Earth Gains A Record Amount Of Sea Ice In 2013

Earth has gained 19,000 Manhattans of sea ice since this date last year, the largest increase on record. There is more sea ice now than there was on this date in 2002.

ScreenHunter_561 Sep. 14 06.01

h/t to Marc Morano

About Tony Heller

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

229 Responses to Earth Gains A Record Amount Of Sea Ice In 2013

  1. Andy DC says:

    Where are all the yapping dogs on your blog talking about how crazy you are? You were spot on. They ended up being the crazy ones.

    • F. Guimaraes says:

      2002 is the 2nd highest ice extent for mid September of the last 12 years, tied with 2004 and 2006 and below only 2003.
      I think it’s interesting to keep an eye on these other years to see if the present ice extent for the day, the month etc., reaches the same level or surpass the corresponding levels of those years.
      This would be an objective measurement of the recovery of the Arctic ice.
      Interesting enough, for the beginning of October and December the highest level was in 2008, the year when the present solar maximum began and just 1 year after the very low minimum of 2007. I don’t think is mere coincidence.
      (according to JAXA, NORSEX and DMI)

    • F. Guimaraes says:

      Logic and objective analysis prevails over pseudo-scientific politically biased models, that’s why Steve was spot on and they keep doing mistake after mistake.

      • Chris says:

        All I see is Steve ignoring 97% of the scientific community creating his own web of deceit. He overloads the reader with data and then draws incorrect conclusions. The idea that climatologists have some conspiracy (what’s the motive?) to push this data is nonsense. Unfortunately you’ve decided to believe his message first. Here’s a new report:

        I know, it’s NPR, the leaders in this climate conspiracy.

        • Please name the 97% for us.

        • Sunsettommy says:

          Do you know what fallacies are Chris?

          Argument from consensus is one of them.

          Meanwhile you didn’t make a real counterpoint here.

        • Bob says:

          The theory might be that one only gets money from Governments for “new” things. So if you are a climatologist, the only way to get money is to forecast something new. Who is going to give you a grant for saying: ” there will be no significant changes”? Why fund this type of science. Think of it as going for a PhD in Climatology, what do you place in your thesis that is really new to justify granting you a PhD?

        • rho1953 says:

          Do you stand up to your boss? Would you tell him he’s wrong about something he has set as policy? Neither do the “scientists” who have their hands out for government funding.

        • John says:

          Consensus science, if you were to go back 102 years the consensus was there was no Pangea, tectonic plates or continental drift. 30 years before that the consensus was there were no prior periods of glaciation. And I think the consensus among scientists for those examples were higher than 97%.

        • rho1953 says:

          Horse manure. There is no 97% consensus. That is just another made up number pulled out of thin air. But even if it were true, there was about a 99% consensus the earth was flat at one time, and that the sun rotated around the earth. Consensus is baloney. Facts and consensus are not the same things.

        • Traitor In Chief says:

          Apparently, Chris is unaware that the 97% turned out to be .3% when the math errors were corrected.

          But Chris, understand this also: Most scientists who say they concur do so because they assume other scientists have proven it. They’re making the same mistake you are.

          A great number of papers study such critical questions as: how many nuts are in squirrel shit?… and then attempt to relate that to what they have heard is a warming world.

        • Chimel says:

          Err, no, it is not scientists blindly “believing” other scientists, you have a poor opinion of scientists if that’s what you think. It is also what climatologists: No climatology studies denies climate change, you’d have to be mental to do so, i.e. unsuitable to be a scientist. And these are people who actually make their own studies of the science, they don’t just rely on other assumptions. and for climatologists, the rate is much higher than 97%, there has been several analyses of the integrality of climate papers, ranking them in pro or contra climate change, or irrelevant. There are almost no paper (or none at all) that deny climate change.

        • rho1953 says:

          No, you have to be a moron to believe it after two decades of flat temperatures. CO2 concentrations of up to 1,000 parts per million are minute.

        • Chimel says:

          Well it’s not exactly flat, surface temps are still increasing, if not as much, and it’s been 16 years going on 17, not 20. Meanwhile 90% of the heat went into the oceans, which is nothing new to climatologists, of course, but was never publicized until the temporary plateau anomaly was highlighted. I first discovered it in “Field Notes from a Catastrophe”.

        • rho1953 says:

          No, the “increase” that it can just as easily be attributed to rounding or other factors. It is almost too small to quantify.

        • rho1953 says:

          Bullshit. There is no 97% concurrence. I notice you never bothered to address the increase in ice.

        • TSZodiac says:

          First off – ” 97% of the scientific community” is incorrect. In fact, the scientists who support the scam that is AGW do so largely not because of their own research into the subject. They do so based on the data/conclusions being spewed out by the IPCC ( which is only about 2500 people). We already know from Email-gate that these IPCC “scientists” manipulated their data to support predetermined conclusions. The motive? Simple – MONEY. Taking YOUR tax dollars to fight mother nature herself….The brave new frontier of profits, environmental legislation….see, the scam worked like this: science knew that in the early to mid 2000’s that the Sun would be entering a solar maximum (solar cycle 24). Some very large business interests saw an opportunity with the higher temps associated with this solar cycle….all they would need is a body that could be influenced into supporting their predetermined goals (enter the UN… know, the same body that puts Countries like Iran – remember, the Muslim Theocracy where woman have few rights and their last President said there aren’t any gay people – in charge of the Human Rights Council, probably the most corrupt quasi a government entity in the world). Now, they need a prominent politician to champion the cause – hmmm, just so happens that there’s a Presidential Election coming up at that time….they can buy an American President to ramrod the effort! Oops, they didn’t count on Gore losing the election…this set their plans back by at least 2 years….but still, if they acted fast enough, they could still get the legislation through before temps began declining again. Enter Hollywood and “An inconvenient truth” – since their politician no longer had a stage to promote their product, they enlisted the help of filmmakers to further their cause. I urge you to re-examine the predictions in that movie….all were only valid or made any sense during solar cycle 24….and ALL of the predictions in the movie have now been proven to be fantasy as solar cycle 24 fades and we enter the new solar cycle – which will be characterized by lower temps. This is why the name changed a couple of years ago to “Global climate change” from “Global Warming” – this name change has the side benefit of allowing the scammers to claim ANY weather as “proof” of their scam – too warm? Your fault! Too cold – you guessed it, you’re fault! Not enough rain – YOUR fault….too much rain- you got it…..YOUR fault !! The REAL inconvenient truth for the Gore-ites is that the geologic and archaeological record are chock full of dramatic and rapid climate change – its why there are marine fossils in the desert southwest of the US, abandoned Viking settlements in Greenland (ask yourself why a place full of ice and snow is named “Green-land”), and sunken settlements off the coasts of India, Japan, the Middle East and Great Britain! I suggest you Google ” the little ice age” or “the medieval warm period”.
          Ask yourself this common sense question – if YOU were Al Gore, and you KNEW 100% that man made climate change caused by carbon dioxide was an IMMEDIATE threat ( at a “tipping point”)to destroy mankind, would YOU still own a home in Tennessee that’s bigger than a Super Walmart (with accompanyingly high electric usage) that your servants live in while you JET around the world on your private plane – traveling with an entourage of gas guzzling SUV’s…staying in the finest accommodations, some of which you own? Forget his WORDS, are Al Gore’s ACTIONS those of some one who is genuinely concerned about this greatest threat to mankind, or are his actions more like a Salesman on the road trying to sell the world on a product? He has a bigger Carbon Footprint than everyone you know – COMBINED !

        • epiminondas says:

          The conspiracy you’re mocking is real. It’s a conspiracy of pseudo-scientists in the environmental movement to keep their cushy government funded jobs pursuing the chimera of “global warming”. Without it, the leftists lose their traction, lose their ability to scare taxpayers into ponying up, and lose their credibility. In order to get rid of these bureaucratic parasites, we’re going to have to laugh them off the stage and cut off their funding.

        • The Bobster says:

          The 97% are the sellout scientists receiving grant money for pushing this scam. The majority of us scientists know junk science when we see it.

        • charome says:

          The motive for the global warming, now climate change scam is money. If you live off of grant money, a good panic will keep the grants coming.

        • Piet says:

          Two things:

          1. He reports “several feet of snow”. Perhaps the ice sheet is in equilibrium, with snow falling on top and ice melting off the bottom?

          2. I don’t understand how melting sea ice can’t raise sea levels. An ice cube melts in a filled glass, no water spills out. Ice floats due to lower density and floating ice melting gains density as water. If the ice gets thicker, it has to sink deeper due to displacement.

        • Lou says:

          “The idea that climatologists have some conspiracy (what’s the motive?) to push this data is nonsense.”

          Ever hear of Research grants? You do not get em ifin you think incorrectly. No conspiracy here just the desire to stay well fed. Science as all of society is being corrupted by the politically correct conjunction of a totalitarian government and ethic less corporations. Money buys people including many scientists and we and truth lose. Money has clearly bought and paid for our “Mainstream Media”. Only the net offers us rapid broadcast truth and the net is under dire attack.

        • “The conspiracy you’re mocking is real. It’s a conspiracy of pseudo-scientists in the environmental movement to keep their cushy government funded jobs pursuing the chimera of “global warming”.”

          – That’s not a “conspiracy”. Conspiracies need to be reasonably secretive to meet the definition. This movement is anything but. Self satisfied self interest as you’ve described it, pretty much describes much of what might be considered the norm in Western societies these days.

        • tim florio says:

          Just to play devils advocate if the govt was pushing a certain agenda and you as a scientest wanted govt grant money you might misrepresent the facts to back up the govt agenda. Sounds like a motive to me. Further more even if the planet is getting warmer there’s no proof that humans are the cause. The planets been through cooling and heating phases plenty of times before people even existed

        • Bob says:

          Chris, why are YOU so committed to a model that is increasingly DISCONFIRMED nearly every time it confronts data (that have NOT been tampered with)????

        • pops says:

          Chris, saying climatologists don’t have an agenda is like saying the media doesn’t have an agenda. They both do.

        • catweazle666 says:

          “All I see is Steve ignoring 97% of the scientific community…”

          Obviously you require a visit to SpecSavers!

        • Nick says:

          The 97% is Boooooguuuuuus!!!

        • Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts.
          – Richard Feynman

    • Jorge says:

      This is why the global warming nut jobs could never produce any satellite imagery that showed a trend of sea ice

    • Yeah… we’re 30% down on ice since 1981 – that’s 400,000 square miles. 19000 Manhattans is peanuts to that.

      • Disco lives forever

      • Fred says:

        19,000 Manhattans is 640,000 square miles.

      • 33.7 Square Miles * 19000 = 641,630 Square Miles and is 241,630 more Square Miles than 400,000. How is the “peanuts”? You climate guys are really good with math.

      • Iceman says:

        Actually, Manhattan is 22.7 square miles and if you multiply that by your 19,000 peanuts you get over 431,000 square miles. That means were up 31,000 square miles of ice… Let it go Pete

      • tpf says:

        Don’t know where you came up with the 400,000 square miles down in sea ice statistic, but Manhattan is 33.77 square miles. 33.77 x 19,000 manhattans is equals 641,630 square miles. You should have done the month first before posting. We have recovered 100 percent of the 400k miles lost and gained an additional 240k square miles according to your statistic.

        • tpf says:

          and I should have proofed my typing… meant math not month and should have deleted after manhattan….

        • Lee Sullivan says:

          According to wikipedia, the land area of Manhattan is 22.96 square miles. The writer of the article was remiss in not stating whether the total area of Manhattan, or land only, was the reference. Still, 22.96*19,000 equals 436,240.

      • Eddy says:

        Pete, I don’t want to impugn your intelligence but…19,000 Manhattans is MORE than 400,000 square miles. In fact, it’s 437,000 square miles. But don’t trust me, do the math yourself!

      • John says:

        Not being very smart is the hallmark of every liberal…

      • Venkman says:

        19,000 Manhattans equals 418,000 square miles…

      • Chris says:

        I find it interesting the argument centers around your incorrect 400,000 miles not the actual continued decrease in ice. It’s pretty clear that there’s nothing real about the science on this blog.

        If you are a skeptic, try listening to the skeptics guide to the universe to understand how all the arguments here are based on logical fallacies.

      • beaker55 says:

        The problem for the warmers is that there’s just not enough wide-spread FEAR about global warming yet. They must induce MORE FEAR in order to get people on board with them. In Pete’s CS Monitor article even the premise is faulty. Here’s one of the most telling statements about the climate fear mongering perspective upheld by the ‘reporter’ who confirms: “… the long-term rate of decline that scientists have measured for at least 34 years.” Long-term? Think about it. Still, the global fear crowd still worship their religion, maintain zealous faith in computer ‘models’, and solemnly sacrifice logic at their alters.

        • rho1953 says:

          Exactly, and it is all agenda driven. They know they are full of it, but they think the ends justifies the means. They hate oil and anything that goes against oil is okay to them, even if it is a lie.

        • Lou says:

          “They must induce MORE FEAR in order to get people on board with them.”

          Yes fear is the great motivator. I remember back in circa 2000 the BBC et al told us our children would NEVER see snow again in merry ole England. God my kids never to see snow, to ride the tube down the hill, to skate on frozen ponds? What a tragedy.

          Now my kids are telling me they are sick of the rotten, bone chilling, LONG, snowy winters.

          Oh well can’t win em all.

        • rho1953 says:

          I was on vacation in northern Minnesota in August. We had frost warnings and saw nighttime temps in the very low forty degree range. The gardens up there are a joke. Their sweet corn was about two feet tall. There was almost no summer in many places in the US this year.

      • Grant says:

        Ice in 1981 was at the end of 30 + years of cooling, when by the way, CO2 was increasing dramatically.

    • Chris Colon says:

      I have no doubt that Obama the Messiah is responsible for this. The Messiah said that Now is the time for him to cause the tides to recede. That is by creating new ice formations. HE DID IT and that is good enough for him to be the Messiah. Like Algore inventing the Internet, Obama made the earth cool. He is ultimately the messiah saving the world. +

  2. Hugh K says:

    The Hillary Effect……..Mother Earth preparing for return of the ice queen in 2016.

  3. Now find Al Gore and throw his fat rear end into that ice and hard.

    • Nys Parkie says:

      He is counting his millions made of the peanut sized brains of all the lemmings…..

    • Evangeline Brabant says:

      Lord Moncton, head of British Environmental Programs, has told Gore that if he sets foot on British soil, anywhere, and pushes one of his products, he (Gore) will be arrested on the spot, and “you will go to prison.”

      In England, years ago, a British judge ruled that before British school children could watch ” An Inconvenient Truth,” they had to be taught the 11 scientific errors in the film. The manual to correct and teach those errors is 80 pages long.

    • Javert says:

      We must send Algore more money so he can put a stop to this. Perhaps he needs several bigger homes and more powerful jet planes so that he can accommodate alr the “experts” and elite university professors. who got on the gravy train.

  4. Joe E in the IE says:

    Care to comment, Former Vice President Gore?

    Hey, hey, no need for obscenity, and, no, you can’t “eff” the horse I rode in on. I don’t even own a horse.

  5. Jimmy says:

    Great! Now all the polar bears can stop dog-paddling.

  6. Leon A Davis says:

    Anybody heard from that “Hide The Decline” chowderhead lately? Climate Alarmists remind me of those religious cult freaks you see every so often who give all their stuff away and make white robes and climb up on their roofs waiting for flying saucers to come and take them away. When that doesn’t happen, it’s a long climb back down to the ground, both in the literal and figurative sense. I’ll bet you one thing for sure; if you show “Hide The Decline” an ice cube, he’ll go into hysterics.

  7. Ted K says:

    But…but…but….the ice at the poles are melting. Right? Right? And the polar bears have no where to go, right? Right? Aw shucks….

  8. catswold says:

    Gee, that looks suspiciously RANDOM. You don’t suppose that ACC/AGW is total bunk and influencing the Earth’s climate is beyond the capability of mankind, do you? /total snark

    Al Bore and his entire faux industry should be placed behind bars for racketeering.

  9. Tim Lucas says:

    This certainly proves global warming at work and the fact I’m being uptuse. This is just a minor set back for those few liberal/communist fully funded in that “carbon credit” scam. Well, you still have that 100 million from the terrorist. Lots of massages for that price and you might get a few of them to go a bit further with that moaning and groaning. A decade or two of this will see your end. Happy trails.

  10. Joseph says:

    The graph follows the 11 year sunspot very well: the cycle of cosmic ray energy from the sun. Increase cosmic rays increase Earth cloudiness, cooling the planet. NASA Earth Temp and cosmic ray curves show this effect in force over the past 500M years. Search NASA climate sites, especially Goddard.

    • Jorge says:

      What does the sun have to do with our climate? It is all those pesky humans burning that nasty naturally occurring substance called oil. The global warming alarmist will come up with some ridiculous hypothesis as to why this is happening. I think the warm air is hiding at the bottom of the ocean and will be released as soon as all those hurricanes they predicted destroy all the coastal cities and then the oceans willl rise, Manhattan will be underwater and AL Gore will be puffing out more CO2 then the Steeler’s Defensive line!

      • Joseph says:

        Jorge, you are right, I apologize, what does science and measurement have to due with it. We are supposed just emote!!! Thanks for setting me straight. NASA Ames has some super presentations on the subject, but all made up of course: how could heat from the sun affect Earth???

    • catswold says:

      “Say it ain’t so, Joe!” LOL! (can’t believe I get to use that line).

      You mean to tell me that . . . GASP! . . . all of those crazy “skeptics” have been right all along? Heh-heh-heh.

      All one has to do to see that AGW has been a chimera of liberals and so-called “climatologists” manufacture. They apparently never figured out that correlation is not the same as causation and that just because two things–say temperatures and CO2 levels–appear to track closely, it does not necessarily imply any relationship, or that the relationship hypothesized is correct.

      Indeed we know after the fact of Al Gore’s movie, that CO2 levels TRAILED rises in temperatures by about 800 years, thus implying that the relationship was one of “causation,” but it was an inverse relationship. The rise in temperatures apparently caused a rise of CO2 levels.

      • X says:

        And that’s why the CO2 levels are getting so high now, because of the intense warming in the last century (caused by solar radiations), in fact the world has been warming since the early 1700’s.
        The increase of CO2 should continue for some time, despite the present cooling trend.

        • KC Ted says:

          “There was a “little ice age” in the mid-1700’s. Check out the frozen Delaware River, in the painting “Washington Crosses The Delaware”. There was a couple years with almost no summer in the northern states. We may even be facing another “little ice age”.
          However, the excess C02 might be a good thing, as Fukishima kills all that ocean phytoplankton that consumes CO2 creates oxygen. The added CO2 may very well stimulate plant growth in other areas, to offset the loss in the Pacific.
          Cooler temperatures in the typical arid areas, along with the moisture it would bring, will cause plant growth where there is currently very little to none.
          Mother earth is quite durable and finds balance where humans see none.

  11. me says:

    Oh noes, this is horrible, just horrible — now all of the polar bears, penguins, and ice barnacles will have to travel _much_ too far over all that barren ice and exhaust themselves in the attempt, while the meal of fish below their feet swim away.

    If only there wasn’t so much ice around!

  12. Cain says:

    Trying to imagine what headline the MSM can use to spin this properly… “Study shows Mother Earth is grumpy, bloated, retaining water at record rate – climate deniers continue to ignore danger to humanity while deluge imminent”

  13. That just proves that there MUST be something wrong, I learned that earlier this week when it was reported that DEC violations in NYS are down 25% which of course made people cry out for more DEC funding to “find” new violations.

  14. Looks pretty even to me….While we may have the ability to affect air quality, I’m pretty sure the Global Warming (Global Freezing in the 1970’s) crowd are just trying to keep their jobs by perpetuating this and playing to our fears… Your welcome Al Gore….

  15. Jon says:

    19000 Manhattans is confusing. It’s almost one Alaska.

  16. bobbyhoying says:

    One more “sky is falling” liberal crisis that was totally bogus – man made global warming. Liberals give man far too much credit for understanding anything or being able to influence anything. God manages the earth whether liberals acknowledge Him or not. He lovingly created a once in the universe planet and we don’t thank Him often enough.

  17. rb says:

    Well of course…. didn’t his holiness Obama tell us that when we elected him that the sea levels were going to start falling?

  18. Jesse Pearce says:

    I don’t understand. What with Global Warming and all.

  19. Mahood says:

    Seriously? Sea ice? What do you think of the morality of feeding irrelevance or even bad news to your readers and to Drudge’s, and spin it as though its good news? Sea ice increases with global warming, as melting causes ice to slide off Greenland and Antarctica. This is not good news.

    • You can’t possibly be as stupid as you pretend to be.

    • Jorge says:

      I agree warming causes things to freeze. Do you ever read what you write? Where are the hurricanes that were predicted, the lack of snow, the rising oceans. Last I hear the warmth was trapped in the bottom of the ocean and the climatologist was serious. It gets colder the deeper you go, warmer water goes to the surface. What will it take for the global warming zeolots to admit they are wrong? Glaciers in New York again (they were there a mer 20,000 years ago).

    • cloud9 says:

      Years ago there was a screen shot from a television interview at Al Gore’s presidential campaign headquarters. There was a bank of television monitors and one was Drudge.

    • Mahood Mahood Mahood. Remember when I told you what icebergs were in the coloring book? Right before the page with your orange and pink dinosaurs. Icebergs slide off the Greenland and Antarctica in the summer and float away. Now the grownups are talking about SEA ICE which forms in the winter and is the opposite of icebergs. Such a cute boy. Now get your hat and run, the bus is coming.

    • The Bobster says:

      The next time I make ice cubes, I’ll put the tray on my stove.

  20. Jorge says:

    This is why the global warming nut jobs could never produce any satellite imagery that showed a trend of sea ice declining. I asked many to produce such images to no avail. I have seen many animations of diminishing sea ice and they were more than happy to supply drawings, never reality.

    • X says:

      World sea ice is very stable, it keeps repeating the same pattern again and again, even when world temperatures vary. I believe this will change in the next decades, because during the LIA the glaciers were larger.

  21. freedomfan says:

    More ice proves AGW

  22. Elcid says:

    I just discovered this site. Fabulous source of info to refute the GW alamists!

    Here’s a data bit that I sure could use: the standard reply by my alarmist friends to reports of recovering sea ice area, is to claim that the DEPTH of the ice is lessening even if the EXTENT of it is holding more or less steady. I’ll be thankful for references/analysis on that point. Maybe you already have it but I have yet to find it?

  23. Lyle says:

    The graph presented here definitely has incorrect data for 2012 (which had a record minimum) and hides the long term trend. To see a graph that shows absolute values see:

    “This year’s higher sea ice extent is merely due to the fact that last year’s minimum extent was record-shattering, and the weather was not as optimal for sea ice loss this summer.”

  24. David Appell says:

    The long view looks much less convincing (and more truthful):

  25. The Progressive Liberal Leftist Socialists want ice to disappear. They want proof that climate change and Global Warming are huge real threats and thus they can tell industrial nations, wealthy nations: stop doing those horrid energy systems and become a nice little 3rd world nation like ….Mali, Venezuela, Syria. After all liberal Dems love to punish American capitalism because after all, we Americans have been so mean making so much wealth!!! YIkes. Time to stop listening to the Left and use fracking ala ND, sign Keystone, go full steam ahead to exploit our huge amounts of oil, gas, coal supplies. If we did, we explode OPEC, we stop the Islamofascists from oil blackmail, and we tell Russia and China, go fish you thugs. As long as we have Dem libs in charge, America is doomed.

  26. NW-HardWood says:

    8I don’t know how this could be….algore says>>>>>

    and obama says>>>>>

    Now…..these tow experts can’t possibly be wrong…..can they?

  27. paddylol says:

    Screw the Manhattans. How many Texas have been covered?

  28. fake quote says:

    “It appears with the latest data that our carbon reduction efforts are paying huge dividends.” Al Gore

  29. GT says:

    Obviously the freezing temperature of water has risen due to global warming.

  30. Don says:

    Nothing to see here, move along, move along………. Nothing to see here…….

  31. Hidingandwatcing says:

    Any pics of polar bears frozen in the ice will be suppressed.

  32. Steve McNary says:

    Obuma must have forgotten to give the arctic a “red line” on ice creation…

  33. Lone Ranger says:

    I know this is a controversial subject… but can we thank the Geo Engineering and the weather control program over the last decade or so…? Stratospheric Arousal Spraying has been going on for a long time. Not all con trail are con trails according to many reputable and respected researchers that are not on the government payroll.
    There seems to be a lot of credible evidence that enormous amounts of aluminum oxide, barium and strodium… just to name a few toxins have been and still are being released into our upper atmosphere, apparently to reflect ultraviolet light and cool the planet. The evidence of a cover up seems quite overwhelming despite “officials” either ignoring or denying any such action.

    • Anthony S says:

      “Stratospheric Arousal Spraying”

      I think that’s something everyone can get behind. 😉

    • I bet the commercial airlines are paying through the nose for strodium. There are no listings on ebay for it, and even amazon doesn’t sell it. I guess it’s a top government secret. I hear it doesn’t really cool the planet anyway so it’s a wash.

  34. phodges says:

    Wow, David Apell is a really angry quack!

  35. S.E.Bailey says:

    Sliding off of Greenland and Iceland…………….(face palm)
    What is a issue is science hijacked for agenda politics… as this happens the presentation of facts and rebutting of the same with in scientific circles has now the emulations of how political circles act, interact, and react.

    hateful, castigating, abusive, derisive.
    David Apell, regardless of your views you attack with such malice and vitriol to those who oppose them, I deem you views unworthy of review, solely for the person that has delivered them.

    • squid2112 says:

      I can’t even force myself to be nice to/about him anymore. Just the sight of his name being posted makes me want to puke. He has made a deep dive below stupid.

  36. Jeffrey2099 says:

    Interesting. It appears from the bar graph that some years the ice builds and some years it melts. Somewhat random. It only goes back to 1980 so its hard to draw any conclusions.

    • F. Guimaraes says:

      I believe there is a slightly increase in the area of the “blues” after 2002 inclusive, while the opposite is true for the previous years. This is reflected in the increased sea ice area during NH hemisphere in the recent winters and increased sea ice anomalies in Antarctica especially in the last 2 years.
      I can see the forcing of solar radiations behind all this.

  37. Eugene WR Gallun says:

    GT 5:29pm

    “Obviously the freezing temperature of water has risen due to global warming.”

    Haha! Good one!

    If I may re-strut my own stuff i said this a few months ago.

    “The work of Phil Jones at East Anglia has raised the temperature of the earth by two degrees. Can you image how cold England would be if he had not done that?” This was said during England’s recent freezing winter.

    I credited this to “King Charlie” — who hopefully who will not outlive his mother.

    Humor is a deadly weapon.

    Eugene WR Gallun

  38. John Keller says:

    Lots of ice, but how much of it is in the form of huge glaciers? They take thousands of years to form. We’re not out of the woods yet.

  39. Bob Ussery says:

    Liberal democrats and their global warming stupidity, totally ignorant of the facts and cherry pick what scientific facts they wish to see and hear and report….save the world, vote out Liberals.

  40. Karmakaze says:

    Why do you show a graph of change in area, rather than a graph of the area?

    Could it be that you don’t want people to realise that even though the area has grown by a record amount, the result of that growth is still less than the 1980’s, 1990’s and even the 2000’s average area:.

    Are you trying to mislead us, or are you just so ignorant of the topic that you think “change in area” is the same thing as “area”?

    • X says:

      The problem with the total ice area is located exclusively on the Arctic, which has shown an extraordinary recovery (for recorded data) this year.
      Even with the recent oscillations the Antarctic ice has grown so much that the total changes are positive, despite the record minimum of last year (as the chart shows).
      Antarctic ice is at its highest levels on record, with little oscillations around that mark, and has been above average for nearly 2 years.
      If the recovery of Arctic ice continues and Antarctic just keep the present levels we’ll be above the levels of the 1980’s in a couple of years.

    • I think he is making the point that the region is highly variable and capable of rapid gains and losses of sea ice.

      It’s curious how if there is a rapid loss of sea ice it’s due to a CO2 induced death spiral. If there is a rapid gain in sea ice, it’s “natural variability.” 🙂

      • squid2112 says:

        Or they pretend that it didn’t happen (which is more the case). I have read so many alarmists that are completely refuting Arctic ice gain. It is absolutely incredible how delusional these clowns are. And to top it off, they actually expect people to take them seriously. I have no idea what the future holds for the Arctic, or the climate, but I sure as hell know that I will never take any of these Climate Clowns seriously. They may as well talk to the hand because this face isn’t and isn’t going to be listening.

  41. Magnus A says:

    Manhattan is a good by New York Times and mainstream media standardized unit, but I guess the increase measured in Polar bear’s sleeping area is even more chocking (due to methodology used in New York Times and mainstream media). Oh, never mind!!!

    • catweazle666 says:

      In the UK the preferred unit of measurement for climate science purposes is a Wales, of course.

      Named in honour of Charles the Dim, Prince of that province.

      (A Wales has an area of 20,716 sq Km, a Manhattan of 87,46 sq Km, incidentally).

  42. Gab Lavoie says:

    Globaltardism and climatechangetardism are 2 diseases on the verge of being eradicated

  43. GT says:

    The models can’t be wrong so obviously this is some new kind of ice.

  44. Chris Colon says:

    Well we have foodstamps for 47M, Disability insurance for 70M, 23M underemployed. But most of all the President for the banana republics according to the Soviet Olympian, The president (for Illegals, Blacks, Gays and abortionists, Union Thugs, deviants, dependants, disposed, Drone Democrats, low information voters) has a chance to add to his constituency. All those who need gov’t assisted home heating supplements – Above and beyond those listed above. I will be called racist for this. Based on his policies, Prez Obama could be the son of Coleman Young. He is leading the country down the same path that Detroit took.

  45. Buffman says:

    Can we just round all these AGW wingnuts up and send them to reeducation camps?

  46. this isn’t good! we can have the earth doing all this shiton her own! has mother earth consulted with algore about this. look, if we’re going to have a partnership here, we can’t have the earth all independent and having us surprised to find out this stuff later. everything has to be choreographed perfectly or the ruse gets busted. now let’s not have this happen again o.k. ”mother earth”. next time you go an pull this growing ice nonsense and try to flex your muscles to try and act like you don’t need me, we’re going to have some trouble. capiche’?

  47. That’s just another sign that global warming is killing the planet, just ask Al Gore!

  48. dougjmiller says:

    Again millions of people will suffer through severely cold temperatures, and will be endangered by more ice and snow. This trend dramatically demonstrates that the earth is profoundly threatened by a new weather phenomenon, “Global Cooling.” If left unchecked the earth will enter a new Ice Age and will turn into a frozen, lifeless ice cube like Mars. This calamity is being caused by the atmospheric changes brought on by all the rich left wingers. By overheating their large mansions, flying around in their personal jets and spewing toxic waste from their mouths, they block the sunlight from reaching earth. Fortunately, there is a solution. By imposing a 100% tax on left wingers we can save civilization and the earth. Al Gore, we’re gonna get our money back

  49. jfreed27 says:

    Hogwash! A classic example of cherry picking. A nice visual can be found here:

    We have lost over all a large fraction of Arctic ice, even ancient ice. Rose’s “recovery” is small and temporary in comparison and doesn’t bring us anywhere close to where it was even a few decades ago.

    And this is also ancient ice lost that had been there for millions of years. It might take that long to accumulate that again. Long after the deniers are dead and buried.

    I cannot imagine the moral depravity of someone like Rose who knowingly distracts and delays. Millions will die – to win an argument? to make a lousy buck? to go all smoochy with other political idealogues?

    But, then Stalin too is a mystery to me.

    • ROFLMAO – Arctic sea ice never lasts more than about 10 years. It all gets flushed by winds out into the North Atlantic.

      You might want to learn some basic information about the topic before you comment.

    • Andy Oz says:

      “Millions will die”??!!
      From what? Even the UN IPCC have admitted the climate alarmists models are massively wrong. Millions of alarmist reputations are dying as we speak. Time to find a new religion.

  50. Joe Bama says:

    All I know is that summer 2013 in the NE was the coolest summer in a long time, and very rainy too. We had not one but two tropical storms blow through here in the last three years, both times direct hits which is totally batsh!t for this area! Normally storms like that stay off the coast of NJ. I think global warming needs to be changed to Global Weirdness.

  51. Chimel says:

    1) The whole graph is irrelevant, ice lows are NOT taken on September 9 of each year, but around the end of the month, because ice melting goes on during that month. You can see it from the 2012 figure, which does not look anything like the record low it was. You need to take the lowest point for each year, taking a specific date such as Sept 9 is guaranteed to make your data totally useless 99.9999% of times.
    2) The graph shows only the seasonal ice. If you look at the graph, every year there is a high record ice, it is systematically followed by a total ice meltdown that takes it into the negative red. There are only 4 exceptions in that graph, but still, the ice cover for the second year is lower than the first year. That’s OK, because it’s the very definition of seasonal ice: Ice that totally melts down during the next summer. But your own graph shows that it’s exactly what’s happening, and it even goes into the red, meaning it systematically melts down some of the older ice accumulated over the past years, not just the seasonal ice.
    3) I don’t know if you’ve ever taken an ice cube in your soda, but these things are not two-dimensional, so the ice surface, while useful for shipping routes, is not as helpful for climate studies as the ice volume. The decline of Arctic ice volume over the decades is even more important than the decline of ice surface:
    4) A year does not climate make. Please do not consider anything smaller than a decade’s average, and then only when compared to several other decade averages.

    • Arctic ice area reached the minimum on September 9, but thanks for the mindless rant.

      • Chimel says:

        And how can that be, since it was still decreasing on September 11? And might still be decreasing today for all we know: “Sea ice in the Arctic will reach its annual minimum “any day now,” says Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center, which tracks Arctic ice.”

        Admittedly we may not have to wait till the end of the month with this cold weather, and the difference with Sept. 9 will probably not be important, but why the hurry to publish an inaccurate article?

        • rho1953 says:

          They are in the business of publishing articles and there are deadlines to meet. Next month brings another opportunity to look at it all again.

    • rho1953 says:

      The truth is that earths climate cannot be measured even in decades. Ten years of data on a planet with a lifespan in the billions is almost zero. Earths climate has to be quantified over centuries or even thousands of years. Fluctuation over a period of fifty years are meaningless. There are probably millions of variables in the climate model. We cannot possibly have a handle on it. That’s why all this is so ludicrous.

      • Chimel says:

        I agree that a decade is meaningless, that’s why I said it should be compared with several decades, but 50 years is not meaningless in the case of anthropogenic warming, especially if it fits in a whole century of the same trend.

        Climate models are the best tools we have at this stage to plan ahead. They are far from perfect, but keep improving as new data and knowledge is added. I don’t think it’s any more ludicrous than a 5-day weather forecast or a 5-year business plan. Heck, there are millions of variables growing a single plant of maize, yet agrobiologists modeled a simple enough process for us to grow a successful crop of millions of plants.

        • rho1953 says:

          No, the climate is far too complex to model. That requires a human with some preconceived ideas to build a model and what has happened is that they skewed the model to make sure warming was the result. This is not in doubt. The Anglican emails show that beyond doubt. They then destroyed the original data so that there was no possibility of checking. That is fraud, and science shouldn’t be allowing it to happen. Nothing is sacred or beyond challenge in real science, and that is where are now. It is considered heresy to even doubt what it is clearly in doubt now.

  52. Kate says:

    I like what Charles krauthamer said about the global warming scientists. He said The very idea of science is to be open to any possible conclusion- and they global warming “scientists” only seem to be open to the conclusion that the earth is heating.

  53. Knowledge says:

    Here’s another fun picture from the same source as your graph.

    The gray curve is the 30-year average. The blue curve is the two-year actual. The red curve indicates net change from the average to the current.

    Climate vs. weather is long term vs. short term. Here’s another graph showing the long-term “anomaly” of the exact same data set which you use to promote your argument.

  54. TonyK says:

    I remember a few years ago when they found some WWII plane in a glacier on Greenland, they had to bore a hole almost 250 ft down just to get to it. I guess it was just magic that an additional 250 ft of ice was added to a glacier in just over 50 years…. And it all occurred during this era of global warming.

  55. Mike Lowry says:

    Funny thing about ” Climate Change ” Fanatics, they almost all have no clue about Scientific Method. Nor do they possess an open mind to evaluate data, or the ability to see errors in the assumptions read ( guesses)many of of the climate models have.
    Interestingly, back in the 1920’s, than the 1950’s, global warming was in vogue. Many scientists jumped on the global warming binge, blaming the Industrial revolution. They too were run out of dodge.
    Climate change happens to be normal. You cannot extrapolate climate change, and assign blame on Hyman kind. They ignore that Mt Pinotuba injected in the stratosphere more metric tons of CFC’S IN 1 minute,than human kind have produced.

  56. Incredible says:

    If anyone bothers to read the graph, one may pause to wonder about the year 1979 as the maximum. It’s entirely possible, especially in the light of a massive distortion campaign, that sea ice levels were in fact lower earlier in that decade since 40 years is hardly enough time for meaningful patterns to be seen.

    • Chimel says:

      That was stevengoddard’s choice. The data goes as far down as 1870 from the same source:

      • Geez, people like Chimel are as dumb as dog shit. The cited data is generated by a computer “model” that assumes that catastrophic global warming theory is true. Then the morons come along and point to the data as proof that catastrophic global warming theory is true. Why is there such a vast ignorance of science in the 21st century? Our education systems have not served us well.

        • Chimel says:

          “Historical timeseries of annual and seasonal Northern Hemisphere sea ice extent are available below for the period 1870-2008.”
          HISTORICAL is the keyword here for this dataset, this is no climate model result.
          HYSTERICAL is the keyword that applies to your reaction.
          If you look closely at the chart, you’ll notice that this year will be the 6th or 7th lowest sea ice cover since 1979, once we know for sure what’s the lowest for September. Maybe it’s more easily visible on this chart, also from the same source:

          Calling people morons and dumb only reflect on yourself.

        • You’re a moron. There are no records of sea ice extent earlier than the beginning of the satellite era. But you don’t know this because you’re a moron.

        • rho1953 says:

          There are detailed records and charts compiled by seagoing vessels as far back as commerce via the sea has been going on. Are we supposed to disavow anything before the era of satellites?

        • Robertv says:

          And Polar Bears love it . Just look at their growing numbers.

        • rho1953 says:

          Not only does it assume it, the model was adjusted to ensure that warming would show. They assumed warming, then they manipulated the parameters to ensure warming. And they destroyed the original input data so that it could never be checked. This is all in the Anglican emails that the left doesn’t want to discuss.

        • X says:

          “… These data are a compilation of data from several sources integrated into a single gridded product by John Walsh and Bill Chapman, University of Illinois. The source of data for each grid cell is included within a separate file.
          These sources of data have changed over the years from observationally derived charts to satellite data. Gaps within observed data are filled with climatology or other
          numerically derived data.
          Please note that much of the pre-1953 data is either climatology or interpolated data and the user is cautioned to use this data with care….”

  57. It was sunny and hot 10 days ago. Today it was rainy and cool! OH MY HEAVENS!!! It’s MAJOR CLIMATE CHANGE!!! It was much colder in February than it was in July. This HAS to be the fault of the cows at the feed-lot. And it PROVES Al Gore’s point, that capitalism and Aerosol Cheese are killing the planet.

    And if it is settled science, why did you have to cook the numbers, and lie about it when you got caught red-handed.

    No, Virginia, there is no Santa Claus, and Al Gore is not the SMARTEST man in the room, he’s just the guy with the FATTEST head(and wallet, by the way) in this climate fraud.

    The difference between Al Gore and a bag of dog crap? The bag.

  58. Ana says:

    Oh no, here we go. On this news I am willing to bet the left will now say the impending ice age they predicted in the 80s is about to arrive.

  59. The last 10 years have been the hottest on record!
    97% of the world’s greatest scientists believe in what I’m typing to you right now.
    The 1979-2013 Arctic trend is down.*

    Anything else left?

    *The Earth’s warmed mildly for 300 years or so, so the first claim has been true in a trivial sense on and off, for about 300 years.

    *97% of climate scientists agree that CO2 warms the atmosphere and because man has expelled extra CO2… man must have contributed to warming.Which 97% of sceptics agree with…

    * The temperature record in the Arctic is highly suggestive of a 60 year temperature cycle in that region, possibly due to the PDO. So citing a 30 years of data might be something of a cherry pick. 😉

  60. gator69 says:

    I guess Chimel has not heard from German physicist and meteorologist Klaus-Eckart Plus…

    “Ten years ago I simply parroted what the IPCC told us. One day I started checking the facts and data – first I started with a sense of doubt but then I became outraged when I discovered that much of what the IPCC and the media were telling us was sheer nonsense and was not even supported by any scientific facts and measurements. To this day I still feel shame that as a scientist I made presentations of their science without first checking it.”

    • Chimel is one of those dopes who has studied the subject for a couple of weeks and then comes onto a forum such as this to ‘educate’ a vastly more intelligent crowd. But next week he’ll move onto animal rights or fracking or anti-vac or alternative medicine or whatever the next fad takes him.

      • gator69 says:

        I find myself frequently confronted by these wet behind the ears types, who have no clue that I was a climatology student before their parents met. They always think they have something new to offer, and never have any knowledge of what the science actually says.

        Teaching children WHAT to think rather than HOW to think, is the cruelest form of child abuse, as it never ends.

      • gator69 says:

        It would explain my deep understanding of the subject, having decades of study, beginning with a classic and formal education. You on the other hand, are a cripple of the ‘model age’.

        When you have spent over three decades in deep study, please feel free to comment again.

        • bluegreen says:

          “Not by age but by capacity is wisdom acquired. “

        • gator69 says:

          And you obviously lack both. 😆

          Do you have any science you would like to discuss, or are you simply here to expose your inner and outer child?

          Got science? 😆

  61. Ron says:

    There is nothing more dangerous, and I mean NOTHING, than an intellect without wisdom! The progressives prove that statement everyday!!

  62. Chimel says:

    No satellite in 1870, really? Gee, could it be because of the commercial and scientific ships?
    “More extensive written records of Arctic sea ice date back to the mid-18th century.”

    Whatever, I was just trying to answer a question about results prior to 1979, from the exact same source used for the graph in this article. Not sure why suddenly these results are less valid than the post 1979 one, but with all the hate around, this is my last visit to this joke of a site. Have fun keeping your head buried in the sand.


  64. Nick says:

    The 97% figure tossed around by the media was based on responses to a survey sent to 10,500 “earth” scientists. 7,500, sensitized to foul odors, declined a response. The remaining 3,000 were cherry picked down to the enormous consensus of, yes, 79 warmist “…actively researching and publishing in the field…” i.e. getting paid, 97% of whom agreed that the evidence, and fat grant check, were convincing.

    Never Look a Polar Bear in the Eye by Zac Unger
    Climate Confusion by Roy W.Spencer
    The Mad, Mad, Mad World of Climatism by Steve Gorham
    Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years by Dennis Avery and Fred Singer

  65. bluegreen says:

    Yapping dogs not wrong.

    Global sea ice is a misleading statistic. Increase in Antarctica ice muddles the picture. See this link for possible explanation:

    And this one about volume of arctic ice:

    Caution Steve, the links discuss real science…

    Sorry to deflate your worldview folks. For fun, also note also that the earth is more or less round!!

    • The world is a big place. There are always ad hoc theories and speculations for why previous predictions and models failed (Such as the rubbish cited above.). And there will always be eco-worriers bravely defending the clearly absurd. It’s a strange kind of settled science that constantly needs new speculations to come out explaining why things aren’t working as planned. Or maybe, like sociology, economics, psychoanalysis, alternate medicine, the field has a large junk science component.

    • Patrick T says:

      1: Warmists point to data point X as proof of AGW.
      2: A few years pass. Data point X shifts and no longer fits their story.
      3: Skeptics (aka “deniers” or “denialists” – which makes you sound like a cult by the way) point this out.
      4: Warmists now insist that data point X is a “misleading indicator” and that only morons would look only to data point X, or that there is some new explanation of the discrepancy, or that AGW would actually cause not what was originally predicted, but rather what is actually happening – – in fact, you only THINK you remember us predicting it. AKA the Squealer tactic, for those of you who have read Animal Farm.

      Sorry, we see right through this.

    • F. Guimaraes says:

      “… Sorry to deflate your worldview folks … ”
      Our world view is not “inflated”, it just reflects the truth of the observed *facts*, that you and your “models” obviously know nothing about.
      And, yes, we are very happy that the *facts* keep proving us right, again and again, and proving you wrong. Every week, every month, a new failed prediction.
      How does it feel, being wrong all the time?
      We don’t need your approval to win this battle, and we are winning.
      Only the *facts*!

      • rho1953 says:

        Gee, it isn’t a misleading stat when it is going your way! I remember all the whining and crying when sea ice was at low levels. Then it was a rock solid indicator of AGW. Meanwhile, back in the real world, Antarctic ice is at all time levels, and there has been no warming for seventeen years. But that might dry up funding and keep the shills from imposing their agenda, so it has to be business as usual.

        • Ana says:

          You’re so right. Bottom line, there is no global warming/climate change. All this scam is about is raising more tax revenue so the libs have more money to buy votes.

  66. bluegreen says:

    Thanks Ana. Aliens from Area 51 told me exactly the same thing. James Hansen in one of them, you know.

  67. Scott says:

    I love global warming – it will be nice to be able to grow food year around anywhere in the world 🙂

Leave a Reply