Business as usual
The National Sea Ice Data Center has an animation showing how the sea ice minimum extent has changed from 1979 - 2006. The 2007 extent is shown on the right. Click on the image for the animation.
A true successor to Bambi meets Godzilla.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Eli meant to behave but there were way too many options.
KoFi Button
Posts
Contributors
Eli Rabett
Eli Rabett, a not quite failed professorial techno-bunny who finally handed in the keys and retired from his wanna be research university. The students continue to be naive but great people and the administrators continue to vary day-to-day between homicidal and delusional without Eli's help. Eli notices from recent political developments that this behavior is not limited to administrators. His colleagues retain their curious inability to see the holes that they dig for themselves. Prof. Rabett is thankful that they, or at least some of them occasionally heeded his pointing out the implications of the various enthusiasms that rattle around the department and school. Ms. Rabett is thankful that Prof. Rabett occasionally heeds her pointing out that he is nuts.
Brian's Other Blog
On Line Textbooks
- Atmospheric Chemistry - Daniel Jacob
- Environmental Geosciences - Robert Stewart
- Ray Pierrehumbert on the physics of climate
- David Archer's Global Warming (Parts)
- Spencer Weart's Disovery of Global Warming
- Stratospheric Ozone
- Global Land Vegetation
- Polar Sea Ice
- Sea Surface Temperatures
- Skeptical Science - not a book but a resource
Mostly Science
- And Then There's Physics
- Blue Skies Research - J&J in the UK
- Bob Grumbine in the 21st Century
- Easterbrook's Serendipity
- Izen or Izen it not?
- James' Empty Blog
- Neven's Artic Sea Ice Blog
- Nick Stoke's Moyhu
- Real Climate
- Science of Doom
- Simon Donner's Maribo II
- Tamino's Open Mind
- The Weasel, aka Stoat
- Victor Venema
- Weather from Bridford, Devon, a beautiful corner of the world
Mostly Climate Policy
Other Lands
Southerners
Cuter in Bunny Ears
Blog Archive
-
▼
2007
(298)
-
▼
September
(28)
- Jaw droppers
- Listen to the bunny (Part XIV)A couple of years ag...
- Better a good Czech than a bad oneBloggers know th...
- Pearls before swine
- Speed and a few other things killDown in the Comme...
- Without comment"NRG Energy, the US power generator...
- Learn to listen carefully young bunnies Aaron Swar...
- Business as usualThe National Sea Ice Data Center ...
- There goes another one . . .
- Ethon checks out the air conditioning. . .
- It could be when, not how muchSimon Donner has a n...
- If an article in the forest is not cited does it m...
- Hors CategorieEli has added a new feature to the b...
- Horatio at the coffeehouse. . . Horatio Algeranon ...
- Roger and JimEthon came back from the library with...
- And so it goes . . .One of the McMice, John V, ov...
- The Northwest Passage is open for businessThe ESA ...
- There is nothing new in the eye of the hurricaneEl...
- Whom you would destroy you first defund (Part 23)T...
- On adaptation without mitigation
- Eli does a Schulte
- And in this corner . . .Eli would like to draw you...
- The Northwest Passage is open and it looks like th...
- A farewell giftEthon brings word from Boulder that...
- Somewhat boring but let's keep the guys over at Cl...
- Cool station of today . . .Alma MI, with the Steve...
- Where we areSome discussion about the number and i...
- Listen to the bunnyA few weeks ago Eli pointed out...
-
▼
September
(28)
Nil Nisi
- A Few Things Illconsidered
- Arthur Smith
- Atmoz
- Capital Climate
- Chris Colose
- Climate Physics Forum
- Cruel Mistress
- Deep Climate
- Delayed Oscillator
- Deltoid
- Denis Delbecq
- Fergus Brown's Old Man
- Greenfyre
- Horatio's Muse
- John Nielsen-Gammon
- Lab Lemming
- Logical Science
- Magnus Westerstrand
- N3xus 6
- Policy Lass
- Post Normal Times
- Rick Piltze
- Some Are Boojums
- Throbgoblin
13 comments:
I read somewhere a suggestion that warmer water could come in through the Bering Strait. Maybe that could have produced that large bite at the top (based on my experience of defrosting my freezer and watching large chunks of ice melt in the sink)
Can Rabetts Swim
http://www.netdisaster.com/go.php?mode=flood&url=http://rabett.blogspot.com/
Ask Jimmy Carter
Perhaps that rabbit was related to that guard rabbit in Monty Python & The Holy Grail, i.e., "Run away, run away."
Doesn't it seem strange that the "large bite" noticed just happens to be north of China? All the ash from those coal-fired plants putting soot on the ice?
Can't get the animation to run. Is that "bite" occurring in the same place each year?
If so, it may be man-caused, but localized to one country causing the damage.
The other edges (next to Canada, and a line from Greenland) don't appear to be that far back.
I think all the #5 stations in the USHCN are up where the ice is melting. Their contaminated data is what's killing the polar bears. As soon as addled amateurs completely photodocument the network and AEI, NewMax and JohnDaly get a hold of them, the ice will grow back.
No, really.
Best,
D
I asked about the "bite" in the ice.
I expected a serious answer, but then the Rabett Blog attack dog jumps in.
Really Dano, if you don't know an answer, why reply at all.
To the more serious bloggers, can someone point me in the right direction to show me:
1. Data for the sea ice MAXIMUMS, and
2. Some data that shows where the maximum loss is. From the pictures shown the bite is north if China. Is this a consistant area, or does the bite area change?
Really Dano, if you don't know an answer, why reply at all.
Really, anon, if you're not sure if my topic is germane to yours, why mention me at all?
I was merely pointing out, in general, the general weakness of boilerplate denialist arguments.
Best,
D
"Dano said:
I think all the #5 stations in the USHCN are up where the ice is melting. Their contaminated data is what's killing the polar bears. As soon as addled amateurs completely photodocument the network and AEI, NewMax and JohnDaly get a hold of them, the ice will grow back.
No, really.
Best,
D"
Followed up by:
"Really, anon, if you're not sure if my topic is germane to yours, why mention me at all?
I was merely pointing out, in general, the general weakness of boilerplate denialist arguments.
Best,
D"
And I'm merely pointing out that when a serious question was asked you label the person as a "denier". Talk about a boilerplate reply.
How can anyone get a straight answer from the AGW believers on this blog, when the first reply I get is a cut-down?
So I'll ask YOU directly, Dano:
From the pictures shown, the bite is north of China. Is this a consistant area, or does the bite area change from year to year?
you label the person as a "denier"...[h]ow can anyone get a straight answer from the AGW believers on this blog, when the first reply I get is a cut-down? So I'll ask YOU directly, Dano... [emphasis added]
First, I wasn't replying to you. Apologies if I wasn't clear enough in my comments.
The original Dano comment was a riff on the uselessness of denialist arguments in the face of the situation on the ground, esp when re-framed in a way that makes this uselessness clear. And the riff framed the denialist "argument" to have the proper light shined on it, to best show the ridiculousness of it all - the lack of denialist testable hypotheses, explanations, data, journal articles, scrunched-up crayon scribbles on soiled napkins [the 'no, really' was the best reply possible to thinking people who would question the specious stance].
Second, I'm not interested in the question to such a degree where I'll do your research for you and your seemingly serious "question" of the "reports" that "Arctic" "ice" extent "is" "shrinking" "due" to "AGW" believers like Hansen's "questionable" "data". I'm focused on green infrastructure in urban environments right now when I'm not deriving amusement from the argumentation of the shrinking Denialist Corps ("Living by Markets, Loving by Chance, Annoying by Shrill Ideology" ).
Surely you can visit a half-dozen sites and answer the question for yourself. Let us know what you find.
Hope this helps.
Best,
D
Dano said:
"I'm focused on green infrastructure in urban environments right now when I'm not deriving amusement from the argumentation of the shrinking Denialist Corps ("Living by Markets, Loving by Chance, Annoying by Shrill Ideology" ).
Surely you can visit a half-dozen sites and answer the question for yourself. Let us know what you find."
In other words, you just post here to laugh at the "denialists", not because you have a real concern for AGW.
I just asked here because Rabett says "RTFR". I'm assuming that he has read ALL the reports, and had a quick answer. He doesn't.
I am researching the question, and it's not looking good (for the pro-AGW croud). And yes, I'll post results: on a better blog, Climate Audit.
In other words, you just post here to laugh at the "denialists", not because you have a real concern for AGW.
Step up your game, boy. No one here is stupid enough to do your simple research for you. Or to think because you have an easily-answered question that calls into question the AGW believers.
Yer a hoot.
Best,
D
Dano:
"Step up your game, boy. No one here is stupid enough to do your simple research for you. Or to think because you have an easily-answered question that calls into question the AGW believers."
Either that, or no-one there is smart enough to answer it.
AGW believers seem to have the answer to ALMOST every denialist claim (except this one, that is)
I am currently "working" the data now (introducing "biases" like Hansen has). When I'm done, I'll post the results: just don't ask me how I came up with it.
Post a Comment