On Sunday, April 6, 2014 4:14:22 PM UTC+1, Lawrence Jenkins wrote:
On Sunday, 6 April 2014 15:11:57 UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:

On Sunday, April 6, 2014 2:44:30 PM UTC+1, Lawrence Jenkins wrote:



On Sunday, 6 April 2014 12:49:45 UTC+1, Lawrence Jenkins wrote:







On Sunday, 6 April 2014 12:43:51 UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:















Same as you have been told dozens of times. It's no-one'a fault but your own that you are *still* ignorant of the differences. shakes head































Maybe you should take the time as you make the sea ice posts , just exactly why record positive beyond standard deviation sea ice in the SH doesn't matter and is in fact a sign of global warming, or so I believe that's what you are saying.































I'm popping now out to get the shopping and expect your reply up and posted by the time I return.































No reply yet?















shakes head don't know why but I shakes head







What, you missed this?







"Same as you have been told dozens of times. It's no-one'a fault but your own that you are *still* ignorant of the differences."







You could cure your ignorance, but after so many times being told, it's clear you are incapable of doing so.







Still no reply.....are you 'avin' a graph?

You've had two already and you've been told the reasons for the Arctic/Antarctic differences dozens of times. Someone was kind enough to explain it to you again after the last NSIDC update and there is no way I'm telling you again, as it would have no effect. You'd still continue to think that because Antarctic ice is not reducing, GW can't somehow be happening and therein lies your problem.

And yes, I am having a laugh at your continued ignorance on the subject.