Growth In Multi-Year Ice Since Week 37, 2012

Green shows multi-year ice which is present now, but wasn’t present in week 37, 2012.

ScreenHunter_101 Nov. 07 12.58

About stevengoddard

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

15 Responses to Growth In Multi-Year Ice Since Week 37, 2012

  1. Alain Jain says:

    Multi-year ice is ice that has been around for one year?

  2. Billy Liar says:

    That’s shocking. What if the same happens next year?

  3. Andy says:

    How old is that multiyear sea ice in green measured in months ? From your 2012 to 2013 comparison it seems to be about 12 months, which is 1 year, unless I am very much mistaken.

    And 12 months is 1 year. So how can 1 year be multi year ? Unless 1 is more than 1 ?

    You cannot say there is a massive increase in multiyear ice when comparing ice that did not exist 1 year ago. That ice is 1 year old by default,

    This is nonsensical

    Andy

  4. Andy says:

    Ice that has appeared since 12 months ago cannot be multi year by pure logic. It can be maximum 1 year old.

    It’s you who needs to show WTF you are talking about in this instance. Doesn’t make sense. Stop trying to grab headlines when none exists.

    Rest of your blog postings today are ok though.

    Andy

    • ROFL. The ice was present 12 months ago, but was not multi-year ice yet.

      • Steve, while not ambiguous, the headline can lead the undiscerning reader to misconstrue your point. “wasn’t present in week 37, 2012” apparently leads the casual reader to miss the math and interpret, as Andy did, that it wasn’t present at all; when in fact, you’re saying it wasn’t present as “multi-year” ice. Dumb it down a bit damn it!

    • markstoval says:

      Damn Andy, how dense can you get anyway? The graph shows growth in multi-year ice just that that big old headline says. Hard to understand? Jesus, Joseph, and Mary!

    • Blade says:

      Andy [November 7, 2013 at 10:01 pm] says:

      Ice that has appeared since 12 months ago cannot be multi year by pure logic. It can be maximum 1 year old.

      It may not be “pure” logic but it is a normal age counting method.

      How old are you the day before and the day after your birthday?

  5. @njsonw fan. says:

    Some one needs to put up ice dam at the Farm straights, Multi year ice is pouring out into waters that will melt it quickly.

  6. Louis Hooffstetter says:

    And this is from Dr. Death Spiral’s bunch (Mark Serreze- NSIDC at the University of Colorado).

    It’s probably much worse (for them) than we think.

  7. Bob Knows says:

    Ice is ice. The regression to “multi year ice” is a lie that uses old data as an excuse to ignore how cold and frozen the Arctic is this year. Lies and lies. “Multi-year ice” is a lie and a misdirection.

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