Of course they dismiss Maslowski now, but they would have more credibility if they had dismissed him AT THE TIME. Too often, climate scientists issue press releases and let others tell exaggerated facts and lies, and they let it go, because it is more important to push the public into action in their minds.
When are they going to call out Michael Mann's errors, like using data upside-down? Instead they claim that they got a hockey stick without tree-rings. Icebergs breaking off was touted everywhere as a sign of record global warming, when they should have responded back that this is normal annual occurrence.
Be charitable - I doubt they even bothered to read the Daily Mail article . They just pick up anything in the denier echo chamber and regurgitate it indiscriminately with the smug zeal as if they have stumbled upon the Rosetta Stone (its OK Pat , Flossie ....you can look that one up)
The extent is more this year and according to PIOMAS the volume is up too, whereas the ice is thin, which to be expected as it is new ice replacing what was lost in 2012.
Does this mean this a recovery "no" it is just one year out of many, and a few more years with more extent will be needed to be able to say that.
Predicting ice extent is difficult because we do not even know what causes the melt, is it atmospheric temperature, is it sunshine, is Arctic ocean temperatures or currents, or extreme cyclones as in the case of 2012?
However it does show that skeptical-science Arctic death spiral is nonsense.
I guess you must be getting frustrated being wrong all the time. You have been hoping for melting ice for a long time. That hasn't happened, obviously, and now you are attacking those who were right all along. TSK! TSK! How lame can you get?
Antarctic: You'll repeat it slowly? Ha! Ha! It really doesn't matter how slowly or rapidly you type. I'm sure the speed that he reads it will be independent of that. You are typically trying a bully tactic. That works even with people in colleges, certainly kids in grade school, but you are corresponding with prroffesionals and you can only intimidate with intelligence. I think you are coming up short on that.
It it really amazing how one article from a questionable newspaper gets the deniers excited. WUWT is slow on the mark on this one.
Total recovery? No but ...
Yep! Looks like it is recovering!
I see where your thumbs down came from. Why don't you see the steep recovery (trend)?
The difference between last year and this year is very revealing!
Could be 40% but that all depends on who is doing the calculations.
-------------------------------------
Skeptics are just being skeptical. Does that really bother you that much?
-------------------------------------
It's nice to know that you are not God!
-------------------------------------
Thank you for your support! The point of skeptics is that the Arctic melt was being pushed on 1 side by the PDO and on the other side by the AMO plus the fact that all of the rivers in Russia were flowing in that direction. Was this natural? I'd say so. Science says so. Where does your CO2 warming come into the equation?
-------------------------------------
Are you guys that much of being total "friggin idiots" that you don't understand how big the world really is? I think you need to start attacking Al Gore instead of me. He is working on $1 billion and I ain't even halfway to a million!
-------------------------------------
You need some 'splainin'?
PDO and AMO go through cycles. Right?
PDO and AMO cycles do not match. Right? But sometimes they are very close. Right?
The PMO started before the AMO. Right? (Are you a woman?)
The AMO didn't start until the mid-1990s. Right? So it's hard to know when it will actually stop its effects. Right? : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_mu...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_dec...
---------------------------------------...
We know (through science) that the oceans (70% of the Earth's surface) are more of a driving force to surface temperatures than land-air temperature is (This has to do with the density of the oceans and their heat capacity). Right?
---------------------------------------...
I guess you're right. There are no facts that tell us that the oceans have more of an effect on air temps than CO2 even though they cover over 70% of the Planet. Nothing at all tells us anything remotely close to that. It's CO2 warming. You guys win! I'm stupid!
Denialists lost it completely a long time ago. They have a long history of thinking that time frames as short as one year make a trend.
Not losing, so much as recycling http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/1_A...
enroute to ultimate Billy-dom http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...
They never had it
It's just become screamingly obvious
They seem to have a new link they think proves something, they have used it in 3-4 questions in just a few hours
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415191/Global-cooling-Arctic-ice-caps-grows-60-global-warming-predictions.html
This claims ice is growing back, by comparing 2013 to 2012, the new record low year, while completely ignoring that 2012 is well below any of the last 6 years but 2013 is right in the mix with those other 5 year, i.e. there is no 'recovery'
The article also make the same tired old claim quoting Wieslaw Maslowski that the Arctic would be ice free in Summer by 2013, it of course makes no mention of the fact groups like the NSIDC have this as ~2030 and have dismissed Maslowski's estimate, in fact only deniers are playing Maslowski's estimate, the scientific community didn't take them seriously.
In my attempts to answer these question I earned the usual thumbs down but so far no denier was brave enough to even try and address these points, so come on, you guys keep claiming you are skeptics and not deniers, prove it.
Here is the NSIDC 6 year record (again) which has 2013, a pretty easy comparison. Please point out the 'recovery' that the Mail-online pretends exists
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/files/2013/09/Figure2.png
global warming is a scam
