Tom Gardner wrote:
On Jan 10, 11:59 pm, T8 wrote:

Oh, dear...http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...DAVID-ROSE-The...


A good rule of thumb with the Daily Wail is that if it
says X is true then don't merely regard X as unproven, but
do regard not-X as true.

And along those lines, be sure to read what the US National Snow and Ice
Data Centre in Colorado, a source they reference, says regarding 2009:

"Arctic sea ice extent remains low; 2009 sees third-lowest mark"

"We still expect to see ice-free summers sometime in the next few decades.”

"Arctic sea ice extent at end of December 2009 remained below normal"

"The linear rate of decline for December is now 3.3% per decade."

"Despite the cool summer, the ice remained thin and vulnerable at the
sea ice minimum, with little of the older, thicker ice that used to
characterize much of the Arctic."

"Only 19 percent of the ice cover was over 2 years old, the least in the
satellite record and far below the 1981-2000 average of 52 percent."

No good news there, unfortunately, despite The Mail's spin on it.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly