Excellent reply.

I will await your evidence re WUWT and storm reporting - I will make sure that I look in from time to time!

Your lack of an answer would suggest I was correct - you spout bollox and pretend it is fact.

"The fraudsters on Wattsup were pretending more storms were predicted" Really - I would be genuinely interested for you to show where WUWT pointed fingers at the IPCC in this regard. And genuinely interested for you to also show where WUWT have made fraudulent claims regarding more storms. Or is it...

What an image! http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/NPEO2013/WEBCAM2/ARCHIVE/npeo_cam2_20130719193545.jpg Melt pond at/near the North Pole. Ahem.... How close is "near"? Well, if 300 miles is near ...... http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/07/29/al-gores-reality-minions-think-the-north-pole-is-melti...

So, neither indomite or the bipolar bear have read the links - good on you!

About right for the alarmists - all hot air but no f**king substance!

Ho hum.

Bill, how do you respond to the article I posted on the previous page where a study (that was peer reviewed and followed due scientific process) :lol: :lol: :lol: concluded that 97% of all scientists hold the consensus that global warming is real AND is caused by man. You can post all you want abou...

So, even the Met Office now admit they don't know!! http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2013/04/08/met-offices-private-briefing-document-for-the-environment-agency/ And for the pillock who SO hates me for doing it ... http://wattsupwiththat.com/ To help with your desperately needed educatio...

Ho hum .... haven't been around for ages and won't be again for some time but just for interest re ocean heat ..... http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/02/25/fact-check-for-andrew-glickson-ocean-heat-has-paused-too/#more-80649 http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/02/25/ocean-temperature-and-heat-content/#mor...

Well, actually, it would appear that the storm did have a lot to do with it! Slightly inconvenient eh slowy! And whilst there is still alot of research that would need doing, it seems there might well be a polar/bi-polar correlation between the two poles and their respective sea ice levels. But keep...

Hi Slowy

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/videogal ... =152489941 .......

..... and for comparison, down south .......

http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress. ... ctic21.png

The Antarctic has almost half a million sq kilometers more sea ice in September than in August. To say that's unprecedented is an understatement. Something very strange (and not at all reassuring) is happening at the poles. To say that's unprecedented is an understatement And you base that staement...

The clue is on the page you reference Groucho!!

And you have the temerity to have pops at Bill!!

August

September

2 different months eh!

Yes. I guess you're buying into the Steve McIntyre conspiracy fantasy. You seem remarkably up to date on the latest Wattsup folderol for someone who wasn't even aware of the change in tree-growth a few posts ago. Google is indeed your friend. :lol: :lol: You really have got to the point these days ...

Tell me Groucho - would that Briffa paper be the one based around the Yamal tree ring series? Just asking.

It's not dishonest at all. Really - that is an interesting take on the falsehood that they perpertrated. But given that 'anything goes' when alarmists try to justify their corner, I don't suppose that we should be surprised. Proxies are used in statistics in this way all the time. Otherwise we woul...

Well thanks very much for that. The truth what this thread sorely needed after all the corrupt scientific rubbish that has been posted. I'm sure the whole bored joins me in expressing our deep gratitude to you for gracing us with your presence and setting us all straight So slow, apart from ignorin...

Well its just heart-warming to first see Getrucked taking such a scholarly interest in the Arctic sea ice satellites of the early '70s I have spoken about this on a number of occasions in the past - you have just refused to acknowledge it! And I find it 'humorous' because 30+ years is so insignific...

Are you REALLY putting that forward as some sort of irrefutable evidence slow? Really?

Record low Arctic sea ice area for the entire satellite era All 33 years of satellite reporting :lol: :lol: :lol: Although satellite readings were available from the early 70s onwards - I wonder why such info is not quoted by the 'chicken lickens'? Hmm - I wonder what the sea ice area was in the ye...

I take it that you have not read the actual paper. ftp://dossier.ogp.noaa.gov/NCASLR/Publications/Chen%20et%20al%20(2011)%20JGR%20GIS%20interannual%20variability%20.pdf I really think that yourself and wattsupwithatt are reading entirely too much into fig 7a. Are you not over projecting the signifi...

Hmm I haven't had a chance to read Mad S's linked paper from 2009 but I have read a more recent study (2011) by J. L. Chen et al that shows: - a dramatic slow down of ice loss in southeast Greenland - that Glaciers in northwest Greenland dominate the ice loss since 2007 The study concludes that Gree...

Is this your most promising line of attack? Lift your game.

Is that your best answer - you bloody fraud!!

So where does Watts Up come into it then Groucho?

What Groucho ....

This ESA?

http://www.esa.int/esaLP/SEMT6UGY50H_index_0.html

So where did "Watts Up' come into it then?

Yet another Wattsup fraud

Perhaps you could reference that - or is that just another Groucho fraud.

Shame you don't read 'Wattsup' Easyray - you might learn something. And to bring up hypocritical claims re funding about sums up the extremely low level of your argument!

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/25/p ... -the-beef/

Ho hum ....

As I say, where did I quote an IPCC document using the word peak!! Just read the f**king document. And re your last graph - perhaps I can use the same source The monthly variability in this historic record of sea ice extent over the Northern Hemisphere is shown in Figure 1 above. The annual cycle va...

Garbage. Show me an IPCC document that says 1979 was a ‘peak’ for sea-ice extent. Any document Dear oh dear - where did I say that. What I suggest you do is get that poker out of your arse, read the document, look at the diagrams in FAR WG1 and note the sea-ice extent for 1974 /75. And for 1979. Su...

Complete gibberish. Suggest you take that up with the IPCC. Ask them about the 1990 IPCC report, particularly the IPCC FAR WG1 report! Perhaps you should read it yourself first though so as not to make a complete twat of yourself! (hint to Slowy – read that document) And, as far as I am aware, I ha...

Of course, one could query why 1979 has been taken as the reference point for satellite-derived sea-ice data. There was robust satellite data prior to 1979, once commonly used by even the IPCC. Surely it wouldn’t be that 1979 was a ‘peak’ for sea-ice extent and that if you take the data back a decad...

Of course, one could query why 1979 has been taken as the reference point for satellite-derived sea-ice data. There was robust satellite data prior to 1979, once commonly used by even the IPCC. Surely it wouldn’t be that 1979 was a ‘peak’ for sea-ice extent and that if you take the data back a decad...