OMG! The Polar Ice is .... NOT melting? WTF?

Okay, this time the comparison is for 2002. That marks 15 years in my view. What happened to the oft-insisted claim that only cycles of 60 years or more can represent climactic trends not weather-related phenomena?

Any sources for the 60-year cycle claim?

It’s not like scientists are unwilling to look further back than 2002 or 1979. You have to make sense of the data you have and base your decision-making on the analysis of that data. What would be the alternative to that?

And we have been advised not to look at isolated examples of weather such is occurring only on the antarctic peninsula. Back to you and your German obsession with dialectics.

As you have started a thread about polar ice you probably can’t wait to read this:

Or maybe not.

From the article.

“It seems that the ice that remains in the late summer is a function of how thick the ice was to begin with,” Cullather said. “We ran our forecast in June without the sea ice thickness and it came with a much higher prediction than when we actually introduced the thickness measurements. That suggests that adding in the thickness observations is changing our values.”

No shit Sherlock. I remember when Fred would post sea ice extent at the height of winter and claim “look, its all grown back again”. All six inches of it, where there might have been a 100 ft glacier previously and would promptly melt again as soon as the seasons change.