On Mar 26, 11:06*pm, "Lawrence Jenkins" wrote:
"Stewart Robert Hinsley" wrote in ...





In message , Lawrence Jenkins
writes
Okay the Catlin expedition, Al Gore, Paul Garvey, Alastair, the IPCC and
so
on, have all told us that the Arctic ice was in terminal decline. Why even
Mark Serrezehttp://nsidc.org/research/bios/serreze.html*-and no that is
not a hippy pony tail and he has no political view on AGW - has told us
that
the ice was'is in peril due to the awful things that humans have done so
that we can communicate by the internet.

But please someone help me out he shouldn't this ice be dissapearing?
http://arctic-roos.org/observations/.../ice-area-and-
extent-in-arctic/?searchterm=sea%20ice%20areas

*and in this one the ice is still expanding past its average peakwhen a
decline should have started.

You'll have to explain how you interpret that diagram to reach that
conclusion.

Please someone explain this to me as I'm confused

By now you should know that interannual variation is superimposed on the
secular trend, and a monotonic year to year decrease is not expected.
Similarly interannual variability (weather) results in variations in the
date of the peak.

You might also observe that the retreat of the ice is more prominent
during the summer months than the winter months.
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

Ermm... so I see.... I think. However there are two issues here *one that
the peak may vary put I can only assume that all those modle speaks we see
are an average ; so the ice is still growing above the average trend so to
peak. The second *issue is the level of ice which seems to be be trending
back to what we can with confidence say is normal.

As for your sophistry and particularly the word secular; I'm an atheist.

When I see jargonistic arrogant replies like yours I think of this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JECTUQVrvzE- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

To simplify things Lawrence, for you certainly need it: it's synoptics
and whatever the amount at the end of the melt season is just about
irrelevant. It's the overall 30-year trend that tells us something.

The next NSIDC explanation will explain, I'm sure and like you, I'm
interested in what the explanation will be. I hope you will be able to
understand it, but if you don't, that's just tough, sorry.

PS What does this mean? ................."I can only assume that all
those modle speaks we see are an average". I don't think it is
sophistry and there are some that wouldn't be happy if you tried to
blame your eyes again! So what does it actually mean? Please explain.