I think it's phenomenal, though it's taken years, that you are now debating the 'A' in AGW. At the start you didn't even think the Earth had warmed. In those days I enjoyed asking if you thought the melting ice was lying.
what a bunch of shit. At first I had no idea if man was causing warming... I was not even challenging the idea we were warming. Then a few years ago.. pspr or somelike him posted studies showing that warming proceeded co2 in the ice core so asked for proof that co2 causes warming on earth... you never produced any proof of that and I am sure you still can't. I think your only offer of proof was a ridiculous t.v. episode.. which was entirely non scientific. recently I have come to learn that it looks like greenhouse gases are more like a thermostat regulating temperature... I understand co2 is just a fraction of greenhouse gases and that man made co2 is just a fraction of co2. I therefore realize there is almost no way your could show man made co2 causes significant warming. but I do know you just lied your ass off because only only lately have I been arguing we have not warmed in 16 years. ( I only learned about that in the last year.)
I'm somewhat surprised to see this topic being discussed (twice!) by Elite Traders. However since it is, this sums up my views: "http://econnexus.org/the-mail-is-being-economical-with-the-truth-about-arctic-sea-ice/" The obvious conclusion?
so your view will be only some of the 20 yachts are stuck because some used the southern passage... and that althougth glacier is much larger it is not quite 60 percent. ( note if you do the math from the minimum in Sept instead of august it is over 60%).
============= Captain; With all due respect ...The next question is are you aware a 10 year chart with a 7,000+ year old earth is a small sample?? If earth is much older, you argument gets REAL WEAK. Climate change=LOL belly laugh; that the new name for the old scam =global warming.LOL
Errrr, it ain't my argument. I was pointing out how ridiculous his chart was to begin with, and have made your same point myself many times. 10 years, or the data they have going back to the late 1800's ain't much to go on in the overall scheme of things. But maybe you're pulling my leg. I do believe the earth is older than 7000 years, unless you're one of those that think the Flintstones is actually factual.
My view is that far less than 20 yachts are currently "ice bound". Zero is more like it. The crew of Libellule successfully completed the full Northwest Passage earlier today (UTC!) and celebrated with a traditional tot of rum. http://econnexus.org/the-northwest-passage-in-2013/#comment-42362 The Mail said it was comparing with "this time last year". Sea ice is a very different kettle of fish to glacier ice. In particular the "square miles of ocean covered with ice" changes quite rapidly in August.
so what percentage more ice are you arguing for? the point really is... given that the earth has not warming in 16 years.... is this big bounce back in the ice part of natural variability or evidence the warming is cycling back to cooling?
The Earth has been warming for 16 years, just not on land as it turns out. But ocean warming should be of great concern, water gives up heat much more slowly than land.
The point really is that it's not a "big bounce back". Part of natural variability sounds much more likely to me. YMMV!