Just posting a few paragraphs from article, you have to read the full article with graphs.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/08/2...is-misleading/

21 08 2009
Guest Post By Bob Tisdale

The Seth Borenstein AP article about the recent high sea surface temperature.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...rwm7AD9A6OUF06
..is misleading. There is a significant difference between what Seth Borenstein reported and what
NOAA stated in the July "State of the Climate".
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/?repor...ear2009&month7

...

And looking at the monthly OI.v2 data since November 1981, Figure 4, there are numerous months with
higher SSTs.

...

The Borenstein article also claims that Arctic SST anomalies are as high as 10 deg F (5.5 deg C)
above average. Wow!! Really??

I used the SST map-making feature of the NOAA NOMADS system to create the map of high latitude
Northern Hemisphere SST anomalies for July 2009. The Contour Interval was set at 1 deg C to help
find the claimed excessively high SST anomalies. Alas, Borenstein was right, BUT, as you will note,
the ONLY area that reaches the 5 to 6 deg C range is the White Sea (indicated by the arrow) off the
Barents Sea.

...

To sum up the Borenstein article, it's factually incorrect in places, and in others, it raises
alarmism to ridiculous levels by dwelling on a meaningless statistic, the July SST anomaly of the
White Sea.

Eric Gisin wrote:
Just posting a few paragraphs from article, you have to read the full
article with graphs.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/08/2...is-misleading/

Same crap, different day.



21 08 2009
Guest Post By Bob Tisdale

The Seth Borenstein AP article about the recent high sea surface
temperature.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...rwm7AD9A6OUF06
.is misleading. There is a significant difference between what Seth
Borenstein reported and what NOAA stated in the July "State of the
Climate". http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/?repor...ear2009&month7

Just not one that makes any difference. lol