Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- “under the Intermediate Scenario”
- “under the Intermediate Scenario”
- “carbon emissions may have now peaked”
- Record Arctic Sea Ice Growth
- “4th Hottest Summer”
- Killing Joshua Trees To Save Them
- NASA Sea Level
- “getting smaller”
- “Permanent Shift” In Antarctic Sea Ice
- Rapidly Accelerating Sea Level Rise
- Technology Advances
- “The Hour Of Decision”
- “fair & equitable”
- Michael Mann Continues His War
- Time Travelling Satellites
- Time Traveling Satellites
- Adult Content On X
- The Climate Of 1923
- Arctic Report Card
- Green Colorado
- Hottest Summer Ever
- “Sea ice could be gone by 2012, scientists warn”
- Record CO2 Growth
- Walz’s For Trump
- 6,000 Year Old Tree In The Austrian Alps
Recent Comments
- Mike Peinsipp on “4th Hottest Summer”
- Mike Peinsipp on “under the Intermediate Scenario”
- Russell Cook on “under the Intermediate Scenario”
- stewartpid on Record Arctic Sea Ice Growth
- oeman50 on “carbon emissions may have now peaked”
- Richard E Fritz on “under the Intermediate Scenario”
- arn on “under the Intermediate Scenario”
- Gordon Vigurs on “under the Intermediate Scenario”
- Gordon Vigurs on “carbon emissions may have now peaked”
- Bob G on “under the Intermediate Scenario”
Anyone who says arctic sea-ice hasn’t been recovering in the last 5 years is a flat out liar.
I don’t label anyone with the D-word, unlike alarmists; either someone is telling the truth, or they ain’t.
Obviously you do not live in the high arctic. Anyone who lives there and sees you comment knows you have no clue about which you talk about.
Please remeber there are 2 parts of ice that extent does not tell. Thickness and continuity. Extent means that there is at least 15% of the ocean covered by some kind of ice. Exapmly if 50% of extent was all covered and 50% was only 15% covered that means in realty only 57.5% of the extent area actually is covered by ice. The other side is the thickness. Satellites can not even get that purfect because if you get a wind the jams lots of ice into ridges, to the satellite it appears thick in reality it could be ice that can break apart very easily and melt very fast. As a hint of how bad things are. look at the extent in February and you would know that most of that ice is very thin and will dissappear quickly.
Go to Baffin Island and then report here how great the Arctic ice is.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/05/07/cryosat-arctic-ice-same-thickness-as-1940/
Are you suggesting that people live on pack ice?
Lets set Dave N back to the year 1993. Dave would have looked back at “ice extent” and said “Anyone who has said ice extent has not been recovering for the past 5 years is lying.” Oops. Dave would have been wrong as future years show. Dave, of course, would have said the same in 2000 about the past 4 years, but alas, he would have been wrong again. Now he is saying the same foolish thing.
Dave, I have a suggestion…check out long term trends, rather than just 5 years. And you don’t need to do any additional research…just look at the graph above.
what good is a death spiral if you can’t depend on it?
Mark should take lessons from Katherine and call it a Weirding Spiral. These people are suffering the consenquenses or their own words