You say you believe in science but you present no science, you present only 'lol's and 'ol geezer'...good for you, mr smartypants
nah - as opposed to those of us who believe in scientific evidence.
so you reckon that AGW Deniers aren't rich ???
the planet's most famous Denier - mr Trump ?
& his Republican party fellow Deniers ????
not to mention the fossil fuel millionaires.
don't think too many of these geezers are short of a shilling, mr Iarmuid ?
wealthy Deniers, indeed deniers, millionaires or paupers, are not so thick on the ground, this side of the Atlantic.
there is however a group of em in GB - mainly looney rightie titled gentlemen.
Lord ……..... ahem .……….. Christopher Moncton is perhaps the most infamous of them.
& in our own dear country - there's a handful of em among the brethren in our NE counties.
you "go with" with em, ol geezer - nobody is holding you back !!!
Yes yes, we know you don't know how to read a graph, no need to labour the point.
You brushed past this....here's what you said about models......."as for myself - I have posted hundreds of comments on AGW, & i'm pretty sure that I never based anything I said on computer models"
Then you posted a graph from PIOMAS, what do you think the M stands for??
You have my permission to continue pretending you're not making a fool of yourself now, oh make sure you put at least one LOL in there!
Seems to show a slight rise in Arctic ice, Dearghoul?
sorry - more bad news for you Rasher.
the above graph of Artic Sea Ice was posted by none other than the disputed King of the Deniers here on P.ie - none other than ol Breeal himself.
& an expert reader of graphs like yourself will see that ol Breeal's graph shows a loss of c. 14 million cubic. km., or c. 70% of Artic sea ice over the 40 years of satellite monitoring !!!!
I know Rasher that it may not be of much solace to you, but the graph does show a significant increase in Artic Sea Ice between 1981 & 1985.
& if your & ol Breeal's hero, the conman Tony Heller was commenting on the graph, he'd tell you that there was more Artic Sea Ice in 1995 than there was in 1981.
& sure he might even throw in for good measure, a few newspaper cuttings as further evidence of an increase in sea ice, although he has also told you that you can't believe anything you read in the newspapers. LOL !!!
Very unclear what you are showing me there, you've no heading, no link to source, it's a complete departure from your former graph. It's almost as if you want to disguise whatever it is you are trying to say.
don't know why you're asking an Alarmist like me, Rasher ?
where's your God, Tony Heller, when you need him ?
maybe the above will e of assistance ?
I just got that graph from Wiki.Very unclear what you are showing me there, you've no heading, no link to source, it's a complete departure from your former graph. It's almost as if you want to disguise whatever it is you are trying to say.
The NMI graph I imaged above shows no change in sea ice over the past ten years.
Heller points out that NOAA begin their loss of sea ice graph in 1979 because it is the coldest greatest sea ice mass on record, so naturally the graph will all flow down hill from there.
Of course if they purposefully did that it would be in order to fool people like you into believing there is a catastrophe about to happen and they could therefore cash in.
You don't have any fears that that is what NOAA did do you?
I reckon that the Norwegian Meteorological Institute are correct.According to the Norwegian Meteorological Institute there is little or no change in sea ice volume in the past ten years...
I don't buy the 'satellite' excuse, there was data for the period prior to 1979, and you have to admit it's very suspicious that 79 was the greatest extent of sea ice in the recent past and that's exactly when NOAA start their graph, so that it gives a fake reading showing a rapid decrease when that is far from the whole story.I just got that graph from Wiki.
there are plenty of good sites out there on Artic Ice, so do your own research, Rasher.
I think that you'll find that Artic Ice extent remained fairy stable until c. 1950s - it must however have been hard to estimate it before the satellite era.
you say - Heller points out that NOAA begin their loss of sea ice graph in 1979 because it is the coldest greatest sea ice mass on record.
does he say that Rasher ? - doesn't surprise me - how many times did I tell you that he's a conman ?
did it occur to you at all, at all, that satellite monitoring commenced in 1979 & that that might have had something to do with it ?
& BTW Rasher, what data did Heller give you for the 1960s/70s - you know before "the coldest greatest" 1979 ??
you ran away again - you're unable to address my last comments, as I told you before in relation to previous comments.