Scientists Are Worried About Antarctica’s Unprecedented Lack of Sea Ice Growth
By Paul Homewood
h/t James Mason
It’s strange that scientists were not panicking about going into an imminent ice age in 2014, when Antarctic sea ice was at a record high!
https://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/s_plot_hires.png
Large variations from year to year often occur, and they are usually the result of wind patterns, which either blow away from the continent, thus pushing ice outwards, or towards it.
We only started collecting data in 1979, so the idea that any of this is unprecedented or concerning is nonsense. In fact, the claims of a six-sigma event are fraudulent; you would need thousands of years of data to calculate the statistical significance of this event.
Meanwhile, aforesaid scientists seem to have gone very quiet about their favourite scare, the Arctic, where the ice refuses to disappear as ordered:
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Scientists do not worry or use emotional language.
Scientists state facts in a sober and balanced way.
Whatever or who ever these people are, either their words are sexed up by some arts graduate wallah or they are congenital bedwetters.
Sadly that is now so last century, some would blame feminisation, I wouldn’t like to comment.
Coldest winter on record in Antarctica last year…..
I have been watching the progress of the large icebergs that have recently been to the North of South Georgia, with some the length of at least half the island itself on EOSDIS. That’s a long way North of the Pole. The polar night means that coverage on the Antarctic coast is still very limited. In fact for the past week there has been no coverage.
https://lpdaac.usgs.gov/news/modis-and-viirs-forward-processing-on-hold/
Question: is the sea ice in the area in question affected by any of the known (and, maybe unknown) sub-sea volcanoes?
A few years ago a British survey team found that the Antarctic ice was a lot thicker than previously believed . So there is far more of it that the media will tell you about .https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/24/antarctic-ice-thicker-survey-finds
Oh Bu–er , just noticed that link is from the Gruniard .
Or have I actually found the one time that they have told the truth .
See NoTricks Zone,dated June o5,2023.
Scientists caught inflating antarctic ice losses 3000% more than observations.
Arctic ice down, Antarctic up.
Arctic ice up, Antarctic down.
About twenty years ago Antarctic Sea ice was at an all time record, now its slightly less, but the Arctic sea ice is increasing.
‘Pseudoscientists Are Worried About Antarctica’s Unprecedented Lack of Sea Ice Growth’
Fixed it.
A lot of people do know that the climate has always changed, that there have been alternating warm and cold periods. A lot of people do know that the Vikings moved to Greenland when it was warmer than now and that they left Greenland when it got colder than now. The political “so called climate” consensus has established a static equilibrium energy balance that does not have these alternating warmer and colder temperatures so that every natural change can be flagged as a new man made disaster.
http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail Virus-free.www.avg.com http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
“A lot of people do know that the climate has always changed”
Cringeworthy. No climate on earth is changing TODAY.
The assertion leaves out the critical TIME component. It implies it is continuous. It’s not. Climates change. Over time.
Those who could indeed left, the rest starved to death. It all happened very quickly. I saw a very fascinating archaeological documentary which for once was sober and professional and not the usual “Ooooh look at this” crap which we get from the usual suspects. It showed that when the end came it was sudden and not at all pleasant.
“In fact, the claims of a six-sigma event are fraudulent; you would need thousands of years of data to calculate the statistical significance of this event.”
Really? It would of course depend on how different the event was from the standard deviation of the other events but 44 data points confined within a similar spread like this should give quite a narrow confidence interval for both mean and SD and thus a strong basis for testing statistical significance of extreme readings. If we had the actual data it would not be hard to calculate it.
“Scientists” do not worry or used emotional words. They do their work in a sober fashion and hand the results on to others. “If” the individuals involved are quoted as using such unprofessional language then I am suspicious as to their motives. Funding chasing is my first thought.
At long last, some common sense from the new IPCC Chairman.
https://www.thegwpf.org/new-ipcc-chairman-is-right-to-rebuke-misleading-climate-alarm/