Comments on: Mid-September boreal sea ice extrema https://habitablezone.com/2023/09/15/mid-september-boreal-sea-ice-extrema/ Sun, 19 Apr 2026 04:50:17 -0700 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: podrock https://habitablezone.com/2023/09/15/mid-september-boreal-sea-ice-extrema/#comment-52339 podrock Fri, 15 Sep 2023 16:21:53 +0000 https://habitablezone.com/?p=101030#comment-52339 And have them, and the link many times, Thank you. And have them, and the link many times, Thank you.

]]> By: ER https://habitablezone.com/2023/09/15/mid-september-boreal-sea-ice-extrema/#comment-52338 ER Fri, 15 Sep 2023 15:15:18 +0000 https://habitablezone.com/?p=101030#comment-52338 You may wonder why I insist on publishing these little abstracts of the National Snow and Ice Data Center analyses of polar sea ice cover. There are several reasons. The poles show the effects of global warming more dramatically than latitudes nearer the equator. Sea Ice Extent (SIE) is a single unambiguous metric, data from one satellite sensor, collected and displayed in a uniform fashion since 1979. The erratic year to year variations in SIE caused by local sea and atmospheric conditions can easily obscure the long-term trends apparent in the data when compared over long periods of time. One single year's up or down (or even one decade's, for that matter) is meaningless. The entire data spread since 1979 is significant and undeniable. There are many evidences for AGW, of various plausibility and verifiability. But I believe this to be the most convincing and the most dramatic. I started publishing these abstracts here when our local AGW denialists were constantly attacking all evidence of the climate crisis by cherry-picking data, or citing obscure studies or authorities which suggested otherwise. They also attacked the motives of AGW as being alarmist, or even corrupt. The nature of this polar SIE data was selected for the reasons outlined above. Needless to say, the validity or significance of the NSIDC data was never questioned by our denialist fringe. As the trend line continued downward, they left. They simply could not respond to the data. They had sufficient scientific background to recognize its legitimacy, and its urgency. And their continued presence only underlined their own ideological partisan and doctrinaire denialism, not to mention their own corruption. Yes, they weren't just mistaken, or exercising prudent scientific skepticism. They were being deliberately deceptive. They knew exactly what they were doing, and why. I have continued publishing these bulletins, on a more or less monthly basis, not because I feel any of you need to be enlightened on this issue, but so that you may become familiar with the NSIDC website. It is the premier resource, and its data is reliable and convincing. You can use this resource as you speak to others on this issue, and I hope that others lurking on the Habitable Zone will also visit NSIDC.org and see for themselves. Keep in mind, the SIE trends I summarize here are only the tip of the iceberg as far as the content of this website is concerned. The data, analysis and reporting on polar ice phenomena is comprehensive and authoritative. A flood in the Sahara or a heat wave in Siberia, by itself, means nothing. What is being documented continuously in the Arctic is Nature's way of telling us something's terribly wrong. You may wonder why I insist on publishing these little abstracts of the National Snow and Ice Data Center analyses of polar sea ice cover. There are several reasons.

The poles show the effects of global warming more dramatically than latitudes nearer the equator.

Sea Ice Extent (SIE) is a single unambiguous metric, data from one satellite sensor, collected and displayed in a uniform fashion since 1979.

The erratic year to year variations in SIE caused by local sea and atmospheric conditions can easily obscure the long-term trends apparent in the data when compared over long periods of time. One single year’s up or down (or even one decade’s, for that matter) is meaningless. The entire data spread since 1979 is significant and undeniable.

There are many evidences for AGW, of various plausibility and verifiability. But I believe this to be the most convincing and the most dramatic.

I started publishing these abstracts here when our local AGW denialists were constantly attacking all evidence of the climate crisis by cherry-picking data, or citing obscure studies or authorities which suggested otherwise. They also attacked the motives of AGW as being alarmist, or even corrupt. The nature of this polar SIE data was selected for the reasons outlined above.

Needless to say, the validity or significance of the NSIDC data was never questioned by our denialist fringe. As the trend line continued downward, they left. They simply could not respond to the data. They had sufficient scientific background to recognize its legitimacy, and its urgency. And their continued presence only underlined their own ideological partisan and doctrinaire denialism, not to mention their own corruption. Yes, they weren’t just mistaken, or exercising prudent scientific skepticism. They were being deliberately deceptive. They knew exactly what they were doing, and why.

I have continued publishing these bulletins, on a more or less monthly basis,
not because I feel any of you need to be enlightened on this issue, but so that you may become familiar with the NSIDC website. It is the premier resource, and its data is reliable and convincing. You can use this resource as you speak to others on this issue, and I hope that others lurking on the Habitable Zone will also visit NSIDC.org and see for themselves.

Keep in mind, the SIE trends I summarize here are only the tip of the iceberg as far as the content of this website is concerned. The data, analysis and reporting on polar ice phenomena is comprehensive and authoritative. A flood in the Sahara or a heat wave in Siberia, by itself, means nothing. What is being documented continuously in the Arctic is Nature’s way of telling us something’s terribly wrong.

]]>