People send me stuff. This is an email solicitation claiming that if you send Avaaz £2 a week (About $3.07 USD at current exchange rate) they’ll somehow be able to help NSIDC’s Julienne Stroeve get started putting back that Arctic ice, much like as a previous subscriber, you may have given money to help dolphins from being sad (see below). There’s only 30 months left apparently, and salesmen operators are standing by to take your urgent call.
I wonder how much money Ms. Stroeve gets for endorsing this alarmist sales pitch, or maybe her name is being used to raise funds without her knowledge/permission? Inquiring minds want to know. What is most curious is that they don’t actually reference Stroeve’s papers or any NSIDC publications, only alarmist news stories.
Of course one only has to look at the WUWT Sea Ice page to note that sea ice disappears every summer, and comes back in the fall and winter. So, with summer just started, now is the perfect time to claim “vast areas of sea ice have disappeared” so as to snag money from the seasonally challenged. According to NASA and AP’s Seth Borenstein: “…after reviewing his own new data, NASA climate scientist Jay Zwally said: “At this rate, the Arctic Ocean could be nearly ice-free at the end of summer by 2012, much faster than previous predictions.” Well, that didn’t happen, so 2013 MUST be the year. No, wait, its 2015 now. Give while there’s still time!
I loved this line from the solicitation: Fatalism on climate change is not just futile, it’s also incompetent.
Dear Avaaz community,
This may be the most important email I’ve written to you. Scientists have found that vast areas of Arctic sea ice are disappearing, accelerating the destruction of our planet — it is a climate tipping point and we CAN stop it, if we act very fast, and all together. We have 30 months until the biggest climate summit ever. To win it, we need to blast out of the starting gate. Click below to pledge a donation of £2 to help us get there:
This may be the most important email I’ve ever written to you.
Scientist Julienne Stroeve has studied Arctic ice for decades. Every summer she travels north to measure how much ice has melted. She knows that climate change is melting the ice fast, but on her last trip, she couldn’t believe what she saw. Vast areas of Arctic ice have disappeared, beyond our worst expectations.
This is what the experts warned us about. As the earth warms, it creates many “tipping points” that accelerate the warming out of control. Warming thaws the Arctic sea ice, destroying the giant white ‘mirror’ that reflects heat back into space, which massively heats up the ocean, and melts more ice, and so on. We spin out of control. Already this year — storms, temperatures — everything is off the charts.
We CAN stop this, if we act very fast, and all together. And out of this extinction nightmare, we can pull one of the most inspiring futures for our children and grandchildren. A clean, green future in balance with the earth that gave birth to us.
We have 30 months until the Paris Summit, the meeting that world leaders have decided will determine the fate of our efforts to fight climate change. It might seem like a long time – it’s not. We have 30 months to get the right leaders in power, get them to that meeting, give them a plan, and hold them accountable. And it’s us vs. the oil companies, and fatalism. We can win, we must, but we need to blast out of the starting gate with pledges of just £2 per week until the summit — we’ll only process the donations if we hit our goal. For the world we dream of, let’s make it happen:
[donation link redacted]
Fatalism on climate change is not just futile, it’s also incompetent. The hour is late, but it is still absolutely within our power to stop this catastrophe, simply by shifting our economies from oil and coal to other sources of power. And doing so will bring the world together like never before, in a deep commitment and cooperation to protect our planetary home. It’s a beautiful possibility, and the kind of future Avaaz was born to create.
Facing this challenge will take heart, and hope, and also all the smarts we have. Here’s the plan:
1. Go Political: Elect Climate Leaders — 5 crucial countries have elections in the next 30 months. Let’s make sure the right people win, and with the right mandate. Avaaz is one of the only major global advocacy organizations that can be political. And since this fight will be won or lost politically, it could be at some points just us vs. the oil companies to decide who our politicians listen to.
2. Make Hollande a Hero — French President Francois Hollande will chair the Paris summit – a powerful position. We have to try every tactic and channel — his personal friends and family, his political constituency, his policy advisors — to make him the hero we need him to be to make the summit a success.
3. Take it to the Next Level — The scale of this crisis demands action that goes beyond regular campaigning. It’s time for powerful, direct, non-violent action, to capture imagination, convey moral urgency, and inspire people to act. Think Occupy.
4. Out the Spoilers — Billionaires like the Koch brothers and their oil companies are the major spoilers in climate change – funding junk science to confuse us and spending millions on misleading PR, while buying politicians wholesale. With investigative journalism and more, we need to expose and counter their horrifically irresponsible actions.
5. Define the Deal — Even in the face of planetary catastrophe, 195 governments in a room can be just incompetent. We need to invest in top quality policy advice to develop ingenious strategies, mechanisms, and careful compromises so that when the summit arrives, a critical mass of leaders are already bought in to a large part of the deal, and no one can claim that good solutions don’t exist.
We need tens of thousands of us to pledge small donations to blast out of the starting gate on this plan. The amount doesn’t matter as much as much as the choice – to hope, and to act:
[donation link redacted]
At the last major climate summit in Copenhagen 2009, we played a pivotal role in German and Japanese ‘climate’ elections, in shifting Brazilian policy, and in helping win a major global deal on financing, with rich countries promising $100 billion per year to poor countries to help them address climate change. Back then, Avaaz was 3 million people. After Copenhagen, we reflected that we needed to be a lot bigger to meet the challenge posed by climate change. Now, we’re 23 million, and growing by 1 million per month.
Climate change is the ultimate global collective action problem, requiring cooperation from every government in the world. And Avaaz is the ultimate collective action solution, with millions of us united in common vision across every nation. This is our time, to build a world for our children that’s beauty matches our dreams. Let’s get started.
With hope and appreciation for this amazing community,
Ricken and the entire Avaaz team
MORE INFORMATION:
With Arctic sea ice vulnerable, summer melt season begins briskly (The Christian Science Monitor)
Arctic sea ice levels to reach record low within days (Guardian)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/aug/23/arctic-sea-ice-record-low
Five Reasons We Need a New Global Agreement on Climate Change by 2015 (Switchboard NRDC)
http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/jschmidt/five_reasons_we_need_a_new_glo.html
The Doha climate talks were a start, but 2015 will be the moment of truth (The Guardian)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/10/doha-climate-talks-global-warming
Arctic sea ice melt disrupts weather patterns (NBC News)
The Arctic Ice “Death Spiral” (Slate)
Avaaz.org is a 22-million-person global campaign network that works to ensure that the views and values of the world’s people shape global decision-making. (“Avaaz” means “voice” or “song” in many languages.) Avaaz members live in every nation of the world; our team is spread across 18 countries on 6 continents and operates in 17 languages. Learn about some of Avaaz’s biggest campaigns here, or follow us on Facebook or Twitter.
You are getting this message because you signed “Save the Saddest Dolphins ” on 2011-xx-xx using the email address xxxxx@xxxx.com
h/t to reader “JP”
===========================================================
Now here’s the real kicker, Dr. Stroeve doesn’t think sea ice will disappear this summer. See her official forecast in the ARCUS June 2013 Sea Ice Outlook:
Of course, NSIDC may not care that Stroeve’s name is being used to raise money, after all, she has a current history of activism while employed there. Your tax dollars at work? This photo was taken on 09/11/2012:
Source: Greenpeace
I shall rush home, empty my freezer of ice and pack it in a polystyrene freezer box and send that to them instead. That will be much more useful for them.
[snip – too stupid to print, consider putting quotation marks around your user handle – mod]
I get their stuff too but this very solicitation angered me because it is stupid and without merit.Another scaremongering pap to read that has been wrong over and over but they never stop the drivel the next year.
They are another overt socialist group I have come to despise because they want to be the policeman pushing aside those who want to go through the legitimate channels to make their voices heard.
I allow the e-mail solicitaions to my inbox for the purpose of keeping tabs on them and their fundrasing drives to keep me amused at their arrogance on some of the things they want to do in the typical socialist drive “To make a better world”.
Just shows that there are at least 16,000 people on the planet who believe AGW scams. Well it’s their money.
Is the link you redacted in Nigeria?
What happens if the Arctic ice extent rebounds in 2013?
If people from the US have given money this could be fraud. Someone should report this to a legal authority.
There’s 16,373 born every minute.
sceptical says:June 24, 2013 at 5:35 am
So you are claiming there is no trend in Arctic sea ice? The only change is seasonal variation?
Where is a claim made at all?
The Spanish economic down-turn has defeated the windmills, so Don Quixotix and faithful Squire Sancho PONZI ride – ride! – to the rescue of the melting icel
This is her:
http://nsidc.org/research/bios/stroeve.html
and she is with the union of concerned scientist, ahh.
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/climate-scientist-julienne-stroeve.html
[note: The Union of Concerned Scientists will take anyone who offers a valid credit card -mod]
Looks like Julienne Stroeve is predicting a significant increase in Arctic sea ice. I wonder why they didn’t highlight it? It appears no one is predicting a decrease.
Of course, this is not about facts or reality. It is about one thing only. Politics.
A Fool and his money are soon parted……or……More money than sense….
… 195 governments in a room can be just incompetent.
The only statement of theirs I am in agreement with.
/snark
The Arctic started losing ice when the AMO went into its warm phase. It should start regaining ice when the AMO cools. That isn’t likely to happen for at least 5 years so we’re going to have to put up with this nonsense for quite awhile. At least the planet is cooling which should help quiet some of the nuts. But, as long as they can point to the Arctic you know the cries will continue from some of the less informed.
Please everyone SAVE this – she is having her Viner moment. In around 10 years time this should be played back to ALL the wiggle watching greens and for that matter the Met Office.
This looks like a total scam to me and I’m pretty sure Dr. Stroeve would be surprised to hear about it.
I got an email about this 6 days ago (having signed a non-climate petition on Avaaz) and it mentions “scientist Igor Semiletov”, not Stroeve. Probably Igor got wind of it and gave them the hump.
“Over 16000 have contributed” Sure. The rest of the pitch is nonsense but you can believe that statistic. NOT. One of the quirks of fund raising is that people will pledge if others already have but nobody wants to be first. Would you consider giving to a world-wide appeal where only 11 people in the world have? You laugh.
Therefore you ‘anticipate’ a modest but substantial number to give people confidence.
NOTE: If you are unsure how to calculate a number for that anticipation there are several excellent climate modeling programs that will forecast a rapid increase for you.
Anthony, you are wearing out my Playtex girdles through laughter!
Regardless of how you feel about their tactics, arctic sea ice is dropping much faster than models predicted. The fact that it “comes back every winter” doesn’t really change that.
I, and I think many others here have a certain amount of respect for Julienne, as she posts frequently here on Arctic ice threads.
Thats said though, I’m dying to know how she’s going to “get started putting back that Arctic ice” with donations of 2 quid a week, especially since the bulk of that would go into the climate fraudster’s pockets.
Julienne ?
195 governments in a room can be just incompetent. Sounds like the UN.
I may be reading this wrong, but isn’t this asking for £2 per week for 30 months. That’s (let’s see…carry the three) well, it’s a lot of wonga.
This sounds like a White House press release lead in to Obama’s climate change speech scheduled for tomorrow.
The writer sounds like a Ponzi scheme modeler.
Ryan – even assuming that the models were meaningful, what do you think contributing to these people will actually do to change that? So they manage to elect the ‘RIGHT’ people. Then what?
^^ Heh, regarding my comment above, lots has changed in the campaign since I got the email last week, particularly:
“And it’s us vs. the oil companies, and fatalism. We can win, we must, but we need to blast out of the starting gate with 40,000 pledges of support — we’ll only process the donations if we hit our goal. For the world we dream of, let’s make it happen: “
Looks like they only need 20,000 to reach their goal now. That’s surprising – since there’s no end date and they’re scrounging for recurring weekly donations. I guess they plan to announce victory with a fanfare to boost their fleecing of the gullible. I wish them great success: anyone stupid enough to believe in dangerous global warming is liable to do something really damaging with excess cash otherwise.
Julienne sounds a bit thick to me. She does not understand arctic seasonal ice yet claims to be an expert on it ? How the hell did she get a PhD ??
Perhaps if we ship all our surplus refrigerators to the Arctic and leave them on full blast with the doors open…
No, I’d better shut up, I might give them ideas!
Avaaz….Sounds like a four-year-old. (“Let’s” do [some childish prank]) but lies like a politician, in hopes of roping in the hopelessly worried. I see them lolling by on Facebook, like flotsam on a flood, and none-too-pleasant flotsam at that….complete with the pile of likes and wooden remarks in support. Like RealClimate, only worse.
This writer and hundreds of others from the MSM with their over the top alarmism are helping us win the battle. Go to almost any internet MSM alarmist news article about climate change and look at the comments. In the US skepticism rules. A surprising amount of comment content is information that is regularly discussed on this site. WUWT is arming the climate “rebels”.
I think there needs to be a small point of clarification. Greenpeace’s Arctic Sunrise is an icebreaker.
[So, what? We have icebreakers in the US navy too, she could have asked to use one of those rather than engage a biased money driven organization like Greenpeace.- mod]
Steve from Rockwood 5:37;
“What happens if the Arctic ice extent rebounds in 2013?”
That would prove beyond all shadow of a doubt that your £2 donation did the trick. Thanks.
“Ryan says:
June 24, 2013 at 6:13 am
Regardless of how you feel about their tactics, arctic sea ice is dropping much faster than models predicted. The fact that it “comes back every winter” doesn’t really change that.”
The most reliable thing about “model prediction”, in a chaotic and mostly little understood system we call climate, is that model prediction *IS* garbage. Actual observation contradicts “models”. Nuff said!
/Ryan – even assuming that the models were meaningful, what do you think contributing to these people will actually do to change that? So they manage to elect the ‘RIGHT’ people. Then what?/
Not sure about this particular donation, but I bet it will do more good than wandering around the net suggesting that winter ice disproves a melting arctic or suggesting that a lack of year over year records somehow eliminates the need for alarm.
hmmmm. Shouldn’t that be “donations already in the millions of dollars” per their member count? Or is this an organization with no-account members? I am betting that investigative journalism would not be their friend.
Avaaz boasts 22 million members. So, three bucks from each of them? Lucrative racket.
AVAAZ is another MoveOn.org created/funded astroturf group. I can’t imagine why Dr. Stroeve would knowingly be involved with MoveOn.org.
Just what size baseball bat does one need to beat some basic science into these clowns brain cells. Every where on Earth,every time the temp goes above 0C,ice melts! But then again,aren’t these the same people saying that ice in Antarctica melts at -50C?? Julienne? (and isn’t julienne something one does with string beans)
Ryan says:
June 24, 2013 at 6:13 am
Regardless of how you feel about their tactics, arctic sea ice is dropping much faster than models predicted. The fact that it “comes back every winter” doesn’t really change that.
=====
so, the computer games were wrong about everything
Julienne, told me that she would consider anything less than 1 million sq km…… ice free
…I reminded her that’s the size of Egypt
Ryan says:
June 24, 2013 at 6:13 am
arctic sea ice is dropping much faster than models predicted.
================
The models predicted a drop in BOTH arctic and antarctic ice. No models predicted a decrease at one pole and an increase at the other pole. Yet that is what is happening. As one warms, the other cools, which is NOT the signature of AGW. It is the signature of the “polar see-saw”. A natural event that predates industrialization.
Every legitimate scientists should know this. Yet, some continue to cherry pick data from the arctic while ignoring or minimizing data from the antarctic. In this fashion they seek to mislead rather than inform. They use this misinformation to panic the general population, to pressure governments into providing funding. Hardly the behavior of legitimate science – it borders on criminal fraud and extortion.
Worse, the diverted funds represent lost opportunity. Money that could have been spent profitably today to improve the lives of people living today is instead being spent in a vain attempt to change the weather 100 years in the future. At the cost of massive debts and unemployment to burden future generations.
Forcing them into a form of slavery to the global banking system, whereby the total GDP of each generation is increasingly going to service the interest on the debt of the previous generations. In effect, each child born inherits the debt of the previous generations, and must work to pay of the debts their ancestors incurred. Debt slaves from birth.
30 Months? Whatever happened to five years?
Still, if they have actually started counting down, then is it too much to hope that they will go away and leave us alone after that? ….I have an urgent appointment to watch some paint dry.
If Slushies are really that dangerous they should be banned from the 7-11’s
I’m also on their mailing list. Avaaz is a peculiar organization because they often have sympathetic humanitarian actions. But their climate issues are utterly silly as if the texts are written by ten-year old children. This time is no exception. About a year ago Donna Laframboise wrote something about this club. Does anyone know more?
Ryan says:
June 24, 2013 at 6:35 am
suggesting that winter ice disproves a melting arctic or suggesting that a lack of year over year records somehow eliminates the need for alarm.
===========
An ice free arctic would be a huge benefit to the peoples of the countries that border the Arctic. Rather than be a cause for alarm it would open up vast areas for commerce and exploration that to date has been largely inaccessible due to the ice.
To see this as a cause for alarm is to ignore history. The arctic was largely ice free for a period of 1500 years, between 8500 and 6000 years ago. The area of permanent ice was much smaller than today. The polar bears did not die out. The world did not end. In fact, that time period marks the beginning of human civilization in many parts of the world.
http://www.lunduniversity.lu.se/o.o.i.s?id=24890&news_item=5634
strike says:
June 24, 2013 at 5:42 am
This is her:
http://nsidc.org/research/bios/stroeve.html
and she is with the union of concerned scientist, ahh.
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/climate-scientist-julienne-stroeve.html
[note: The Union of Concerned Scientists will take anyone who offers a valid credit card -mod]
————————————————-
Anthony, perhaps you could suggest Kenji say something to this poor soul at the next meeting of Concerned Scientists. You know, kind of bring a fellow Concerned Scientist up to speed, as a professional courtesy.
I wonder how often Concerned Scientists meet?
Or has Kenji sent a letter of resignation because of the UCS position on CAGW? (I could easily understand this decision as a way of protest)
cn
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/333/6043/747.full
A 10,000-Year Record of Arctic Ocean Sea-Ice Variability—View from the Beach
We present a sea-ice record from northern Greenland covering the past 10,000 years. Multiyear sea ice reached a minimum between ~8500 and 6000 years ago, when the limit of year-round sea ice at the coast of Greenland was located ~1000 kilometers to the north of its present position. … The lack of uniformity in past sea-ice changes, which is probably related to large-scale atmospheric anomalies such as the Arctic Oscillation, is not well reproduced in models. This needs to be further explored, as it is likely to have an impact on predictions of future sea-ice distribution.
Science 5 August 2011:
Vol. 333 no. 6043 pp. 747-750DOI:10.1126/science.1202760
FWIW, I hope many alarmists donate to the cause. After all, I would sooner THEY pay for this stupdity, rather than us! And as for the gullible moronic sheeple that get duped – sorry, but I have no time for them anymore either. Again, it is their money – and the (certain to come at some point!) backlash at the futility of the AGW hype from ordinary people is what we want to see at a later date!
If folk won’t be educated, or open their eyes, or mouths, to raise questions and/or objections – they get what they deserve. My patience with humanity has all but expired, and trying to ‘help’ them – when 16000+ muppets donate to such a stupid ’cause’ – is not very high on my list of priorities anymore!
As for Stroeve – hopefully, she will see this is a racket and deal with it – but somehow, I’m guessing not………
I just love the idea of turning President Hollande into a hero – have they not noticed quite how badly he has handled just about everything since his election. I doubt he will be taken seriously even by sympathetic politicians (the British left-wing parties have stopped associating with him as it becomes clear how bad a leader he is for example). If your lobbying ideas are to promote the influence of a man with this sort of reputation (and apparently touch) then you may have problems.
Over 16,000 fools so far? I just heard the top 50 charity scams in the US ( http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/13/tonight-on-ac360-the-50-worst-charities/ ). 3 of them are owned by the same family (husband, wife, son). And out of $26m collected, they have donated about $20k.
Seems they have opened up another front in the charity scam.
The moral hazard/rent seeking behavior of AGW promoters has seldom been more plainly on display.
Mr, Berple:
Thanks for saving me the trouble of recounting Arctic sea ice history for Ryan’s benefit.
Another good proxy for sea ice extent is bowhead whale fossils:
http://arctic.synergiesprairies.ca/arctic/index.php/arctic/article/view/111
In the early Holocene (10.4 kya), sea ice contraction was much worse than previously believed, aided not only by a rapidly warming world but the infusion of meltwater from the Laurentide Ice Sheet & associated glacial masses. But after the melt off, bowheads returned to higher than present latitudes again at around 4.0 kya.
By the way, has anyone else noticed that President of Hollande looks just like Chauncey Gardner?
catweazle666 says:
June 24, 2013 at 6:25 am
Perhaps if we ship all our surplus refrigerators to the Arctic and leave them on full blast with the doors open…
http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1990-02-08/
I notice Greenpeace has a helicopter on their icebreaker. So they obviously think it’s OK to go round the arctic smashing up the ice and spewing CO2 and particulates out of helicopters and ships.
Perhaps it’s a cunning plan …
Well, I think we can guarantee a high September minimum arctic ice this year.
Why? Because the UKMO has forecast the least ice and they have a long history of predicting the exact opposite of what actually happens.
Shows the incestuous relationship between some “scientists” and the green propaganda machine (WWF, Greenpeace…).
/The Arctic started losing ice when the AMO went into its warm phase. It should start regaining ice when the AMO cools./
Do people here really believe this? That the Arctic is just going to shoot back up to normal sea ice during this century?
/As one warms, the other cools, which is NOT the signature of AGW. It is the signature of the “polar see-saw”. A natural event that predates industrialization./
Yea, no…
Even on this page you guys have been told what is driving the slight trend in Antarctic Winter sea ice. It ain’t cooling…
Ryan… people here believe whatever the solid science tells them…. its really as simple as that. The arctic seasonal ice situation for the coming years is unknown. But science will give us indicators. Some gravy-training half-wit with a penchant for the dramatic is not a “solid scientific indicator” of anything other than is scientifically certain that even in small percentages , the halfwit will con people out of their money.
Ryan says:
June 24, 2013 at 8:11 am
Do people here really believe this? That the Arctic is just going to shoot back up to normal sea ice during this century?
========
absolutely…..because it’s normal right now…..you’ve just been tricked into believing it’s not
“Worthy of particular attention is the fact that in 1943 all the anomalies noted were favorable for navigation, that they extended to all seas, and that in actuality navigation was extremely easy in 1943 along the entire course of the Northern Sea Route. The total area of clear water at the end of the navigational period in the Kara, Laptev, East Siberian and Chuckchee Seas amounted to almost 2,000,000 square km which is unprecedented in the history of the Arctic. The ice opposition of the Kara and Chuckchee Seas (which was mentioned in Section 156) did not take place in 1943.”
http://archive.org/stream/arcticice00zubo#page/470/mode/2up
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/06/24/arctic-panic-setting-in-soon/#comment-240273
Ryan says:
June 24, 2013 at 8:11 am
/The Arctic started losing ice when the AMO went into its warm phase. It should start regaining ice when the AMO cools./
Do people here really believe this? That the Arctic is just going to shoot back up to normal sea ice during this century?
——————————
People here are convinced by scientific evidence. No belief needed or wanted.
There is no such thing as “normal” sea ice, unless you mean maybe the average for the Holocene or prior interglacials. In that case, it’s presently still above “normal”.
In this century Arctic sea ice is unlikely to return to its great extent in the Little Ice Age or Dark Ages Cold Periods, but is highly likely to return to its coverage in prior cool periods of the Modern, Medieval, Roman & Minoan Warm Periods. With the AMO still in warm mode, it is returning to its lows of the 1920s & 1930s.
Man-made GHGs have little to no impact & air temperature itself less than ocean currents.
Has anyone noticed that as of today, the Arctic Sea Ice Extant is above the 2000s average?
http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm
Just when you thought they were dead, the ensembles arise and attack, stumbling and meandering to feed on your economic resources. I could not help but think of zombies reading the just released paper “Anthropogenic aerosol forcing of Atlantic tropical storms”, Nature Geosocience, by our friends from the UK Met Office. It is at http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1854.html#ref17
The aim of the article seems to be to use the trusty reliable ensemble of models to show that the only reason temps have not gone up like they should is that we evil humans polluted the atmosphere with aerosols and that “forced” the frequency of tropical storms down, when “everyone knows” AGW CO2 forcing should be making them go up. The kicker is the claim of the article that — just wait — , now that we got aerosols decreasing, the frequency is going up but fast, so keep those contributions flowing.
The saving grace of the article to me is the new definition of chutzpah it gives. In the “Competing Financial Interest” line the authors say “The authors declare no competing financial interests.”
Wonderful read, zombies and chutzpah all in one. It just keeps getting better.
Gentlemen (and Ladies),
Over 16000 people have donated?!? I have seen my future and it is nubar enviro – fundraising.
Adios, losers.
TB
(sarc)
“Refund?”
Ryan, if you persist, you will have the opportunity to be disabused of your misconceptions by vastly more educated, intelligent, and knowledgeable people . . if such a thing is possible.
One can always hope.
PaulH says:
June 24, 2013 at 5:58 am
… 195 governments in a room can be just incompetent.
The only statement of theirs I am in agreement with.
/snark
————————————
But then, so can one.
cn
16,000 contributors out of 23,000,000 members.
Sounds like even the members don’t want to support her.
cn
Ryan says:
June 24, 2013 at 6:13 am
Regardless of how you feel about their tactics, arctic sea ice is dropping much faster than models predicted. The fact that it “comes back every winter” doesn’t really change that.
Idiot! Put a donation in for clown that way you can make the ice grow quicker and save us all.
Her present mindset has to be the result of one of two courses through time: A) She was always hell-bent on a leftist course of action and found like-minded thesis advisor(s) throughout her uni indoctri -er- education and training, or B) She has slowly drifted leftward via ‘stuck-rudder-syndrome’ … leftward ho! … finding herself where she is now; perhaps a series of ‘soft lies’ told often and repeatedly being most effective.
.
Ryan
The fish pond in my garden keeps melting every year and some years it comes back and others it doesn’t. Please send me €50 / month to save the carp, the pond, the ice and the world. Hurry !!!
Some people will do anything to avoid serious work …
The image of ‘small dogs’ being taught tricks e.g. beckoning hither and yon to fetch and to jump through a small hoops at the commanding sound of their master’s voice (positively reinforced by tidbits given upon proper performance at ‘conferences’ and trendy social events) enters the mind upon reading that response …
.
Their plan is to take the growing Antarctic Sea Extent, chop some bits off, and ship them to the other pole.
“2. Make Hollande a Hero ”
Well maybe first put the ice back together – that sounds more feasible.
Ryan says:
June 24, 2013 at 8:11 am
“/The Arctic started losing ice when the AMO went into its warm phase. It should start regaining ice when the AMO cools./
Do people here really believe this? That the Arctic is just going to shoot back up to normal sea ice during this century?”
Sounds more plausible than the IPCC computer models.
Ryan, why is Antarctic sea ice area growing? You’re a warmist, you know the future. You must know.
Ryan says:
June 24, 2013 at 8:14 am
“/As one warms, the other cools, which is NOT the signature of AGW. It is the signature of the “polar see-saw”. A natural event that predates industrialization./
Yea, no…
Even on this page you guys have been told what is driving the slight trend in Antarctic Winter sea ice. It ain’t cooling…”
Oh let me guess. It’s warming? Have I won?
Climate science is so fun.
“As the earth warms, it creates many “tipping points” that accelerate the warming out of control. We spin out of control….. — everything is off the charts.”
Well then it’s too damn late.
Tipping points have tipped leaving us tipped over and tipped up.
So tip off, Julienne.
But have a nice day.
In reply to Ryan.
Ryan says:
June 24, 2013 at 8:14 am
/As one warms, the other cools, which is NOT the signature of AGW. It is the signature of the “polar see-saw”. A natural event that predates industrialization./
Yea, no…
Even on this page you guys have been told what is driving the slight trend in Antarctic Winter sea ice. It ain’t cooling…
William:
Yes the planet will cool. There is observational evidence the cooling has started. There is now record sea ice in the Antarctic for all months of the year, which indicates there is now cooling in the region around the Antarctic ice sheet. There is now observed cooling in the Arctic and on the Greenland ice sheet.
The following are more details concerning the polar see-saw. It should be noted that the polar see-saw is Arctic/Green land ice sheet Vs Antarctic ice sheet, not the Antarctic region sea ice. The Antarctic ice sheet cooled in the last 70 years while the Southern oceans warmed slightly.
The albedo of the Antarctic ice sheet (very high speed winds on the ice sheet break down snow crystals) is greater than low level clouds so when there is a reduction in low level cloud cover over the Antarctic ice sheet there is slight cooling. The albedo is lower for the Arctic and Greenland Ice sheet and those regions of the planet are affected more by temperature changes of the surrounding water (the Antarctic ice sheet is isolated by a very, very strong polar vortex) and hence warm when there is a reduction in low level cloud cover.
The warming in the last 70 years, the latitudes where the warming occurred and the amount of warming that occurred can almost all be explained by a change in planetary cloud cover, rather than by an increase in atmospheric CO2. As noted below solar magnetic activity was the highest in 8000 years during the last 70 years and the duration of high solar activity was the highest in 11,000 years in the last 70 years.
2013
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php
Antarctic Sea Ice, 2013 compared to 2012 and compared to 1979 to 2008 mean
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/S_timeseries.png
The current interglacial period – the Holocene – has experienced nine cyclic warming periods which were all followed by cooling periods.
Greenland ice temperature, last 11,000 years determined from ice core analysis, Richard Alley’s paper.
http://www.climate4you.com/images/GISP2%20TemperatureSince10700%20BP%20with%20CO2%20from%20EPICA%20DomeC.gif
http://www.climate4you.com/
The last warming period the Medieval Warm period was followed by the Little Ice Age. The Little Ice Age correlated in time with a deep solar magnetic minimum that is called the Maunder minimum.
The cyclic warming and cooling periods in the past, were not caused by changes to atmospheric CO2. The regions that warmed and cooled cyclically are the same region that warmed in the last 70 years.
These cyclic warming and cooling periods all correlate with solar magnetic cycle changes. When the sun is very active different mechanisms reduce the amount of ions in the atmosphere which in turn reduces the amount of cloud cover. Less cloud cover, less sunlight reflected off into space, warmer planet. Following each warm period the sun goes into a deep minimum for 50 to 100 years which is then followed by weak magnetic cycles. The planet hence cools and remains cold for 75 to 100 years.
The solar magnetic cycle has abruptly slowed down. Solar cycle 24 will be the weakest solar cycle in 150 years. Solar cycle 25 is predicted to be a Maunder minimum like solar cycle (no sunspots).
http://www.solen.info/solar/images/comparison_recent_cycles.png
http://www.solen.info/solar/images/comparison_similar_cycles.png
Attached is a link to the Danish (Svensmark) scientist’s paper that explains the polar see-saw.
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0612145v1
“The Antarctic climate anomaly and galactic cosmic rays
Borehole temperatures in the ice sheets spanning the past 6000 years show Antarctica repeatedly warming when Greenland cooled, and vice versa (Fig. 1) [13, 14]. North-south oscillations of greater amplitude associated with Dansgaard-Oeschger events are evident in oxygenisotope data from the Wurm-Wisconsin glaciation[15]. The phenomenon has been called the polar see-saw[15, 16], but that implies a north-south symmetry that is absent. Greenland is better coupled to global temperatures than Antarctica is, and the fulcrum of the temperature swings is near the Antarctic Circle. A more apt term for the effect is the Antarctic climate anomaly. … ….Figure (2a) also shows that the polar warming effect of clouds is not symmetrical, being most pronounced beyond 75◦S. In the Arctic it does no more than offset the cooling effect, despite the fact that the Arctic is much cloudier than the Antarctic (Fig. (2b)). The main reason for the difference seems to be the exceptionally high albedo of Antarctica in the absence of clouds…”
The latitudinal pattern of warming in the last 70 years does not match the predicted pattern if the warming was due to the increase in atmospheric CO2.
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0809/0809.0581.pdf
“Limits on CO2 Climate Forcing from Recent Temperature Data of Earth
If the climate forcing were only from CO2 one would expect from property #2 a small variation with latitude. However, it is noted that NoExtropics is 2 times that of the global and 4 times that of the Tropics. Thus one concludes that the climate forcing in the NoExtropics includes more than CO2 forcing. These non-CO2 effects include: land use [Peilke et al. 2007]; industrialization [McKitrick and Michaels 2007), Kalnay and Cai (2003), DeLaat and Maurellis (2006)]; high natural variability, and daily nocturnal effects [Walters et al. (2007)].”
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.3256
http://www.utdallas.edu/physics/pdf/Atmos_060302.pdf
Atmospheric Ionization and Clouds as Links Between Solar Activity and Climate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age
Little Ice Age
….Crop practices throughout Europe had to be altered to adapt to the shortened, less reliable growing season, and there were many years of dearth and famine (such as the Great Famine of 1315–1317, although this may have been before the LIA proper).[25] According to Elizabeth Ewan and Janay Nugent, “Famines in France 1693–94, Norway 1695–96 and Sweden 1696–97 claimed roughly 10% of the population of each country. In Estonia and Finland in 1696–97, losses have been estimated at a fifth and a third of the national populations, respectively.”[26] Viticulture disappeared from some northern regions. Violent storms caused serious flooding and loss of life. Some of these resulted in permanent loss of large areas of land from the Danish, German and Dutch coasts.[24] … ….Historian Wolfgang Behringer has linked intensive witch-hunting episodes in Europe to agricultural failures during the Little Ice Age.[36]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jun/13/met-office-uk-bad-weather-cause
“….recent changes to weather patterns, not just in the UK but across the rest of Europe. This week, the National Farmers Union said that 30% less wheat than normal was being grown in the UK this year due to the recent weather. In addition to this year’s cold spring, 2012 was the second wettest year in England since 1910, according to the Met Office.
A Met Office spokesman said: “We have seen a run of unusual seasons in the UK and northern Europe, such as the cold winter of 2010, last year’s wet weather and the cold spring this year. This may be nothing more than a run of natural variability, but there may be other factors impacting our weather there is emerging research which suggests there is a link between declining Arctic sea ice and European climate – but exactly how this process might work and how important it may be among a host of other factors remains unclear.”
http://cc.oulu.fi/~usoskin/personal/nature02995.pdf
Unusual activity of the Sun during recent decades compared to the previous 11,000 years
http://cio.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/FILES/root/1999/QuatSciRevvGeel/1999QuatSciRevvGeel.pdf
“The role of solar forcing upon climate change”
https://ams.confex.com/ams/pdfpapers/74103.pdf
The Sun-Climate Connection by John A. Eddy, National Solar Observatory
“Make Hollande a Hero” HAR! Even the French hate him already!!!
but I don’t know why they want to make people wait 30 months for cooling results – if people will send ME money, I GUARANTEE that Minnesota and Wisconsin will be covered with snow and ice within 6 months or your money back!!!
I promise that for every $100 they raise, I will blow off at least one bottle of SF6, perfluorocarbon tracer, or freon in order to save the world (or at least help measure it properly) from the coming Ice Age.
I’d check where they ‘invest’ it while holding onto it.
From: http://www.greenpeace.org/czech/cz/news/tajici-Arktida-ocima-vedcu/
September 25, 2012
Q: What is the long-term picture?
Julienne Stroeve: “If we continue to warm the atmosphere, ”
Comment: Didn’t I just read where UAH and RSS troposphereic temp measurements show little or no warming? Would that nullify your ‘given’, assumed condition (your supposition)?
Julienne (continuing): ” the Arctic may be ice-free in summer 2030th While natural climate change may increase the level of ice temporarily for a few years, the long-term downward trend. This year is exceptional – we are at the end of current climate models. We have observed is that the decrease of the ice level is significantly faster than projected in most IPCC models.”
Therefore that which followed (that which appears directly above) is inapplicable since the qualifying condition didn’t occur? Would that be roughly correct?
Hmmm … BTW, how are the IPCC ‘models’ for arctic ice looking compared to ‘actual’? Anything like their surface temp measurement projections (which are/have missed the mark)?
.
If it is now the norm to measure climate stimuli in Hiroshima Equivalent units then appeals such as this should be measured in hyperbole units. This one has the highest hu in recorded history, beating out Chicken Little and the boy who cried wolf.
If they want to do something for the children of tomorrows to come they should turn a skeptical eye toward the greatest threat to all next generations – planned parenthood. But there’s no money in solving problems – theirs is a cycle of #1:gathering grant money; faux studies of auto-created threats to the world; regurgitate nonsense that has no hope of implementation; loop #1.
She should be taken to task for fraud.
Enough £2’s and I can do it 😉
I have a scientifically proven method of increasing the arctic ice extent. It will take about 4 months but we have to start now and it won’t be cheap. I estimate I will need about $10,000 to do it; I might be able to offer a discount to $49.95. But the point is, we have to act now, before Wednesday. If I receive this amount in any denomination in the next few hours we can get right to work.
Will Nelson says:
June 24, 2013 at 10:16 am
I have a scientifically proven method of increasing the arctic ice extent. It will take about 4 months
===========
ROTFL
Another tax exempt (501-C3) NGO.
Interesting facts about Azaaz from:
http://www.faqs.org/tax-exempt/NY/Avaaz-Foundation.html
Amount of income in 2010: $6,664,634
Other organizations performing similar types of work: $67,275
Assets in 2010: $2,029,995
Other organizations performing similar types of work: $40,175″
Pretty deep pockets, and they pay not taxes on an income of > $6.6 million
Nice offices in the upper east side of Manhattan
Ryan says:
June 24, 2013 at 6:35 am
/Ryan – even assuming that the models were meaningful, what do you think contributing to these people will actually do to change that? So they manage to elect the ‘RIGHT’ people. Then what?/
Not sure about this particular donation, but I bet it will do more good than wandering around the net suggesting that winter ice disproves a melting arctic or suggesting that a lack of year over year records somehow eliminates the need for alarm.
—————————————————
My questions to Ryan are “What are you afraid of?”
“What great harm do you see in your future?”
and “Are you aware climate changes all the time, naturally. (Look up “Dust Bowl”)
It’s government’s and NGOs’ M.O. to scare us so we’ll all cave in and let them do what ever they want. I don’t believe them or even trust them because they make such bad decisions.
Is the globe warming?
How would I know that?
Will warming be bad?
I don’t know for sure but warm is usually good. I live in Florida.
Should we stop using fossil fuels, give up the freedom and prosperity they provide?
Should we withhold the health, nutrition, personal safety, longevity, etc from emerging nations?
What would you recommend we replace fossil fuels with? Windmills and solar panels?
If government wants to tax fossil fuels more than they currently do then let congress raise the tax at the pump. Show the people how much tax they are paying by including it along with all the other taxes. They won’t because it’s not a good idea to reduce CO2 by destroying prosperity.
They don’t need a new tax. Yet another tax with no ending date or termination criteria and no requirements on how to increase and distribute the new “general revenue”?
They just want a new tax and you want to give it to them.
My real question to you is “Are you crazy?”
cn
So Ryan, have you taken the pledge to donate weekly to Avaaz?
I believe Ms. Stroeve has responded in the past to ice-related posts here at WUWT. Perhaps she can respond to this one. I would like to know if she knew that her work and interview would be used for questionable fund raising like this? What say you, Ms. Stroeve??
PS
This year’s arctic ice extent looks pretty healthy for late June…
PSS
Could someone find out how much the principal directors of AVAAZ.org are making in salary? Usually, these “non-profit” organizations make sure their staffs are VERY well compensated…
I often wonder what would have happened if the Kyoto Protocol was universally ratified. How would the Climatestrogists be behaving in that scenario?
I suspect they would cite that seventeen years of no warming as proof they had saved the planet, and they would be busy “homogenizing” recent temp data downward rather than upward. Of course (as always) more would need to be done.
You’d think people wanting to save the earth would at least be asked to donate their personal weight in money… Two pounds is less than what the normal person eats per day.
Sounds more like a scam than anything else.
Steve from Rockwood says (June 24, 2013 at 5:37 am)
What happens if the Arctic ice extent rebounds in 2013?
It would be denied, obviously.
🙂 This moderator owes me a new monitor!
“Ed Zuiderwijk says:
June 24, 2013 at 11:15 am
Steve from Rockwood says (June 24, 2013 at 5:37 am)
What happens if the Arctic ice extent rebounds in 2013?
It would be denied, obviously.”
Or previous years would suddenly be found to have MORE ice.
Ryan says:
June 24, 2013 at 6:13 am
Regardless of how you feel about their tactics, arctic sea ice is dropping much faster than models predicted. The fact that it “comes back every winter” doesn’t really change that.
First, even if this were true, you fail to delineate what this might mean that would be important enough to do something about it – if anything effective really could be done. Again, in terms of “what it all means,” normal during your life time is meaningless scientifically, geologically, geographically, oceanographically. We do not have base line data of sufficient duration to even determine some global – or even regional – “normal” in any of these domains. There is more than sufficient documentation available to show that the arctic has retained far less ice at points in the recent historic era (ca.70 years ago for instance). This persistent idea that any change from what we “experienced” in our lifetimes is “normal” times is bad is egocentric at best and narcissism at worst. The planet is not stable in any domain at any time scale. Read some historical geology and paleontology and get a clue. You’ll be able to lean back and enjoy the beverage of your choice rather than worry that the planet needs saving.
As far as the original post goes, based upon the information the organization provides on the internet, the chief activity of Avaaz is wall papering the planet with “campaigns” and “petitions.” Some might even be worthwhile. Worrying about ice in the arctic is not.
She sure looks awfully overdressed for all that warming. And is that a diesel burning ship(or maybe nuclear) smashing through all that ice? And a chopper? JP5 fuel is not exactley carbon,sulfer,methane,etc free.Think of the poor polie bears killed by this ship.(Or were the bears drinking Coke?) And just what was powering the cameras to take this sorry excuse for a photo-op?
And were they eating pine needles and tree leaves,because all the corn was being used to power the GreenSludge?
Want to see de-evolution( or not-so-intelligent design) at work? Look no further than the eco-cultists.
And we let them get away with it. Who are the real fools?
•Avaaz was co-founded in 2007 by “Res Publica, a global civic advocacy group, and Moveon.org,” a George Soros-funded organization involved in ideological and political campaigns in the US.
http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/avaaz
h Avaaz t
Article was about Arctic ice. But the top picture of the huge melting flat ice shelf is only found in the Antarctic? Or have I been misinformed?
Makes you wonder if CAGW as an industry would exist at all were it not for Photoshop.
Ed Zuiderwijk says:
June 24, 2013 at 11:15 am
Steve from Rockwood says (June 24, 2013 at 5:37 am)
What happens if the Arctic ice extent rebounds in 2013?
It would be denied, obviously.
—————————————–
Weather.
(Anthony may not allow this, but here goes…..)
The program is called 95/95. Send $95 to WUWT and we will GUARANTEE that 95% of the Arctic sea ice will return by Feb/2014.
This is your chance to SAVE the Planet!. Why wait. The guarantee is absolute. If the sea ice does not return as promised, you get 95% of your contribution back.
Sleep better. Save the planet. It’s all about the children (and polar bears).
CONTRIBUTE NOW!
REPLY: it is a joke of course, Anthony
Manfred says:
June 24, 2013 at 11:57 am
•Avaaz was co-founded in 2007 by “Res Publica, a global civic advocacy group, and Moveon.org,” a George Soros-funded organization involved in ideological and political campaigns in the US.
http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/avaaz
———————————————
Soros is in on the same carbon scam as Gore.
Oh I see Avaaz is a moveon.org subsidiary. That explains the stupidity.
As this thread concerns Ms Stroeve it is highly relevant to post this abstract from my recent article ‘historic variations in arctic ice Part two 1920-1950’ as it references her; This is from the much fuller version. Copies on request.
‘….but the preceding does raise the question as to whether x amount of ice in the satellite era (1979 onwards) is really the same as x amount in the period prior to that, derived through climatological or physical observations in often difficult conditions by such as whalers, which brings us to the thorny question of what the definition of ice actually is.
This comment was noted by the author in the library of the Scott Polar institute in Cambridge and has parallels in one of the news items previously quoted;
‘Observational data of the drifting station 1950-51-by M Somov -Volume 1 of 3 of this Russian North pole station on an ice floe.’
Middle of June onwards ‘the melting of the snow and ice took place very quickly although the air temperature remained close to freezing’
‘the sun shone…could walk about without a coat…some even tried to get a sun tan.’
‘because of the thaw an enormous amount of water accumulated on the ice’
‘walking was only possible if one wore high rubber boots reaching above the knees’ (because of the water sitting on the ice.
‘many problems because of the thawing.’
The book described how later in the season some high spots became dry and these were little hillocks in a sea of icy water sitting on solid ice. This caused me to ask the following question of NSIDC;
“ …..how did pre satellite researchers estimating sea ice extent tell the difference between water, water floating on ice, and solid ice, and how can satellites differentiate between the three states? I was struck by Russian reports from the 1950’s at The Scott Polar institute in Cambridge when staff at the floating research stations commented about using Wellington boots in order to walk around the station, and how little dry ice islands eventually formed by the end of the summer surrounded by water on top of ice.”
I received the following reply from Julienne Stroeve ;(reproduced with permission)
“ … using passive microwave data it is very easy to tell the difference between ice and water as the dielectric constant differs quite a bit and this is reflected in large differences in the microwave emission. The main advantage of using passive microwave is that it can see the ice even if it’s cloudy or dark. There is a problem however in summer when melt ponds form on the ice since the sea ice algorithms then underestimate how much ice there really is (they think it’s open water). That’s one reason why we focus on extent rather than true ice area for the NSIDC sea ice news and analysis web site.
Visible and thermal imagery provides higher spatial resolution but is often hampered by clouds. Trying to do this work using earlier visible and thermal imagery requires the scientists to go through each image and manually filter out the clouds and determine where the ice is.”
Ends
The arctic in those pre satellite days was simply too large to be effectively and continually monitored. Observers getting close enough to the ice edge to make physical observations might be deterred from proceeding further by apparently impenetrable ice although better, more open conditions, might lie beyond. Data from such as the Russian sector – where much warming occurred, was not always taken into account. (However, the reader should be aware that, as Larsen noted, ice did sporadically return, whilst reports from 1939-45 are sparse for obvious reasons.)
In trying to determine the true extent of sea ice melt during the period we run the risk of comparing apples-physical observations, and oranges- satellite altimetry, and the different methods employed over the years creates uncertainties over whether each accurately picked up what is ice, what is water covered ice and what is open water. This makes it difficult to determine how modern ice extent compares to the past with any certainty.
However, the conclusion must be that drawn that warming was more widespread in the arctic-not just the Atlantic side-than is currently noted in the official sea ice data bases covering1920-1945/50 and that the official records appear to very substantially overstate the ice area extent. Some of the thinning of the ice and reduction of glaciers noted today appears to have had their genesis in the period.
The 1920-1940’s arctic sea ice melt can therefore be seen as remarkable, albeit the caveats about apples and oranges need to be applied. Looking at the evidence available from each of the arctic oceans means the ice extent probably lies somewhere within that experienced during the first half of the 2000’s, but was probably not as low as 2007 and 2012, the causes of which are out with the scope of this paper.’
End of extract
So the definition of ice is not that clear cut, but the high level of melting in the period is something that seems to have been quickly forgotten
tonyb
Ryan says:
June 24, 2013 at 6:13 am
“Regardless of how you feel about their tactics, arctic sea ice is dropping much faster than models predicted”
Ah, Ryan you are starting to see the light. Obviously GCM’s have failed in predícting arctic sea ice extent. We agree on that. Now accept that they have also failed by predicting a tropospheric hotspot that doesn’t exist; failed by forecasting a warming that hasn’t happened in the last 17 years etc.
You know, failure is failure. Failure tells you that the model is wrong. Whether they’re off in the warming or in the cooling direction does not matter – it’s wrong. So… why would anyone trust the models, and therefore, why would anyone trust the predictions of the IPCC?
The models are wrong. You and I agree.
climatereason says:
June 24, 2013 at 12:26 pm
1998-2012: Less Arctic ice, more Antarctic ice
1977-1998: Less ice
1945-1977: More ice
1915-1945: Less ice
1880-1915: More ice
1850-1880: Less ice
Little Ice Age: Mostly more ice than now
Medieval WP: Less ice
Dark Ages CP: Mostly more ice
Roman WP: Less ice
Cold Period: Mostly more ice
Minoan Warm Period: Less ice
Up & down for a while: More & less ice
Holocene Optimum: Less ice than now
It’s all about the elections. They want the “right” votes to “save the world”. Another power grab (They’re getting worried). I bet they’re disappointed with having only 16,000 (out of millions).
BTW, is there a use-by date on that 30 months? Or will it always be 30 months? When they send out a secondary push, say in two months, will it be down to 28 months, or will it still be 30? What’s the betting?
Meanwhile, their course of action is to run around yelling at anyone who disagrees with their brand of politics, and try and turn around the greenie-slump. That’s their idea of humankind using their smarts? Wow, I’m gobsmacked.
ferdberple says:
June 24, 2013 at 7:09 am
An ice free arctic would be a huge benefit to the peoples of the countries that border the Arctic. Rather than be a cause for alarm it would open up vast areas for commerce and exploration that to date has been largely inaccessible due to the ice.
To see this as a cause for alarm is to ignore history. The arctic was largely ice free for a period of 1500 years, between 8500 and 6000 years ago. The area of permanent ice was much smaller than today. The polar bears did not die out. The world did not end. In fact, that time period marks the beginning of human civilization in many parts of the world.
Exactly. The alarmists have a strange logic. The Arctic was largely ice free and that did not start any irreversible warming. The whole globe was warmer.
So what is their problem with that sensible ice? What? What if the Arctic melts?
Unfortunately it does not look like this.
William Astley says:
June 24, 2013 at 9:43 am
….
Thanks for the explanations and for the link to Svensmark’s paper. Good to see that science papers are for free :).
Milodonharlani
Well, that was an awful lot more succinct than my articles over the last five years and summed up pretty accurately.
Don’t write haikus do you?
Tonyb
You can see the 2010 form 990 Avaaz filed with the IRS at
http://avaazimages.s3.amazonaws.com/2010-12-31_Avaaz%20Foundation%20Form%20990%20for%20Public%20Viewing.pdf
I could not find a more current filing. Looks like they have two directors who get paid about $180K and $110K. They list 16 total employees and about $600K wage expenses. The pay a couple of consultants $400K for IT work. They also pay a lot for services of various types and lots of travel. It gives me a headache going through it so I stopped, but you can look if you want.
So Ice is normal?
I’m surprised that hasn’t been attempted already. The probable reason it hasn’t is that influential voices like Fenton advised against it behind closed doors (wisely).
Tonyb:
If my not quite flippant summary approximates your observations of reality, then maybe I should write haiku. I’ll inflict this one on readers:
Climate
Ice forms on the sea.
Water pools on floes unseen,
Change will always be.
Okay, another ‘play on words’ as interpreted on the first quick ‘read’ thru the eyeballs en route to the brain:
” co-founded in 2007 by Res Publica, a global chic advocacy group ”
This re-interpretation by the brain was not without help from the internet though where a search for Julienne Stroeve earlier leads one to a number of web sites like these two:
(1) “Climbing Mountains around the World for Critical Conservation Causes”
http://climbforconservation.org/climbing/
and
(2) ” ‘Green Girls’ to Climb Mount Kilimanjaro for Rhinos”
http://www.genconnect.com/giving-back/green-girls-to-climb-mount-kilimanjaro-for-rhinos/
Where she and her self-styled (and labeled) “Green Girls” seek to do ‘right’ on saving endangered animals of all sorts …
Good work, I’m thinking, if one can get the grant money and donations to come in!
.
Or maybe this last line:
Change the same shall be.
_Jim says:
June 24, 2013 at 1:38 pm
Climate crusading is the gift that keeps on giving for social climbers.
Milodon
You need to get the words ‘satellite’ in there, something along the lines of ‘ice pools on floes unseen by satellites’
You can do it
Tonyb
Tonyb:
I tried, but the 17 syllable tradition in the English haiku makes it tough. Regrettably “eyes in the sky” has even more syllables than satellite & is trite. This is the best I can do while holding down my day job (at least not blogging on the public dime, as my time’s my own, & my clients’):
Ice forms on the sea.
Water on floes above unseen,
Change shall always be.
PS: This would work, if space counts as sky:
unseen from sky
Tonyb:
Final drafts, to relieve suffering of too patient readers:
1998-2012: Less Arctic ice, more Antarctic ice
1977-1998: Less ice
1945-1977: More ice
1915-1945: Less ice
1880-1915: More ice
1850-1880: Less ice
Little Ice Age: Mostly more ice than now
Medieval WP: Less ice
Dark Ages CP: Mostly more ice
Roman WP: Less ice
Cold Period: Mostly more ice
Minoan Warm Period: Less ice
5 to 3 kya: More & less ice
Holocene Optimum: Less ice than now
Wisconsin Glaciation: Much more ice than now
Eemian Interglacial: Less ice than now & Holocene Optimum
2.4 mya to 130 kya: repeat above many times
Climate Satellites
Ice forms on sea.
Water on floes unseen from sky,
Change the same shall be.
in the official sea ice data bases covering1920-1945/50 and that the official records appear to very substantially overstate the ice area extent.
====
Tony…don’t forget…..the early, and up to fairly recent, satellite data did the same..
every time they’ve “improved” the satellite measurements…it’s to show more water and less ice
Didn’t they ever see “Brewster’s Millions”? Tow one iceberg to, say, Saudi Arabia, and they’ll make enough money to fund everything else they’re trying to do.
milodon
I will put a cheque in the post for your work…
tonyb
I got another solicitation from the Avaaz! organization today that is making me wonder if they are being pushed to post their imbecilic crap but the gullible is falling for it since the team is bragging about a new fundraiser record being broken.
This is a partial excerpt:
“Wow, this is looking like the largest fundraiser in Avaaz history!! So proud of all of us — here’s the email —
Dear Avaaz community,
This may be the most important email I’ve ever written to you.
Scientist Julienne Stroeve has studied Arctic ice for decades. Every summer she travels north to measure how much ice has melted. She knows that climate change is melting the ice fast, but on her last trip, she couldn’t believe what she saw. Vast areas of Arctic ice have disappeared, beyond our worst expectations.
This is what the experts warned us about. As the earth warms, it creates many “tipping points” that accelerate the warming out of control. Warming thaws the Arctic sea ice, destroying the giant white ‘mirror’ that reflects heat back into space, which massively heats up the ocean, and melts more ice, and so on. We spin out of control. Already this year — storms, temperatures — everything is off the charts.
We CAN stop this, if we act very fast, and all together. And out of this extinction nightmare, we can pull one of the most inspiring futures for our children and grandchildren. A clean, green future in balance with the earth that gave birth to us.
We have 30 months until the Paris Summit, the meeting that world leaders have decided will determine the fate of our efforts to fight climate change. It might seem like a long time – it’s not. We have 30 months to get the right leaders in power, get them to that meeting, give them a plan, and hold them accountable. And it’s us vs. the oil companies, and fatalism. We can win, we must, but we need to blast out of the starting gate with pledges of just $1 per week until the summit — we’ll only process the donations if we hit our goal. For the world we dream of, let’s make it happen: ”
Something about the fundraiser smells to high heaven.It makes me wonder if they are being pushed to do this since there is nothing that terrible and unusual going on climate wise.They are willing to lie and distort the evidence in their effort to help governments shackle us with more of their climate control bullcrap.
When will they ever stop being infatuated with political environmentalism?
“Make Hollande a Hero” !!! He’s an idiot, he has managed to make the people who make the money and the jobs that France needs to leave France, why? Because they are not stupid enough to pay income tax at 75%! Even if they were that stupid, they would not pay income tax at that level to have it mis-spent by some left wing moron whose policies are driven by jealousy and spite!
RockyRoad says:
June 24, 2013 at 11:06 am
You’d think people wanting to save the earth would at least be asked to donate their personal weight in money… Two pounds is less than what the normal person eats per day.
Could Mikey Mann afford that?
Please send me £2 and provided I get 1 million donations, I can stop global warming.
Please send your bank/credit card details to: scamsareus@scams.com, please ensure you send your passwords, mother’s maiden name and the name of the town where you were born. Thank you on behalf of the planet!
PS if you send me £4, I will send you photos of me kneeling on the ice, naked!
A thought. Jai Mitchell is now in pre-mod and Ryan is back.
As Private Eye might say: Is there a connection; I think we should be told.
Mods – many apologies for my last post. Coming home at 1 o’clock in the morning after having spent 6 hours in the pub, ones mind wanders.
climatereason says:
June 24, 2013 at 3:04 pm
milodon
I will put a cheque in the post for your work…
tonyb
———————-
Or donate to the New Model Boris’ next campaign. If Ur-CACCAista Maggie Thatcher can see the light & eschew Warm-mongering, then why not BoJo?
Thanks!
A PhD in geography no less … this video explains it all:
.
A 22-million-person global campaign network gets 20,000 people in its network to cough up a few bucks to “save the world”. It seems that the other 99.9% think it is not that urgent.
It is the perfect scam.
The situation seems to be getting better so the can claim it was them.
Oh come on, why are you all so negative in this thread?
It really works: since people started to give in money, the Arctic ice has stopped its accelerating decrease. You just need to look at the data.
Now if they would give enough, it may even start recovery.
The poor sensible ice, imagine it is so thin that even plancton can live under the ice!
Is this not a disaster?
Not a little, not a bit but massive! (Massive Phytoplankton Blooms Under Arctic Sea Ice)
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/336/6087/1408.abstract
doesn’t look like the albedo is so hight to reflect all that good light…
I propose a project, maybe we can all buy plastic ducks, wrap them in aluminium foil and set them free over the Arctic ocean to keep its albedo high?
Measurements beat speculation every time.
nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_daily_concentration_hires.png
nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png
psc.apl.washington.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/schweiger/ice_volume/BPIOMASIceVolumeAnomalyCurrentV2.png?%3C?php%20echo%20time%28%29%20?
The annual cliff jump for both Arctic Sea Ice Volume and Extent started some time ago.
Looking at the volume we see that the 2012-2013 maxium extent tool longer to reach, and started to decline almost immediately, unlike the previous 2 winters after the the tipping point in 2010, where the summer time volume started to reach new lows every summer.
The measured loss of ice is well ahead of the the models..
The extent has also begun a base jump. That thin new ice is a uniform thickness and tends to melt to open water at about the same all over the arctic.
An anomaly of 10,000 cubic km of ice is enough ice to cover 5 million sq km with ice 2 meters thick. An some folks here talk about making ice in their freezer. Let us know how that one works out for you.
Global warming ended in ccyy doesn’t seem to be working out, no matter how many times a new year is plugged into that mantra.
Sea Ice has begun to recover in ccyy is also getting to be an old and tired refrain.