature of what was transpiring ordered his Treasury Secretary to announce that gold from the reserves would be sold into the market. (Looks like the same source, Armstrong)
and this: http://seekingalpha.com/article/176286-bankers-arm-themselves-prepare-for-populace-retribution
Seems even our recent history is being changed.
HISTORY As A WEAPON
Howard Zinn? The lying marxist POS that even leftists now decry?
Thanks Gator, I never heard of him. However as we all know rewriting history IS used as a weapon by the Progressives.
The 1970s Ice Age scare is a prime example.
There was a Black Friday, but no source that I find remotely credible mentions bankers being lynched, which could not have escaped the notice of historians. Also this Armstrong didn’t do the research. In that period, to say that gold was at 162 meant that it took that many paper dollars to buy 100 gold dollars; naturally, during the Civil War, gold was often a good deal higher than that. I don’t know exactly what the gold price as so defined is now: more than 5000 anyway.
Thanks Beale, I was wondering about that. I saw that there were threats of lynchings but nothing except Armstrong’s word about actual lynchings.
The nice thing about this website is if you fly a bad piece of info it gets shot down pretty quick with facts attached.
According to the National Snow and Ice Data Center, the Arctic minimum for 2012 occurred on 9/17/15 and was 339 million square kilometers. The minimum for this year occurred on 9/11/15 and was 441 million square kilometers. That is an increase of 30.1%. Not 37%, but still pretty good!
According to the National Snow and Ice Data Center, the Arctic minimum for 2012 occurred on 9/17/12 and was 339 million square kilometers. The minimum for this year occurred on 9/11/15 and was 441 million square kilometers. That is an increase of 30.1%. Not 37%, but still pretty good!
Opps! I meant 9/17/12 not 9/17/15 for Arctic Ice min in 2012….
“Study raises doubt about viability of Northwest Passage as shipping route
Thick ice means commercial shipping still decades off, researchers say.
“It would take 30, or even 50 years, before the ice becomes weaker, he said. “It’s really thick in the winter and there is a chance that during individual summers, it can survive and stay thick. If we have a cooler summer, like we had in 2014 and 2013, there would be significantly thick ice surviving.”
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2015/09/30/study-raises-doubt-about-viability-of-northwest-passage-as-shipping-route.html
One thing about it. Been a few days since any of the Arctic is melting away types have shown their faces here to argue about it or dispute something that has been posted here on it.
Hey, rah. You think that lack of argument is victory? Really? Lack of argument means that you are on your own, not that you are right.
The ‘arctic has recovered’ types are you. And you are wrong.
The arctic just had a really low summer extent. You want to quantify that? I don’t care. You and ‘Steven Goddard’ (how cute is that?, wanting to be credited with those that he now trashes). Tony is a Heller. He wants you to believe that the arctic is fine. It has recovered. He, of course, is absolutely wrong.
Again, your display your utter and complete IGNORANCE in every word you type.
Current Arctic sea ice levels are ANOMALOUSLY HIGH compared to all but the last few hundred years of the Holocene.
The reason they are so high is because we have just finished climbing out of the coldest period in the last 10,000 years.
The reason why MORONS like you want to take 1979 as a reference starting point is because it was a peak in the already huge extent of summer sea ice, due to the cool phase of the AMO.
Those are the FACTS, that you either don’t have the intelligence to understand,
or are WILLFULLY LYING about.
DECEITFUL LIES and IGNORANCE…….. Its all you have.
rah, take your tinfoil hat off. Sea ice observations from passive microwave sensors began in 1972 with the Electrically Scanning Microwave Radiometer (ESMR) aboard NOAA’s Nimbus-5 satellite. In 1978, NASA’s Scanning Multichannel Microwave Radiometer (SMMR) provided detailed, reliable information about sea ice. In 1987, a series of DMSP Special Sensor Microwave/Imager (SSM/I) sensors continued the time series, or long-term record, of sea ice data through present. In 2002, NASA launched the Aqua satellite, which carried the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer-Earth Observing System (AMSR-E) sensor. The system’s improved technology complemented the time series of sea ice data. ESMR, SMMR, SSM/I, and AMSR-E sea ice data are all available from NSID.
The reason most scientists limit themselves to the post 1978 data is that it is the most consistent and reliable. Many climate scientists have reconstructed pre-satellite arctic sea ice data, and there is no 1979 maximum that Tony Heller screams about. He simply cannot paste a pre-1979 anomoly graph from the first IPCC report onto a modern anomoly graph without regard to the baseline of the two anomoly graphs. And circling two peak anomolies to claim that the arctic gained two million km^2 between 1974 and 1979 is just inane. He would be laughed out of any climate science seminar. When you look at the actual data that NSID and other groups provide, you will see that the summer minimum in 1974 is virtually identical to the summer minimum of 1979. The anomalies happened because 1974 had a relative low winter maximum, while 1979 had a rather high winter max.
Look how difficult it is to use pre-1972 satellite data- http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-22271972
Notice how it is the disparaged ‘scientists’ that are doing all the heavy lifting when it comes to pre-satellite data- http://www.star.nesdis.noaa.gov/star/documents/meetings/Ice2013/dayTwo/Walsh_Wed.pdf
Where is Tony Heller’s pre-satellite references? A bunch of newspaper clippings from Samoa in 1927?
http://seaiceatlas.snap.uaf.edu/about
http://nsidc.org/icelights/2011/01/31/arctic-sea-ice-before-satellites/
https://tamino.wordpress.com/2010/10/16/history-of-arctic-and-antarctic-sea-ice-part-1/
http://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2011/09/historical-minimum-in-sea-ice-extent.html
So you immediately use the post 1970 data, the last 30 or so years of the cycle.
DOH !
Ignore the fact that the ONLY reason the Arctic sea ice level is so high is because we are still only just above the coldest period of the whole last 10,000 years.
It is only though that base-level ignorance that these childish scares have any worth what-so-ever.
I don’t need to “qualify” anything! The ICE up there has done that for me. It never approached 2012 low level this summer and remains withing 2 standard deviations of the rather high mean established during 1979.
https://sunshinehours.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/arctic_sea_ice_extent_zoomed_2015_day_273_1981-2010.png
. In short THERE IS NO DEATH SPIRAL as predicted and there is no evidence that there will be one! We who watch but do not predict the end of ice have seen. The claim of the DEATH SPIRAL was unadulterated Bull Shit! All the words in the world can’t change the FACT that what the alarmists claimed would happen has not happened and there is absolutely no evidence that it is about to happen anytime in the foreseeable future.
Game- Set- Match.
Further. The very fact that you and so many others have put so much stock in a body of ice that floats in an ocean who’s coverage and concentration can be changed very quickly by factors having NOTHING directly to do with either the temperature of the water or air is HILARIOUS! Storms, winds, waves and currents effect sea ice greatly. But to hear you clowns one would think they are non factors and that is what really first clued me in to just how dishonest or ignorant people like you are!
No, Andy, I did not immediately use the post 1970 data. Most of my posted links refer back to 1870 or so. 1970 was 45 years ago, not 30.
Droll, rah, very droll. I am a dishonest and ignorant person who you just scored a ‘Game- Set- Match’ against by claiming that I am wrong as a DEATH SPIRAL predictor. Why you are yelling, and why you think I am a chicken little is as obscure as why you think that two standard deviations below the norm is standard operating procedure. I told you to take the tinfoil hat off, not everyone who disagrees with your world view is out to hamstring the world economy.
YAWN.. another empty, meaningless rant from the low-end git.
Didn’t dispute a single thing I said. That says it all.
“One thing about it. Been a few days since any of the Arctic is melting away types have shown their faces here to argue about it or dispute something that has been posted here on it.”
The fact that I answered is your refutation. Are you simple minded?
What puerile crap you go on with.. Low IQ , junior high, I’m guessing
“I am a dishonest and ignorant person”
Yes.. the mirror has revealed your inner self to you… at last !!
95% of the values fall within 2 standard deviations of either side of the mean. For a result NOT to be considered part of the random distribution it must fall outside the expected results generally 3.0 standard deviations or 99.7%.
In other words there is nothing unusual going on especially since 2015 is not as low as 2012.
In engineering we tend to consider that it should fall outside two sd’s before it can be considered to be significantly different from random chance. Seems there is a discrepancy somewhere.
Andy,
If it falls outside of two sd’s I would certainly question it and watch closely to see if there is a pattern. (We did continuous process when I plotted Shewhart charts.) If it falls outside of three sd’s it is pretty much a slam dunk the data belongs to another ‘population’