New Antarctic sea ice record—but scientists aren't 'confounded'

New Antarctic sea ice record — but scientists aren’t ‘confounded’
Sea ice on the Ross Sea - part of Antarctica where the ice is increasing. Credit: Brian Stetson/Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA

Antarctic winter sea ice has once again broken the record for maximum extent. On September 12, the coverage measured 19.619 million square kilometres, the highest since satellite records began.

The ice has broken daily records on about 150 days this year, indicating consistently greater than in previous years. With several weeks of growth still to go, more records could fall.

2014 is the third year in a row that the ice has broken the maximum extent record. In 2013 the reached 19.47 million square km, 3.6% above the average for 1981-2010. The records continue a weak trend towards greater sea ice cover, which evidence suggests is linked to increasing greenhouse gases and climate change.

Dr Guy Williams, a sea ice specialist at University of Tasmania who has previously written on The Conversation, said the new records add to an "exciting" puzzle for climate scientists. Each record-breaking year is different due to variations in seasonal weather and ocean conditions—"it's those differences that will tell us something."

Total is not the full story either. The weak positive trend masks declines in some regions, and increases in others. Parts of the Antarctic—particularly to the west of the Antarctic Peninsula—show a very large decline in sea ice. In other regions, such as the Ross Sea, sea ice is increasing.

There are also as yet no published data on sea ice volume—a much better measure of whether sea ice is increasing or decreasing.

New Antarctic sea ice record — but scientists aren’t ‘confounded’
Trends in sea ice duration, 1979-2010, showing large regional variations. Figure from Maksym et al. 2012. Credit: Guy Williams

Two suspects: wind and water

There are two main hypotheses to explain the changes in Antarctic sea ice. The first is that westerly winds, which flow around Antarctica, are speeding up and shifting south. Counter-intuitively, this drives sea ice further north.

Scientists have shown that there is a direct link between the winds shifting south and increasing greenhouse and ozone-depleting gases, and a link between the winds and increasing sea ice cover, but not as yet a link between all three.

Dr Williams said so far this year the hypothesis checks out—atmospheric patterns, comparable to El Niño that affects the Pacific Ocean, mean the westerly winds are further south than normal.

The other hypothesis is that melt water from Antarctica's melting glaciers and ice sheets is making it easier for sea ice to form. As the ice melts, cold, fresh water pours into the surrounding ocean. Colder and fresher surface water freezes more easily, and also reduces the heat from deeper in the ocean reaching the surface.

Dr Williams said scientists investigating satellite-derived sea surface temperatures in the Ross Sea—where sea ice is increasing—are reporting that the surface water has indeed been colder this year.


Explore further

Poles apart: Arctic sea ice has shrunk but Antarctic sea ice has grown

This story is published courtesy of The Conversation (under Creative Commons-Attribution/No derivatives).
The Conversation

Citation: New Antarctic sea ice record—but scientists aren't 'confounded' (2014, September 15) retrieved 21 October 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2014-09-antarctic-sea-ice-recordbut-scientists.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
0 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Sep 15, 2014
It's not the record-breaking sea ice. It's also the cold temperatures. On August 12, 2014, British Antarctic Research Station Halley hit the coldest temperature it had ever recorded -69F which knocked out the stations power.

Sep 15, 2014
So is the Settled Science that we are warming, or changing? And is it still 95% for sure, man caused?Just trying to keep up here.

Sep 15, 2014
Al Gore on suicide watch.
Oh no, never mind...he just made $500 mil off big oil.

Sep 15, 2014
If ice decreases, it is due to AGW
If ice increase it is due to AGW
???????

West Antarctic ice melt is due to Volcanic activity, which should supply more fresh water to the west shelf, but they say it is decreasing negating the fresh water more sea ice theory.

They grasp at any and all theorys to avoid answering real questions.


Sep 15, 2014
Golly Gee Professor, if this works will we get off Gilligan's Isle?

Sep 15, 2014
Well, at least the AGW Cult won't have to worry about ice, for that last batch of Kool-aid.

Sep 15, 2014
1. The ice melting off the continent in the summer makes more sea ice in the winter. The only problem is, the sea ice forms up to 2000 miles from the continent.

2. Rain falls on the sea due to climate change, and freezes into extra sea ice. The sea ice is 8 feet thick so they get 8 feet of rain every winter.

3. The sea is warmer due to global warming so it forms a thermohaline thermocline halocline and more sea ice forms because there is less sea ice.

4. It's the wind that blows the sea ice to northern latitudes where the freezing point of water is higher.

5. There is more CO2 in the ice which causes it to be "hard water" so it's not really ice at all

6. The Koch Brothers are adding chemicals to the water to make it freeze

Sep 15, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

KDK
Sep 15, 2014
Of course not, Big Science, Big Business, Big Government and Agenda 21 will not be deterred!

Sep 15, 2014
It runs in cycles. Not long ago there were huge mile high sheets of ice around 200 miles to the north of where I am.. Then it warmed and the Ice went north. The oceans rose, from miles off the current coast to where they are today..

Sep 15, 2014
I'm not a scientist,but could it just possibly be because the majority of the Antarctic continent is getting colder?

Sep 15, 2014
There are also as yet no published data on sea ice volume—a much better measure of whether sea ice is increasing or decreasing.


Without which this article is useless.

No one seemed to notice the distressing part of this article the "Polar Vortex" of the South, known as those Westerly winds. Runrig will be able to explain those better, but winds are efficient means of transferring heat.

The other bit of useful information would be if temperature averages are higher/lower on the Antarctic continent itself.

I'm no expert on Antarctic weather, but the trend seems to be colder this year, but with alot more snow.
This makes snow sense to me... as condensing water should warm things up... unless it is losing heat energy before it gets there...

Anybody?

Sep 15, 2014
@Earth Scientist
As ice melts it absorbs colossal amounts of energy. If your environment is 0C or below, you can see how this would be confusing. So yes there is a paradox involved. Adding heat to the Earth thermo-hydrodynamic can result in cooling. You have to understand what the environmental conditions are. All in all, the polar ice caps that we have all finally agreed are going away (at least in the North-where most PEOPLE are) cool the entire planet as they diminish.
You may be skeptical, but the Earth's Sea level has risen 6cm, it is straightforward to calculate how much energy it took to do this. 6cm x ocean area x 333kjoul/kg = an awful lot of heat.

It's counter intuitive, but not complicated.

@tnrebel, it is important to realize something always causes the cycle. Change. This time we're it.

Sep 16, 2014
Just so I'm on the same page.......2 decades of "everything will get warmer and all ice will melt" has now seamlessly changed to "hotter, colder, more ice less ice, whatev--it's still man-made climate change"? That's awfully convenient, isn't it? Why can't "scientists" just admit they were wrong?

Sep 16, 2014
All that needs to be understood here, is that a record layer of surface ice can never replace the cooling potential that was once provided by the deep water ice that has been lost. And it is not at all surprising that this has happened, considering the massive volumes of cooling water that was added to the aquatic structure by the rapid decline of the deep water ice and ancient snow packs. Naturally, this massive volume of chilled water has had a major impact upon the thermal build-up that was responsible for triggering the rapid decline of the ice. Most of this chilled water has simply collected within the southern hemisphere where it has allowed surface ice to return, due to wide spread colder temperatures. This is only a temporary event. As is evident by the continued decline of the arctic in the northern hemisphere, where the waters are still well above normal, and not just at the surface, but hundred's of feet below the surface.

Sep 16, 2014
1. The ice melting off the continent in the summer makes more sea ice in the winter. The only problem is, the sea ice forms up to 2000 miles from the continent.

No it doesn't it forms closer in and is blown out..... err coz it's colder there.

2. Rain falls on the sea due to climate change, and freezes into extra sea ice. The sea ice is 8 feet thick so they get 8 feet of rain every winter.

Antarctic sea-ice is on average is about half of that....so no.
http://nsidc.org/...nce.html

3. The sea is warmer due to global warming so it forms a thermohaline thermocline halocline and more sea ice forms because there is less sea ice.

I see what you've done there.

4. It's the wind that blows the sea ice to northern latitudes where the freezing point of water is higher.

It's blown north but the freezing point is lower (saltier).

5. There is more CO2 in the ice which causes it to be "hard water" so it's not really ice at all

More wit LOL.

6. The Koch Brothers are adding chemicals to the water to make it freeze

Mmmmmmm never thought of that.

Sep 16, 2014
I'm not a scientist,but could it just possibly be because the majority of the Antarctic continent is getting colder?

You're not?
I'd never have guessed .... and
NO.

Sep 16, 2014
Just so I'm on the same page.......2 decades of "everything will get warmer and all ice will melt" has now seamlessly changed to "hotter, colder, more ice less ice, whatev--it's still man-made climate change"? That's awfully convenient, isn't it? Why can't "scientists" just admit they were wrong?

Because their not ...... on a global basis.
However there are regional, counter-intuitive changes.
None more so than the Antarctic.
Do wiki it if you are not aware of it's uniquely isolated and extreme geographical and meteorological characteristics....
Oh and while you're at it - look up the properties of O3, of which these is a hole over Antarctica ... man-made of course. Just like GW.

Sep 16, 2014
Damage control?

Sep 16, 2014
Could someone please provide just some simple numbers to justify the claim that it is warmer summer air that is melting all of this ice in Antarctica. It is my understanding that except for a relatively few days each year most of the air temperatures are below 0C. Thus the few days of warm temperatures have to first warm the ice to 0C before it can even start to melt. How can a substantial amount of ice melt when there is no heat?

Let's face it, there are natural cycles here that we know nothing about. To say AGW is that cause of this is pure propaganda.

Sep 16, 2014
What convinces me of the reality of climate change, despite the uncertainties, is that the comments put out by climate change denialists are absolute, unmitigated garbage. We find distortion and misuse of credentials, publication of counterfeit papers, and scientific illiteracy of all sorts. This junk is on a par with the creationism of Michael Behe and Darwin's Black Box. Comparing the long term steady decrease of Arctic sea ice with a tiny peak in Antarctic sea ice is statistical illiteracy of the worst kind.

Sep 16, 2014
"Comparing the long term steady decrease of Arctic sea ice with a tiny peak in Antarctic sea ice is statistical illiteracy of the worst kind."

KI you are guilty of exactly the same distortions that you are complaining about. Since when is 35 years "Long Term"? Plus that, the short term trend in Arctic ice is very much up.

Sep 16, 2014
"Comparing the long term steady decrease of Arctic sea ice with a tiny peak in Antarctic sea ice is statistical illiteracy of the worst kind."

KI you are guilty of exactly the same distortions that you are complaining about. Since when is 35 years "Long Term"? Plus that, the short term trend in Arctic ice is very much up.


Short-term trend of 2 years MR, just a normal variation about a steady falling mean. As of course we should expect.

http://metofficen..._ts.jpeg

Sep 16, 2014
@Science Officer,
I'm not a scientist,but could it just possibly be because the majority of the Antarctic continent is getting colder?

A science officer who is not a scientist?!?!?

Sep 16, 2014
Run I know that you are smarter than that. Does this look like a short term decline?

http://www.ijis.i...ev_L.png

Political agendas go both ways. I suggest that you review your preconceived notions.

Sep 16, 2014
I'm not a scientist,but could it just possibly be because the majority of the Antarctic continent is getting colder?

And you're not a comedian either, cuz that wasn't very funny...

Sep 16, 2014
Mr166 spouted:
Run I know that you are smarter than that. Does this look like a short term decline?

http://www.ijis.i...ev_L.png

Political agendas go both ways. I suggest that you review your preconceived notions.


Of course an idiot like 166 would only include the ice during the 2000s. How about this graph from the same site:

http://www.ijis.i...tent.htm

Do you notice a trend when the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s are included? Did you expect us to not even look at the site you linked us to? Or were you just so stupid you didn't look farther in the site. The site you sent us to, exactly, backs up what Run was saying, not what you are saying.

Sep 16, 2014
Extract from Paul R. Holland, Nicolas Bruneau, Clare Enright, Martin Losch, Nathan T. Kurtz, and Ron Kwok, 2014: Modeled Trends in Antarctic Sea Ice Thickness. J. Climate, 27, 3784–3801.
http://dx.doi.org...-00301.1
"The model successfully reproduces observations of mean ice concentration, thickness, and drift, and decadal trends ..... imparting some confidence in the hindcasted trends in ice thickness. The model suggests that overall Antarctic sea ice volume has increased by approximately 30 km3 yr−1 (0.4% yr−1) as an equal result of areal expansion (20 × 103 km2 yr−1 or 0.2% yr−1) and thickening (1.5 mm yr−1 or 0.2% yr−1). This ice volume increase is an order of magnitude smaller than the Arctic decrease, and about half the size of the increased freshwater supply from the Antarctic Ice Sheet. Similarly to the observed ice concentration trends, the small overall increase in modeled ice volume is actually the residual of much larger opposing regional trends."

Sep 16, 2014
Run I know that you are smarter than that. Does this look like a short term decline?

http://www.ijis.i...ev_L.png

Political agendas go both ways. I suggest that you review your preconceived notions.

MR:
That graph shows that there were only 5/6 years in which the summer minimum Arctic sea-ice extent was lower.
Do you really expect every year to be lower than the previous. weather impacts ice melt too you know.
Look at how many years in the last 6 that the minimum extent has been ~3SD's below (the already falling) trend line, - which means ~0.2% chance of occurring (in a normal distribution).
Please point out to me where there is any trend up and away from the long-term falling trend.
http://neven1.typ...c970d-pi

Sep 16, 2014
Huge advance made in biodegradable construction.

http://www.breitb...bustible

Sep 16, 2014
Huge advance made in biodegradable construction.

http://www.breitb...bustible


Typical troll. Lose the arguement, go off topic.

Sep 16, 2014
Hey Vet while we are off topic what do you think of the POTUS making all of the sacrifices of all of the Iraq vets meaningless by withdrawing all of our troops and ceding power to ISIS?

Sep 16, 2014
Hey Vet while we are off topic what do you think of the POTUS making all of the sacrifices of all of the Iraq vets meaningless by withdrawing all of our troops and ceding power to ISIS?


You are off topic but more important is that you are an ignorant asshole.

Sep 17, 2014
MR166 betrayed his agenda with this admission
Hey Vet while we are off topic what do you think of...
This is you in a nutshell & your various cousins - off topic at the drop of a hat !

Poke and retreat with your tail between your legs - no counter hypothesis ever..!

Science is also about attention & convergence, it is wise to be tenacious to address any core issue to understand the myriad opinions & upon what they are based & on some minor issues that I take it we are agreed, in so far as; Properties of GHGs, properties of water, specific heat etc

So MR166, wouldn't it be smarter to delve into the detail and move forward no like some static robot poking ! - if you did this with a mandatory feel, then this is smarter then you wouldn't poke time-wasting narrow items that go nowhere.

Then you might actually learn some higher ideals of being a real Scientist ie. Integrity !

Please exercise any remnants of a latent skill MR166 to separate idle opinion from truth.

Sep 17, 2014
@Mike_Massen

Well said. Again!

If anyone doubts or cares to learn more about the complex dynamics of Antarctic sea ice they should read Sir Ernest Shackleton's South. His descriptions of the bizarre behaviour of sea ice at the mercy of the forces of wind, current, precipitation, and sea floor topography and the depth of difference between seasons and years is remarkable. Not to mention its a great story of courage and survival.

With all the variables its amazing that any predictions or measurements can be made at all.

A very fascinating and precious place.

Sep 17, 2014
http://notrickszo...ice-age/

It's the sun guys not CO2.



Sep 17, 2014
Yeah, so the CAGW hypothesis posits that the tropical troposphere will heat faster than any other area and that the heat will transfer itself from the equatorial regions poleward. Following this hypothesis then sea ice further away from the poles will melt first and then the melting will hit the poles.
Well, Antarctic sea ice--naturally closer to the equator--is increasing AND Arctic sea ice is massively rebounding from "all-time record lows"(satellite era lows only by the way).

Now, with all of this "well understood" climatological modeling we have been spoon fed the notion that we are all at increasingly imperiled risk due to "well understood" "consensus" driven by "well understood" models which happen to NOT actually predict what has happened. And now we are being told that anything that happens was "well understood" only after such things happen...like dramatic rise in Antarctic sea ice and rebounding Arctic sea ice.

No sane person believes this crap.

Sep 17, 2014
And, if scientists are "not confounded by Antarctic ice" can you please point me in the direction of ANY SINGLE ALARMIST WHO PREDICTED THAT ANTARCTIC ICE WOULD GROW?

Please, just one...any one scientist who did predict this as being even a possibility.

One person in the entire field of people you claim as "climate scientists" who made the claim that Antarctic Ice would be at record levels in 2014.

Oh, and this link has to be someone who "predicted" this as happening. Not someone today looking back and saying "oh yeah, consistent!! Yes, yes, consistent with what we already said about polar ice caps melting that the polar ice caps are growing!!" whooooWhat?!?!

Sep 17, 2014
Yeah, so the CAGW hypothesis posits that the tropical troposphere will heat faster than any other area and that the heat will transfer itself from the equatorial regions poleward.
Well, Antarctic sea ice--naturally closer to the equator--is increasing AND Arctic sea ice is massively rebounding from "all-time record lows"(satellite era lows only by the way).

Now, with all of this "well understood" climatological modeling we have been spoon fed the notion that we are all at increasingly imperiled risk due to "well understood" "consensus" driven by "well understood" models which happen to NOT actually predict what has happened. And now we are being told that anything that happens was "well understood" only after such things happen...like dramatic rise in Antarctic sea ice and rebounding Arctic sea ice.

No sane person believes this crap.


Agreed. I don't believe any of the crap written above either.

Sep 17, 2014
And, if scientists are "not confounded by Antarctic ice" can you please point me in the direction of ANY SINGLE ALARMIST WHO PREDICTED THAT ANTARCTIC ICE WOULD GROW?

Please, just one...any one scientist who did predict this as being even a possibility.

One person in the entire field of people you claim as "climate scientists" who made the claim that Antarctic Ice would be at record levels in 2014.

Oh, and this link has to be someone who "predicted" this as happening. Not someone today looking back and saying "oh yeah, consistent!! Yes, yes, consistent with what we already said about polar ice caps melting that the polar ice caps are growing!!" whooooWhat?!?!


Well I'm not a scientist but I have always expected a chaotic variability period as the earth's inter-oceanic and atmospheric currents transition to a new paradigm caused by increased temperatures.

That you expected a smooth upward temperature transition is a result of your own lazy thinking and nothing more.

Sep 17, 2014
Gaelan you just do not understand "Climate Science". It is an evolving field and by that I mean there is absolutely no climate or weather phenomenon that can occur that would disprove that CO2 contributes to warming! No matter how small the contribution it still contributes. Of course warming is "bad" and cooling is good as proved by the "wonderful" advancement of societies that occurred during the the "Little Ice Age" in Europe.

The AGW movement refuses to concede the fact that warm is better than cold to the survival of mankind.

Sep 17, 2014
OMG increased CO2 could be causing the forests to grow.

http://phys.org/n...ter.html

Sep 17, 2014
Gaelan you just do not understand "Climate Science". It is an evolving field and by that I mean there is absolutely no climate or weather phenomenon that can occur that would disprove that CO2 contributes to warming! No matter how small the contribution it still contributes. Of course warming is "bad" and cooling is good as proved by the "wonderful" advancement of societies that occurred during the the "Little Ice Age" in Europe.

The AGW movement refuses to concede the fact that warm is better than cold to the survival of mankind.

Nearly right MR... but no cigar.
It's a matter of degree - we had the optimum ... and it will tip over to ...


Sep 17, 2014
OMG increased CO2 could be causing the forests to grow.

http://phys.org/n...ter.html


Only where it rains sufficiently.

Sep 17, 2014
"Nearly right MR... but no cigar.
It's a matter of degree - we had the optimum ... and it will tip over to..."

Ah, there in lies the problem.

Any change at all must be stopped no matter what the economic cost. Social justice requires that energy users share their wealth.

Sep 17, 2014
Agreed. I don't believe any of the crap written above either.

Oh lookee, the rockturd.
Well, I didn't believe the AGW Cult was desperate enough to recruit turds, until you showed up.

Sep 17, 2014
@GaelenClark:
It is not hard to predict ice growth as a result of adding heat:

Here's three scenarios, that I am by no means claiming is correct:
1. It's snowing more than usual there; more warm moist is allowed to be driven farther than before because
2. Cold nonsaline and so less dense water is melting off the inland, or from underneath surfacing and re-freezing. Melting ice from below zero absorbs amazing amounts of heat.
3. The wind has changed to a more constant western wind and is efficiently transferring cold from inland to the shores.

All of these can result from AGW phenomena.


Sep 17, 2014
Agreed. I don't believe any of the crap written above either.

Oh lookee, the rockturd.
Well, I didn't believe the AGW Cult was desperate enough to recruit turds, until you showed up.


What you believe or do not believe is totally irrelevant considering how monumentally stupid you are. I mean who really cares about anything you have to say?

Your efforts at insulting - total failure.

Your efforts at refuting AGW - total failure.

Your life - total failure.

Sucks to be you eh?

Do better ignoracle.

Sep 17, 2014
MR166 seems didn't learn basic plant biology in primary school
OMG increased CO2 could be causing the forests to grow.
http://phys.org/n...ter.html
Shocked aye, I can tell its new to you but, bear in mind the vast majority of those studying in various fields interested in climate related topics are already well up to speed. So who are you addressing your blurts to; people of the same level of politics or interested in mindless one liners as you ?

MR166 next time you feel compelled to post a quote, try not to make it from a journalist, smarter to go to the journal link they rely on & in English would be best otherwise it's another case of propaganda, ie Someone said what some else said - does you no credit.

It would also have been smarter to look up the actual data & not be lazy relying on runrig, you are often like a pest seeking attention, so much like ryggesogn2, u related ?

Science please, with some forethought, smarter posts & ON TOPIC please :-)

Sep 18, 2014
MR166 with another pointless redneck type blurt
Ah, there in lies the problem.
Any change at all must be stopped no matter what the economic cost. Social justice requires that energy users share their wealth.
You really are no good at making things up, which climate science groups or their spokespeople have ever 'said' this ?

Where is the published article, the journal, the author's credentials ?

Making things up to post looks as if you Need to have fun with yourself we know what that is called. Its no fun and boring for us to put up with your rants, I am taking the trouble to get you to be smarter & lift your game. When you get no response from me then you will know you have reached your asymptote - the maximum level of incompetence which matches your dwindling desire to improve yourself...

Be smarter yeah ? Post the actual papers from climate scientists, meteorologists etc & if compelled then post contrary views with some form of thoughtful analysis - that's how its done !

Sep 18, 2014
"MR166 seems didn't learn basic plant biology in primary school"

How is that Alzheimers treating you Mike? You inability to remember to remember climate/vegitation predictions of the recient past is really beginning to concern me.

Sep 18, 2014
"MR166 seems didn't learn basic plant biology in primary school"

How is that Alzheimers treating you Mike? You inability to remember to remember climate/vegitation predictions of the recient past is really beginning to concern me.


You're accusing Mike of having Alzheimer's? Priceless.

remember to remember to remember to remember that vegetation only has one " i " in it and recent has none.

Sep 18, 2014
OOOps, you got me there Rock.

Sep 19, 2014
MR166 proves significant cognitive deficit with
How is that Alzheimers treating you Mike? You inability to remember to remember climate/vegitation predictions of the recient..
If you were really concerned then link to the article to show u are smart. Be careful here MR166 my mother died of alzheimers, I am deeply aware of the condition & means to ameliorate. Your choice of grammar in conjunction with massive inability to spell simple words is very sad.

What is clear is you have great difficulty appreciating best protocols for posting in a Science forum, you should already KNOW to link to actual data instead of making useless claims. Just because you have some ability to string a few words together like a toddler doesn't make them substantive.

Which particular 'climate/vegetation' predictions do you imagine I've forgotten about & when, any that are from actual peer reviewed journal links ?

Despite multiple university qualifications I don't claim to be a Climate Scientist !

Sep 19, 2014
"MR166 seems didn't learn basic plant biology in primary school"

Mike I am sorry to hear about your mother. I do tend to become abrasive when called an idiot.

Can you at least admit that there is an awful amount of hyperbole and propaganda being put out by the government and biased media about global warming?

Sep 19, 2014
remember to remember to remember to remember that vegetation only has one " i " in it and recent has none.
--rockturd
Wow!!
Who'd have thunk it, the little rockturd can use a spellchecker.

Sep 19, 2014
remember to remember to remember to remember that vegetation only has one " i " in it and recent has none.
--rockturd
Wow!!
Who'd have thunk it, the little rockturd can use a spellchecker.


Certainly not you considering that thinking is something you've repeatedly demonstrated is beyond your capacity.

Are you sure you don't have any more 20 year old data to share with us ignoracle?

Sep 20, 2014
MR166 muttered
I do tend to become abrasive when called an idiot.
In context with idiocy/stupidity, what was the phrase offered in the film "Forrest Gump" ?

& the other which should apply to you "Run MR, Run MR.." :-)

MR166 asked (for a change)
Can you at least admit that there is an awful amount of hyperbole and propaganda being put out by the government and biased media about global warming?
Although I tend to be selective in my reading, I do browse the daily press also & no I haven't seen government put out much hyperbole at all, esp financial review.

Only palpable "bias" I have seen is popular media taking any chance they can get from even the hint of a story to bias readers to BUY their publications.

As there is far more evidence for real global [atmosphere, oceans, ice & land] warming then its obvious & already in the public perception, especially here in Australia (unlike US odd climate), that media chase/follow thus appearing biased when they are only a business !

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more