Julienne Schmoozing On The Greenpeace Cruise

The record minimum extent is now likely to be formally called on Monday by the US National Snow and Ice Data Centre (NSIDC) in Colorado.

No doubt they will also make a huge hoopla about the Antarctic record maximum, where most of the world’s sea ice is located.

The staggering decline of sea ice at the frontline of climate change Scientists on board Greenpeace’s vessel exploring the minimum extent of the ice cap are shocked at the speed of the melt

The staggering increase in BS triggered by the August winter storm.

“In the 1970s we had 8m sq km of sea ice. That has been halved. We need it in the summer. It has never decreased like this before”.  “We knew the ice was getting thinner but I did not expect we’d lose this much this year. We broke the record by a lot”, says the NSIDC scientist Julienne Stroeve.

“The acceleration of the loss of the extent of the ice is mostly because the ice has been so thin. This would explain why it has melted so much this year. By June the ice edge had pulled back to where it normally is in September,” she says.

Very naughty – NSIDC maps show that ice extent in the western Arctic was “normal” in June. Julienne knows perfectly well that the big drop occurred in mid-August after the storm. She posted the information here.

N_201206_extn.png (420×500)

Sea ice extent has varied naturally over the decades with some Russian data suggesting similar or even greater ice loss in some local areas in the 1930s. But the models are clear, says Stroeve. If you omit the observed records, keeping CO2 levels at pre-industrial levels, then none show a decline of ice cover. When you do put CO2 into the models, they all show a decline, she says.

The staggering decline of sea ice at the frontline of climate change | Environment | guardian.co.uk

Russian data shows that the ice was just as thin in 1940 as it is now. Models did not predict the record amount of Antarctic sea ice.

http://trove.nla.gov.au/

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

23 Responses to Julienne Schmoozing On The Greenpeace Cruise

  1. Chewage says:

    She’s developed DRB Syndrome, for sure!

  2. kirkmyers says:

    This is another act of desperation by alarmists as they scramble to shore up their collapsing global warming theory. The fact is, there’s no hard evidence to support the hypothesis that man-made CO2 is warming the climate or melting ice at the poles. To generate a CO2 warming signal, scientists have had to tune their models while ignoring or minimizing natural factors (e.g. the sun, oceanic oscillations and clouds). Such behavior isn’t science; it’s science fiction.

    While arctic sea ice declines to a new minimum (based on observations that go back only to the late 1970s), antarctic sea ice continues to increase.

    Today’s CO2 molecules appear to be terribly choosy. They like to melt ice in the arctic, but are not the least bit interested in melting ice at the opposite pole. Obviously, they have a real hatred of the arctic.

    • “There’s no hard evidence…”

      This may surprise you, but a lot of scientific research is not based on “hard evidence”, if by that you mean such things as laboratory experimentation, due to the nature of the problem or question. Instead, multiple lines of evidence consistent with the theory are used as justification. This is not an illogical approach.

      However, the actual problem with “enhanced” greenhouse/AGW theory is that there are no multiple lines of evidence available to support the claims being made. In fact, the opposite is presently true.

  3. Glacierman says:

    So, using the model that was developed to show how CO2 affects ice, when CO2 is removed there is more ice, when it is increased it is decreased. Amazing bias conformation. The only thing they have is their models which were designed to show that CO2 will cause melting. Can they show exactly how increased CO2 has caused this? I think all they can really say is it is the only explanation so it must be correct. Well, it the only explanation they will even consider.

    NSIDC scientist on a Greenpeace junkett? That’s priceless, but not really surprising based on her comments here.

    • Richard T. Fowler says:

      I wonder if she used any oil-, gas-, coal-, peat-, food crop-, solid waste-, nuclear-, forest-, or conventional-hydro-based energy to move herself and her luggage to the point of embarkment.

      RTF

    • gator69 says:

      “So, using the model that was developed to show how CO2 affects ice, when CO2 is removed there is more ice, when it is increased it is decreased.”

      It is truly incredible how dishonest or stupid they are, either way it is utterly astounding.

  4. Andy DC says:

    Right after the Arctic storm in early August, Julienne wrote an interesting article that the storm brought up warm water from below the surface which caused unusual melt. Now that political expediency dictates othewise, the freak Arctic storm has been thrown under the bus. The melt is now due to thin ice.

  5. Blade says:

    Julienne is on a Greenpeace ship? For real? She must be laughing her ass off up there, fooling so many for so long.

    Perhaps others will finally wake up and realize she’s as much a phony as all the alleged scientists in the AGW cult, and stop treating her with kid gloves.

    I saw right through her non-partisan act of coy, emotional, soft-spoken questions. In fact I remember a few years back when she turned the scientific method on its head with her statement (paraphrased): “what would it take to be convinced of man’s influence.“.

    Nothing like starting with a conclusion ( ‘man’s influence’ ) and working backwards to convince others of that conclusion while brandishing the title of scientist as camouflage.

    Paul Ehrlich in a skirt.

  6. Julienne still has not responded ,(unless I have missed it) ,to my references pointing out that the Arctic, and Greenland in particular, have been warmer, with less ice, for much of the recent past.

  7. Bob Tisdale says:

    “But the models are clear, says Stroeve. If you omit the observed records, keeping CO2 levels at pre-industrial levels, then none show a decline of ice cover.”

    That’s a clear indication the models are faulty.

    • Glacierman says:

      Bingo.

      Her statements are antiscientific (“if you omit the observed records…..”). I can make a model that will show anything I want it to show. Clearly they have.

  8. Billy Liar says:

    So it’s not just the Canucks and the Russians who go out chopping up the ice in icebreakers; Greenpeace does it too! And they wonder where it’s all gone -it’s in little pieces in your wake you idiots.

    • Glacierman says:

      These zeolots act like Arctic ice is the most precious thing on the planet and loosing even one ice cube will doom us all (I guess they didn’t learn that water can freeze and the ice that is there is only a couple of years old – not left from the last ice age), yet when asked about the role of ice breakers to open water, and keep it open, they just act like its no big deal. It’s only a big deal to them if they can spin the data and reaction to it to get what they want – regulation and control of energy distribution. The ends justify the means to post-normal psuedo scientists.

      • Eric Webb says:

        Exactly right, there’s a reason why we have icebreakers. If we had an ice-free arctic, it would actually benefit ships passing through it, and would allow for faster and cheaper transportation of people and materials. This is something people like Julienne don’t want to admit.

  9. The CO2 ,Arctic Sea Ice connection is a bunch of BS. The AMO , being strongly in positive territory since 1994 , is the reason.

    If C02 ,were the reason, the same thing would be happening in Antarctica, which it is not. Antarctica is at record high Sea Ice which puts the CO2 connection to Sea Ice,in the trash where it belongs.

  10. Has anyone noticed the OHC model forecast. Another failure, in a constant string of failures. How many does it take???

  11. Jimbo says:

    “In the 1970s we had 8m sq km of sea ice. That has been halved. We need it in the summer. It has never decreased like this before”.

    Ice free Arctic during the Holocene
    http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2010.08.016
    http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007AGUFMPP11A0203F
    http://geology.geoscienceworld.org/cgi/content/abstract/21/3/227

  12. HL Mencken says:

    Where are the warmists this time around?
    Their voices are strangely silent.
    HL Mencken

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s