This tweet from Tony appears to have stirred up establishment media greens;
“Antarctic sea ice extent is 17% higher today than it was in 1979. Ice doesn’t lie, but climate scientists do,” the text reads.
An NSIDC spokesperson told Reuters via email that Antarctic sea ice extent on Dec. 24, 1979, was 7.38 million square kilometres, and on Dec. 24, 2024, it was 8.28 million square kilometres. This is an increase of 12.2%.
Source Reuters / Tony Heller
…
However, NSIDC data also show that there was more, opens new tab Antarctic sea ice on the majority of days in 1979 compared with days in 2024. …
“It would be a bit like saying that because a sports team won the first game of the year in 2025 but lost the first game of the year in 2020, they had got better, even if they were bottom of the league in 2025 and top of the league in 2020,” she said.
…
Antarctic sea ice is particularly variable, and has defied attempts to connect its long-term trend to climate change, the NSIDC spokesperson said.
“In the absence of a clear climate reason for the change, many scientists looked to oceanic changes as the cause.”
But uncertainties about Antarctic sea ice’s relationship with global temperatures do not invalidate evidence of climate change globally.
Screen said: “Even if sea ice returns in the Antarctic, it doesn’t disprove other indicators of climate change. Warming oceans, melting glaciers, and the dramatic loss of Arctic sea ice are just some of the many signs of a warming planet.”
When they mentioned uncertainty and sea ice variability, Reuters forgot to mention back in 2014 record Antarctic sea ice was blamed on global warming.
Antarctic winter sea ice extent sets new record in 2014
BY MICHON SCOTT REVIEWED BY TED SCAMBOS PUBLISHED OCTOBER 7, 2014
DETAILS
…
It’s not unreasonable to wonder how, if the planet is warming, Antarctic winter sea ice can set record highs. As the NSIDC release explains, Antarctica’s sea ice growth spurt may be down to stronger winds and slightly fresher sea surface water around the margins of the continent’s melting ice shelves.
…
Winds probably did not act alone to spur so much sea ice growth; melting land ice may have played a role. Most of Antarctica’s ice lies in the ice sheets that cover the continent, and in recent decades, that ice has been melting. Along the coastline, ice shelves float on the ocean surface, and much of the recent melt may be driven by warm water from the deep ocean rising and making contact with ice shelf undersides.
How does the melting of land ice matter to sea ice formation? The resulting meltwater is fresher than the seawater. As it mixes with the seawater, the meltwater makes the nearby seawater slightly less dense, and slightly closer to the freezing point than the ocean water below. This less dense seawater spreads out across the ocean surface surrounding the continent, forming a stable pool of surface water that is close to the freezing point, and close to the ice onto which it could freeze.
So as counterintuitive as expanding winter Antarctic sea ice may appear on a warming planet, it may actually be a manifestation of recent warming. “Both the Arctic and the Antarctic are responding to climate change, and both have areas that are warming rapidly,” explains NSIDC lead scientist Ted Scambos. “But Antarctic sea ice is responding to wind shifts and ocean changes in an unexpected way, and we’re still trying to fully understand it.”
“It may actually be” doesn’t fill me with a sense of certainty.
If melting land ice in the Antarctic caused sea ice to peak, due to melting fresh water ice reducing the salinity of adjacent sea water, why didn’t melting land ice in the Arctic cause Arctic sea ice to peak? Or does the melting land ice effect only work in Southern latitudes? It is all very well to talk about the Southern ocean being bigger, but shouldn’t the concentration of nearby land ice allegedly melting into the landlocked Arctic ocean cause even more sea ice to form?
If sea ice is so poorly understood and variable, and the connection to global warming so ambiguous, why have we been subject to years of claims that runaway global warming is going to flood all the coastal cities and melt the polar ice caps?
Climategate 2 Email 0700.txt (20/03/1998):
EC Meeting on Polar Climate Research
Copenhagen 12-13 March 1998
DISCUSSION
On future challenges for the polar regions
Discussion Panel : A Ghazi, J. Thiede, O. Orheim
Participants : L Anderson, K Briffa, H Decleir, M Fily, T Friborg, A Hakon Hoel, J O Hagen, C Hammer, J P Hart Hansen, D Hedberg, J C Hesselbjerg, K Holmen, K Hutter, E Jansen, O Johannessen, J Jouzel, G Jugie, A Korhola, K Kristjansson, E Larsen, P Lemke, P Malkki, H Miller, J Oerlemans, V Pavlenko, S Raper, C Rapley, D Raynaud ; N Reeh, O Rogne, B Stauffer, J Taagholt, I Troen, C A Williams, M Zucchelli,
…
The interface between science and politics
B Stauffer said that science could not prevent global climate change, therefore science should support sustainability, however if science can point to means of reducing the rate of global change, this would show that there was something that could be done and would evoke political decisions.
J Jouzel said that the truth will come from the use of models and their validation and that there was a move in WCRP – CLIVAR to take more interest in palaeo-data. Communications between scientists and politicians are becoming more and more important and the scientific population must be large enough to be visible. D Raynaud commented that the work by Stocker in 1997 on the gross rate of emissions and the change in thermo circulation is important to conferences such as Kyoto. K Hutter added that politicians accused scientists of a high signal to noise ratio; scientists must make sure that they come up with stronger signals. The time-frame for science and politics is very different; politicians need instant information, but scientific results take a long time
A Ghazi pointed out that the funding is set once the politicians want the research to be done. We need to make them understand that we do not understand the climate system. Kyoto was a compromise and the EC accepted pollution levels which were not accepted by all members. At the next meeting in Buenos Aires in November 1998 we must learn how to approach the USA. The USA wants to buy the 30% of emissions that is not achieved in Russia. This emission trading is not acceptable. However the US argues that if the EC is trading within itself then it can do so also, however the EC will be achieving an emissions reduction of 6-8
…
From Climategate Email 0700.txt
Politicians who control research funds pressuring scientists to provide “stronger signals” raises obvious concerns – though to be fair, in the email the scientists resolved to try to educate politicians on how science works.
One thing seems clear. Regardless of what you read, hear or see in the media, nobody truly understands the global climate system, especially when it comes to the behaviour of polar sea ice.
It’s a theology…the carbon gods ways and methods are unknowable
Michael Flynn
February 12, 2025 10:30 pm
” . . .nobody truly understands the global climate system,”.
I don’t even understand what “the global climate system” is! Sounds like someone trying to appear important by stringing some “sciency” words together.
There are many such pseudo-scientific jargon foisted on the public.
Nick Stokes
February 12, 2025 10:42 pm
OK, here is the cherry picking. A graph of 1979 vs 2024, day by day. There was more ice in 1979 for almost the whole year, but for some reason 1979 did a dive at the end.
EDIT – Nick indicated this graph contains an error, replacement below
While the numbers don’t agree exactly with Tony Heller’s, there is no doubt that for late December, 2024 was far higher than 1979 …. and the difference is about 17%
And the minimum extent in the 79/80 season was 2.52km2 currently it’s 2.08km2 with some time to go before the expected minimum date. So 2024/5 is about 17% lower than 1979/80, or to use your terminology ‘far lower’.
Ice, like most things, has natural variation. 2024 had less ice, day for day, than 1979 over the last year. But it happened that melting was a bit slow in December in 2024.
Not only that, but look at the squiggles on the red line. It’s a little difficult to compare with the scale at the left but they look like rapid cycles of several thousand sq. km. on a daily or sub-daily basis for an entire year. Wonder what they represent?
Anyway, one ill-timed volcanic eruption could make things interesting. We are far closer to another year without a summer than to any high temp catastrophe.
Interesting. If her theory is correct, cooling should already have started……. but it hasn’t. According to both satellite and surface measurements, warming continues. So, it would seem so far anyway, that her predictions have not been realised….
Her predictions follow a curve with cooling periods but an overall warming over hundreds of years. She calculates we are at the tail end of the warm cycle going towards a minimum after which the 12 year cycle starts again. This is not an exact calculation and other elements might interfere, seismic activity like the Honga Tunga effect w more water vapour in the atmosphere which explains the 23/24 spike in temperature. But the trajectory is downwards and she (or the graph) sees the early 2030s as the period where that minimum starts to..well..bite.
So, exactly the opposite of the climate alarmists.
There was an artefact with the previous graph, in that my program unwisely infilled missing data with day averages. The zigzag is because 1979 had data only every second day. Here is a fixed version in which I took the 365 days to 11 Feb (the latest 2025 point) so you get a better idea of the extent of the 1979 dive, and of the cherry pick. Actually it is more of a melting pause in 2024. Didn’t last long.
For the ice to melt that fast it can only mean it was very thin, that thermodynamics thing again. So basically what that is saying is the antarctic sea ice was very thin but covering more area in 1979.
If you would compare to 2022, the melting was quicker than in 1979.
If you look at the ice extent for every year up until 2011, there are variations, but no clear trend for any part of the year. Then you have three years in a row with record breaking maximum extent, with 2014 beating previous marks with quite a margin. Then the situation is turned on its head and since late 2016, the sea ice extent has instead been beating minimum low records several times at all parts of the year (except in april, where 1980 still has the record).
I have added 1980 and 2023, in fainter colors. It looks like there was a melting spurt in late 1979. It could have been caused by a warm spell or unusual winds.
It could be just ice carving, A23a was a massive carving in 1986 and that thing is still floating around off Argentina. Whatever the case Antarctica isn’t disappearing any time soon.
It’s no longer ‘well above 1979’, in fact it’s second lowest in the record and is very close to the record minimum, with 10-15 days to go to the minimum it’s at 1.36 million km2 vs previous record of 1.06 million km2
Sea ice is less now than it was during the coldest time on this planet for over a century.
The time when most scientists were screaming about the coming ice age.
Here again is the advantage of ‘climate change’ over ‘global warming’. Which came in after the ‘pause’ in the 1980s. Blame the unprecedented Brazilian snowfall on GW and people will snigger. On CC and you can stroke your beard and look wise.
Someone picked up the comedy croc numbers in QLD/NT are at record numbers 100,000 in NT and 30,000 in Queensland. They are about to start culling in both States and I am not sure how that reconciles with that study.
Nick they are finding them further South because the young males get kicked out of territory by big males.
That is what I was laughing at it a puff piece the PhD student has a hypothesis which she is reported like this
.
“Because they are sit-and-wait predators, we’re concerned that shorter dive times might limit their ability to hunt, and also to hide and escape from predators, or travel.”
I am guessing it will out as a NUL but the ABC puff piece acts like it’s a fact. There is how activism corrupts science.
….what do you want them to do with billions of dollars of funding? BTW, Trump also is trying force 85% of the grants to go to their designated purpose. As it is, apparently the vast majority goes to the institution to use however they like.
When they actually spoke to someone who knows what they’re talking about, you know, someone actually involved, not sitting in an air-conditioned office thousands of kilometres away:
The tour guide said he believed crocodiles were “very resilient animals” and they would survive as waters got warmer.
“They’ve gotten through all those terrible climate changes that the dinosaurs couldn’t cope with and the meteorite strikes … I think they will adapt and get through it,” Mr White said.
No Nick, the only reason crocodiles don’t infest rivers all the way down to Brisbane is any croc south of Gladstone is relocated North. Crocodiles are highly mobile and would happily visit hundreds of miles south of their normal range during warmer months. Every so often we have an alert in my area, well south of Gladstone.
For those familiar with eastern U.S. geography, alligators live in Florida, where sometimes they even eat the residents. However, alligators are also found as far north as North Carolina. There’s even an Alligator River and an Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge in eastern NC, just south of the Virginia state line.
There are alligators west of Florida all the way into Texas too.
The rarer American crocodile lives in Southern Florida and neotropical places around the Gulf of America and up and down the west coasts of Mexico, Central America and South America. They definitely don’t like cold weather.
Thanks for the response. I live in SE VA, so I guess I was being a little provincial. Didn’t consider alligators extending to the west of Florida. I was trying to point out how far north alligators extend in eastern US, as analogous to how far south crocodiles live in Australia (as the discussion above) and that it has nothing to do with “global warming” or the dreaded “Climate Change.”
Texas central coast has been long well known to collect flotsam and jetsam, including alligators. I have seen stunned alligators from two Louisiana hurricanes, one from a Texas freeze and one alive well offshore from a flood. Several, even one with Louisiana tag, have ended up on Texas coast lately which already has enough. One member of the La Salle expedition (late 1680s) was killed by one in crossing a Texas river. I have a picture of a Texas coast alligator (over a meter long) on a lawn by a pond less than a block away from a flock of whooping cranes which I have from two good authorities have seen whoopers eat snakes when normal food was scarce.
Alligators are native to coastal North Carolina. There were alligators at the Battleship Memorial before it was the Memorial, this is their home, and we respect that. The largest alligator has been called “Charlie” for many years, but there are usually several in the vicinity. Just because “Charlie” has a name does not mean that he is tame or a pet. All alligators are wild animals, and you should NEVER try to get close to one or (even worse) hold your child over the side for a better look. Small children are the same size as their primary food source and aren’t smart enough to know the difference between your baby and a turtle. It is also against State law to harass an alligator in any way, and if you do, you will be prosecuted.
Currently in second lowest just above the record minimum. That 8million km2 is now 1.36 million km2.
abolition man
February 13, 2025 2:46 am
All you small minded alarmists had better hope that Dr. Zharkova is incorrect in her calculations regarding a Grand Solar Minimum! If temperatures drop substantially in the next few years there will be Hell to pay for all those that pushed the Climate Hoax conspiracy fraud; wasting trillions of much needed dollars on an imaginary little trace gas demon!
With Trump in office, the corporatist bureaucrats are going to have to explain just what they were doing, and where ALL the money went! Punishments for those who pushed and perpetrated this hoax must be draconian to discourage further fraud! I personally like impalement as befitting for those who enriched themselves at the public’s expense; but the major wind power moguls should receive the Promethean treatment; hung from the turbines for vultures to tear out their livers!
What I found interesting was that the linked Chartic page shows median, interquartile range and specifically notes the “record minimum” year.
But there is no indication of the “record maximum” year. I went through manually and (as Heller says) it appears to be 2014 for Antarctic sea ice.
This to me is a strong “tell” that the people behind the data are not neutral. You are failing in your duty to present data from a neutral scientific perspective if you draw attention to only one side of the statistics.
But there is no indication of the “record maximum” year. I went through manually and (as Heller says) it appears to be 2014 for Antarctic sea ice.
I had similar questions and came up with the following graph.
2014 did indeed set many of the “daily maxima” records, while 2023 set most of the “daily minima” ones (up to November at least).
2hotel9
February 13, 2025 4:17 am
How is Reuters going to continue spewing lies for the left when all their USAID money has been blocked. Their advertising damned well ain’t gone pay the bills.
Tony Heller has been weak on the underlying science sometimes, like “dry ice in Antarctica” , but he is a superlative archivist. If any relevant data has been published, it seems like he will find it.
Bruce Cobb
February 13, 2025 8:25 am
Rule #1 of “Climate Science”: If it supports the Warmunist narrative, then it’s Science, and if not, then it’s Denialism.
Rule # 2: See Rule #1.
Denis
February 13, 2025 11:36 am
NSIDC likes to tell us that Arctic sea ice has been declining at a rate of about 12% per year for decades so whatever Antarctica is doing is not important. What they neglect to tell us is that since 2007, Arctic sea ice has ceased declining and has been (and remains) stable. But the decline is settled science, right?
Well there’s a strong probability that this year’s maximum won’t reach 14 million.
son of mulder
February 13, 2025 2:38 pm
Isn’t there meant to be an increase in precipitation due to climate change? Then wouldn’t there be an increase in precipitation over the Antarctic, where it’s still below zero?. Wouldn’t that decrease sea level as ice accumulates and increase sea ice as the extra ice it is forced into the sea by gravity? How would sea level be affected in 2100? How much of sea level rise is due to thermal expansion? Just asking for a friend.
More Heller nonsense! He picked some random time during the rapid seasonal decline and makes claims about how there’s more Antarctic sea ice than in 1979. Now we’re nearing the annual minimum sea ice in the Antarctic and what do we find? It’s 2nd lowest in the satellite period with ~2 weeks and little further melting to go! In fact if we look at global sea ice we see that it’s at a record low due in part to a record low Arctic sea ice area as well as the low Antarctic value!
Problem for Global Warmists……
It just ain’t happening.
It’s a theology…the carbon gods ways and methods are unknowable
” . . .nobody truly understands the global climate system,”.
I don’t even understand what “the global climate system” is! Sounds like someone trying to appear important by stringing some “sciency” words together.
There are many such pseudo-scientific jargon foisted on the public.
OK, here is the cherry picking. A graph of 1979 vs 2024, day by day. There was more ice in 1979 for almost the whole year, but for some reason 1979 did a dive at the end.
EDIT – Nick indicated this graph contains an error, replacement below
Nick,
Is your comment supposed to have some relevance to something? Sea ice comes and goes, Antarctica was once ice-free.
I trust that you aren’t trying to imply that CO2 has any atmosphere warming properties. It hasn’t, you know!
Just downloaded from
FTP directory /DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/south/daily/data/ at sidads.colorado.edu
and copied the relevant dates..
While the numbers don’t agree exactly with Tony Heller’s, there is no doubt that for late December, 2024 was far higher than 1979 …. and the difference is about 17%
And the minimum extent in the 79/80 season was 2.52km2 currently it’s 2.08km2 with some time to go before the expected minimum date. So 2024/5 is about 17% lower than 1979/80, or to use your terminology ‘far lower’.
Yes.
This natural phenomenon was observed and recorded by Prof Chris Turney’s holiday cruise / research “Ship Of Fools” voyage to Antarctica in 2014.
Nobody could have missed this revelation about sea ice.
It was in all the papers 🙂
Your graph is in complete contradiction with the 17% difference in extent between 1979 and 2024.
Not so. But there is a better version below, which fixes an artefact with missing data.
Ah, so global warming is to blame for both falling and rising sea ice?
Ice, like most things, has natural variation. 2024 had less ice, day for day, than 1979 over the last year. But it happened that melting was a bit slow in December in 2024.
If I apply Climate Scientology correctly, this trend indicates a new ice age is imminent. Be afraid, be very afraid!
Yeah, and this bit lacks any credibility. Watts Up With That?
Plotting artefact – my bad. Fixed below
Not only that, but look at the squiggles on the red line. It’s a little difficult to compare with the scale at the left but they look like rapid cycles of several thousand sq. km. on a daily or sub-daily basis for an entire year. Wonder what they represent?
I believe it given the cold temps of late.
Anyway, one ill-timed volcanic eruption could make things interesting. We are far closer to another year without a summer than to any high temp catastrophe.
Yes, i had already noted her prediction of more seismic events prior to the latest tremors yesterday. Was it Santorini?
Interesting. If her theory is correct, cooling should already have started……. but it hasn’t. According to both satellite and surface measurements, warming continues. So, it would seem so far anyway, that her predictions have not been realised….
Her predictions follow a curve with cooling periods but an overall warming over hundreds of years. She calculates we are at the tail end of the warm cycle going towards a minimum after which the 12 year cycle starts again. This is not an exact calculation and other elements might interfere, seismic activity like the Honga Tunga effect w more water vapour in the atmosphere which explains the 23/24 spike in temperature. But the trajectory is downwards and she (or the graph) sees the early 2030s as the period where that minimum starts to..well..bite.
So, exactly the opposite of the climate alarmists.
There looks to be some unresolved data issues around the maximum ice extent in 2024. And measurement issues for the 1979 data.
Actually plotting issues – see next comment for revised graph
There was an artefact with the previous graph, in that my program unwisely infilled missing data with day averages. The zigzag is because 1979 had data only every second day. Here is a fixed version in which I took the 365 days to 11 Feb (the latest 2025 point) so you get a better idea of the extent of the 1979 dive, and of the cherry pick. Actually it is more of a melting pause in 2024. Didn’t last long.
For the ice to melt that fast it can only mean it was very thin, that thermodynamics thing again. So basically what that is saying is the antarctic sea ice was very thin but covering more area in 1979.
If you would compare to 2022, the melting was quicker than in 1979.
If you look at the ice extent for every year up until 2011, there are variations, but no clear trend for any part of the year. Then you have three years in a row with record breaking maximum extent, with 2014 beating previous marks with quite a margin. Then the situation is turned on its head and since late 2016, the sea ice extent has instead been beating minimum low records several times at all parts of the year (except in april, where 1980 still has the record).
I have added 1980 and 2023, in fainter colors. It looks like there was a melting spurt in late 1979. It could have been caused by a warm spell or unusual winds.
It could be just ice carving, A23a was a massive carving in 1986 and that thing is still floating around off Argentina. Whatever the case Antarctica isn’t disappearing any time soon.
2023 and 2024 were affected by the El Nino and HT event.
End of 2024 it recovered to be well above 1979.
Maybe there was a weather event to drop down the extent in1979 in December..
… there was certainly a massive weather event to drop down the extent for most of 2023 and 2024.
Oops.
It’s no longer ‘well above 1979’, in fact it’s second lowest in the record and is very close to the record minimum, with 10-15 days to go to the minimum it’s at 1.36 million km2 vs previous record of 1.06 million km2
Ice carvings are done with chainsaws. You mean calving.
That’s not true. Some people use chisels.
Calving is done by female cows yes?
Sea ice however….is disappearing very fast. It has accelerated in recent weeks taking it well below the mean line
Nick’s graph shows that Tony Heller was correct… as does the data direct from the ftp site.
Melting spurts happen all the time.. It is called weather.
But of course, it if happens near the very low point, like it did in the Arctic in 2012… it is “climate”
Sea ice is less now than it was during the coldest time on this planet for over a century.
The time when most scientists were screaming about the coming ice age.
“There was an artefact with the previous graph, in that my program unwisely infilled missing data with day averages”
So… it’s unwise to infill temperature values for stations that don’t exist?
No, I should have infilled with an average of neighboring values. Which is what the line graphing does anyway.
Whatever you do, you have to estimate. Do it well!
“There was an artefact”
a most apt description of climate science
Here again is the advantage of ‘climate change’ over ‘global warming’. Which came in after the ‘pause’ in the 1980s. Blame the unprecedented Brazilian snowfall on GW and people will snigger. On CC and you can stroke your beard and look wise.
Mann & Co can stroke their beards (any why do they all seem to have these odd beards?) all they like. They certainly don’t look wise!
What’s odd about their beards?
“why do they all seem to have these odd beards?
So they won’t be bald faced liars?
😉
Excellent 😂😂
I found a definite reason we want more Global Warming
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-02-13/warmer-water-affecting-crocodile-behaviour/104929432
They don’t like the heat up north. So they are coming south. Frequent around Rockhampton, and even sightings around Maryborough.
Crocodilians don’t like heat!!? ROFLMAO Oh, God, Nick that was a good one!! Now pull the other one; it’s got lots of little bells on it!
Someone picked up the comedy croc numbers in QLD/NT are at record numbers 100,000 in NT and 30,000 in Queensland. They are about to start culling in both States and I am not sure how that reconciles with that study.
Nick they are finding them further South because the young males get kicked out of territory by big males.
Just like bears do.
That is what Leon’s link said, with evidence. But anyway, they are coming south.
Is it true, or did you read it on the ABC?
Ha ha!
OMG, 1 degree warmer. Be afraid, be very afraid!
That is what I was laughing at it a puff piece the PhD student has a hypothesis which she is reported like this
.
“Because they are sit-and-wait predators, we’re concerned that shorter dive times might limit their ability to hunt, and also to hide and escape from predators, or travel.”
I am guessing it will out as a NUL but the ABC puff piece acts like it’s a fact. There is how activism corrupts science.
….what do you want them to do with billions of dollars of funding? BTW, Trump also is trying force 85% of the grants to go to their designated purpose. As it is, apparently the vast majority goes to the institution to use however they like.
Well the alligators should be since that means all the young will be males!
When they actually spoke to someone who knows what they’re talking about, you know, someone actually involved, not sitting in an air-conditioned office thousands of kilometres away:
Maybe the cane toads are overwhelming the crocs?
No Nick, the only reason crocodiles don’t infest rivers all the way down to Brisbane is any croc south of Gladstone is relocated North. Crocodiles are highly mobile and would happily visit hundreds of miles south of their normal range during warmer months. Every so often we have an alert in my area, well south of Gladstone.
https://environment.desi.qld.gov.au/wildlife/animals/living-with/crocodiles/management
For those familiar with eastern U.S. geography, alligators live in Florida, where sometimes they even eat the residents. However, alligators are also found as far north as North Carolina. There’s even an Alligator River and an Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge in eastern NC, just south of the Virginia state line.
There are alligators west of Florida all the way into Texas too.
The rarer American crocodile lives in Southern Florida and neotropical places around the Gulf of America and up and down the west coasts of Mexico, Central America and South America. They definitely don’t like cold weather.
Thanks for the response. I live in SE VA, so I guess I was being a little provincial. Didn’t consider alligators extending to the west of Florida. I was trying to point out how far north alligators extend in eastern US, as analogous to how far south crocodiles live in Australia (as the discussion above) and that it has nothing to do with “global warming” or the dreaded “Climate Change.”
A little further west and somewhat north, we even have an alligator farm in Colorado.
Texas central coast has been long well known to collect flotsam and jetsam, including alligators. I have seen stunned alligators from two Louisiana hurricanes, one from a Texas freeze and one alive well offshore from a flood. Several, even one with Louisiana tag, have ended up on Texas coast lately which already has enough. One member of the La Salle expedition (late 1680s) was killed by one in crossing a Texas river. I have a picture of a Texas coast alligator (over a meter long) on a lawn by a pond less than a block away from a flock of whooping cranes which I have from two good authorities have seen whoopers eat snakes when normal food was scarce.
From the Battleship North Carolina site. ( https://battleshipnc.com/faqs/ )
Excellent. So you can now wander around on Cape York without having to be worried about crocs.
Please do send us videos!
There is a tried and tested method for dealing with errant crocs, no need to panic:
https://www.southparkstudios.co.uk/video-clips/0tab5y/south-park-the-crocodile-hunter
And of course 2024 was actually lower than usual for most of the year as it recovered from the effects of the El Nino and HT event.
Did a great job of recovering to be in the middle of the pack in December… and well above 1979
Any graph comparing all of 1979 to all of 2024 without explaining the El Nino/HT effect is totally misleading.
You didn’t finish the story.
Recovered….before plunging again to a minimum as low or lower than last year.
Currently in second lowest just above the record minimum. That 8million km2 is now 1.36 million km2.
All you small minded alarmists had better hope that Dr. Zharkova is incorrect in her calculations regarding a Grand Solar Minimum! If temperatures drop substantially in the next few years there will be Hell to pay for all those that pushed the Climate Hoax conspiracy fraud; wasting trillions of much needed dollars on an imaginary little trace gas demon!
With Trump in office, the corporatist bureaucrats are going to have to explain just what they were doing, and where ALL the money went! Punishments for those who pushed and perpetrated this hoax must be draconian to discourage further fraud! I personally like impalement as befitting for those who enriched themselves at the public’s expense; but the major wind power moguls should receive the Promethean treatment; hung from the turbines for vultures to tear out their livers!
If they aren’t too senile by then to prosecute.
It’ll do about as well as the Easterbrook and Archibald cooling predictions featured here years ago.
Not very well.
Does that mean you will now admit the IPCC and its many acolytes have been wrong in their prediction going back to 1990…..
Snicker…..
Models show very good agreement with observations. Certainly better than the above two gents’ forecasts.
What I found interesting was that the linked Chartic page shows median, interquartile range and specifically notes the “record minimum” year.
But there is no indication of the “record maximum” year. I went through manually and (as Heller says) it appears to be 2014 for Antarctic sea ice.
This to me is a strong “tell” that the people behind the data are not neutral. You are failing in your duty to present data from a neutral scientific perspective if you draw attention to only one side of the statistics.
I had similar questions and came up with the following graph.
2014 did indeed set many of the “daily maxima” records, while 2023 set most of the “daily minima” ones (up to November at least).
How is Reuters going to continue spewing lies for the left when all their USAID money has been blocked. Their advertising damned well ain’t gone pay the bills.
Politico, BBC, too.
Were Reuters and other independent news organizations always just manipulators? Or is that something new since 2001 or so?
especially when it comes to the behaviour of polar sea ice.
Or CO2. Or H2O. Or clouds. Or orbital mechanics. Or the sun. Or… or…. or….
Potential story tip. New research on glacial melt contribution to sea level rise shows model predictions may be 3-4 times too high.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/video/animals/scientists-uncover-critical-flaw-in-sea-level-rise-predictions/vi-AA1yVZa0?ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=1e277bbd30a546c8ad5367ff68a2c314&ei=73
Tony Heller has been weak on the underlying science sometimes, like “dry ice in Antarctica” , but he is a superlative archivist. If any relevant data has been published, it seems like he will find it.
Rule #1 of “Climate Science”: If it supports the Warmunist narrative, then it’s Science, and if not, then it’s Denialism.
Rule # 2: See Rule #1.
NSIDC likes to tell us that Arctic sea ice has been declining at a rate of about 12% per year for decades so whatever Antarctica is doing is not important. What they neglect to tell us is that since 2007, Arctic sea ice has ceased declining and has been (and remains) stable. But the decline is settled science, right?
Remains stable? Currently the Arctic seaice is well below the previous record level.
Yes, remarkably stable since 2007.
1979 was a time of extreme high Arctic sea ice extent which drove many of the sea creatures out
Current arctic sea ice levels are in the top 5% or so of the last 10,000 years.
Well there’s a strong probability that this year’s maximum won’t reach 14 million.
Isn’t there meant to be an increase in precipitation due to climate change? Then wouldn’t there be an increase in precipitation over the Antarctic, where it’s still below zero?. Wouldn’t that decrease sea level as ice accumulates and increase sea ice as the extra ice it is forced into the sea by gravity? How would sea level be affected in 2100? How much of sea level rise is due to thermal expansion? Just asking for a friend.
Whatever the case was in December 2024 or 1979, what is clear is that very recent ice loss in Antarctica has accelerated in the last few weeks.
Oh no! Two down votes for simply making an observation…… difficult crowd to please here 🥴😬😉
More Heller nonsense! He picked some random time during the rapid seasonal decline and makes claims about how there’s more Antarctic sea ice than in 1979. Now we’re nearing the annual minimum sea ice in the Antarctic and what do we find? It’s 2nd lowest in the satellite period with ~2 weeks and little further melting to go! In fact if we look at global sea ice we see that it’s at a record low due in part to a record low Arctic sea ice area as well as the low Antarctic value!