Climatologists Got It Wrong with El Niño

[CrusaderFrank]

The impacts of warmer oceans in the eastern pacific have been opposite of what the climate experts predicted. Instead of storm tracks being centered upon SoCal they have risen above the Pacific Northwest. The result has been extremely dry conditions for SoCal this winter and below average snowfall for the Sierras.

If they can't even get close to telling us the climate just a few months in advance, how can they justify telling us to change the economy for something they are predicting a century from now?

Show us such a prediction that is not simply a review of the effects of past el Nino events.

Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?

The Polar ice in the Arctic is, in fact, rapidly diminishing. It has not "disappeared" yet. but then, no scientist ever said that the Arctic ice would all be gone by now, so your post is just another stupid strawman argument.

...and by "rapidly diminishing" you mean you're just making it all up and calling NASA a bunch of liars for saying Antarctica ice is growing

 

[westwall]

The impacts of warmer oceans in the eastern pacific have been opposite of what the climate experts predicted. Instead of storm tracks being centered upon SoCal they have risen above the Pacific Northwest. The result has been extremely dry conditions for SoCal this winter and below average snowfall for the Sierras.

If they can't even get close to telling us the climate just a few months in advance, how can they justify telling us to change the economy for something they are predicting a century from now?

Show us such a prediction that is not simply a review of the effects of past el Nino events.

Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?

The Polar ice in the Arctic is, in fact, rapidly diminishing. It has not "disappeared" yet. but then, no scientist ever said that the Arctic ice would all be gone by now, so your post is just another stupid strawman argument.

Wrong again bucko.....



Updated NASA Data: Global Warming Not Causing Any Polar Ice Retreat

A 10-percent decline in polar sea ice is not very remarkable, especially considering the 1979 baseline was abnormally high anyway. Regardless, global warming activists and a compliant news media frequently and vociferously claimed the modest polar ice cap retreat was a sign of impending catastrophe. Al Gore even predicted the Arctic ice cap could completely disappear by 2014.

In late 2012, however, polar ice dramatically rebounded and quickly surpassed the post-1979 average. Ever since, the polar ice caps have been at a greater average extent than the post-1979 mean.

Now, in May 2015, the updated NASA data show polar sea ice is approximately 5 percent above the post-1979 average.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg

 

[RollingThunder]

The impacts of warmer oceans in the eastern pacific have been opposite of what the climate experts predicted. Instead of storm tracks being centered upon SoCal they have risen above the Pacific Northwest. The result has been extremely dry conditions for SoCal this winter and below average snowfall for the Sierras.

If they can't even get close to telling us the climate just a few months in advance, how can they justify telling us to change the economy for something they are predicting a century from now?

Show us such a prediction that is not simply a review of the effects of past el Nino events.

Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?

The Polar ice in the Arctic is, in fact, rapidly diminishing. It has not "disappeared" yet. but then, no scientist ever said that the Arctic ice would all be gone by now, so your post is just another stupid strawman argument.

...and by "rapidly diminishing" you mean you're just making it all up and calling NASA a bunch of liars for saying Antarctica ice is growing

Ahhhhh, CrazyFruitcake, you are such a clueless moron!

Arctic ice, as I said, IS RAPIDLY DIMINISHING. By every available measurement, the Arctic ice cap is currently rapidly shrinking in extent and volume, and Greenland is losing massive amounts of ice from its ice sheets.

As far as the Antarctic ice goes....

The fact is, no scientist ever said that the Antarctic ice would all be gone by now either, so your post - "Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?" - is just another really stupid denier cult strawman argument.

There have been a number of studies of the state of the Antarctic ice sheets. One recent NASA study analyzed satellite altimetry data that only ran up through 2008 and found that Antarctica appeared to be gaining slightly more ice in the interior from increased snowfall than the rather large amounts it was losing at the edges. All of the other studies that have been done in the last two decades however indicate that Antarctica is, on the whole, losing ice mass. That includes another recent NASA study, that analyzed gravity field measurements from the GRACE satellites, and included much more recently observed data, which concluded both that Antarctica is indeed losing ice mass, the rate of ice mass loss since 2008 has greatly increased - throwing into doubt the results of the altimetry based study with no data since 2008.

 

[westwall]

The impacts of warmer oceans in the eastern pacific have been opposite of what the climate experts predicted. Instead of storm tracks being centered upon SoCal they have risen above the Pacific Northwest. The result has been extremely dry conditions for SoCal this winter and below average snowfall for the Sierras.

If they can't even get close to telling us the climate just a few months in advance, how can they justify telling us to change the economy for something they are predicting a century from now?

Show us such a prediction that is not simply a review of the effects of past el Nino events.

Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?

The Polar ice in the Arctic is, in fact, rapidly diminishing. It has not "disappeared" yet. but then, no scientist ever said that the Arctic ice would all be gone by now, so your post is just another stupid strawman argument.

...and by "rapidly diminishing" you mean you're just making it all up and calling NASA a bunch of liars for saying Antarctica ice is growing

Ahhhhh, CrazyFruitcake, you are such a clueless moron!

Arctic ice, as I said, IS RAPIDLY DIMINISHING. By every available measurement, the Arctic ice cap is currently rapidly shrinking in extent and volume, and Greenland is losing massive amounts of ice from its ice sheets.

As far as the Antarctic ice goes....

The fact is, no scientist ever said that the Antarctic ice would all be gone by now either, so your post - "Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?" - is just another really stupid denier cult strawman argument.

There have been a number of studies of the state of the Antarctic ice sheets. One recent NASA study analyzed satellite altimetry data that only ran up through 2008 and found that Antarctica appeared to be gaining slightly more ice in the interior from increased snowfall than the rather large amounts it was losing at the edges. All of the other studies that have been done in the last two decades however indicate that Antarctica is, on the whole, losing ice mass. That includes another recent NASA study, that analyzed gravity field measurements from the GRACE satellites, and included much more recently observed data, which concluded both that Antarctica is indeed losing ice mass, the rate of ice mass loss since 2008 has greatly increased - throwing into doubt the results of the altimetry based study with no data since 2008.

What a retarded boob you are trolling blunder. Here you go. In all of their glory. Scientists. YOUR scientists claiming that the arctic would be ice free based entirely on their bullshit models and ignorant twats like you lap it up like the sad little puppies you are.

Read it and weep silly boy.....

Do you even know how to do basic research or do you just regurgitate the sewage your masters at SS shove up your keester?

Arctic summers ice-free 'by 2013'

"Scientists in the US have presented one of the most dramatic forecasts yet for the disappearance of Arctic sea ice.

Their latest modelling studies indicate northern polar waters could be ice-free in summers within just 5-6 years.

Professor Wieslaw Maslowski told an American Geophysical Union meeting that previous projections had underestimated the processes now driving ice loss."

"Professor Maslowski's group, which includes co-workers at Nasa and the Institute of Oceanology, Polish Academy of Sciences (PAS), is well known for producing modelled dates that are in advance of other teams."


"Professor Peter Wadhams from Cambridge University, UK, is an expert on Arctic ice. He has used sonar data collected by Royal Navy submarines to show that the volume loss is outstripping even area withdrawal, which is in agreement with the model result of Professor Maslowski.

"Some models have not been taking proper account of the physical processes that go on," he commented.

"The ice is thinning faster than it is shrinking; and some modellers have been assuming the ice was a rather thick slab."

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Arctic summers ice-free 'by 2013'

Predictions of an ice-free Arctic Ocean - Climate Dispatch

 

[SSDD]

The impacts of warmer oceans in the eastern pacific have been opposite of what the climate experts predicted. Instead of storm tracks being centered upon SoCal they have risen above the Pacific Northwest. The result has been extremely dry conditions for SoCal this winter and below average snowfall for the Sierras.

If they can't even get close to telling us the climate just a few months in advance, how can they justify telling us to change the economy for something they are predicting a century from now?

Show us such a prediction that is not simply a review of the effects of past el Nino events.

Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?

The Polar ice in the Arctic is, in fact, rapidly diminishing. It has not "disappeared" yet. but then, no scientist ever said that the Arctic ice would all be gone by now, so your post is just another stupid strawman argument.

...and by "rapidly diminishing" you mean you're just making it all up and calling NASA a bunch of liars for saying Antarctica ice is growing

Ahhhhh, CrazyFruitcake, you are such a clueless moron!

Arctic ice, as I said, IS RAPIDLY DIMINISHING. By every available measurement, the Arctic ice cap is currently rapidly shrinking in extent and volume, and Greenland is losing massive amounts of ice from its ice sheets.

As far as the Antarctic ice goes....

The fact is, no scientist ever said that the Antarctic ice would all be gone by now either, so your post - "Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?" - is just another really stupid denier cult strawman argument.

There have been a number of studies of the state of the Antarctic ice sheets. One recent NASA study analyzed satellite altimetry data that only ran up through 2008 and found that Antarctica appeared to be gaining slightly more ice in the interior from increased snowfall than the rather large amounts it was losing at the edges. All of the other studies that have been done in the last two decades however indicate that Antarctica is, on the whole, losing ice mass. That includes another recent NASA study, that analyzed gravity field measurements from the GRACE satellites, and included much more recently observed data, which concluded both that Antarctica is indeed losing ice mass, the rate of ice mass loss since 2008 has greatly increased - throwing into doubt the results of the altimetry based study with no data since 2008.

Thunder is like all AGW believers, and climate scientists themselves....he keeps what supports his beliefs, and regurgitates it at ever opportunity, even if it has been disproven and disregards anything that runs contrary to his beliefs with a mind set such that it is as if the contrary evidence never existed....how else, after all these years, and all their abject failures could they still believe?












What a retarded boob you are trolling blunder. Here you go. In all of their glory. Scientists. YOUR scientists claiming that the arctic would be ice free based entirely on their bullshit models and ignorant twats like you lap it up like the sad little puppies you are.

Read it and weep silly boy.....

Do you even know how to do basic research or do you just regurgitate the sewage your masters at SS shove up your keester?

Arctic summers ice-free 'by 2013'

"Scientists in the US have presented one of the most dramatic forecasts yet for the disappearance of Arctic sea ice.

Their latest modelling studies indicate northern polar waters could be ice-free in summers within just 5-6 years.

Professor Wieslaw Maslowski told an American Geophysical Union meeting that previous projections had underestimated the processes now driving ice loss."

"Professor Maslowski's group, which includes co-workers at Nasa and the Institute of Oceanology, Polish Academy of Sciences (PAS), is well known for producing modelled dates that are in advance of other teams."


"Professor Peter Wadhams from Cambridge University, UK, is an expert on Arctic ice. He has used sonar data collected by Royal Navy submarines to show that the volume loss is outstripping even area withdrawal, which is in agreement with the model result of Professor Maslowski.

"Some models have not been taking proper account of the physical processes that go on," he commented.

"The ice is thinning faster than it is shrinking; and some modellers have been assuming the ice was a rather thick slab."

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Arctic summers ice-free 'by 2013'

Predictions of an ice-free Arctic Ocean - Climate Dispatch

 

[jc456]

Mr. Westwall, we are supposed to be in a cooling trend according to your predictions of six years ago. So where the hell is that cooling. Three record years in a row is quite some cooling.

right where Mr. Westwall said it was going to be. Any day you can post up real stats, but the garbage you post in here is just garbage made up to look like mumbo jumbo. And it has no taste at all.

 

[jc456]

Looking at Global circulation patterns the dying El Niño has no atmospheric effect on circulation patterns. and has not for some time.
View attachment 65004

dude, here in Chicago, the pattern hasn't changed for years now. I hate the Polar Vortex weather in my climate. climate that is the same as it was back in the 80s, so no changing pattern. La Nina is still very persistent as again today we have winter weather advisories in March.

 

[jc456]

The impacts of warmer oceans in the eastern pacific have been opposite of what the climate experts predicted. Instead of storm tracks being centered upon SoCal they have risen above the Pacific Northwest. The result has been extremely dry conditions for SoCal this winter and below average snowfall for the Sierras.

If they can't even get close to telling us the climate just a few months in advance, how can they justify telling us to change the economy for something they are predicting a century from now?

In their defense they never truly made a prediction. Everything they ever say is always hedged with the magic words "might", "could" and "possibly". Climatologists stopped making real predictions years and years ago when the temperature leveled off while the CO2 kept rising.

Like all good charlatans they began using qualifiers with their "predictions" thus no matter what happened they would claim they predicted it.

Leveled off?

NASA, NOAA Analyses Reveal Record-Shattering Global Temperatures

Earth’s 2015 surface temperatures were the warmest since modern record keeping began in 1880, according to independent analyses by NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).



Globally-averaged temperatures in 2015 shattered the previous mark set in 2014 by 0.23 degrees Fahrenheit (0.13 Celsius). Only once before, in 1998, has the new record been greater than the old record by this much.



The 2015 temperatures continue a long-term warming trend, according to analyses by scientists at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York (GISTEMP). NOAA scientists concur with the finding that 2015 was the warmest year on record based on separate, independent analyses of the data. Because weather station locations and measurements change over time, there is some uncertainty in the individual values in the GISTEMP index. Taking this into account, NASA analysis estimates 2015 was the warmest year with 94 percent certainty.



“Climate change is the challenge of our generation, and NASA’s vital work on this important issue affects every person on Earth,” said NASA Administrator Charles Bolden. “Today’s announcement not only underscores how critical NASA’s Earth observation program is, it is a key data point that should make policy makers stand up and take notice - now is the time to act on climate.”



The planet’s average surface temperature has risen about 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit (1.0 degree Celsius) since the late-19th century, a change largely driven by increased carbon dioxide and other human-made emissions into the atmosphere.

Ooooooh, yet more "shattered" records. Funny when they claim 58 degrees and change are some new record when they made the exact same claim back in 1998 and then the temp was 62 degrees and change. So, which is bigger? 62 or 58?

Both claims originated from NOAA, and both are "OFFICIAL" though the new claim is a true turd based on the 1998 claim.....

View attachment 65093

I am not seeing this record of which they keep spewing forth...

dude, cause 58>62 and that is exactly what you posted so 58 was the high and 62 the low. don't you get the big picture?

 

[jc456]

We had typical El Nino winter in Minnesota. Warm and wet except we had much more rain than usual and less snow than usual. 60 degrees today n the city and 90% of the snow is gone. We are entering March but it's like we are entering mid- April.
I love to snow shoe but it didn't happen this year, not enough snow, bummer.

looks like a fairly average year 2016.

Minneapolis Month Weather - AccuWeather Forecast for MN 55415

 

[Weatherman2020]

The impacts of warmer oceans in the eastern pacific have been opposite of what the climate experts predicted. Instead of storm tracks being centered upon SoCal they have risen above the Pacific Northwest. The result has been extremely dry conditions for SoCal this winter and below average snowfall for the Sierras.

If they can't even get close to telling us the climate just a few months in advance, how can they justify telling us to change the economy for something they are predicting a century from now?

Show us such a prediction that is not simply a review of the effects of past el Nino events.

Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?

The Polar ice in the Arctic is, in fact, rapidly diminishing. It has not "disappeared" yet. but then, no scientist ever said that the Arctic ice would all be gone by now, so your post is just another stupid strawman argument.

...and by "rapidly diminishing" you mean you're just making it all up and calling NASA a bunch of liars for saying Antarctica ice is growing

Ahhhhh, CrazyFruitcake, you are such a clueless moron!

Arctic ice, as I said, IS RAPIDLY DIMINISHING. By every available measurement, the Arctic ice cap is currently rapidly shrinking in extent and volume, and Greenland is losing massive amounts of ice from its ice sheets.

As far as the Antarctic ice goes....

The fact is, no scientist ever said that the Antarctic ice would all be gone by now either, so your post - "Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?" - is just another really stupid denier cult strawman argument.

There have been a number of studies of the state of the Antarctic ice sheets. One recent NASA study analyzed satellite altimetry data that only ran up through 2008 and found that Antarctica appeared to be gaining slightly more ice in the interior from increased snowfall than the rather large amounts it was losing at the edges. All of the other studies that have been done in the last two decades however indicate that Antarctica is, on the whole, losing ice mass. That includes another recent NASA study, that analyzed gravity field measurements from the GRACE satellites, and included much more recently observed data, which concluded both that Antarctica is indeed losing ice mass, the rate of ice mass loss since 2008 has greatly increased - throwing into doubt the results of the altimetry based study with no data since 2008.

Right on nominal.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The impacts of warmer oceans in the eastern pacific have been opposite of what the climate experts predicted. Instead of storm tracks being centered upon SoCal they have risen above the Pacific Northwest. The result has been extremely dry conditions for SoCal this winter and below average snowfall for the Sierras.

If they can't even get close to telling us the climate just a few months in advance, how can they justify telling us to change the economy for something they are predicting a century from now?

Show us such a prediction that is not simply a review of the effects of past el Nino events.

Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?

The Polar ice in the Arctic is, in fact, rapidly diminishing. It has not "disappeared" yet. but then, no scientist ever said that the Arctic ice would all be gone by now, so your post is just another stupid strawman argument.

...and by "rapidly diminishing" you mean you're just making it all up and calling NASA a bunch of liars for saying Antarctica ice is growing

Ahhhhh, CrazyFruitcake, you are such a clueless moron!

Arctic ice, as I said, IS RAPIDLY DIMINISHING. By every available measurement, the Arctic ice cap is currently rapidly shrinking in extent and volume, and Greenland is losing massive amounts of ice from its ice sheets.

As far as the Antarctic ice goes....

The fact is, no scientist ever said that the Antarctic ice would all be gone by now either, so your post - "Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?" - is just another really stupid denier cult strawman argument.

There have been a number of studies of the state of the Antarctic ice sheets. One recent NASA study analyzed satellite altimetry data that only ran up through 2008 and found that Antarctica appeared to be gaining slightly more ice in the interior from increased snowfall than the rather large amounts it was losing at the edges. All of the other studies that have been done in the last two decades however indicate that Antarctica is, on the whole, losing ice mass. That includes another recent NASA study, that analyzed gravity field measurements from the GRACE satellites, and included much more recently observed data, which concluded both that Antarctica is indeed losing ice mass, the rate of ice mass loss since 2008 has greatly increased - throwing into doubt the results of the altimetry based study with no data since 2008.

Right on nominal.

View attachment 65407

Why does Old Rock keeps insisting that we're see "wider and wider swings with an overall warming trend" so far that's never shown up on any chart

 

[westwall]

The impacts of warmer oceans in the eastern pacific have been opposite of what the climate experts predicted. Instead of storm tracks being centered upon SoCal they have risen above the Pacific Northwest. The result has been extremely dry conditions for SoCal this winter and below average snowfall for the Sierras.

If they can't even get close to telling us the climate just a few months in advance, how can they justify telling us to change the economy for something they are predicting a century from now?

Show us such a prediction that is not simply a review of the effects of past el Nino events.

Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?

The Polar ice in the Arctic is, in fact, rapidly diminishing. It has not "disappeared" yet. but then, no scientist ever said that the Arctic ice would all be gone by now, so your post is just another stupid strawman argument.

...and by "rapidly diminishing" you mean you're just making it all up and calling NASA a bunch of liars for saying Antarctica ice is growing

Ahhhhh, CrazyFruitcake, you are such a clueless moron!

Arctic ice, as I said, IS RAPIDLY DIMINISHING. By every available measurement, the Arctic ice cap is currently rapidly shrinking in extent and volume, and Greenland is losing massive amounts of ice from its ice sheets.

As far as the Antarctic ice goes....

The fact is, no scientist ever said that the Antarctic ice would all be gone by now either, so your post - "Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?" - is just another really stupid denier cult strawman argument.

There have been a number of studies of the state of the Antarctic ice sheets. One recent NASA study analyzed satellite altimetry data that only ran up through 2008 and found that Antarctica appeared to be gaining slightly more ice in the interior from increased snowfall than the rather large amounts it was losing at the edges. All of the other studies that have been done in the last two decades however indicate that Antarctica is, on the whole, losing ice mass. That includes another recent NASA study, that analyzed gravity field measurements from the GRACE satellites, and included much more recently observed data, which concluded both that Antarctica is indeed losing ice mass, the rate of ice mass loss since 2008 has greatly increased - throwing into doubt the results of the altimetry based study with no data since 2008.

Right on nominal.

View attachment 65407

Why does Old Rock keeps insisting that we're see "wider and wider swings with an overall warming trend" so far that's never shown up on any chart

Because that is the scripture he has been ordered to chant. These AGW clowns are reminding me more and more of the religious nuts from Airplane. Most specifically how they keep having their butts handed to them....

 

[Weatherman2020]

Case closed. The storm track did not shift south as the climate models said they likely would.

 

[RollingThunder]

The impacts of warmer oceans in the eastern pacific have been opposite of what the climate experts predicted. Instead of storm tracks being centered upon SoCal they have risen above the Pacific Northwest. The result has been extremely dry conditions for SoCal this winter and below average snowfall for the Sierras.

If they can't even get close to telling us the climate just a few months in advance, how can they justify telling us to change the economy for something they are predicting a century from now?

Show us such a prediction that is not simply a review of the effects of past el Nino events.

Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?

The Polar ice in the Arctic is, in fact, rapidly diminishing. It has not "disappeared" yet. but then, no scientist ever said that the Arctic ice would all be gone by now, so your post is just another stupid strawman argument.

...and by "rapidly diminishing" you mean you're just making it all up and calling NASA a bunch of liars for saying Antarctica ice is growing

Ahhhhh, CrazyFruitcake, you are such a clueless moron!

Arctic ice, as I said, IS RAPIDLY DIMINISHING. By every available measurement, the Arctic ice cap is currently rapidly shrinking in extent and volume, and Greenland is losing massive amounts of ice from its ice sheets.

As far as the Antarctic ice goes....

The fact is, no scientist ever said that the Antarctic ice would all be gone by now either, so your post - "Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?" - is just another really stupid denier cult strawman argument.

There have been a number of studies of the state of the Antarctic ice sheets. One recent NASA study analyzed satellite altimetry data that only ran up through 2008 and found that Antarctica appeared to be gaining slightly more ice in the interior from increased snowfall than the rather large amounts it was losing at the edges. All of the other studies that have been done in the last two decades however indicate that Antarctica is, on the whole, losing ice mass. That includes another recent NASA study, that analyzed gravity field measurements from the GRACE satellites, and included much more recently observed data, which concluded both that Antarctica is indeed losing ice mass, the rate of ice mass loss since 2008 has greatly increased - throwing into doubt the results of the altimetry based study with no data since 2008.

Right on nominal.

View attachment 65407

Nope! In the real world, not your denier cult fantasyland, Arctic sea ice has reached a record breaking low extent and volume.You are so stupid, you try to deceive people with a graph that stops in 2015 and doesn't include any data from 2016. The last record low Arctic sea ice extent happened in 2012. So far this year, 2016, Arctic sea ice extent is tracking well below the 2012 levels, and is currently more than two standard deviations from the 1981-2010 average.

Last year, in 2015, this happened:
"On February 25, 2015, Arctic sea ice extent appeared to have reached its annual maximum extent, marking the beginning of the sea ice melt season. This year’s maximum extent not only occurred early; it is also the lowest in the satellite record." - NSIDC

This year:
Annual winter growth of Arctic sea ice stalls early
Alaska Dispatch News
Yereth Rosen
February 23, 2016
Normally in the Arctic, the ocean water keeps freezing through the entire winter, creating ice that reaches its maximum extent just before the melt starts in the spring.

Not so this year.

As of Tuesday, sea ice had stopped growing for two weeks. Sea ice extent -- the areas with at least 15 percent ice coverage -- hit a winter maximum of 14.214 million square kilometers (5.488 million square miles) on Feb. 9, and has stalled since, according to daily reports from the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Colorado.

If there is no more growth, the Feb. 9 total extent would be a double record that would mean an unprecedented head start on the annual melt season that runs until fall.

“If this was the maximum in sea ice extent, it would be the earliest that we’ve ever seen and it would also be the lowest maximum that we’ve ever seen, by a long shot, actually,” said Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center. “If this was the maximum, that would be pretty big in terms of what is happening in the Arctic.”

Up to now, the lowest winter ice-extent maximum in the satellite record dating back to 1979 was hit last year, when ice extent reached 14.54 million square kilometers (5.614 million square miles) on Feb. 25, according to NSIDC records. The earliest seasonal winter maximum was reached in 1996, when sea ice hit its peak extent on Feb. 24 of that year, according to the center’s records. Normally, ice extent reaches its maximum in early or mid-March; between 1981 and 2010, the average maximum date was March 12.
***

 

[Billy_Bob]

The impacts of warmer oceans in the eastern pacific have been opposite of what the climate experts predicted. Instead of storm tracks being centered upon SoCal they have risen above the Pacific Northwest. The result has been extremely dry conditions for SoCal this winter and below average snowfall for the Sierras.

If they can't even get close to telling us the climate just a few months in advance, how can they justify telling us to change the economy for something they are predicting a century from now?

Show us such a prediction that is not simply a review of the effects of past el Nino events.

Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?

The Polar ice in the Arctic is, in fact, rapidly diminishing. It has not "disappeared" yet. but then, no scientist ever said that the Arctic ice would all be gone by now, so your post is just another stupid strawman argument.

...and by "rapidly diminishing" you mean you're just making it all up and calling NASA a bunch of liars for saying Antarctica ice is growing

Ahhhhh, CrazyFruitcake, you are such a clueless moron!

Arctic ice, as I said, IS RAPIDLY DIMINISHING. By every available measurement, the Arctic ice cap is currently rapidly shrinking in extent and volume, and Greenland is losing massive amounts of ice from its ice sheets.

As far as the Antarctic ice goes....

The fact is, no scientist ever said that the Antarctic ice would all be gone by now either, so your post - "Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?" - is just another really stupid denier cult strawman argument.

There have been a number of studies of the state of the Antarctic ice sheets. One recent NASA study analyzed satellite altimetry data that only ran up through 2008 and found that Antarctica appeared to be gaining slightly more ice in the interior from increased snowfall than the rather large amounts it was losing at the edges. All of the other studies that have been done in the last two decades however indicate that Antarctica is, on the whole, losing ice mass. That includes another recent NASA study, that analyzed gravity field measurements from the GRACE satellites, and included much more recently observed data, which concluded both that Antarctica is indeed losing ice mass, the rate of ice mass loss since 2008 has greatly increased - throwing into doubt the results of the altimetry based study with no data since 2008.

Right on nominal.

View attachment 65407

Why does Old Rock keeps insisting that we're see "wider and wider swings with an overall warming trend" so far that's never shown up on any chart

Because that is the scripture he has been ordered to chant. These AGW clowns are reminding me more and more of the religious nuts from Airplane. Most specifically how they keep having their butts handed to them....

Kind of like the "She's a Witch" skit Monty Python does.. Pretty much the alarmist meme reasoning skills on video tape..



Old Crock and rolling blunder boy reasoning skills ^^^^^

Truthfully, This is the AGW crowd in action..

 

[Billy_Bob]

The impacts of warmer oceans in the eastern pacific have been opposite of what the climate experts predicted. Instead of storm tracks being centered upon SoCal they have risen above the Pacific Northwest. The result has been extremely dry conditions for SoCal this winter and below average snowfall for the Sierras.

If they can't even get close to telling us the climate just a few months in advance, how can they justify telling us to change the economy for something they are predicting a century from now?

Show us such a prediction that is not simply a review of the effects of past el Nino events.

Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?

The Polar ice in the Arctic is, in fact, rapidly diminishing. It has not "disappeared" yet. but then, no scientist ever said that the Arctic ice would all be gone by now, so your post is just another stupid strawman argument.

...and by "rapidly diminishing" you mean you're just making it all up and calling NASA a bunch of liars for saying Antarctica ice is growing

Ahhhhh, CrazyFruitcake, you are such a clueless moron!

Arctic ice, as I said, IS RAPIDLY DIMINISHING. By every available measurement, the Arctic ice cap is currently rapidly shrinking in extent and volume, and Greenland is losing massive amounts of ice from its ice sheets.

As far as the Antarctic ice goes....

The fact is, no scientist ever said that the Antarctic ice would all be gone by now either, so your post - "Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?" - is just another really stupid denier cult strawman argument.

There have been a number of studies of the state of the Antarctic ice sheets. One recent NASA study analyzed satellite altimetry data that only ran up through 2008 and found that Antarctica appeared to be gaining slightly more ice in the interior from increased snowfall than the rather large amounts it was losing at the edges. All of the other studies that have been done in the last two decades however indicate that Antarctica is, on the whole, losing ice mass. That includes another recent NASA study, that analyzed gravity field measurements from the GRACE satellites, and included much more recently observed data, which concluded both that Antarctica is indeed losing ice mass, the rate of ice mass loss since 2008 has greatly increased - throwing into doubt the results of the altimetry based study with no data since 2008.

Right on nominal.

View attachment 65407

Nope! In the real world, not your denier cult fantasyland, Arctic sea ice has reached a record breaking low extent and volume.You are so stupid, you try to deceive people with a graph that stops in 2015 and doesn't include any data from 2016. The last record low Arctic sea ice extent happened in 2012. So far this year, 2016, Arctic sea ice extent is tracking well below the 2012 levels, and is currently more than two standard deviations from the 1981-2010 average.

Last year, in 2015, this happened:
"On February 25, 2015, Arctic sea ice extent appeared to have reached its annual maximum extent, marking the beginning of the sea ice melt season. This year’s maximum extent not only occurred early; it is also the lowest in the satellite record." - NSIDC

This year:
Annual winter growth of Arctic sea ice stalls early
Alaska Dispatch News
Yereth Rosen
February 23, 2016
Normally in the Arctic, the ocean water keeps freezing through the entire winter, creating ice that reaches its maximum extent just before the melt starts in the spring.

Not so this year.

As of Tuesday, sea ice had stopped growing for two weeks. Sea ice extent -- the areas with at least 15 percent ice coverage -- hit a winter maximum of 14.214 million square kilometers (5.488 million square miles) on Feb. 9, and has stalled since, according to daily reports from the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Colorado.

If there is no more growth, the Feb. 9 total extent would be a double record that would mean an unprecedented head start on the annual melt season that runs until fall.

“If this was the maximum in sea ice extent, it would be the earliest that we’ve ever seen and it would also be the lowest maximum that we’ve ever seen, by a long shot, actually,” said Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center. “If this was the maximum, that would be pretty big in terms of what is happening in the Arctic.”

Up to now, the lowest winter ice-extent maximum in the satellite record dating back to 1979 was hit last year, when ice extent reached 14.54 million square kilometers (5.614 million square miles) on Feb. 25, according to NSIDC records. The earliest seasonal winter maximum was reached in 1996, when sea ice hit its peak extent on Feb. 24 of that year, according to the center’s records. Normally, ice extent reaches its maximum in early or mid-March; between 1981 and 2010, the average maximum date was March 12.
***

Why do you use the 15% SEA ICE COVERAGE graph when it is a very poor indicator of ice content or levels? You dont have a dam clue about what you post..

Tell me old crock, what happens to that ice when the wind blows?

 

[Weatherman2020]

The impacts of warmer oceans in the eastern pacific have been opposite of what the climate experts predicted. Instead of storm tracks being centered upon SoCal they have risen above the Pacific Northwest. The result has been extremely dry conditions for SoCal this winter and below average snowfall for the Sierras.

If they can't even get close to telling us the climate just a few months in advance, how can they justify telling us to change the economy for something they are predicting a century from now?

Show us such a prediction that is not simply a review of the effects of past el Nino events.

Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?

The Polar ice in the Arctic is, in fact, rapidly diminishing. It has not "disappeared" yet. but then, no scientist ever said that the Arctic ice would all be gone by now, so your post is just another stupid strawman argument.

...and by "rapidly diminishing" you mean you're just making it all up and calling NASA a bunch of liars for saying Antarctica ice is growing

Ahhhhh, CrazyFruitcake, you are such a clueless moron!

Arctic ice, as I said, IS RAPIDLY DIMINISHING. By every available measurement, the Arctic ice cap is currently rapidly shrinking in extent and volume, and Greenland is losing massive amounts of ice from its ice sheets.

As far as the Antarctic ice goes....

The fact is, no scientist ever said that the Antarctic ice would all be gone by now either, so your post - "Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?" - is just another really stupid denier cult strawman argument.

There have been a number of studies of the state of the Antarctic ice sheets. One recent NASA study analyzed satellite altimetry data that only ran up through 2008 and found that Antarctica appeared to be gaining slightly more ice in the interior from increased snowfall than the rather large amounts it was losing at the edges. All of the other studies that have been done in the last two decades however indicate that Antarctica is, on the whole, losing ice mass. That includes another recent NASA study, that analyzed gravity field measurements from the GRACE satellites, and included much more recently observed data, which concluded both that Antarctica is indeed losing ice mass, the rate of ice mass loss since 2008 has greatly increased - throwing into doubt the results of the altimetry based study with no data since 2008.

Right on nominal.

View attachment 65407

Nope! In the real world, not your denier cult fantasyland, Arctic sea ice has reached a record breaking low extent and volume.You are so stupid, you try to deceive people with a graph that stops in 2015 and doesn't include any data from 2016. The last record low Arctic sea ice extent happened in 2012. So far this year, 2016, Arctic sea ice extent is tracking well below the 2012 levels, and is currently more than two standard deviations from the 1981-2010 average.

Last year, in 2015, this happened:
"On February 25, 2015, Arctic sea ice extent appeared to have reached its annual maximum extent, marking the beginning of the sea ice melt season. This year’s maximum extent not only occurred early; it is also the lowest in the satellite record." - NSIDC

This year:
Annual winter growth of Arctic sea ice stalls early
Alaska Dispatch News
Yereth Rosen
February 23, 2016
Normally in the Arctic, the ocean water keeps freezing through the entire winter, creating ice that reaches its maximum extent just before the melt starts in the spring.

Not so this year.

As of Tuesday, sea ice had stopped growing for two weeks. Sea ice extent -- the areas with at least 15 percent ice coverage -- hit a winter maximum of 14.214 million square kilometers (5.488 million square miles) on Feb. 9, and has stalled since, according to daily reports from the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Colorado.

If there is no more growth, the Feb. 9 total extent would be a double record that would mean an unprecedented head start on the annual melt season that runs until fall.

“If this was the maximum in sea ice extent, it would be the earliest that we’ve ever seen and it would also be the lowest maximum that we’ve ever seen, by a long shot, actually,” said Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center. “If this was the maximum, that would be pretty big in terms of what is happening in the Arctic.”

Up to now, the lowest winter ice-extent maximum in the satellite record dating back to 1979 was hit last year, when ice extent reached 14.54 million square kilometers (5.614 million square miles) on Feb. 25, according to NSIDC records. The earliest seasonal winter maximum was reached in 1996, when sea ice hit its peak extent on Feb. 24 of that year, according to the center’s records. Normally, ice extent reaches its maximum in early or mid-March; between 1981 and 2010, the average maximum date was March 12.
***

OK, let's use your chart. Within 2 standard deviations, which means it's within normal range. Let's us know when it falls out of 3 standard deviations.

 

[RollingThunder]

The impacts of warmer oceans in the eastern pacific have been opposite of what the climate experts predicted. Instead of storm tracks being centered upon SoCal they have risen above the Pacific Northwest. The result has been extremely dry conditions for SoCal this winter and below average snowfall for the Sierras.

If they can't even get close to telling us the climate just a few months in advance, how can they justify telling us to change the economy for something they are predicting a century from now?

Show us such a prediction that is not simply a review of the effects of past el Nino events.

Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?

The Polar ice in the Arctic is, in fact, rapidly diminishing. It has not "disappeared" yet. but then, no scientist ever said that the Arctic ice would all be gone by now, so your post is just another stupid strawman argument.

...and by "rapidly diminishing" you mean you're just making it all up and calling NASA a bunch of liars for saying Antarctica ice is growing

Ahhhhh, CrazyFruitcake, you are such a clueless moron!

Arctic ice, as I said, IS RAPIDLY DIMINISHING. By every available measurement, the Arctic ice cap is currently rapidly shrinking in extent and volume, and Greenland is losing massive amounts of ice from its ice sheets.

As far as the Antarctic ice goes....

The fact is, no scientist ever said that the Antarctic ice would all be gone by now either, so your post - "Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?" - is just another really stupid denier cult strawman argument.

There have been a number of studies of the state of the Antarctic ice sheets. One recent NASA study analyzed satellite altimetry data that only ran up through 2008 and found that Antarctica appeared to be gaining slightly more ice in the interior from increased snowfall than the rather large amounts it was losing at the edges. All of the other studies that have been done in the last two decades however indicate that Antarctica is, on the whole, losing ice mass. That includes another recent NASA study, that analyzed gravity field measurements from the GRACE satellites, and included much more recently observed data, which concluded both that Antarctica is indeed losing ice mass, the rate of ice mass loss since 2008 has greatly increased - throwing into doubt the results of the altimetry based study with no data since 2008.

Right on nominal.

View attachment 65407

Nope! In the real world, not your denier cult fantasyland, Arctic sea ice has reached a record breaking low extent and volume.You are so stupid, you try to deceive people with a graph that stops in 2015 and doesn't include any data from 2016. The last record low Arctic sea ice extent happened in 2012. So far this year, 2016, Arctic sea ice extent is tracking well below the 2012 levels, and is currently more than two standard deviations from the 1981-2010 average.

Last year, in 2015, this happened:
"On February 25, 2015, Arctic sea ice extent appeared to have reached its annual maximum extent, marking the beginning of the sea ice melt season. This year’s maximum extent not only occurred early; it is also the lowest in the satellite record." - NSIDC

This year:
Annual winter growth of Arctic sea ice stalls early
Alaska Dispatch News
Yereth Rosen
February 23, 2016
Normally in the Arctic, the ocean water keeps freezing through the entire winter, creating ice that reaches its maximum extent just before the melt starts in the spring.

Not so this year.

As of Tuesday, sea ice had stopped growing for two weeks. Sea ice extent -- the areas with at least 15 percent ice coverage -- hit a winter maximum of 14.214 million square kilometers (5.488 million square miles) on Feb. 9, and has stalled since, according to daily reports from the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Colorado.

If there is no more growth, the Feb. 9 total extent would be a double record that would mean an unprecedented head start on the annual melt season that runs until fall.

“If this was the maximum in sea ice extent, it would be the earliest that we’ve ever seen and it would also be the lowest maximum that we’ve ever seen, by a long shot, actually,” said Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center. “If this was the maximum, that would be pretty big in terms of what is happening in the Arctic.”

Up to now, the lowest winter ice-extent maximum in the satellite record dating back to 1979 was hit last year, when ice extent reached 14.54 million square kilometers (5.614 million square miles) on Feb. 25, according to NSIDC records. The earliest seasonal winter maximum was reached in 1996, when sea ice hit its peak extent on Feb. 24 of that year, according to the center’s records. Normally, ice extent reaches its maximum in early or mid-March; between 1981 and 2010, the average maximum date was March 12.
***

OK, let's use your chart. Within 2 standard deviations, which means it's within normal range. Let's us L know when it falls out of 3 standard deviations.

Actually, numbnuts, I said (and Arctic ice extent is) "more than two standard deviations from the 1981-2010 average", not 'within'. Liar!

And sure, you blind denier cult retard, ignore all of the rest of the evidence there that thoroughly debunks your idiot claim that the Arctic ice is "right on nominal".

 

[Weatherman2020]

The impacts of warmer oceans in the eastern pacific have been opposite of what the climate experts predicted. Instead of storm tracks being centered upon SoCal they have risen above the Pacific Northwest. The result has been extremely dry conditions for SoCal this winter and below average snowfall for the Sierras.

If they can't even get close to telling us the climate just a few months in advance, how can they justify telling us to change the economy for something they are predicting a century from now?

Show us such a prediction that is not simply a review of the effects of past el Nino events.

Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?

The Polar ice in the Arctic is, in fact, rapidly diminishing. It has not "disappeared" yet. but then, no scientist ever said that the Arctic ice would all be gone by now, so your post is just another stupid strawman argument.

...and by "rapidly diminishing" you mean you're just making it all up and calling NASA a bunch of liars for saying Antarctica ice is growing

Ahhhhh, CrazyFruitcake, you are such a clueless moron!

Arctic ice, as I said, IS RAPIDLY DIMINISHING. By every available measurement, the Arctic ice cap is currently rapidly shrinking in extent and volume, and Greenland is losing massive amounts of ice from its ice sheets.

As far as the Antarctic ice goes....

The fact is, no scientist ever said that the Antarctic ice would all be gone by now either, so your post - "Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?" - is just another really stupid denier cult strawman argument.

There have been a number of studies of the state of the Antarctic ice sheets. One recent NASA study analyzed satellite altimetry data that only ran up through 2008 and found that Antarctica appeared to be gaining slightly more ice in the interior from increased snowfall than the rather large amounts it was losing at the edges. All of the other studies that have been done in the last two decades however indicate that Antarctica is, on the whole, losing ice mass. That includes another recent NASA study, that analyzed gravity field measurements from the GRACE satellites, and included much more recently observed data, which concluded both that Antarctica is indeed losing ice mass, the rate of ice mass loss since 2008 has greatly increased - throwing into doubt the results of the altimetry based study with no data since 2008.

Right on nominal.

View attachment 65407

Nope! In the real world, not your denier cult fantasyland, Arctic sea ice has reached a record breaking low extent and volume.You are so stupid, you try to deceive people with a graph that stops in 2015 and doesn't include any data from 2016. The last record low Arctic sea ice extent happened in 2012. So far this year, 2016, Arctic sea ice extent is tracking well below the 2012 levels, and is currently more than two standard deviations from the 1981-2010 average.

Last year, in 2015, this happened:
"On February 25, 2015, Arctic sea ice extent appeared to have reached its annual maximum extent, marking the beginning of the sea ice melt season. This year’s maximum extent not only occurred early; it is also the lowest in the satellite record." - NSIDC

This year:
Annual winter growth of Arctic sea ice stalls early
Alaska Dispatch News
Yereth Rosen
February 23, 2016
Normally in the Arctic, the ocean water keeps freezing through the entire winter, creating ice that reaches its maximum extent just before the melt starts in the spring.

Not so this year.

As of Tuesday, sea ice had stopped growing for two weeks. Sea ice extent -- the areas with at least 15 percent ice coverage -- hit a winter maximum of 14.214 million square kilometers (5.488 million square miles) on Feb. 9, and has stalled since, according to daily reports from the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Colorado.

If there is no more growth, the Feb. 9 total extent would be a double record that would mean an unprecedented head start on the annual melt season that runs until fall.

“If this was the maximum in sea ice extent, it would be the earliest that we’ve ever seen and it would also be the lowest maximum that we’ve ever seen, by a long shot, actually,” said Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center. “If this was the maximum, that would be pretty big in terms of what is happening in the Arctic.”

Up to now, the lowest winter ice-extent maximum in the satellite record dating back to 1979 was hit last year, when ice extent reached 14.54 million square kilometers (5.614 million square miles) on Feb. 25, according to NSIDC records. The earliest seasonal winter maximum was reached in 1996, when sea ice hit its peak extent on Feb. 24 of that year, according to the center’s records. Normally, ice extent reaches its maximum in early or mid-March; between 1981 and 2010, the average maximum date was March 12.
***

OK, let's use your chart. Within 2 standard deviations, which means it's within normal range. Let's us L know when it falls out of 3 standard deviations.

Actually, numbnuts, I said (and Arctic ice extent is) "more than two standard deviations from the 1981-2010 average", not 'within'. Liar!

And sure, you blind denier cult retard, ignore all of the rest of the evidence there that thoroughly debunks your idiot claim that the Arctic ice is "right on nominal".

It's your graph, and it shows March right at 2 Standard Deviations. And well within 3, which means a normal distribution.

Keep grasping, this is funny.

 

[Weatherman2020]

The impacts of warmer oceans in the eastern pacific have been opposite of what the climate experts predicted. Instead of storm tracks being centered upon SoCal they have risen above the Pacific Northwest. The result has been extremely dry conditions for SoCal this winter and below average snowfall for the Sierras.

If they can't even get close to telling us the climate just a few months in advance, how can they justify telling us to change the economy for something they are predicting a century from now?

Show us such a prediction that is not simply a review of the effects of past el Nino events.

Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?

The Polar ice in the Arctic is, in fact, rapidly diminishing. It has not "disappeared" yet. but then, no scientist ever said that the Arctic ice would all be gone by now, so your post is just another stupid strawman argument.

...and by "rapidly diminishing" you mean you're just making it all up and calling NASA a bunch of liars for saying Antarctica ice is growing

Ahhhhh, CrazyFruitcake, you are such a clueless moron!

Arctic ice, as I said, IS RAPIDLY DIMINISHING. By every available measurement, the Arctic ice cap is currently rapidly shrinking in extent and volume, and Greenland is losing massive amounts of ice from its ice sheets.

As far as the Antarctic ice goes....

The fact is, no scientist ever said that the Antarctic ice would all be gone by now either, so your post - "Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?" - is just another really stupid denier cult strawman argument.

There have been a number of studies of the state of the Antarctic ice sheets. One recent NASA study analyzed satellite altimetry data that only ran up through 2008 and found that Antarctica appeared to be gaining slightly more ice in the interior from increased snowfall than the rather large amounts it was losing at the edges. All of the other studies that have been done in the last two decades however indicate that Antarctica is, on the whole, losing ice mass. That includes another recent NASA study, that analyzed gravity field measurements from the GRACE satellites, and included much more recently observed data, which concluded both that Antarctica is indeed losing ice mass, the rate of ice mass loss since 2008 has greatly increased - throwing into doubt the results of the altimetry based study with no data since 2008.

Right on nominal.

View attachment 65407

Nope! In the real world, not your denier cult fantasyland, Arctic sea ice has reached a record breaking low extent and volume.You are so stupid, you try to deceive people with a graph that stops in 2015 and doesn't include any data from 2016. The last record low Arctic sea ice extent happened in 2012. So far this year, 2016, Arctic sea ice extent is tracking well below the 2012 levels, and is currently more than two standard deviations from the 1981-2010 average.

Last year, in 2015, this happened:
"On February 25, 2015, Arctic sea ice extent appeared to have reached its annual maximum extent, marking the beginning of the sea ice melt season. This year’s maximum extent not only occurred early; it is also the lowest in the satellite record." - NSIDC

This year:
Annual winter growth of Arctic sea ice stalls early
Alaska Dispatch News
Yereth Rosen
February 23, 2016
Normally in the Arctic, the ocean water keeps freezing through the entire winter, creating ice that reaches its maximum extent just before the melt starts in the spring.

Not so this year.

As of Tuesday, sea ice had stopped growing for two weeks. Sea ice extent -- the areas with at least 15 percent ice coverage -- hit a winter maximum of 14.214 million square kilometers (5.488 million square miles) on Feb. 9, and has stalled since, according to daily reports from the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Colorado.

If there is no more growth, the Feb. 9 total extent would be a double record that would mean an unprecedented head start on the annual melt season that runs until fall.

“If this was the maximum in sea ice extent, it would be the earliest that we’ve ever seen and it would also be the lowest maximum that we’ve ever seen, by a long shot, actually,” said Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center. “If this was the maximum, that would be pretty big in terms of what is happening in the Arctic.”

Up to now, the lowest winter ice-extent maximum in the satellite record dating back to 1979 was hit last year, when ice extent reached 14.54 million square kilometers (5.614 million square miles) on Feb. 25, according to NSIDC records. The earliest seasonal winter maximum was reached in 1996, when sea ice hit its peak extent on Feb. 24 of that year, according to the center’s records. Normally, ice extent reaches its maximum in early or mid-March; between 1981 and 2010, the average maximum date was March 12.
***

OK, let's use your chart. Within 2 standard deviations, which means it's within normal range. Let's us L know when it falls out of 3 standard deviations.

Actually, numbnuts, I said (and Arctic ice extent is) "more than two standard deviations from the 1981-2010 average", not 'within'. Liar!

And sure, you blind denier cult retard, ignore all of the rest of the evidence there that thoroughly debunks your idiot claim that the Arctic ice is "right on nominal".

It's your graph, and it shows March right at 2 Standard Deviations. And well within 3, which means a normal distribution.

The impacts of warmer oceans in the eastern pacific have been opposite of what the climate experts predicted. Instead of storm tracks being centered upon SoCal they have risen above the Pacific Northwest. The result has been extremely dry conditions for SoCal this winter and below average snowfall for the Sierras.

If they can't even get close to telling us the climate just a few months in advance, how can they justify telling us to change the economy for something they are predicting a century from now?

Show us such a prediction that is not simply a review of the effects of past el Nino events.

Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?

The Polar ice in the Arctic is, in fact, rapidly diminishing. It has not "disappeared" yet. but then, no scientist ever said that the Arctic ice would all be gone by now, so your post is just another stupid strawman argument.

...and by "rapidly diminishing" you mean you're just making it all up and calling NASA a bunch of liars for saying Antarctica ice is growing

Ahhhhh, CrazyFruitcake, you are such a clueless moron!

Arctic ice, as I said, IS RAPIDLY DIMINISHING. By every available measurement, the Arctic ice cap is currently rapidly shrinking in extent and volume, and Greenland is losing massive amounts of ice from its ice sheets.

As far as the Antarctic ice goes....

The fact is, no scientist ever said that the Antarctic ice would all be gone by now either, so your post - "Polar ice caps have disappeared, right?" - is just another really stupid denier cult strawman argument.

There have been a number of studies of the state of the Antarctic ice sheets. One recent NASA study analyzed satellite altimetry data that only ran up through 2008 and found that Antarctica appeared to be gaining slightly more ice in the interior from increased snowfall than the rather large amounts it was losing at the edges. All of the other studies that have been done in the last two decades however indicate that Antarctica is, on the whole, losing ice mass. That includes another recent NASA study, that analyzed gravity field measurements from the GRACE satellites, and included much more recently observed data, which concluded both that Antarctica is indeed losing ice mass, the rate of ice mass loss since 2008 has greatly increased - throwing into doubt the results of the altimetry based study with no data since 2008.

Right on nominal.

View attachment 65407

Nope! In the real world, not your denier cult fantasyland, Arctic sea ice has reached a record breaking low extent and volume.You are so stupid, you try to deceive people with a graph that stops in 2015 and doesn't include any data from 2016. The last record low Arctic sea ice extent happened in 2012. So far this year, 2016, Arctic sea ice extent is tracking well below the 2012 levels, and is currently more than two standard deviations from the 1981-2010 average.

Last year, in 2015, this happened:
"On February 25, 2015, Arctic sea ice extent appeared to have reached its annual maximum extent, marking the beginning of the sea ice melt season. This year’s maximum extent not only occurred early; it is also the lowest in the satellite record." - NSIDC

This year:
Annual winter growth of Arctic sea ice stalls early
Alaska Dispatch News
Yereth Rosen
February 23, 2016
Normally in the Arctic, the ocean water keeps freezing through the entire winter, creating ice that reaches its maximum extent just before the melt starts in the spring.

Not so this year.

As of Tuesday, sea ice had stopped growing for two weeks. Sea ice extent -- the areas with at least 15 percent ice coverage -- hit a winter maximum of 14.214 million square kilometers (5.488 million square miles) on Feb. 9, and has stalled since, according to daily reports from the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Colorado.

If there is no more growth, the Feb. 9 total extent would be a double record that would mean an unprecedented head start on the annual melt season that runs until fall.

“If this was the maximum in sea ice extent, it would be the earliest that we’ve ever seen and it would also be the lowest maximum that we’ve ever seen, by a long shot, actually,” said Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center. “If this was the maximum, that would be pretty big in terms of what is happening in the Arctic.”

Up to now, the lowest winter ice-extent maximum in the satellite record dating back to 1979 was hit last year, when ice extent reached 14.54 million square kilometers (5.614 million square miles) on Feb. 25, according to NSIDC records. The earliest seasonal winter maximum was reached in 1996, when sea ice hit its peak extent on Feb. 24 of that year, according to the center’s records. Normally, ice extent reaches its maximum in early or mid-March; between 1981 and 2010, the average maximum date was March 12.
***

OK, let's use your chart. Within 2 standard deviations, which means it's within normal range. Let's us L know when it falls out of 3 standard deviations.

Actually, numbnuts, I said (and Arctic ice extent is) "more than two standard deviations from the 1981-2010 average", not 'within'. Liar!

And sure, you blind denier cult retard, ignore all of the rest of the evidence there that thoroughly debunks your idiot claim that the Arctic ice is "right on nominal".

And BTW, cherry picking an average like they did in your chart is dishonest statistics. Anyone who presented that would be kicked out of not just my meeting, but the building.