On Oct 16, 10:46*pm, wrote:
On Oct 16, 9:48*pm, Dawlish wrote:





On Oct 16, 8:30*pm, wrote:

I've noticed that al the 'usual suspects' the BBC, Guardian,
Independent and of course the son of a affluent professional marxist;
now whats his name ..ah yes the boy Ed Milliband and associates, are
all keeping very quiet about the remarkable recovery of the Arctic sea
ice.
I'm not too sure if *Alastair and Dawlish posted-they usualy do if the
ice news is grim; but if never ceases to amaze me how all those that
are concerned that we heading for melt down stay silent when the
disaster is postponed.

The BBC are notorious for this but I digress the Arctic ice is
rebounding with seemingly,enthusiasm.http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/10/1...w-287-higher-t...

Just thought I'd make this point.

Lawrence; there are many times in the re-freeze and the melt seasons
when a snapshot appears to paint a picture. Don't be taken in by it
would be my advice. Look at the pattern of reducing summer Arctic Sea
ice over time. That's the only thing that actually means anything in
this. Wherever we appear to be in October means very little. Really.
So many times I've had to argue this point in the last few years and
the person who posts that something special is happening because area
A, or B, has more ice than last year, or that the pace of freezing is
quick, or the pace of melting seems slow, find it hard to accept that
a snapshot means nothing - but that's the case. I don't post a lot in
either the re-freeze, or the melt seasons until we get closer to the
the nadir of the low. It's cold up there at present. Things freeze
when it is cold and there's a lot of sea to freeze. Don't worry about
it. See where we are heading next July instead.

The "disaster" is a nice straw man, but I'm not sure anybody believes
that no summer Arctic Sea ice at all will be a disaster. Nice try, but
you can't expect me to argue against something that I believe to be
true!

Sorry to seem a tad impolite but my point was that you and others were
quick of the mark when it was melting *beyonf the norm (I still won
the bet by the way) but no where to be seen when the opposite is the
case. TBH if the Arctic reached 1978-2008- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You are not impolite in the slightest! However, if you look at the
anomaly on Cryosphere, it has remained constant at -2m km2 through the
start of the melt season, compared to the 1971-2000 mean. as a result,
I fail to see how this re-freeze is so incredible. In addition, just
look at the pace of last year's re-freeze from late Oct to early Nov.
and compare it to the first month of this year's re-freeze. I hope you
will come back after the first week of November and talk to us about
the continuing comparative pace of this year's re-freeze. I feel you
are, perhaps, being drawn in by a temporary, cold, synoptic set-up.

I was not "quick off the mark" Lawrence, I've commented in great
detail on Arctic Sea ice for the last 4 years and I was neither
quicker, nor slower than I was in each of the other 3 years!

You did win the bet! Well done! It was close, but no record. I would
have paid out gladly, the bookmaker having lost. I have a book for
next year on totally!, if you would be interested! *)) No record
being set = evens. A new record = 4/5. Tempting eh? Especially with
what you feel about this re-freeze!

http://totallyweatherandclimate.co.uk/

Like I say; take wherever we are now with a pinch of salt (damn,
that'll melt it) and see where we are again next July.