ssmi1_ice_area.png (1667×1250)
BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013’
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- 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
- Glaciers Vs. The Hockey Stick
- CNN : Unvaccinated Should Not Be Allowed To Leave Their Homes
- IPCC : Himalayan Glaciers Gone By 2035
- Deadly Cyclones And Arctic Sea Ice
- What About The Middle Part?
- “filled with racist remarks”
- Defacing Art Can Prevent Floods
- The Worst Disaster Year In History
- Harris Wins Pennsylvania
- “politicians & shills bankrolled by the fossil fuel industry”
- UN : CO2 Killing Babies
- Patriotic Clapper Misspoke
- New York Times Headlines
- Settled Science At The New York Times
- “Teasing Out” Junk Science
- Moving From 0% to 100% In Six Years
- “Only 3.4% of Journalists Are Republican”
Recent Comments
- Bob G on Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
- Disillusioned on Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
- Disillusioned on Harris To Win In A Blowout
- Mac on The End Of Everything
- czechlist on The End Of Everything
- arn on Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
- Peter Carroll on Harris To Win In A Blowout
- arn on Election Results
- arn on Election Results
- Timo, not that one! on Election Results
Actually it is now above the average of the satellite era.
Why is the average only upto 2006 ? That’s now well over six years old ? Souldn’t hey be using 2012 as the base line ? If the comparison to average was more recent wouldn’t we be above the 25 year average now ?
Alarmists love cherries, but only the cherries that they get to pick.
It is a meaningless mean, that picks the largest volume years of the satellite era. I have written to NSIDC about this nonsense, and was told years ago that they are ‘reviewing’ the issue.
That’s the only way they can control the discussion – by allowing the holders of the data to determine what “normal” is.
Please note that as ice extent is now at or close to ‘normal’ (whatever that is) the new buzz word on the climate block is volume,
Memo to alarmists: volume is the way, volume is the future. Extent is sooo yesterday. Nobody, whatever they do, mention the fact that ice extent is now effectively within the range of normal…
IF extent ever get back to ‘normal’ they will indeed pick on volume. They started saying that after 2007 when we saw an uptick from the 2007 minimum.
People like Professor Wieslaw Maslowski should learn when to give up. After his 2007 prediction (which looks like it will fail this September) he proceeds to make up another prediction for an ice-free Arctic in 2016! Just 3 more years to go………….again. 🙁
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13002706
How’s the ice volume or multiyear ice doing wiseguys?
Multi-year ice has increased more than 30% since 2008. Hope this helps.
I predict that global ice will be higher in September. Climate science is completely compromised.
Question is, how will they ever be able to prove a totally ice free Arctic? All it takes is someone in a rowboat finding a single ice cube.
That’s why most of them are trying to hedge the bet – and say “nearly” ice free.
Since they control the data, they might just get by with it.