Mike Davis wrote:Sorry Groupie:
You did not get away with your lies. What NASA says and What Monckton said are related to two different things. Neither is wrong but neither has any relevance. Monckton is showing the problems with the alarmist side of the climate issue by stating the ice is recovering form the minimum in 2007 and NASA is stating the current ice Extent, Volume, Area is or was the 5th lowest since they started observing. Two completely different statements about the ice that do NOT contradict each other and both true and both meaningless.
Monckton did not need to make any claims about NASA's statements because NASA's statement is self contradictory.
"Scientists who track Arctic sea ice cover from space announced today that this winter had the fifth lowest maximum ice extent on record. The six lowest maximum events since satellite monitoring began in 1979 have all occurred in the past six years (2004-2009)."
"The latest Arctic sea ice data from NASA and the National Snow and Ice Data Center show that the decade-long trend of shrinking sea ice cover is continuing. New evidence from satellite observations also shows that the ice cap is thinning as well."
The ice can not be at the 5th lowest and the shrinking continuing as well. It would be either or as the statements contradict each other and one supports Monckton's claim that the ice has recovered to the 5th lowest in 31 years from the lowest.
Mike Davis wrote:How did you arrive at the Arctic is thinning with the 5th lowest thickness. Thinner would be the thinnest. Are you that stupid?
NASA contradicts themselves by making opposing claims which I pointed out and you are to stupid to see that Monckton was correct with his claim and NASA agreed with him by saying:
"Scientists who track Arctic sea ice cover from space announced today that this winter had the fifth lowest maximum ice extent on record"
If you do not know what the fifth lowest means I think you need to return to elementary school because in my time that sort of thing was taught in the lower grades.
You are probably referring to this line:
New evidence from satellite observations also shows that the ice cap is thinning as well."
Which has no reference period to compare the new evidence to and that means the statement is an opinion based on nothing more than a few observations of a dynamic situation that is in constant flux getting thicker and thinner throughout time.
The statements are meaningless because they are based on to short of a time period. Go back and read the linked report on Arctic conditions through recent history.
Mike Davis wrote:OK!
I copied and pasted what NASA actually said and NASA agreed with Monckton by saying the ice is currently the 5th lowest for the satellite period. Monckton claimed the ice is recovering from the minimum of 2007 and if the ice is at the 5th lowest then it is recovering from the 2007 minimum
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest