(Polar bear mother (Ursus maritimus) and twin cubs of the year hunting on the pack ice, Svalbard Archipelago, Arctic Norway Credit: All Canada Photos / Alamy Stock Photo)
Inevitably, when even satellite temperatures were showing 2016 as “the hottest year on record”, we were going to be told last winter that the Arctic ice was at its lowest extent ever. Sure enough, before Christmas, a report from the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration was greeted with such headlines as “Hottest Arctic on record triggers massive ice melt”. In March we had the BBC trumpeting another study that blamed vanishing Arctic ice as the cause of weather which led to the worst-ever smog in Beijing, warning that it “could even threaten the Beijing Winter Olympics in 2022”.
But last week we were brought back to earth by the Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI), as charted by our friend Paul Homewood on his blog Notalotofpeopleknowthat, with the news that ever since December temperatures in the Arctic have consistently been lower than minus 20 C. In April the extent of Arctic...
Poster Comment:
What to do, oh what to do? I've got it! Pump more co2 into the atmosphere to see if it will warm things up.
Only left-wing loons buy into this global warming nonsense.
#1: buckeroo To: HomerBohn (#0)
buckeroo posted on 2017-05-08 08:11:50 Reply Private Reply
#2: Justified To: buckeroo, HomerBohn (#1)
Yes. We call them seasons and climate cycles here in Texas. Not sure what they call them in the blue states?
Justified posted on 2017-05-08 08:26:46 Reply Private Reply
#3: buckeroo To: Justified (#2)
buckeroo posted on 2017-05-08 11:00:33 Reply Private Reply
#4: Stoner To: Justified (#2)
Yes, common sense. I remember back in the 70's when the global warming crowd were hysterical, screaming that by now, the entire US would be under 30-80 ft of ice. Nuts
Stoner posted on 2017-05-08 12:12:45 Reply Private Reply
#5: cranky To: HomerBohn (#0)
Fear not.
This year will still be declared the 'hottest year ever' by the gorons.
Wait and see.
cranky posted on 2017-05-08 19:28:47 Reply Private Reply
#6: cranky To: buckeroo (#1)
Based on what data?
The 'climategate' data? Or noaa's latest fraud?
Where do you get 'data' from?
cranky posted on 2017-05-08 19:43:10 Reply Private Reply
#7: paraclete To: buckeroo (#1)
What is the definition of REAL? Climate change has been happening since the planet formed and right now we are in an interglacial period, some ten thousand years ago warming began without human influence and has continued interrupted by brief periods of volcano induced freeze. perhaps instead of defining REAL we should try defining NORMAL. There is no normal in regard to climate there are periods of stability observed generationally.
I refute average ambient temperatures are rising everywhere, they are observed to rise in some places and averages are a cheat anyway. I acknowledge that it doesn't snow frequently where I live and it used to snow more frequently 150 years ago but then we only have a few observations to go on. On this continent they built a massive hydoelectric scheme relying on snow fall and snow fall has been less than their expectations, I think someone missled someone regarding climate and I want my money back
paraclete posted on 2017-05-08 21:10:21 Reply Private Reply
#8: buckeroo To: paraclete (#7)
BAH! Your own homeland, down under, is classick proof to climate change.
buckeroo posted on 2017-05-08 21:18:30 Reply Private Reply
#9: paraclete To: buckeroo (#8)
It is a classic proof of what I have been saying, climate change is an ongoing process that doesn't need man's intervention. Once this continent was further south and subject to volcanic activity, it had high mountains, so it is different now to what it was then and the local climate was different. I have observed local climate patterns this year that I observed when I was a child, some want to say this is due to climate change, but I say it is part of a cycle
paraclete posted on 2017-05-09 21:56:00 Reply Private Reply