Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Tostuya 0LOL Not going to post your link this time, Comrade Frankie boi? Because there are other places in the arctic that are way above what they should be in mid-January.No, really. The "Arctic is 50F warmer than usual" never actually happened. The chart is a fraud
Cool.
Barrow -26F
Kotelnly -4F
Golomjannayj 9F
Alert -4F
Very cool
Arctic Weather Map
Show us one (1)
Cape Cheluskin 5
Golomjannyj 14
Vize Island 12
Arctic Weather Map
And there are at least seven more on that map that are very warm for this time of year.
December 2016 compared to previous years
Figure 3. Monthly December ice extent for 1979 to 2016 shows a decline of 3.4 percent per decade.
Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center
Global sea ice tracking far below average
Figure 6a. This time series of daily global sea ice extent (Arctic plus Antarctic) shows global extent tracking below the 1981 to 2010 average. The X axis shows the month of the year, aligned with the first day of the month. Sea Ice Index data.
Credit: NSIDC
High-resolution image
Figure 6b. This graph shows daily global sea ice difference from average, relative to the 1981 to 2010 reference period in square kilometers for the satellite record from 1979 through 2016
Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center
High-resolution image
Figure 6c. This graph shows daily sea ice difference from average in units of the standard deviation (based on 1981-2010 variation from the average) for this period.
Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center
High-resolution image
Image 2 of 4 (play slideshow) Download
)
One day, from one station is not climate, right?You dumb lying fuck, that was not a claim for the whole of the winter, but one day during the winter. However, it has been unusually warm in the Arctic this winter, and the sea ice in the Arctic clearly shows that.LOL Not going to post your link this time, Comrade Frankie boi? Because there are other places in the arctic that are way above what they should be in mid-January.Barrow -26F
Kotelnly -4F
Golomjannayj 9F
Alert -4F
Very cool
Arctic Weather Map
Show us one (1)
Not just temperature guys. Ice doesn't build at the poles at it's HIGHEST rates without precipt. Antarctica is virtual desert and that factor varies WILDLY from year to year based on MINUTE amounts of precipt. The Arctic weather storm patterns will make a huge difference in sea ice build rates.
I'm just combating the "Arctic is 50F higher than normal" hysteria with actual Arctic temperature readings
You really are a moron...No, you dumb burger flipper, we did not survive 4 interglacials, The homo sapiens is only about 200,000 years old. And, thus far, it is not a survival issue, but one of maintaining our present civilization in the face of a rapid climate change.
Have you been to Denali or up the Alaskan coast, there is a lot of melting going on..
Also I grew up in northern Minnesota with deep cold winters, they haven't had a huge cold winter storm in several years.
Have you been to Denali or up the Alaskan coast, there is a lot of melting going on..
Also I grew up in northern Minnesota with deep cold winters, they haven't had a huge cold winter storm in several years.
The problem is, we humans have a very short life span as compared to the cyclical climate of our earth. Thus we do not live long enough to see the cycles start to finish. This makes us easily duped by those who would want to control us and use this as a weapon to deprive us of our freedoms and rights.
Just in the current interglacial we have seen 5 cycles of ice free and a return to partial glaciation. A fact the alarmists don't want you to see or understand.
View attachment 107567
Interglacial's last about 14,000 years on average. Were at 14,600 years at present. We are over due for our next 90,000 year glacial cycle. Pray that our current interglacial last a while longer. The death that will happen when we fall into the next glacial cycle will thin the herd massively.
WE do not blow chemicals into the air etc... we want reasonable regulations based on science, not left wing fear mongering and hype. Another left wing lie that needs to die as well..
Have you been to Denali or up the Alaskan coast, there is a lot of melting going on..
Also I grew up in northern Minnesota with deep cold winters, they haven't had a huge cold winter storm in several years.
The problem is, we humans have a very short life span as compared to the cyclical climate of our earth. Thus we do not live long enough to see the cycles start to finish. This makes us easily duped by those who would want to control us and use this as a weapon to deprive us of our freedoms and rights.
Just in the current interglacial we have seen 5 cycles of ice free and a return to partial glaciation. A fact the alarmists don't want you to see or understand.
View attachment 107567
Interglacial's last about 14,000 years on average. Were at 14,600 years at present. We are over due for our next 90,000 year glacial cycle. Pray that our current interglacial last a while longer. The death that will happen when we fall into the next glacial cycle will thin the herd massively.
I don't know enough to get into the science of things, but why is there such and opposition from the party who supports people like the Koch brothers to blow all of their chemicals into the air and water?
We have a cancer epidemic in America , so our bodies are warning us of what we are doing to our world.
Anyway, I do not want to hi-jack the thread, I find it interesting.
Have you been to Denali or up the Alaskan coast, there is a lot of melting going on..
Also I grew up in northern Minnesota with deep cold winters, they haven't had a huge cold winter storm in several years.
The problem is, we humans have a very short life span as compared to the cyclical climate of our earth. Thus we do not live long enough to see the cycles start to finish. This makes us easily duped by those who would want to control us and use this as a weapon to deprive us of our freedoms and rights.
Just in the current interglacial we have seen 5 cycles of ice free and a return to partial glaciation. A fact the alarmists don't want you to see or understand.
View attachment 107567
Interglacial's last about 14,000 years on average. Were at 14,600 years at present. We are over due for our next 90,000 year glacial cycle. Pray that our current interglacial last a while longer. The death that will happen when we fall into the next glacial cycle will thin the herd massively.
I don't know enough to get into the science of things, but why is there such and opposition from the party who supports people like the Koch brothers to blow all of their chemicals into the air and water?
We have a cancer epidemic in America , so our bodies are warning us of what we are doing to our world.
Anyway, I do not want to hi-jack the thread, I find it interesting.
Got to remind you here OldieRocks, everyone likes to PRETEND there was no satellite tally of Arctic Sea Ice before 1979..
It's kinda WILLFULLY dishonest to start data from relative PEAKS, when you have this in your back pocket. Isn't it???? Need an answer to that question bud..
And yet not one single shred of empirical evidence that man has caused any of it...Got to remind you here OldieRocks, everyone likes to PRETEND there was no satellite tally of Arctic Sea Ice before 1979..
No, only deniers pretend that, because it allows them to lie and claim ice was lower before the satellite era. For example, I've posted this here before.
TC - Abstract - A simple approach to providing a more consistent Arctic sea ice extent time series from the 1950s to present
All the deniers have seen that before, yet they pretend it doesn't exist, because it contradicts their confirmation bias. Instead of showing all the data, they deliberately cherrypick a much shorter piece that confirms their confirmation bias, as Flac just did. Essentially, that old graph that they love just grabs the bit from the shaded box.
It's kinda WILLFULLY dishonest to start data from relative PEAKS, when you have this in your back pocket. Isn't it???? Need an answer to that question bud..
It's obviously willfully dishonest to cherrypick data to avoid showing the higher ice levels prior to 1979, as Flac did. By his own standards, he needs to answer the question of why he tried to deceive us. But if past patterns hold, he won't offer an explanation. Instead, he'll snarl out some insults to cover his panicked retreat. And then, some months later, he'll post the same debunked nonsense again, even though he knows how deceptive it is.
The data goes back even farther. If we look at this study, we see how Arctic sea ice was definitely _increasing_ from 1935 - 1970. That destroys Flac's claim that long term Arctic sea ice levels were decreasing before the global warming era. Nope, it was the exact opposite, which is what you usually discover when you examine any of Flac's claims.
A new time series of September Arctic sea ice extent: 1935-2014
I'm not worried (at this point) about sea level rise. Actually, I never have to worry about it personally since I live at 4900 ft. My main concern is the positive feedback from absorption of solar radiation in a dark arctic sea. As for the negative feedback, are you expecting CO2 levels to drop significantly?I GTG work. But a couple other things to consider.
1) It's not SEA ice that is gonna drown your ass. Not from EITHER pole.. It's LAND ice. From Greenland and Antarctica primarily. And to LOSE MASSIVE amounts from a continent like Antarctica is only gonna happen at the END of any extraordinary warming period in a place where it's below -15degF most of the year. Sublimation and drought being the ONLY factors that you would see now until the next century. And sublimation can happen with a run-up in Total Solar Irradiance. Like the one we've seen since the 1700s.
2) An "ice free Arctic Ocean" is a neglected NEGATIVE feedback restraining the "runaway warming" theories. Because an ice barren very cold sea is a WONDERFUL "new" CO2 sink. .The equivalent of planting a new virgin forest the size of Australia..
Got to remind you here OldieRocks, everyone likes to PRETEND there was no satellite tally of Arctic Sea Ice before 1979..
No, only deniers pretend that, because it allows them to lie and claim ice was lower before the satellite era. For example, I've posted this here before.
TC - Abstract - A simple approach to providing a more consistent Arctic sea ice extent time series from the 1950s to present
All the deniers have seen that before, yet they pretend it doesn't exist, because it contradicts their confirmation bias. Instead of showing all the data, they deliberately cherrypick a much shorter piece that confirms their confirmation bias, as Flac just did. Essentially, that old graph that they love just grabs the bit from the shaded box.
It's kinda WILLFULLY dishonest to start data from relative PEAKS, when you have this in your back pocket. Isn't it???? Need an answer to that question bud..
It's obviously willfully dishonest to cherrypick data to avoid showing the higher ice levels prior to 1979, as Flac did. By his own standards, he needs to answer the question of why he tried to deceive us. But if past patterns hold, he won't offer an explanation. Instead, he'll snarl out some insults to cover his panicked retreat. And then, some months later, he'll post the same debunked nonsense again, even though he knows how deceptive it is.
The data goes back even farther. If we look at this study, we see how Arctic sea ice was definitely _increasing_ from 1935 - 1970. That destroys Flac's claim that long term Arctic sea ice levels were decreasing before the global warming era. Nope, it was the exact opposite, which is what you usually discover when you examine any of Flac's claims.
A new time series of September Arctic sea ice extent: 1935-2014
WE do not blow chemicals into the air etc... we want reasonable regulations based on science, not left wing fear mongering and hype. Another left wing lie that needs to die as well..
Have you been to Denali or up the Alaskan coast, there is a lot of melting going on..
Also I grew up in northern Minnesota with deep cold winters, they haven't had a huge cold winter storm in several years.
The problem is, we humans have a very short life span as compared to the cyclical climate of our earth. Thus we do not live long enough to see the cycles start to finish. This makes us easily duped by those who would want to control us and use this as a weapon to deprive us of our freedoms and rights.
Just in the current interglacial we have seen 5 cycles of ice free and a return to partial glaciation. A fact the alarmists don't want you to see or understand.
View attachment 107567
Interglacial's last about 14,000 years on average. Were at 14,600 years at present. We are over due for our next 90,000 year glacial cycle. Pray that our current interglacial last a while longer. The death that will happen when we fall into the next glacial cycle will thin the herd massively.
I don't know enough to get into the science of things, but why is there such and opposition from the party who supports people like the Koch brothers to blow all of their chemicals into the air and water?
We have a cancer epidemic in America , so our bodies are warning us of what we are doing to our world.
Anyway, I do not want to hi-jack the thread, I find it interesting.
I'm not worried (at this point) about sea level rise. Actually, I never have to worry about it personally since I live at 4900 ft. My main concern is the positive feedback from absorption of solar radiation in a dark arctic sea. As for the negative feedback, are you expecting CO2 levels to drop significantly?I GTG work. But a couple other things to consider.
1) It's not SEA ice that is gonna drown your ass. Not from EITHER pole.. It's LAND ice. From Greenland and Antarctica primarily. And to LOSE MASSIVE amounts from a continent like Antarctica is only gonna happen at the END of any extraordinary warming period in a place where it's below -15degF most of the year. Sublimation and drought being the ONLY factors that you would see now until the next century. And sublimation can happen with a run-up in Total Solar Irradiance. Like the one we've seen since the 1700s.
2) An "ice free Arctic Ocean" is a neglected NEGATIVE feedback restraining the "runaway warming" theories. Because an ice barren very cold sea is a WONDERFUL "new" CO2 sink. .The equivalent of planting a new virgin forest the size of Australia..
WE do not blow chemicals into the air etc... we want reasonable regulations based on science, not left wing fear mongering and hype. Another left wing lie that needs to die as well..
Have you been to Denali or up the Alaskan coast, there is a lot of melting going on..
Also I grew up in northern Minnesota with deep cold winters, they haven't had a huge cold winter storm in several years.
The problem is, we humans have a very short life span as compared to the cyclical climate of our earth. Thus we do not live long enough to see the cycles start to finish. This makes us easily duped by those who would want to control us and use this as a weapon to deprive us of our freedoms and rights.
Just in the current interglacial we have seen 5 cycles of ice free and a return to partial glaciation. A fact the alarmists don't want you to see or understand.
View attachment 107567
Interglacial's last about 14,000 years on average. Were at 14,600 years at present. We are over due for our next 90,000 year glacial cycle. Pray that our current interglacial last a while longer. The death that will happen when we fall into the next glacial cycle will thin the herd massively.
I don't know enough to get into the science of things, but why is there such and opposition from the party who supports people like the Koch brothers to blow all of their chemicals into the air and water?
We have a cancer epidemic in America , so our bodies are warning us of what we are doing to our world.
Anyway, I do not want to hi-jack the thread, I find it interesting.
Take it easy on EagleWings. Poster is probably still under the impression that CO2 is a pollutant and a chemical. Not their fault they've been propagandized.
