The UK Met Office says that extreme cold this spring is caused by missing Arctic ice. Only they forgot to check whether or not the ice is actually missing.
It is great how climate scientists can develop a cause and effect relationship, skipping directly past the “cause” part.
 | gelcarrion0t on Australia Permanent Drought Up… |
| gelcarrion0t on “New computer modeling… |
 | Morgan Wright on Climate Destroying Shrimp |
 | Christopher Simpson on 1896 : Japan Hit By Earthquake… |
 | energywise on What’s At Stake? |
 | Robert Cherba on Too Hot To Live |
| gelcarrion0t on Too Hot To Live |
 | Nicholas McGinley on “The world began to end… |
| Nicholas McGinley on “The world began to end… |
| Nicholas McGinley on “The world began to end… |
I know we toss the word gullible around a lot about the climate change cult . However I know many otherwise intelligent and educated people who believe this religion. They flat do not like you to make fun of there god CO2. When I showed an article from WUWT how a Tesla S really put out more CO2 than an SUV I thought I would be burned at the stake.
Mainly people can not be bothered with old news paper clippings because people then were stupid and only todays high priests no anything.
The MET office is becoming a laughingstock. Its growing desperation has moved it to offer some of the most ludicrous explanations for the lack of global warming over the past 16 years. The agency simply can’t face the facts: there is no catastrophic CO2-induced global warming, and mankind’s impact on global climate (if there is any at all) is immeasurably tiny.
The Met Office is fast becoming the homeopaths of weather services. Dilute a minuscule amounts of CO2 in air for maximum effects.
‘Cause they can get away with it!
OK, that was somewhat snarky, but I couldn’t resist.
According to Richard Feynman, scientific theories arise as follows. First comes the Guess, then the Prediction, then the Observations from Experience, and only then the Conclusion.
CAGW is a good hypothesis. It is based on good physics. However it has not been borne out by observation. There are alternative hypotheses to explain the same phenomena. That they are equally flawed is not a proof of the CAGW hypothesis.
Unfortunately the only proof that counts today is how much political support your Guess can gather.
It is a cherry picked 27(?) year mean(ingless).
It is worse than you thought Steven …. often they skip right past the “science” part too!
Well, we’re certainly below the ‘thousands-of-years-at-a-mile-deep-over-chicago’ mean. I guess that’s my fault. 🙁 And when that mean does return, I’m sure that will also be my fault.
I have been preached to that “volume counts more than extent” – does that fly ?
As far as radiative transfer goes, it make very little difference how thick the ice is. Area and latitude are much more important than volume.
Steve,
Particularly so in summer, however, winter volume has a direct effect upon summer extent. What shall we see in 100 days?
Winter winds have a direct effect on summer extent. I winder why that rarely gets talked about?
Summer cyclones also have an effect on fall extent.