Yeah - stuff like that's a pity, but I think Neven is far more respected worldwide than Goddard! Q - I get the same things pass my mind - David Rose gets 150,000 pageviews and my most popular SkS pieces get 20,000. I try to console myself with the notion that the Mail readers are mostly looking at the pictures!

Tabloids: someone fortuitously pointed out this morning: The Sun Says: Muslim women shouldn't wear veils (Page one); for more about what women should wear see The Sun (page three). It's a nasty, spiteful old world out there!

I have another one. Brian Gaze vs James madden. I expect in a couple of weeks the express will be predicting -28C by October the 3rd. Btw SKS is actually a really awesome website, I particularly like how you have basic, intermediate and expert sections. So its not just for the refutation but its also for pure climate education. To be fair though, I think the media storm was worse back in 2008 than it is now, apart from the mail it hasn't really been anywhere else. The telegraph mentioned it, but it was basically just one long quote from the mail; and they made up for that by doing a great piece a few days later. 

 

Skeptical Science is really good if you like your information distorted.

-------------------

Like where the climate models are right on target so far.

And the 90% of the Warming is Going into the Oceans.

 

Yeah - stuff like that's a pity, but I think Neven is far more respected worldwide than Goddard! Q - I get the same things pass my mind - David Rose gets 150,000 pageviews and my most popular SkS pieces get 20,000. I try to console myself with the notion that the Mail readers are mostly looking at the pictures!

Tabloids: someone fortuitously pointed out this morning: The Sun Says: Muslim women shouldn't wear veils (Page one); for more about what women should wear see The Sun (page three). It's a nasty, spiteful old world out there!

I have another one. Brian Gaze vs James madden. I expect in a couple of weeks the express will be predicting -28C by October the 3rd. Btw SKS is actually a really awesome website, I particularly like how you have basic, intermediate and expert sections. So its not just for the refutation but its also for pure climate education. To be fair though, I think the media storm was worse back in 2008 than it is now, apart from the mail it hasn't really been anywhere else. The telegraph mentioned it, but it was basically just one long quote from the mail; and they made up for that by doing a great piece a few days later. 

 

Skeptical Science is really good if you like your information distorted.

 

Having seen that distorted picture of Dr Jones you posted I think that's rich.

---

Any chance of sticking to discussing the state of the Arctic Sea ice (rather than the usual petty squabbling)?

For clarification that is not in direct reply to the above message but rather to the entire irrelevant, seemingly ubiquitous petty name calling that IMO destroys this and many other forums. 😄

---

Any chance of sticking to discussing the state of the Arctic Sea ice (rather than the usual petty squabbling)? For clarification that is not in direct reply to the above message but rather to the entire irrelevant, seemingly ubiquitous petty name calling that IMO destroys this and many other forums. 😄

I'd welcome that!

---

Just a quick diversion in that I would point out to Bill that the important points we make at SkS are referenced. This means that the reader may follow the links and check out the literature for themselves, and wherever possible we link to full PDF copies of papers. If you think that is distortion, so be it, I suppose.

Now, has minimum been called across the board yet?

Now, has minimum been called across the board yet?

I'd say probably rather than definitely.

---

Just a quick diversion in that I would point out to Bill that the important points we make at SkS are referenced. This means that the reader may follow the links and check out the literature for themselves, and wherever possible we link to full PDF copies of papers. If you think that is distortion, so be it, I suppose. Now, has minimum been called across the board yet?

Does SkS also reference, contrary, research papers which would actually support some skepticism? - there perhaps lies the nub??

---

Yes, if we decide to write about them. There aren't that many though, despite oft-made claims. And we also criticise over-alarmism - such as recent stuff regarding Arctic methane hydrate catastrophism.

OK NSDIC press release out.

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

Excellent read as always. Ill summarise the most important points below:

• NW passage did not open this year


• N passage did


• Above average September temperatures


• Climate models predict large year-year variation. 2013 should not be too suprising.


• Cold tempertures prevalled during the summer over the CAA and greenland (no mention of any records though)


• SSTs above average


• Record antartic sea ice

---

Context often helps!

Context often helps!

Sorry, it was just a summary 

I suggest everyone read the press release for themseleves. I personally look forward to them every month. 

---

Yes, if we decide to write about them. There aren't that many though, despite oft-made claims. And we also criticise over-alarmism - such as recent stuff regarding Arctic methane hydrate catastrophism.

I have for a long time posted links for new research which would question high senstivity to CO2 doubling and on this issue alone, there have been several pieces of research only recently published (see Judith Curry's blog).

Have SkS contributors, yet written about the questions raised on the subject of sensitivity? Or indeed, thought about writing a piece on the recent research?

---

Lots of articles on sensitivity and the attendant uncertainties - go and take a look!

Snow in the arctic is now above average, unlike last year where it was still below. In fact there is some snow unusually far south in parts of canada, russia and even iceland. This may interest winter forecastors more than sea ice watchers. 

---

Snow in the arctic is now above average, unlike last year where it was still below. In fact there is some snow unusually far south in parts of canada, russia and even iceland. This may interest winter forecastors more than sea ice watchers. 

I made the same point four days ago - here   - it's as though the usual stage of snow cover build up along Arctic coastal lands has been skipped.

---

You get snow on the ice cap in Iceland all year.

Snow in the arctic is now above average, unlike last year where it was still below. In fact there is some snow unusually far south in parts of canada, russia and even iceland. This may interest winter forecastors more than sea ice watchers. 

The snow cover in central Canada probably won't interest sea ice watchers - it's over a thousand miles away LOL.

Sorry for what may sound like a really stupid question. Most of the south end of Portsea Island is at or even just below sea level. The average high tide mark on the sea wall in Old Portsmouth has been in the same position for over three hundred years. The stone built quay is still being used today. If, year on year, temperatures are rising along with sea levels, why is most of Portsmouth not under water?

---

Snow in the arctic is now above average, unlike last year where it was still below. In fact there is some snow unusually far south in parts of canada, russia and even iceland. This may interest winter forecastors more than sea ice watchers. 

The snow cover in central Canada probably won't interest sea ice watchers - it's over a thousand miles away LOL.

Sorry for what may sound like a really stupid question. Most of the south end of Portsea Island is at or even just below sea level. The average high tide mark on the sea wall in Old Portsmouth has been in the same position for over three hundred years. The stone built quay is still being used today. If, year on year, temperatures are rising along with sea levels, why is most of Portsmouth not under water?

Isn't SE England still sinking, post ice age? I can't remember the rate but maybe the sinking is cancelling out the rise?

I think it's also the case the sea level doesn't rise at the same rate everywhere. Or, indeed that the sea level is the same everywhere?

---

Snow in the arctic is now above average, unlike last year where it was still below. In fact there is some snow unusually far south in parts of canada, russia and even iceland. This may interest winter forecastors more than sea ice watchers. 

The snow cover in central Canada probably won't interest sea ice watchers - it's over a thousand miles away LOL.

Sorry for what may sound like a really stupid question. Most of the south end of Portsea Island is at or even just below sea level. The average high tide mark on the sea wall in Old Portsmouth has been in the same position for over three hundred years. The stone built quay is still being used today. If, year on year, temperatures are rising along with sea levels, why is most of Portsmouth not under water?

Bad luck? 😝

Seriously though, I think there are regional variations in the overall rate of sea level rises. Perhaps the UK waters, or at least some of them have been effected to a lesser extent (so far)? That's just a guess though. I belie pave the data are out there, including global maps but I haven't looked at them before writing this.

I would have thought that the gradual lowering of land mass in the south may have made a difference too but perhaps these are all within the range which would be masked by large changes associated with tidal flows or storm surges etc. ?

Edit: Peter wouldn't the land mass in the south sinking actually exacerbate the effects of sea level rises?

---

Snow in the arctic is now above average, unlike last year where it was still below. In fact there is some snow unusually far south in parts of canada, russia and even iceland. This may interest winter forecastors more than sea ice watchers. 

The snow cover in central Canada probably won't interest sea ice watchers - it's over a thousand miles away LOL.

Sorry for what may sound like a really stupid question. Most of the south end of Portsea Island is at or even just below sea level. The average high tide mark on the sea wall in Old Portsmouth has been in the same position for over three hundred years. The stone built quay is still being used today. If, year on year, temperatures are rising along with sea levels, why is most of Portsmouth not under water?

That's interesting Neil. In Guernsey there are similar marks but they indicate the half tide. They were moved three times to different locations the last one being during the Occuptaion. They are useful marks as parts of the Harbour dry at low water and using the rule of twelths it's quite easy to quickly calculate which berths are available depending on water availability. Our harbour is not quite as old as yours but the sea hasn't made any more frequent ingress over the walls since it was built either. Mind, nobody can tell me why we don't get E'ly gales during Spring tides.