Ice is a hot topic today. Please read the entire article at Watts Up With That ? But what is becoming painfully obvious is that a certain large portion of the science community is using distortion and manipulation in order to push the AGW agenda. If the data does not support the agenda or is not alarming enough, find a new way to present it to fit the narrative. Of course the media is not calling them on these slight of hand maneuvers, even if they are aware of them. It is truly a manipulation of public trust, plain and simple.
NSIDC Raises The Bar
past years, NSIDC has referred to “declining multi-year ice” as the problem which the Arctic faces. Mark Serreze at NSIDC forecast a possible “Ice Free North Pole” in 2008, based on the fact that it had only first year ice. This year, multi-year ice has increased and NSIDC is now referring to declining “2+ year old” ice as the problem. Note the missing age group (2 year old ice) in the paragraph below from their latest press release .
First-year ice in particular is thinner and more prone to melting away than thicker, older, multi-year ice. This year, ice older than two years accounted for less than 10% of the ice cover at the end of February. From 1981 through 2000, such older ice made up an average of 30% of the total sea ice cover at this time of the year.
Due to the record minimum in 2007, it goes without saying that there isn’t a lot of three year old ice in 2009. Maybe next year they can raise the bar to 3+ year old ice, as the multi-year ice ages one more year?....
Univ of Illinois used to publish satellite photos of ice levels. Until they didn't show a descrease:
ReplyDeletehttp://canadianbluelemons.blogspot.com/2009/03/when-proof-you-provide-doesnt-prove.html
They determine "old ice" as that which has survived at least one melting season. Though I'm sure they will adapt this as necessary
FUNNY - my visual authentication graphic for my last comment was "uniced".
ReplyDeleteSeriously.