For most of August, the press was writing stories about record heat and record melting in the Arctic, while I was pointing out that there was very little melting occurring in the Arctic. As is almost always the case, they were wrong. Yet there will be no corrections, no admissions, no retractions and no acknowledgments. Because the climate press are propagandists and have no interest in the truth.
For years and years alarmists have been screaming and shouting about melting ice and climate catastrophe, as if somehow more frozen wasteland is good and less of it is bad, and in fact unsurvivable.
So if at any time the amount of ice increases above the long term average, and especially above the grey zone, anyone who thinks melting ice is a crisis would have to be very happy and have cause to celebrate.
Personally I think it would be bad and may be an early sign of a shift to colder temps which could lead to reduced crop yields and more energy demand and generally more misery and expense for a great number of people.
But anyone who thinks melting ice is bad would have to celebrate more ice.
I predict that we will soon (within a few years and maybe this Winter) have increasing ice that goes above the 1981-2000 mean, and that not one single alarmist will have anything happy or good to say about it.
“(within a few years and maybe this Winter)”
Assuming you are talking sea ice only, do you mean in the Arctic or the Arctic and Antarctic ?
What do you base your prediction on?
Andy55
While i’m on your side that CO2 doesn’t control weather, you can’t say that this is the shortest arctic melt season in recorded history bc the period of record only goes back to 1979.
Forgetting that it ain’t over till the fat lady gets harpooned, the shortest melt season could also then be described as the fastest melt season, given the start and end values. You can turn it around and the longest melt season becomes the slowest melt season once again. Depending on your predilection.
We get this with a really low summer extent with the rapid freezing that follows being described as the fastest refreeze on record, just as it gets back to the normal trendline.
Having said that
1. I doubt it will be a particularly long melt season.
2. I am not whether length of melt season matters in the Arctic due to geographical land locking during winter.
From 2019 so far I note is as a boring year with still low value rather than anything out of the ordinary. I like boring years for the trend, compared to 2007 and 2012 which were just weather things.
Andy55
No, little-andy, the extent will NOT be low this year.
It will still be in the top 5% or so of the last 10,000 years.
Their is still one heck of a lot of sea ice up their.
Why do you have such problems with basic mathematical concepts of areas and numbers, little child-mind?
Did you FAIL junior high school?
Or are you just making comments that are DELIBERATELY IGNORANT as a mind-numbed form of trolling and attention seeking ??
Why the discourtesy Spike? What does it gain you or anybody?
He is a serial offender with his dis-information and remarks. He refuses to learn, always pushing garbage ill-informed comments.
He is a TROLL, nothing more.
Why should anyone be polite to those who are espouse the socialist AGW anti-science, anti-truth agenda !
If your comment isn’t incoherent, it’s at least …
For most of August, the press was writing stories about record heat and record melting in the Arctic, while I was pointing out that there was very little melting occurring in the Arctic. As is almost always the case, they were I was wrong.
I’ve corrected your opening statement!
According to Chartic Aug 1st extent=6.231, on Aug 31st extent = 4.620, a drop of 1.611 (-25%, not very little melting).
You also stated earlier in the month that you thought that this years extent “was likely to finish highest in the last five years”. I pointed out at the time that that was most unlikely and that the 2017 and 2018 minimums would be passed within a week.
As of today the extent is below the minimums of 2014, 2016, 2017, & 2018
“they were” should have been struck through, apparently doesn’t work here.
Still waiting to see your corrections, admissions, and retractions.
Still waiting on you to criticize forty plus years of failed alarmist predictions…
From the BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49483580