Oh, c'mon. Attacking the messenger is just ridiculous. Do a Google News search with "Antarctica" and "warming" and you'll get (by last count) 143 news articles with this topic. Is the "Ottawa Citizen" the "all global warming" Canadian newspaper? What about Reuters, the BBC, station KARK in Arkansas, the UNIAN news agency of the Ukraine, the Khaleej Times in the United Arab Emirates -- all global warming mouthpieces, I guess. (I mean, seriously...)
Same data, massaged by the same alarmists, all fighting for the same government science grants, towing the same old line, finding a pretty new package and bow for the same bucket of sh*t every week.
According to reports, its not the same data. This is from AFP:
"Using new data on land surface temperatures and state-of-the-art computer models to simulate different climate scenarios, a team of scientists led by East Anglia's Nathan Gillet were able to tease apart the internal and external drivers of observed changes at both poles.
Rather than covering the entire Arctic and Antarctic regions, as previous studies have done, they focused only on the grid points where precise measurements have been taken.
This made their climate models more accurate, and showed that observed changes in temperatures over the 20th century could only have occurred if the impact of industrial greenhouse gas emissions, and upper atmosphere ozone depletion, are taken into account."
Somebody has to read the paper to find out what "new data" is used.
Yeah, same old same old... all the data that fits the answer that gets the grants. Go figure.
Oh, and sorry, you don’t get to use “definitive source” and “just the messenger” is the same thought bubble.
You are the one who linked to a discovery networks site that is making “global warming” a business model.
No soup for you.
Haven’t found the paper or the abstract.
How do they do this usingfive data points?