Arctic Sea Ice Continues Its Astonishing Streak of Lows

[Crick]

March 2006 held the record for the lowest maximum ice extent for many years. Your comparison tells us we've matched a record-setter.

Sorry guy...it didn't even hold it for 1 year...

2007 was the only year to have a lower max and that by a very small and very brief margin. You've fucking cherry-picked this and you are pushing BULLSHIT

 

[SSDD]

And 2006 was a record LOW maximum extent. You've CHERRY-PICKED your comparison here.

Once again...crick proves conclusively that he can't read a graph...2007 has less ice than 2006.

 

[Crick]

Let's see, what did Crick JUST say "2007 was the only year to have a lower max"

Are you not awake yet? You've been nailed. Your comparison is cherry picked. Give it the fuck up.

 

[mamooth]

Extent remains essentially tied for a record low for the date, while volume is still at record-breaking lows.

 

[SSDD]

What do you suppose the arctic has looked like for most of the past 10,00 years? How do you suppose the volume of ice today compares to the ice 900 years ago.....or 2000 years ago...or 6800 years ago....or 7800 years ago...or for the vast majority of the past 10,000 years?

You hand waving glassy eyed chanting cult hysterics have to be one of the stupidest groups of people to have come down the chute. Is it your politics that requires you to be this senseless or do you hold your political position because you are senseless?

 

[JoeNormal]

What do you suppose the arctic has looked like for most of the past 10,00 years? How do you suppose the volume of ice today compares to the ice 900 years ago.....or 2000 years ago...or 6800 years ago....or 7800 years ago...or for the vast majority of the past 10,000 years?

You hand waving glassy eyed chanting cult hysterics have to be one of the stupidest groups of people to have come down the chute. Is it your politics that requires you to be this senseless or do you hold your political position because you are senseless?

This would be an excellent point if at any time in human history before now, the world had 7 billion people to feed with a large percentage living in tropical and/or oceanfront areas.

 

[skookerasbil]

The OP is a dummy..........thinks the only place it should be cold is at the north pole. It occasionally shifts south meathead..........


"It was also shown that these warming events at the pole occur once or twice each decade with an event in 2014 and the earliest event that has been so far identified taking place in 1959. The 1959, 2014 and 2015 events share a number of common characteristics including the presence of a deep extra-tropical cyclone in the vicinity of the pole that transported warm and moist air towards the pole. All events also were associated with a highly perturbed polar vortex that brought the jet stream close to the pole."



https://www.nature.com/articles/srep39084



[URL='http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/Laughing%20gif.gif.html'][/URL]

 

[Old Rocks]

This is a problem that is not going to go away by acting the fool, and posting silly ass posts. The lack of arctic ice will have major effects on the weather and climate worldwide.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Well old rocks, it seems that your graphs don't agree with the satellite photos... Your graph makes claims that the photos show are not correct...fake graphs...fake news...fake alarm...fake science....it is all fake all the time with you glassy eyed chanting cultists.

Lying and deception is all they have.

They are playing on the hope the average citizen doesn't know how to check out the lies they are spewing.

They have chosen to use anomalies rather than real temps as the real temps show no change in the distribution of warming and cooling cycles. Anomalies can be show to be scary by changing the base period they use, to make the anomaly look scary.

 

[Old Rocks]

Oh, it's Silly Billy, our atmospheric physicist that doesn't know third grade science.

Image 2 of 4 (play slideshow) Download

Image 4 of 4 (play slideshow) Download

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis | Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag

 

[SSDD]

What do you suppose the arctic has looked like for most of the past 10,00 years? How do you suppose the volume of ice today compares to the ice 900 years ago.....or 2000 years ago...or 6800 years ago....or 7800 years ago...or for the vast majority of the past 10,000 years?

You hand waving glassy eyed chanting cult hysterics have to be one of the stupidest groups of people to have come down the chute. Is it your politics that requires you to be this senseless or do you hold your political position because you are senseless?

This would be an excellent point if at any time in human history before now, the world had 7 billion people to feed with a large percentage living in tropical and/or oceanfront areas.

You are looking at a natural cycle...the past remains an excellent point...there is nothing we have done to alter the natural progression of such cycles and there is nothing we can do to alter them in the future except do what we have always done...adapt. Our ability to adapt is why we are the most successful species that ever walked the planet.

 

[SSDD]

This is a problem that is not going to go away by acting the fool, and posting silly ass posts. The lack of arctic ice will have major effects on the weather and climate worldwide.

Really? Describe the effects during the past 10K years when arctic ice was considerably lower than the present..

Oh, it's Silly Billy, our atmospheric physicist that doesn't know third grade science.

Image 2 of 4 (play slideshow) Download

Image 4 of 4 (play slideshow) Download

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis | Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag

Once again rocks...how do you suppose your short view of arctic ice looks compared to the longer view...why do you find it impossible to admit the truth that the present sea ice extent is far greater than it has been for most of the past 10,000 years? Are you really that dishonest that you can't acknowledge the truth when it is looking you right in the eye?...and what does that say about the quality of your character?

 

[Crick]

RATE OF CHANGE fool

 

[SSDD]

RATE OF CHANGE fool

If you could make heads or tails of a graph, you would see that the graph above shows rates of change that are far more rapid than anything we have seen and of a greater magnitude as well...fool.

 

[Crick]

Really? Then you've just tossed out the chronological resolution argument.

 

[SSDD]

Really? Then you've just tossed out the chronological resolution argument.

Not at all...ice cores have the finest resolution available to us....There is a reason ice cores are known as the gold standard for temperature reconstruction.

I must say, it is damned interesting to watch you people struggle, engage in elaborate mental masturbation, and drag your intellects (such as they are) through the sewer in an attempt to defend the indefensible...it shows an abject lack of character...but that is to be expected of liberals...isn't it?

 

[Crick]

Yes at all. For years you and your compatriots here have insisted that a temperature and CO2 spike such as we have experience in the last century and a half could not be seen and thus - according to your master logicians - MUST have occurred over and over again. And this conversation certainly has not precluded ice core data.

Fool. If you want to talk of character shortcoming, perhaps we can go over your consistent dishonesty.

 

[SSDD]

Yes at all. For years you and your compatriots here have insisted that a temperature and CO2 spike such as we have experience in the last century and a half could not be seen and thus - according to your master logicians - MUST have occurred over and over again. And this conversation certainly has not precluded ice core data.

Fool. If you want to talk of character shortcoming, perhaps we can go over your consistent dishonesty.

You just can't manage to tell the truth can you? I have asked you to show me a temperature reconstruction with resolution adequate for you to make the claim that the warming we have seen in the past 150 years is unprecedented...and you can't do it...that would be because the only temperature reconstructions that can show that sort of resolution show just the opposite of what you claim....perhaps that is why you never provided one of the gold standard temperature reconstructions made from ice cores...

The resolution of the ice cores is shown at the bottom of the graph..sorry I didn't point that out to you in crayon...clearly you didn't get yourself a 5th grader to help you out with the graph or you wouldn't have responded with such a whiney assed cry baby statement. BOO HOO....

 

[Old Rocks]

Now SSo DDumb, if there were a spike in temperature due to CO2, we would see a very slow return from that spike due to the residence time of CO2 in the atmosphere. Pretty damned obvious to anyone that understands the physics of CO2 in the atmosphere. If you need some tutoring in that;

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

 

[SSDD]

Now SSo DDumb, if there were a spike in temperature due to CO2, we would see a very slow return from that spike due to the residence time of CO2 in the atmosphere. Pretty damned obvious to anyone that understands the physics of CO2 in the atmosphere. If you need some tutoring in that;

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

There never has been, nor will there ever be a spike in temperate from CO2...and anyone who understands the physics of CO2 in the atmosphere would not claim that it can cause warming...the sensitivity of the climate to CO2 in the literature is well on its way to zero...only idiots, and truly dishonest people claim that CO2 can cause the temperature to increase.