Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- 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
- Harris To Win In A Blowout
- Election Results
- “Glaciers, Icebergs Melt As World Gets Warmer”
- “falsely labeling”
- Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
- Protesting Too Much Snow
Recent Comments
- conrad ziefle on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- Greg in NZ on Making Themselves Irrelevant
- arn on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- Trevor on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- czechlist on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- arn on COP29 Preview
- arn on COP29 Preview
- conrad ziefle on COP29 Preview
- conrad ziefle on Making Themselves Irrelevant
- stewartpid on COP29 Preview
Stocked up on popcorn…
Who’s dataset you gonna use? And I’m with Dave. Wonder who’ll get to eat the humble pie. Lord willin and the creek don’t rise, we’ll see in Sept.
The only daily extent dataset that I know of online is JAXA
http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/plot.csv
Most people seem to choose the NSIDC monthly to avoid noise issues.
-Scott
NSIDC is far too political for my tastes, and they don’t publish daily data.
I agree with Steve. NSIDC is tainted by its sensitivity to the AGW message. I seems to want to promote a message of a melting arctic. I don’t trust the organization.
There is also DMI (Danish Meteorological Institute) Ice SIte and the NORSEX Ice site, which are both daily ice sites. (I think NORSEX is the best one, in my opinion). Watts up With That has a nice sea ice page that’s useful.
They don’t provide digital data.
It’s nice to see one of Hansen’s underlings visit your site. I wonder if he helps Hansen torture data? 🙂
Wow, this is going to be interesting!! I think this climate clown is about lose $50, because with the bearing sea as cool as it is, slow melt should commence, and with little to no sign of wind influence like in 2007, I don’t see happening.
Have you seen the Cryosphere comparison of 2007 to this year? they show the Bering sea area at about 60% ice concentration compared to 80% in 2007. http://home.comcast.net/~ewerme/wuwt/cryo_compare.jpg
That just seems a fishy to me given the cold temperatures on that side of the Arctic this year.
Yes, it does seem fishy!!! Hmmm…..Perhaps they’re pulling a “hansen” on us and adjusting the data after the fact. The Bearing Sea had record sea ice this year, and was comparable to the 1950s when the PDO was cold. and in 2007, about this time, winds blew the ice toward warmer waters that allowed for vigorous melting in that area of the arctic. To add to that seas surface temperatures in the Bearing Sea, courtesy of Unisys, are 2-3 degrees below normal, so with all these things considered, if we’re going to see a rapid melting anywhere in the arctic, it likely wont come from the Bearing Sea, and I think Cryosphere needs to check their facts.
Oh I can see why they have 2007 higher than this year, in the website address I see “Comcast”, and don’t they own NBC? If that’s correct then I could see why the data looks fishy, because NBC is a progressive, eco-freak think tank.
Shall we start a list of possible places for him to donate? Heartland Institute? Koch Family Foundations? Restore Our Future?
I recommend the NRA!
Well done. You got one of the fear-mongers to spend some of his ill gotten gain.
What matters is that this doesn’t matter.
(I means it does matter that Steven wins his bet, but otherwise…) Actually, this is a little side battle that’s fine to fight, but as we all know we are currently recovering from the Little Ice Age, and ice melt is to be expected, and further, regional climate conditions affect regions… like the Arctic. SO even if a new minimum were to be made, it would be proof of nothing.
Moreover, if there had been a significant net land ice melt, we would have had -obvious- sea level rise. Well, though maybe some “data” shows ocean rise, when we go to the beach, going back decades or more and across multiple continents, we don’t see any discernible sea level rise. None at all. It’s almost common sense… nothing has changed about the climate or the sea; the scare-mongering Chicken Littles are most obviously full of it.
What we have is that the 2 foundations of the AGW theory have been removed, debunked, but the theory continues blithely on as if nothing has changed. It’s ludicrous. First, the hockey stick was shown to be fanciful bs, a fabrication by the leftist Berkeley graduate M Mann. That means that current temps are fine, and there is nothing wrong with the climate. Repeat: there is nothing wrong, so quit trying to throw a wrecking ball into western civilization by cutting to the bone essential and innocuous CO2 emissions.
Which brings up point # 2: the ipcc based the entire AGW theory on the posited causal correlation between CO2 & temps. But that was proven to be specious bunk; click my name for the 3 minute video (algor excerpt) that exposes the bullshit behind the ipcc claim about CO2. Also: love this cartoon that jonova highlighted about the doomsayers, lol:
http://andysrant.typepad.com/.a/6a01538f1adeb1970b0167680f9402970b-800wi
Agree with everything you said, and even if it was warming like they said, would it be worse than a drastic cooling period, which have been known to lead to mass extinctions ? That cartoon cracks me up, haha good one
In addition to the video you refer to with Fred Singer et al, a more recent look at:
http://www.colderside.com/Colderside/Temp_%26_CO2.html
clearly shows that CO2 is NOT a real factor, and certainly not a “leading” indicator.
Yeah, Carbon Dioxide isn’t much of a factor at all, and clearly with last 15 years of temperature data flatlining it certainly indicates there are larger forces at work like the Solar Cycles and Oceans, but the alarmists won’t see it that way because they heavily suffer from the Dunning-Krueger effect, which was mentioned on Joe Bastardi’s twitter page. The alarmists completely refuse to look at contradictory data and this gives them a cognitive bias, which makes them perform poorly on their subject (climate) Since of all this true they are unaware of their own ignorance and incompetence, thus they make little to no self-improvement on these aspects, and eventually leads to their ultimate downfall.
Eric,
In addition to CO2 levels lagging temperature by roughly 800 years, we might also add that additions of man-made CO2 to the atmosphere do not cause any measurable rise in temperature, even though CO2 absorbs and emits long-wave radiation in the 15 micrometer wave band (and a few smaller bands). That energy is emiitted isotropically, not just earthward. As we know, CO2 doesn’t “trap heat.” Nor does earth’s atmosphere function like a greenhouse. (Greenhouses are warmed through the suppression of convection, not via “backradiation.”)
Most of the heat energy from the earth’s surface is transported via conduction, evaporation, convection and condensation. Radiation is the small fry when it come to heat transport. This inconvenient fact is studiously ignored by the radiative physics crowd.
The warming effect of man-made CO2 in the atmosphere is the equivalent of a fart in a hurricane.
That explains things a lot, and i appreciate your insight!! I agree with you 100%
What has not been taken into account is that we’re betting essentially on surface area being at (or not at) 2007 levels. While last winter’s cold refroze more sea “surface” ice than normal, the volume of total floating ice is still shrinking, and thus surface area can erode more quickly.
So: I’ll take the bet that we’ll have a new “record” open Arctic ocean this September, and it will be a close one, but I’m counting on frangibility to push this over to a win.
Who gets paid? If I win, you pay $100, with $50 going to Heartland and $50 to C-Fact. If I lose, the money goes to the same organizations, except this time it will be out of my pocket.
Either JAXA or NSIDC should be OK to call the bet!
BTW Next winter should be on your “watch list” from a northern hemisphere Snow Cover Extent (SCE) standpoint, as amelioration of La Nina, if current trends continue, will increase polar – equatorial temperature contrast, Jet Stream undulation, and the resulting SCE should make for an “interesting” winter, unlike last year.
Yep, this winter shouldn’t be boring at all, especially considering we’re entering el nino conditions, with an el nino centered over the central pacific after a double la nina in a cold PDO, you couldn’t really ask for better conditions. Another factor that will also play into this winter, something Joe Bastardi mentioned and that was that the current extreme cold and -AAO has linkage to the northern hemisphere winter.
I have to like “ToSeek”. At least he is prepared to put his money where his mouth is.
Steve. When you will win this bet please email me at:
[email protected] and I will send $50 to a bank account of your choosing.
Sorry “ToSeek”. While I like your spirit there is no way you will get any money from me.
Regardless of the outcome, and I doubt ToSeek will win because of various current situations, I would like to congratulate ToS. for engaging someone at a skeptical blog. I would encourage ToSeek to continue to do so because it has been sorely lacking worldwide, and for the most part it has been those who believe there is significant AGW who will not engage. Any engagement should be about all parties gaining and not about ego trips and winning. What good does it do?
I would hope there are no ad hominem attacks either way.
I also appreciate sites like Judy C at climate etc. because I believe she takes an honest look at each and every item. Perhaps that is why so many opinions are given there on a regular basis.
Some technical, Some Not
I hope he pays up if he loses, I know Steve would. Jaxa seems a good one to use.
I can see this one going down in recriminations and a fight regarding whose data is more dishonest…
Unlike most AGW believers, At least To Seek had the courage to face a skeptic, and for that I have to give (him or her) some respect.
Big list here (scroll to the bottom):
http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/sea-ice-page/
You and “ToSeek” should settle on the dataset(s) in advance, though. Recall when Bremen announced a record low last year (which, of course, made news headlines everywhere)? But everyone else said it wasn’t a record low.
Yeah, I remember the alarmism last year coming out in full force from the record low Bremen claimed was there, then the media of course never reported on the fact that it was false. Very sad indeed. It’s no wonder why America’s trust in the media is now comparable to Congress.
In my case, I really don’t care which data set is used as Heartland and C-Fact will win regardless!
not fiar, Steve. I took the bet 2 weeks ago, and even gave you a predicted minimum. Not being an ideologue like To Seek, however, I proposed we bet a dinner at Galatoire’s in New Orleans where we can can eat multiple courses cooked with flames created by the burning of fossil fuels
Fair enough! Unfortunately though I am a raw foods vegetarian.
Now how in Hades are you supposed to contribute anything useful (Read: “CO2”) to stave off Glow Bull Cooling, if you don’t eat cooked animal flesh? I, as a member of the Greater Carbon Contribution Commission, recommend that you immediately go out and buy the biggest, baddest off-road vehicle currently available and start running over entire herds of native bovines, then cooking them on freshly-felled grandfather oaks, while sipping your favorite adult beverage shipped from the farthest point on the globe by the most fuel-inefficent means possible! 😉
Good luck on your bet. We’ll keep the fires burning for you.
Also, kudos to “ToSeek” for stepping into the batter’s box in a
hostileout-of-town ballpark.It took me several days to recover from your revelation. Does that mean you don’t drink alcoholic beverages, either?
Fair enough again, though. $100 from the loser to the winner’s favorite charity. You can send your check to Second Harvest Food Bank in New Orleans.
No, I have a drink once in a while. Sounds good, and you can donate to the Romney campaign!
Done, and done. I already donate to Mr. Romney’s campaign, but another $100 is not a problem in the unlikely event the ice holds.
raw foods vegetarian? Interesting…
And I ride a bicycle everywhere. I will not get in a car unless I have no other choice. I hate cars, traffic, pollution and I think the amount of oil we waste is beyond criminal.
that should be “fair”
Not sure it matters who wins this bet.
Alarmists want to say that no ice is bad, yet what exactly is the downside? Ice extent doesn’t prove or disprove AGW. And, AGW has not been proven to be harmful given that no data show more drought/floods/tornadoes (EF3-EF5)/hurricanes.
Looking at Jeff Master’s blog, it seems like the warmists over there are already preparing to announce the new date for ice free arctic 2015.
Temperatures at the North Pole have been above freezing for only a few hours this summer. How long does it take to melt six feet of ice at 1C?
They are morons.
Absolutely correct!! Then they’ll say, “Hey!!, look it’s cracking, must be warming!” Soon enough the freezing season will come around and it will be interesting to see if we get even more ice this winter than last winter.
I must admit that you sound like me whenever I deal with vegetarians when it came to actual science over nutrition. Many of them ignore science when it comes to preventing heart disease and diabetes type two. I just find it funny. It’s always fun to watch their head explode when I show papers that saturated fat is good for you because it raises your HDL (good cholesterol) level. 🙂 Same for sun scare crap. They go nuts over it when I show them how sun actually cuts down cancers. 🙂