Do we need to be preparing for Arctic cruising strategies because of Global Cooling

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY

Holy Smokes....A Rapid Drop in June Temps....

The Alarmists and MMGW Cultists won't like this.

I'm not sure if it's a case of you Reefy, Stu not understanding the science or that you have gone so far with your mocking that your simply way too proud to admit how wrong you have been


"Mean monthly temperatures for June for Australia were 1.30 °C above average, the sixth-highest on record. Every month of 2016 has had temperatures well above average and the first six months of the year have been 1.38 °C above average, 0.22 °C above the previous record set in 2005. The 12 months from July 2015 to June 2016 (1.28 °C above average) were also the warmest on record"

Australia in June 2016

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by jackdale

June 2016 is not up to date enough for you? Try Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis | Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag

Sent from my SM-T705W using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

It's July. The data is out there.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

I'm not sure if it's a case of you Reefy, Stu not understanding the science or that you have gone so far with your mocking that your simply way too proud to admit how wrong you have been


"Mean monthly temperatures for June for Australia were 1.30 °C above average, the sixth-highest on record. Every month of 2016 has had temperatures well above average and the first six months of the year have been 1.38 °C above average, 0.22 °C above the previous record set in 2005. The 12 months from July 2015 to June 2016 (1.28 °C above average) were also the warmest on record"

Australia in June 2016

The sixth warmest, aye? July figures will be interesting.

[adoxograph]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

... -- if you are trying to make some argument -- make that argument, and make it in your own words, and use other people's words selectively to support your argument. ...

This is a good one. Using their own argument. Hilarious!

You are expecting too much from the participants here, which are mostly blinded by their political believes (left and right) and do not understand the underlying science at all.

The worst thing is both sides do not even try to get a scientifically balanced view, relying only on sources (cut and paste/quoting) confirming their believes (there is no AGW/there is AGW) and consequently ignoring everything that would contradict this believe. Even worse, both sides are discrediting sources, which do not fit in their world view. I think there is a word for that. Ah yes, it is called bias.

This is a thread where the whole argument can be summarised as: "See Prof.Dr.John Doe said it and therefore I'm right and you are an ignorant imbecile/true believer" followed by the counterargument "John Doe is a charlatan, he is not even a Prof. How stupid can you be believing him?"

However, this is exactly what makes this thread so entertaining.

[Reefmagnet]

Well, I for one don't not believe there is a link between warming and atmospheric CO2 / greenhouse gas composition. I just want to understand the mindset that results in endless predictions of doom and gloom which just isn't happening. And isn't happening 166 years past so called "climatic optimums". Furthermore, the zeal of some alarmists to report every little blip in the weather as some kind of proof of devastating climate change is laughable.

More concerning is when one of the world's most preeminent climate change scientists quotes absolute exagerated facts to the point where they become untruths. At least Al Gore had an excuse that being he isn't a scientist.

[transmitterdan]

Atmospheric CO2 contributes to atmospheric warming. It's a simple scientific fact.

Whether the warming is a catastrophe or a huge boon to any particular interest group is another thing not easily proved or disproved.

That sums up it up I think.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Meanwhile in the Arctic

June set another satellite-era record low for average sea ice extent, despite slower than average rates of ice loss. The slow rate of ice loss reflects the prevailing atmospheric pattern, with low pressure centered over the central Arctic Ocean and lower than average temperatures over the Beaufort Sea.

The seminal "How To Lie With Statistics" by Darrell Huff
Chapter 6.

"torn" or "truncated" graph.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Well, I for one don't not believe there is a link between warming and atmospheric CO2 / greenhouse gas composition. I just want to understand the mindset that results in endless predictions of doom and gloom which just isn't happening. And isn't happening 166 years past so called "climatic optimums". Furthermore, the zeal of some alarmists to report every little blip in the weather as some kind of proof of devastating climate change is laughable.

More concerning is when one of the world's most preeminent climate change scientists quotes absolute exagerated facts to the point where they become untruths. At least Al Gore had an excuse that being he isn't a scientist.

Wot 'e sed!

[StuM]

Originally Posted by transmitterdan

Atmospheric CO2 contributes to atmospheric warming. It's a simple scientific fact.

Whether the warming is a catastrophe or a huge boon to any particular interest group is another thing not easily proved or disproved.

That sums up it up I think.

And 'im!

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by StuM

The seminal "How To Lie With Statistics" by Darrell Huff
Chapter 6.

"torn" or "truncated" graph.

That is the range for the satellite record for Arctic sea ice. How is it torn or truncated?

[StuM]

Originally Posted by jackdale

That is the range for the satellite record for Arctic sea ice. How is it torn or truncated?

Y Axis starts at 10.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

It's July. The data is out there.

It was a report on the month of June.

Here is the current data. Remember the ides of September is the low minimum date. Two months to go.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by StuM

Y Axis starts at 10.

It was probably done to save space, nothing nefarious.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

It was a report on the month of June.

Here is the current data. Remember the ides of September is the low minimum date. Two months to go.

The real interesting part I see is the current years melt shows within the ±2 standard deviation of the baseline

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

The real interesting part I see is the current years melt shows within the ±2 standard deviation of the baseline

It is 2 SD below the mean.

If you had an IQ -2 SD of the mean, it would be 70. About 97% of the population would be higher than you.