[NormsRevenge]

NASA composite image shows a fully dark (city lights) full disk image centered on the North Pole. Global warming may already be having an effect on the Arctic which in 2005 only replaced a little of the thick sea ice it loses and usually replenishes annually, a NASA study said Tuesday.(AFP/NASA-HO/File)

[A message]

I would be curious what the exact ice cover was during summers in the years 900AD- 1250AD.

Has this thinning ice cover happened before. I’m sure it has.

[beethovenfan]

If this keeps up, Greenland will become nice and balmly -
just like it was when the Vikings were there. (Gee - I wonder
why they called it “Greenland”???)

[SierraWasp]

Frankly... They've got me confused with someone who actually gives a chit, mon!!!

It's all in God's hands anyway and everybody knows it!!!

[marron]

Global warming may already be having an effect on the Arctic which in 2005 only replaced a little of the thick sea ice it loses and usually replenishes annually, a NASA study said Tuesday.

Like thats a bad thing.

[aruanan]

Arctic lost part of its perennial sea ice in 2005: NASA

And the problem, according to an arctic researcher who recently shot down the theory of anthropogenic global warming, is that a lot of new researchers are confining themselves to data that has been around since the start of the satellite age. He says that their conclusions are faulty because they're not looking at a long enough history. There have been times in the past where there was little or no Arctic ice. Big deal. It comes and it goes with warming cycles of the earth. We happen to be at the end of the longest (though not warmest) of interglacial periods in the last 500,000 years. Things have been warming up since before the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. Pretty soon, if geological history is any guide, we'll be confronted with another ice age. This will pose a lot more problems than another 2-5C increase in temperatures. We need to make (and grow) hay while the sun is shining and take advantage of all this free plant food in the atmosphere before temperatures fall with decreased solar output and the CO2 gets absorbed by the ocean and crop productivity falls.

[SierraWasp]

So WHAT?!? When the ice melts in yer danged cocktail it doesn't over-top the glass even when filled to the brim!!!

So what's this article supposed to induce in people's minds besides bolschivick boolchit???

[Drammach]

"If the correlations between replenishment area and numbers of freezing and melting temperature days hold long-term, it is expected the perennial ice coverage will continue to decline."

Assuming there is a correlation in the first place..
Then one is required to assume the temp ranges and behaviors will "hold long-term"..
There is no evidence that the "expected" decline of ice coverage is the eventual outcome..
A more accurate statement would be "GW enthusiast's hopes" that ice coverage will continue to decline..

Records dating back to 1958 have shown a gradual warming of Arctic temperatures which speeded up in the 1980s.

49 years out of the last 10,000 years of post Ice Age warming is probably not considered "statistically significant" in any scientific conversation.. ( except a pro-GW one, that is..)

Their study suggests that politics and greed are still in full control of the pro-GW movement..

[Right Wing Assault]

And we’re supposed to get a couple inches of snow tonight night here and more tomorrow. Lows in the 20s for the next week. Cool!

[ricks_place]

This Arctic thaw will make drilling for oil much easier!

[Colorado Doug]

Why is NASA wasting resources on earth sciences? Shouldn’t they be trying to get a viable shuttle program up and running or something along those lines?

[Fierce Allegiance]

This is excellent news, as it will open up new and very rich fishing grounds.

[xcamel]

FReepmail me to get on or off

Click on POGW graphic for full GW rundown

New!!: Dr. John Ray's
GREENIE WATCH

Ping me if you find one I've missed.

---

they're too stupid to be called scientists - "one cycle" is exactly 11,500 years, not 365 days...

[JustDoItAlways]

Some of the different research groups at NASA are total flaming global warmers while other groups are more objective scientists. They hide their institute's bias behind the banner "NASA". This group is one of those.

Here is the actual sea ice extent by day going back to 1978. It goes up and down with the seasons (not unexpectedly) but it also shows the summer minimum (september) has been relatively stable for the past 16 years. 1999 was the lowest year.

[Trteamer]

It’s the sun. We have to control the sun.

[JustDoItAlways]

Just noting that the chart I linked to above, was completely reworked over the last 24 hours.

The historical records have been completely changed so the chart now shows a more-or-less steady decline in arctic sea ice extents over the whole record.

So whatever point I was trying to make is now Moot.

There is a long history of this in the climate research community. Whenever the historical datasets don’t show the global warming trends they want to show anymore, someone just goes back and adjusts all the old records and databases.

Temperatures are a good example. The current trendline shows an increase of 0.8C since 1900. But the historical temperature records have been adjusted (over several phases) by a total of 0.7C in terms of changing the trend upward.

So there is no way to win in this debate. The authorities which maintain the climate record databases are also the ones trying to prove the global warming theory. One can always archive the old records and point to the old trendlines - but some global warmer will just come along and say “this is not what the sea ice extent chart says - its right here” and you are dead in the water.

Much time has been wasted.

[JustDoItAlways]

Thanks to Wayback Machine, I bring you the sea ice extent historical data changes. Here's how the chart looked on May 15, 2006 Here is how much they have changed it. 2006 minimum was lowered by 1.25 million km2 or about 25% (WOW - brazen)