A chilly Arctic summer has left nearly a million more square miles of ocean covered with ice than at the same time last year – an increase of 60 per cent.See, that's the whole issue I have with the ZOMG GLOBAL WARMENING WILL KILL US ALL crowd. We were treated ad nauseum to dire predictions of an ice-free Arctic, where polar bears were drowning, not all that long ago. The science is settled! we were told, repeatedly, any time we raised any questions. Here we are, less than a decade later, and Whoops! Everything we told you last decade was wrong. Sorry you sold all your possessions and moved into a cave! Except they won't apologize for being wrong - because Anthropogenic Global Warming is a religious belief, not a rational position. They are so SURE that global warming is happening that any events to the contrary cease to exist in their view.
The rebound from 2012’s record low comes six years after the BBC reported that global warming would leave the Arctic ice-free in summer by 2013.
Instead, days before the annual autumn re-freeze is due to begin, an unbroken ice sheet more than half the size of Europe already stretches from the Canadian islands to Russia’s northern shores.
I've long held that there are four pieces of the puzzle that need to be addressed before we give global warming the kind of interest the True Believers would like:
1. Is this *really* global warming outside the normal range of temperature fluctuations over time periods?
2. Is it *really* caused by the hand of man, or are there outside forces at work (sunspots, volcanic eruption, etc.)?
3. Could we do anything about the warming if 1 & 2 were proven?
4. Is global warming necessarily a bad thing?
Issues 3 and 4 are the "do something" phase. We're still full-on into 1 & 2, where it's not particularly established whether the temperature fluctuations we've seen over the past 40 or so years are anything more than normal variations. Remember, they were predicting the next Ice Age back in the 1970s, and it looks like they're back to that now. They're trying to have it both ways - they want to use extremely short periods of time (when it comes to predicting long term trends in climate) as an indication of abnormal warming, yet when it swings back the other way, they want us to ignore that data because "it's not long enough".
And, quite frankly, I find the irony simply delicious. All those polar bears we were told would be drowning as the ice floes melted are now up to their eyeballs in fresh ice pack. Al Gore can start refunding "carbon credits" any day now, right? We're all done, global warming has been solved, start driving SUVs again. It's for the polar bears! Now, I hate to step on my #1 blogson's schtick (especially since he so kindly pimped my KTKC fundraiser), but I had to point out the tasty,tasty irony...
Because, as I've said before, you can't spell schadenfreude without a dictionary...
That is all.