Date Anomaly Area 2013.1589 0.3236561 16.2882099arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/timeseries.global.anom.1979-2008
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Ellen Flees To The UK
- HUD Climate Advisor
- Causes Of Increased Storminess
- Scientist Kamala Harris
- The End Of Polar Bears
- Cats And Hamsters Cause Hurricanes
- Democrats’ Campaign Of Joy
- New BBC Climate Expert
- 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- “the United States has suffered a “precipitous increase” in hurricane strikes”
- Thing Of The Past Returns
- “Impossible Heatwaves”
- Billion Dollar Electric Chargers
- “Not A Mandate”
- Up Is Down
- The Clean Energy Boom
- Climate Change In Spain
- 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
Recent Comments
- spren on HUD Climate Advisor
- conrad ziefle on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Tel on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Petit_Barde on Ellen Flees To The UK
- dm on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Gamecock on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Richard E Fritz on The End Of Polar Bears
- Richard E Fritz on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Richard E Fritz on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Richard E Fritz on Causes Of Increased Storminess
Lol, well, sure that’s one way of putting it! 😀 Brevity, there’s no replacing it’s effectiveness. I went through much more bother saying the same thing.
Unfortunately, in a changing climate this is exactly the kind of thing we can expect.
That is complete bullshit. The whole basis of CAGW theory is feedbacks, with one of the largest being albedo (ice) loss at the poles.
heh – a very large number times zero is still zero.
Whatever happens is exactly what was expected…
The model says so.
Aldous,
the climate is ALWAYS in a state of change thus your statement is silly.
Aldous,
Have you read about Arctic amplification? Secondly, your nonsense about changing climate is exactly that. The climate ALWAYS changes. Why didn’t you use global warming?
Steve,
O/T and FYI.
More temperature fiddling highlighted
http://joannenova.com.au/2013/03/not-the-hottest-ever-summer-for-most-australians-in-sydney-melbourne-or-brisbane-not-extreme-heatwaves-either/
It was a relatively nice summer given the fact that the previous year’s was so cold and wet. Sometimes you get lucky.
I remember 1972, my first visit to Oz, and in Melbourne the temperature was 80C or above every day for the late autumn month of May. I don’t believe that this has been repeated since, even though 1972 was right in the middle of the “mini Ice age.”
Hi Steve,
NSIDC displays a 15.6 million km2 february mean for 1979-2000 range. I downloaded their data, excluded months where there were less than 14 days recorded and computed these datas : I got a 15.47 million km2 mean for this period.
I got a bigger difference for january, they displayed 15.1 million km2 and I got 14.63.
I think they artificially enlarge past ice sheet extent so the present one appears smaller.
Can you confirm my results ?
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/
I was writting about North Hemisphere datas, Arctic ice sheet !
I think they compensate for the Arctic satellite visibility hole around the pole
They compensate always in the same direction, I’m not comfortable with “datas” obtained not only by mesurement but by using some esoterics models…
(I’m French, my english is perfectible)