The NSIDC is a rather ideological group out of CO, but they are somewhat better than some outright junk outfit like the University of East Anglia, the IPCC, or the Climate Research Unit I'll grant you. They are often found to take great effort to present data in a specific way to communicate the desired message. They often make ridiculous claims themselves(like Dr. Mark Serreze and his 'death spiral of arctic ice' prediction just two years ago). I use a slightly different visual approach to data below from them. Amazingly it communicates a different message. But I'm not surprised to see 'the usual suspects' trotted out by the religious CAGW faithful either way.
If only those CAGW groups hadn't made claims like the arctic summer would be ice free by 2013(which the 'scientist' said was "too conservative" an estimate, it would be sooner), the Bering Strait would be open for good, 'death spiral' of arctic ice cover just two years ago, etc. Published all over the world these alarmist claims, and called 'science'. Nobel prizes were won, Oscars even! Held up as dramatic PROOF! International headlines!
Ice recovers? Not a peep.
That's what's convenient about conspiracy theories, the lack of evidence only PROVES the conspiracy. Ridiculous claim after ridiculous claim, innumerable predictions based on models, when not only are many found to be outright deliberately false, but the weather moves in the opposite direction of them all? THAT only proves CAGW all the more. I'm waiting for the first CAGW person to be bold enough to say the weather patterns are caused by Satan to 'test our faith in CAGW'. This stuff is a religion.
The issue has never been about fluctuations in the earth's temperatures and weather patterns. The issue has been the hysteria, ridiculous junk science, models, predictions, and claims of the CAGW 'religion'. I wasn't trying to make the claim this year proved anything, just that it completely disproved the claims, models, and junk science of the CAGW community. Now do you follow? BTW 30 years of anything is not significant as to global temperatures and weather patterns, though you seem to imply it is?
Always the context of such things that matters yes? Well maybe not in your mind, but in the minds of many people who make an effort to have a logical and balanced view of such things. The 'scientific' predictions, consistent and ever more alarming predictions of the CAGW groups is the context here, whether someone wants to try and pretend it isn't or not.
The sea ice cover right now is near or above the thirty year average for this time of year, depending on variations in sources. This shows a clear recovery trend of arctic ice cover that runs counter to every CAGW prediction and 'model' I've seen. So yes it's noteworthy. This is the second year in a row approaching average, this year is expected to surpass average, and it's the third year of the trend.
As a former CAGW 'faithful believer' reporter has aptly stated:
"For the researchers, grant dollars and reputations are on the line. For reporters, global warming offers the thrill of covering The Biggest Story Ever Told, an appeal I could not resist. For politicians, it has offered an endless opportunity for grandstanding and power grabs. Convinced they are saving the earth—what could be more rewarding or important?—all three groups helped each other lose their minds" - A. Kam Napier, Ex-CAGW alarmist journalist
To quote NSIDC scientist Dr. Walt Meir about this event to which he responded via email:
"It’s a good question about the last time we’ve been above average. It was May 2001. April-May is the period when you’re starting to get into the peak of the melt season for the regions outside of the Arctic Ocean (Bering Sea, Hudson Bay) and the extent tends to have lower variability compared to other parts of the year as that thinner ice tends to go about the same time of year due to the solar heating. Even last year, we came fairly close to the average in early May.
Basically, it is due primarily to a lot more ice in the Bering Sea, as is evident in the images. The Bering ice is controlled largely by local winds, temperatures are not as important (though of course it still need to be at or at least near freezing to have ice an area for any length of time). We’ve seen a lot of northerly winds this winter in the Bering, particularly the last couple of weeks."
One need look no further than threads on this forum to see nonsense about an 'ice free Bering Strait' and all the catastrophic implications of such. Not a peep about "a lot more ice" in the Strait though.
That was my point above.
Last edited:
