New record low max Arctic ice extent, second year in a row

[RollingThunder]

Looking over the posts on this thread, it is so very obvious that almost all of the 'arguments' disputing the scientific information in the OP that have been put forth by the denier cultists fall into one of three categories.

1. Argument from Ignorance - (excerpts) The argument from ignorance (or argumentum ad ignorantiam) is a logical fallacy that claims that a premise is false because it has not been proven true.

2. Argument from Incredulity (also known as Argument from Personal Belief or Argument from Personal Conviction, or Argument by Lack of Imagination) is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone decides that something did not happen, because they cannot personally understand how it could happen. Or in other words, that someone's personal incredulity or credulity towards a premise is a logical reason for acceptance or rejection. This incredulity can stem from ignorance (defined as a lack of knowledge and experience) or from willful ignorance (defined as a flat out refusal to gain the knowledge).

Almost all the claims from the anti-science movement revolve around some form of personal incredulity or argument from ignorance.

Proponents of the anti-science movement will usually pick some aspect of a currently accepted scientific theory and argue that it must be wrong because they do not believe it explains some aspect of the natural world. Common examples of this are such claims as "you can't prove global warming is caused by humans."

3. Argument from Insanity - the denier cultists' favorite form of argument - self-explanatory and very obvious.....and very common among the deniers.

 

[jc456]

On our lakes around here the ice becomes deeper when the temperature stays below 32 for extended periods. That would result in more ice. Thing is, it all melts over time.

and ice will melt

Looking over the posts on this thread, it is so very obvious that almost all of the 'arguments' disputing the scientific information in the OP that have been put forth by the denier cultists fall into one of three categories.

1. Argument from Ignorance - (excerpts) The argument from ignorance (or argumentum ad ignorantiam) is a logical fallacy that claims that a premise is false because it has not been proven true.

2. Argument from Incredulity (also known as Argument from Personal Belief or Argument from Personal Conviction, or Argument by Lack of Imagination) is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone decides that something did not happen, because they cannot personally understand how it could happen. Or in other words, that someone's personal incredulity or credulity towards a premise is a logical reason for acceptance or rejection. This incredulity can stem from ignorance (defined as a lack of knowledge and experience) or from willful ignorance (defined as a flat out refusal to gain the knowledge).

Almost all the claims from the anti-science movement revolve around some form of personal incredulity or argument from ignorance.

Proponents of the anti-science movement will usually pick some aspect of a currently accepted scientific theory and argue that it must be wrong because they do not believe it explains some aspect of the natural world. Common examples of this are such claims as "you can't prove global warming is caused by humans."

3. Argument from Insanity - the denier cultists' favorite form of argument - self-explanatory and very obvious.....and very common among the deniers.

and every post from the warmers in here comes without evidence, from opinion pieces and from the left talking points. No factual information to make the claim. So how can one argue against something that isn't even proven? You should actually gather facts and present evidence to support a claim you make. It is the scientific thing to do. Experimental evidence would help prove your hypothesis.

Again, IPCC states 15 year pause while CO2 rose.

 

[mamooth]

excuse me while I laugh my balls off from your post. you don't understand why the water in a river didn't freeze. Holy fk are you stupid. Do you know what plumbers tell house owners to do in the winter when temps go below freezing for a long period of time? They tell them to go to the faucet and let water trickle out of the pipes. do you know why they would say that? face palm, wow. I don't know. for someone who brags about yourself as much as you do this is simply unbelievable.

Yet the moving river does freeze over completely some years. And not in others.

The difference? It only freezes over in the really cold years.

An average 4-year-old can grasp this. More cold means more water freezing.

Point is, you're a moron, and you shouldn't be bothering the grownups. Here's a juicebox, now run along and watch Dora.

 

[westwall]

They typically use the most recent 3 decade period. 1972 is the beginning of satellite data. Did that confuse you? And what issue were you addressing? Did you think the selection of baseline was the reason for the record value? If so, sorry, no.

They leave off the years prior to 1979 because they were LOWER than anything seen since. They arbitrarily (or not) start their "record" at one of the highest sea level extents ever recorded. Whenever one of you clowns bleat about how low the sea ice is I just harken back to this video.. and the record from 1959.......

“the Skate found open water both in the summer and following winter. We surfaced near the North Pole in the winter through thin ice less than 2 feet thick. The ice moves from Alaska to Iceland and the wind and tides causes open water as the ice breaks up. The Ice at the polar ice cap is an average of 6-8 feet thick, but with the wind and tides the ice will crack and open into large polynyas (areas of open water), these areas will refreeze over with thin ice. We had sonar equipment that would find these open or thin areas to come up through, thus limiting any damage to the submarine. The ice would also close in and cover these areas crushing together making large ice ridges both above and below the water. We came up through a very large opening in 1958 that was 1/2 mile long and 200 yards wide. The wind came up and closed the opening within 2 hours. On both trips we were able to find open water. We were not able to surface through ice thicker than 3 feet.”

 

[Crick]

My god are you stupid. Before your time runs out you might repair your confusion about sea ice extents and sea level in your post.

As to that STUPID FUCKING SUB video.

State of the Cryosphere | SOTC: Sea Ice | National Snow and Ice Data Center

Which shows you to be a liar or a moron. I'm perfectly willing to take the latter, but it's hard. I mean, you can type and all.

Thanks to Mamooth for locating the graphic

 

[PredFan]

For the Media | The Arctic sets yet another record low maximum extent | National Snow and Ice Data Center

Arctic sea ice was at a record low maximum extent for the second straight year, according to scientists at the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) and NASA.

“I’ve never seen such a warm, crazy winter in the Arctic,” said NSIDC director Mark Serreze. “The heat was relentless.” Air temperatures over the Arctic Ocean for the months of December, January and February were 2 to 6 degrees Celsius (4 to 11 degrees Fahrenheit) above average in nearly every region.
****************************************************************************************

But that's all lies, isn't it. These NSIDC "scientists" consulted Conspiracy HQ in the secret basements at East Anglia and received their marching orders as to what temperatures to report and what clever CG-faked satellite photos to publish. There's no chance of this project going astray. Anyone considering revealing the hoax disappears along with their extended families, into the white slave trade of darkest Africa. Yeah. That's what's happening.

So what? Nothing we can do about it.

 

[Crick]

Nothing you can do about it. Too stupid.

 

[jc456]

Nothing you can do about it. Too stupid.

what is it exactly you've done about it since you think it's so?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Looking over the posts on this thread, it is so very obvious that almost all of the 'arguments' disputing the scientific information in the OP that have been put forth by the denier cultists fall into one of three categories.

1. Argument from Ignorance - (excerpts) The argument from ignorance (or argumentum ad ignorantiam) is a logical fallacy that claims that a premise is false because it has not been proven true.

2. Argument from Incredulity (also known as Argument from Personal Belief or Argument from Personal Conviction, or Argument by Lack of Imagination) is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone decides that something did not happen, because they cannot personally understand how it could happen. Or in other words, that someone's personal incredulity or credulity towards a premise is a logical reason for acceptance or rejection. This incredulity can stem from ignorance (defined as a lack of knowledge and experience) or from willful ignorance (defined as a flat out refusal to gain the knowledge).

Almost all the claims from the anti-science movement revolve around some form of personal incredulity or argument from ignorance.

Proponents of the anti-science movement will usually pick some aspect of a currently accepted scientific theory and argue that it must be wrong because they do not believe it explains some aspect of the natural world. Common examples of this are such claims as "you can't prove global warming is caused by humans."

3. Argument from Insanity - the denier cultists' favorite form of argument - self-explanatory and very obvious.....and very common among the deniers.

You are so over the edge drinking the AGW Kool aid you wouldn't know real science/ history or technology if it bit you on your ass.

 

[RollingThunder]

Looking over the posts on this thread, it is so very obvious that almost all of the 'arguments' disputing the scientific information in the OP that have been put forth by the denier cultists fall into one of three categories.
1. Argument from Ignorance
2. Argument from Incredulity
3. Argument from Insanity - the denier cultists' favorite form of argument - self-explanatory and very obvious.....and very common among the deniers.

You are so over the edge drinking the AGW Kool aid you wouldn't know real science/ history or technology if it bit you on your ass.

And....the very ignorant, anti-science, denier cult retard, bearbutt, tries to use the Argument from Insanity fallacy again....for the umpteenth time!

 

[jc456]

Looking over the posts on this thread, it is so very obvious that almost all of the 'arguments' disputing the scientific information in the OP that have been put forth by the denier cultists fall into one of three categories.
1. Argument from Ignorance
2. Argument from Incredulity
3. Argument from Insanity - the denier cultists' favorite form of argument - self-explanatory and very obvious.....and very common among the deniers.

You are so over the edge drinking the AGW Kool aid you wouldn't know real science/ history or technology if it bit you on your ass.

And....the very ignorant, anti-science, denier cult retard, bearbutt, tries to use the Argument from Insanity fallacy again....for the umpteenth time!

and you still haven't posted any facts.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Looking over the posts on this thread, it is so very obvious that almost all of the 'arguments' disputing the scientific information in the OP that have been put forth by the denier cultists fall into one of three categories.
1. Argument from Ignorance
2. Argument from Incredulity
3. Argument from Insanity - the denier cultists' favorite form of argument - self-explanatory and very obvious.....and very common among the deniers.

You are so over the edge drinking the AGW Kool aid you wouldn't know real science/ history or technology if it bit you on your ass.

And....the very ignorant, anti-science, denier cult retard, bearbutt, tries to use the Argument from Insanity fallacy again....for the umpteenth time!

Why you posting to me troll?

I Thought you were ignoring me?????

 

[elektra]

NASA reports that Sea Ice is low? Crick you said NASA only provides Data?

Wow...
The National Snow and Ice Data Center, or NSIDC, is a United States information and referral center in support of polar and cryospheric research. NSIDC archives and distributes digital and analog snow and ice data and also maintains information about snow cover, avalanches, glaciers, ice sheets, freshwater ice, sea ice, ground ice, permafrost, atmospheric ice, paleoglaciology, and ice cores.

NSIDC is part of the University of Colorado Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES), and is affiliated with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Geophysical Data Center through a cooperative agreement. NSIDC serves as one of eightDistributed Active Archive Centers funded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to archive and distribute data from NASA's past and current satellites and field measurement programs. NSIDC also supports the National Science Foundation through the Advanced Cooperative Arctic Data and Information Service (ACADIS), the Exchange For Local Observations and Knowledge of the Arctic (ELOKA) and the Antarctic Glaciological Data Center. NSIDC is also a member of the ICSU World Data System. Mark Serreze is the director of NSIDC.

Aside from using images from NASA's satellites, where the fuck do you get the idea that NSIDC is NASA? As stated here, they are part of NOAA, as anyone familiar with the actual function of these various agencies might guess.

That last wee peak coincides with record lowest max extent. You did have increasing volume for a bit and increasing multi-year ice. But that looks to have ended. The long term trend is obvious and anyone choosing to toss it is a fool.

Speaking of fools, do you still claim to have a degree in atmospheric physics? Because, even in a listing of university programs supported by the National Weather Association, I do not find degrees at any level of Atmospheric Physics. I do find numerous programs of Atmospheric Science even at the BS level. Not physics. Do you know what the term "self-aggrandizement" means?

Sorry, Crick, I was just following your link, if you dont like the answers you link to, why do you link to them?

Arctic sea ice appears to have reached a record low wintertime maximum extent for the second year in a row, according to scientists at the NASA-supported National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) and NASA.

 

[mamooth]

More ignoring the trolls, and more science ...

Kinnard et al (2011) takes it back 1450 years, using sediment proxies. Certain algae only grow on ice, and can be detected in the sediment layers, giving a proxy record of ice coverage.

Reconstructed changes in Arctic sea ice over the past 1,450 years : Nature : Nature Publishing Group
---
Here we use a network of high-resolution terrestrial proxies from the circum-Arctic region to reconstruct past extents of summer sea ice, and show that—although extensive uncertainties remain, especially before the sixteenth century—both the duration and magnitude of the current decline in sea ice seem to be unprecedented for the past 1,450 years

---

 

[RollingThunder]

NASA reports that Sea Ice is low? Crick you said NASA only provides Data?

Wow...
The National Snow and Ice Data Center, or NSIDC, is a United States information and referral center in support of polar and cryospheric research. NSIDC archives and distributes digital and analog snow and ice data and also maintains information about snow cover, avalanches, glaciers, ice sheets, freshwater ice, sea ice, ground ice, permafrost, atmospheric ice, paleoglaciology, and ice cores.

NSIDC is part of the University of Colorado Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES), and is affiliated with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Geophysical Data Center through a cooperative agreement. NSIDC serves as one of eightDistributed Active Archive Centers funded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to archive and distribute data from NASA's past and current satellites and field measurement programs. NSIDC also supports the National Science Foundation through the Advanced Cooperative Arctic Data and Information Service (ACADIS), the Exchange For Local Observations and Knowledge of the Arctic (ELOKA) and the Antarctic Glaciological Data Center. NSIDC is also a member of the ICSU World Data System. Mark Serreze is the director of NSIDC.

Aside from using images from NASA's satellites, where the fuck do you get the idea that NSIDC is NASA? As stated here, they are part of NOAA, as anyone familiar with the actual function of these various agencies might guess.

That last wee peak coincides with record lowest max extent. You did have increasing volume for a bit and increasing multi-year ice. But that looks to have ended. The long term trend is obvious and anyone choosing to toss it is a fool.

Speaking of fools, do you still claim to have a degree in atmospheric physics? Because, even in a listing of university programs supported by the National Weather Association, I do not find degrees at any level of Atmospheric Physics. I do find numerous programs of Atmospheric Science even at the BS level. Not physics. Do you know what the term "self-aggrandizement" means?

Sorry, Crick, I was just following your link, if you dont like the answers you link to, why do you link to them?

Arctic sea ice appears to have reached a record low wintertime maximum extent for the second year in a row, according to scientists at the NASA-supported National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) and NASA.

I knew you were severely retarded, Ejakulatra, but thanks for so clearly demonstrating that fact once again.

Crick posted the facts about the NSIDC....

NSIDC is part of the University of Colorado Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES), and is affiliated with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Geophysical Data Center through a cooperative agreement. NSIDC serves as one of eight Distributed Active Archive Centers funded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to archive and distribute data from NASA's past and current satellites and field measurement programs.

And you are so fucking stupid, you ignore the facts and insist that a statement (that clearly differentiates between the two organizations) about NASA "supporting" the NSIDC - "scientists at the NASA-supported National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) AND NASA" - which refers to NASA providing funding to eight different archive centers that store NASA's satellite and field measurement data for them - the NSIDC being just one of those centers......somehow means that the NSIDC is part of NASA....even though it is clearly a separate independent organization.

You are a either a severely retarded, highly delusional nut job (most likely) or a cynically corrupt paid troll working for the Koch brothers or Exxon to spread misinformation and lies about the scientifically confirmed reality of human caused global warming/climate change.

 

[elektra]

I guess nobody is going to point out that the satelitte record is fabricated, there are years in the early 2000's when the satellite was broke. No kidding, the satellite broke and these guys are not acknowleding the satellite data contains a gap of a few years.

 

[Wyatt earp]

More ignoring the trolls, and more science ...

Kinnard et al (2011) takes it back 1450 years, using sediment proxies. Certain algae only grow on ice, and can be detected in the sediment layers, giving a proxy record of ice coverage.

Reconstructed changes in Arctic sea ice over the past 1,450 years : Nature : Nature Publishing Group
---
Here we use a network of high-resolution terrestrial proxies from the circum-Arctic region to reconstruct past extents of summer sea ice, and show that—although extensive uncertainties remain, especially before the sixteenth century—both the duration and magnitude of the current decline in sea ice seem to be unprecedented for the past 1,450 years

---

Here we use a network of high-resolution terrestrial proxies from the circum-Arctic region to reconstruct past extents of summer sea ice, and show that—although extensive uncertainties remain, especially before the sixteenth century—both the duration and magnitude of the current decline in sea ice seem to be unprecedented for the past 1,450 years

----------------------------------------------------


seem
sēm/
verb

1. give the impression or sensation of being something or having a particular quality.
   "Dawn seemed annoyed"
   synonyms: appear (to be), have the appearance/air of being, give the impression of being, look, look as though one is, show signs of being, look to be;More
   
   • used to make a statement or description of one's thoughts, feelings, or actions less assertive or forceful.
     "I seem to remember giving you very precise instructions"
   • be unable to do something, despite having tried.

Do you have any facts or do you seem to believe?

 

[Yarddog]

For the Media | The Arctic sets yet another record low maximum extent | National Snow and Ice Data Center

Arctic sea ice was at a record low maximum extent for the second straight year, according to scientists at the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) and NASA.

“I’ve never seen such a warm, crazy winter in the Arctic,” said NSIDC director Mark Serreze. “The heat was relentless.” Air temperatures over the Arctic Ocean for the months of December, January and February were 2 to 6 degrees Celsius (4 to 11 degrees Fahrenheit) above average in nearly every region.
****************************************************************************************

But that's all lies, isn't it. These NSIDC "scientists" consulted Conspiracy HQ in the secret basements at East Anglia and received their marching orders as to what temperatures to report and what clever CG-faked satellite photos to publish. There's no chance of this project going astray. Anyone considering revealing the hoax disappears along with their extended families, into the white slave trade of darkest Africa. Yeah. That's what's happening.

Damn , there goes my plan to get rid of JR

 

[RollingThunder]

I guess nobody is going to point out that the satelitte record is fabricated, there are years in the early 2000's when the satellite was broke. No kidding, the satellite broke and these guys are not acknowleding the satellite data contains a gap of a few years.

But people have repeatedly pointed out how utterly insane and delusional you are, Ejakulatra. The denier cult myths you believe in, like this one about ALL of the satellites being "broken" are what is "fabricated".

And here you provide another good example of your delusional insanity!

In reality....here's the facts from the NSIDC....

NSIDC
June 2, 2009
NSIDC has transitioned from the Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP) F13 satellite, to the DMSP F17 satellite. Switching to the new satellite will allow us to continue our consistent long-term record of sea ice extent.


Figure 1. NSIDC now has more than a year of data from the Special Sensor Microwave Imager/Sounder (SSMIS) sensor on the DMSP F17 satellite, which has been intercalibrated with data from the F13 satellite. Note the close correspondence between the two data records. The average absolute daily difference was approximately 28,000 square kilometers (11,000 square miles). Sea Ice Index data. About the data. —Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center - High-resolution image

Continuing a long-term data series

The DMSP F13 satellite that has been central to our Arctic sea ice analysis for the past several years is nearing the end of its mission and is no longer a reliable resource for our sea ice products. As is standard data practice, we have transitioned to a newer sensor.

NSIDC now has more than a year of data from F17, obtained from the NOAA Comprehensive Large Array-data Stewardship System(CLASS). While the sensors on the two satellites are slightly different, they use the same microwave frequencies to collect sea ice data; by comparing a year of F17 data with a year of F13 data, we have been able to calibrate F17 to ensure its measurements are consistent with the prior F13 record. F13, in turn, had been similarly calibrated with prior generations of sensors, resulting in a consistent, long-term record of sea ice extent since 1979. The average absolute daily difference between data from F13 and F17 was approximately 28,000 square kilometers (11,000 square miles).

For more information on the satellite sensors that NSIDC uses for sea ice data, see our February 26 update. For detailed information on the near-real-time sea ice data, please read the data set documentation.

 

[mamooth]

Do you have any facts or do you seem to believe?

Are you capable of anything except dishonest trolling?

We do get it. All the science says you're parroting loony conspiracy theories. Hence, you and your cult pals have been instructed to troll madly, to flail about and sputter nonsense, to divert discussion away from the science at all cost. Look at you, frantically waving your hands around about what "seems" means. Wow, that's pathetic.

It's good to be on the rational side. Being that all the science backs us up, we can just point at the science again and laugh at your tantrums.