DailyTech – Sea Ice Ends Year at Same Level as 1979 – FYI.
Lies I say! Now Let’s All Sing! Laaaaaa! Rapid growth spurt leaves amount of ice at levels seen 29 years ago. Thanks to a rapid rebound in recent months, global sea ice levels now equal those seen 29 years ago, when the year 1979 also drew to a close.
Ice levels had been tracking lower throughout much of 2008, but rapidly recovered in the last quarter. In fact, the rate of increase from September onward is the fastest rate of change on record, either upwards or downwards. The data is being reported by the University of Illinois’s Arctic Climate Research Center, and is derived from satellite observations of the Northern and Southern hemisphere polar regions.
Earlier this year, predictions were rife that the North Pole could melt entirely in 2008. Instead, the Arctic ice saw a substantial recovery. Bill Chapman, a researcher with the UIUC’s Arctic Center, tells DailyTech this was due in part to colder temperatures in the region. Chapman says wind patterns have also been weaker this year. Strong winds can slow ice formation as well as forcing ice into warmer waters where it will melt.
In May, concerns over disappearing sea ice led the U.S. to officially list the polar bear a threatened species, over objections from experts who claimed the animal’s numbers were increasing.
Perhaps the Dvorak.org should revisit this topic.
Wow an actual correction from you guys. Kudos to you!
Well thats that then. Feel free to resume polluting the bejeezus out of the planet. Your kids will no doubt thank you for it.
Wait, hold it! Global warming is a lie?
NO, IT CAN’T BE!!!
Then that would mean Idiot George W. Bush was actually CORRECT in refusing to sign the Kyoto Protocol?
Bush — was Right??
Oh, my head is spinning, the room is growing dim…
Global Warming, even if true, says very little about the Kyoto Protocol. I saw a report where the analyst said the USA would implement other carbon neutralizing programs outside of the Ky oto Protocols. Haven’t heard much since but there are a few Swedish Scientist saying much more carbon reduction cook take place without the artificial expense of Kyoto which CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG has an intended consequence of transferring wealth from first world manufacturing countries to third world rural countries? And China where the most heavy manufacturing pollution production is taking place is exempt from Kyoto???—ie—another typical UN f&ckedup program.
Ice cover and ice depth are not the same thing. Let’s see what happens next august. Even if the north pole had recoverd an historically noticable portion of it’s ice mass, that in and of itself seems a worrisome change in just one cycle/year. I fail to understand this paranoia over climate change. Even if it is just chicken little shouting the sky is falling, at least it seems to be motivating a change in the right direction. Doesn’t take a genius to see the benefits of alternative energies and more responsible resource management.
Obviously John C. Dvorak hates Gore like a 3rd grader, drawing lipstick and blush on Gore’s pictures. I can’t image what he did as a child.
This is an old recycled Dvorak Uncensored image that John should just delete from his hard drive, along with his other naughty pictures.
I think it’s cherry picked data, and a better picture of the situation can be seen in a sea ice map. The planet’s ecology is more important than talking about the weather, which is kinda easy.
@amodedoma – you’re an idiot. What do you think will happen next August – the ice will melt. It will not melt because of something man made. It will melt because of something that has been going on before man. It is called summer. How are we going in the right direction by this hoax? If the purpose of the hoax is putting us in a direction that leads to nowhere, this is not the right direction. My wish is that gas was below $1.00/gal and that we don’t use it because it is too expensive compared to other forms of energy, not that we use other forms of energy that are more expensive than gas. Cheap gas that costs more than alternatives is the only solution that will work.
@amodedoma – you’re an idiot. What do you think will happen next August – the ice will melt. It will not melt because of something man made. It will melt because of something that has been going on before man. It is called summer. How are we going in the right direction by this hoax? If the purpose of the hoax is putting us in a direction that leads to nowhere, this is not the right direction. My wish is that gas was below $1.00/gal and that we don’t use it because it is too expensive compared to other forms of energy, not that we use other forms of energy that are more expensive than gas. Cheap gas that costs more than alternatives is the only solution that will work. Forcing people to do something based on lies it not beneficial.
Bill Chapman just got a huge check from ExxonMobil. Thanks Bill!
Obviously a single data point is worth much more than 30 years of observations!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harold-ambler/mr-gore-apology-accepted_b_154982.html
“Well thats that then. Feel free to resume polluting the bejeezus out of the planet. Your kids will no doubt thank you for it.”
If you have taught the lie of Santa through Christmas to your children, and then let them know the truth, is Christmas then not enjoyable anymore for you or them?
In other words – do we need a lie perpetuated to curb pollution, or a big fearful lie to goad us to take measures? What lie is next to get the sheep to run right now left?
Honest truth needs no false props.
Aww anyhow, hippo fossils have been found in and around the Thames river. It has not got that warm there yet again. And here I was rooting for global warming and all 🙁
Up here in Northern U.S. record cold – snow – and road closures.
Global pffffft! So much for my plans on a citrus orchard.
#8 Thermo
Ahhhh, the old conspiracy theory. Always better than a scientific theory right? A hoax presupposes someone has something to gain. Oh, I get it, they’re after your money aren’t they? Sounds like someone’s been watching fox news.
As far as the theory leading nowhere you should have a look at the technological progress made in field of alternative energies since the climate change theory was proposed. Sorry, no cheap electric car, yet.
#10 LOL! That’s quite some crystal ball!
#11, That is a great article. Worth the read.
#4, bobbo. I’ve always felt the same way about Kyoto. It was just a big con job by the UN. (What good is the UN nowadays, again?)
The “climate change debate” highlights the big problem with bad science headed by activist with an ulterior agenda. We really do need to reduce carbon emissions simply because it’s less toxins to worry about and less Arabs to boot, but unfortunately climate change fanaticism has thrown carbon reduction into the bin of junk science. Now it will be much more difficult to take it seriously.
And it really doesn’t help when huge stinking piles like this video appear.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMLJD-mantE
One normal winter does not make a lie of climate change. Regardless, funding of clean energy development and reduction of pollution are desirable goals. Do you really want to gamble on our childrens future?
Sounds like some of you guys actually are pulling for some kind of climate disaster. A bit emotionally invested, even.
#14
No, it doesn’t make it a lie, but it does show that we aren’t necessarily in an endless spiral of complete collapse unless we give away are money to Al Gore so he can invest it in his hedge fund.
And the tree huggers were weeping.
Sea Ice Ends Year at Same Level as 1979.
It’s all those polluting bastards again.
RBG
So does that mean the Maldives still exist?
# 14 Hugh Ripper said, “Do you really want to gamble on our childrens future?”
Of course, not. But what this may show is that we don’t understand what’s going on and that climate change ois NOT an emergency but a fact of life whether we pollute or not. So, let’s slow down, figure out how to do this without bankrupting companies and countries. Invest in cleaner energy? Yes. YES. But we shouldn’t have to stop burning coal so the Chinese can burn more. That is just absurd.
Yup. A single data point on a 30-year chart must certainly overwhelm existing analyses. Of course, the actual studies don’t match the conclusions of the blog quoted in the post.
Most folks here never even notice the actual study or conclusions aren’t referenced. You might learn the 2-dimensional coverage increased while the overall thickness of sea ice continued to diminish.
Why waste time saying you support science and scientific research when it’s politically correct (in nutball circles) to be skeptical about any science that assigns responsibility to human behavior or activity.
Yup. We’re all God’s critters. Forgiven.
Here’s a link for those few who care to read science instead of commentators about science:
http://tinyurl.com/4xpsjt
There are related links through the NASA site. None of which are politically correct as far as the RNC is concerned.
ROFL this is great entertainment. Now watch Gore and all these other warming goons change their tunes and start singing “The Climate Change We Need” with the chorus saying that there is more ice because carbon credits have put people back to work.
Now, for anyone that may have just gotten past their own egos after hearing this latest squashing of the rediculous global warming theories, hear this, OUTER SPACE cools the planet, the sun’s radiation warms it. We have NO CONTROL over this, none, zip, nada.
I concluded the post John references with the following comment:
“Fact is – the chickens are probably coming home to roost a bit earlier than expected. But, why let facts get in the way of politics?”
Just as accurate now as then. The overall mass of sea ice continues to diminish, glaciers continue to retreat, the analysis of the rate of decline compared to the dramatic rate of increase of greenhouse gases over the course of the industrial age hasn’t been refuted by any political diatribes.
The few folks here who actually care to study the science involved in the analysis might start at http://tinyurl.com/23ozzs – I realize it involves a few more gray cells than blogosphere opinion. Even worse, the suggestion might occur to you to act politically to turn things round and that’s not always comfortable.
The chuckle is – given a corner of this blog’s politics through the recent election cycle – even John McCain has taken the time to read the IPCC report and understands the historic logic of the hundreds of scientists who participated.
Not only is the headline misleading, it’s untrue, btw. Here’s a chart which even the laziest should comprehend. And the source, http://tinyurl.com/72u4fm
Life if an Environmental wacko:
1979 – Looks at sea ice level “It’s Global Cooling I tell you!”
2009 – Looks at sea ice level “It’s Climate change I tell you!”
How far back does accurate Arctic Ice cap coverage data go?
Just to add a small bit for those who understand a bit of science.
First year ice, which is what this is about, is a poor indicator of the health of the pole regions. It is the old ice scientists worry about. Old ice is what remains after the seasonal melt and contributes to the continued climate of the region.
As “Eideard” pointed out above, the old ice on the glaciers and sea shelves has been melting. What the nay saying idiots don’t understand is that this huge and powerful heat sink, especially at the Antarctic, is disappearing. When it is gone, the heat will remain in the temperate and tropic regions of earth.
So cheer about the new ice in the Arctic ocean. Just hope most of it is still there in November 2009.
Here in ND it has been an average of 10 degrees cooler this winter… I believe it.
This in no way means we should start driving SUV’s again when you only have one friggin’ kid ladies!
I looked it up. There is accurate data about Arctic ice cap size from about 1978. There is sketchy data from about 1870 (not long after the little ice age ended.
A nanosecond in geological time. Not enough data points to evaluate either way what is or isn’t happening.
The largest effect of the ice cap is to reflect solar radiation. So, the most important thing is the area, not thickness.