THE WARMING ARCTIC-DECONSTRUCTING THE PROPAGANDA WITH DATA
Once again it is that time of year, and no, I am not referring to the Christmas cheer of the Holiday Season as retailers' eyes become dollar signs rolling about in their sockets. I am of course talking about that time of year when the propagandists of the global warming narrative come out in full storm to tell us that the Arctic is warming up twice as fast as the rest of the world and the Arctic Ice is melting. Thus begins the hype twelve days before X-mas.
Warming in Arctic Raises Fears of a ‘Rapid Unraveling’ of the Region says the NY Times
WE’RE MELTING
Arctic Has Experienced Five Hottest Years on Record says The Daily Beast
Arctic's record warming driving 'broad change' in environment, says major study says The Straits Times
The Arctic’s warmest five years on record? 2014-present says The Star
ARCTIC REPORT CARD DETAILS EFFECT OF RECORD MELTING ON GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES says TECH2
Arctic's record warming driving 'broad change' in environment: study says The Digital Journal
December sea ice levels in Arctic Europe at record low says Radio Canada International
And of course, many of these articles come with the obligatory picture of a polar bear or of an image of broken ice.
image courtesy of the Straits Times
Image courtesy of NY Times
Or in the case of the CBC, they outdid everyone else and had a polar bear amid broken ice.
Image courtesy of the CBC
These articles with their bold headlines are clearly not trying to accurately inform you or appeal to your highly evolved reasoning abilities, that which separates you from the rest of the animal kingdom, they are attempting to invoke an emotional response, to appeal to your primal animalistic emotions. This is not news, it is propaganda, and sadly, far too many of you will fall for it. You will trust these News organizations to be the bastions of truth, there to inform you, and frankly, that is really quite niave of you to believe them when on so many instances(far too many to cite) they have gotten it wrong, if not totally failed in their responsibility as the Fifth Estate and simply parroted what Government said.
So, let's take a look at what they say with such hyperbolic language and see if it in any way has any merit.
Several of the headlines speak about how HOT! the Arctic is. That it is the WARMEST five years on record. So, what exactly is the temperature in the Arctic today?
In this screenshot I took from https://earth.nullschool.net it shows the temperature at the geographic North Pole to be a balmy -30* Celsius. And all those purple shaded areas are also in the -30 to -35* Celsius range. Does that seem like it is warming up and melting? I think not.
They also claim that this alleged warming of the Arctic is twice that of the rest of the planet. While most make the claim, they do not offer an actual number but provide a link to The Arctic Report Card put out by NOAA which links to a page offering "talking points" but no data. It is now up to you to search out the data to ensure they are being honest which of course most people will not do simply because they lack the time or the resources.
The Straits Times said. "During the latest period studied, October 2017 through September 2018, annual average temperature in the Arctic was 1.7 degrees Celsius higher than the 1981-2010 average."
The Digital Journal said, "During the latest period studied, October 2017 through September 2018, annual average temperature in the Arctic was 3.1 Fahrenheit (1.7 Celsius) higher than the 1981–2010 average.
The year 2018 was the second warmest year on record in the Arctic since 1900 (after 2016)."
While it seems the majority of the big news providers were vague, only two minor online news sources dared to provide specific data regarding what this terrible warming amounted to- 1.7* C. So, based on today's reading of the Arctic temperature provided by Nullschool.net, are we to believe that we should be concerned because the temperature went from -31.7* C to -30* C? And now at -30* C, somehow the ice is melting? Seriously? Does that make any sense to you when looked at in the light of actual data?
Imagine the ridiculousness of the headline if they actually put in facts such as real data?
ARCTIC ICE MELTS AS ARCTIC WARMS FROM -31.7C to -30 C!**
Somehow I doubt even the non-critical reader would believe such a headline. Then there are the claims that this is wreaking havoc upon the environment. How so? In this they make all kinds of spurious claims, none of which is actually backed by any scientific observations noe do they provide a mechanism an as to how it works. You are just supposed to believe the unnamed scientists allegedly behind the report. Haven't you learned to accept the authority of the unnamed scientist? Were you not paying attention in Public School as they tried to indoctinate you into subserviance? NO! well good for you.
What kind of havoc could come from such a minor fluctuation in temperatures? While it is true, the 1.7* C they claim is an average taken over the year, even then with temperatures as low as they are on average with the summer highs of 1.5* C and winter lows as low as -35* C or lower, such a fluctuation that they decry is insignificant and CANNOT negatively impact the environment as they claim and is really quite a ludicrous statement to make.
Well, of course they must go on about how the Arctic Ice is melting, even though it actually isn't. Again, while most make this claim, few actually try to support it with any data.
Radio Canada International(RCI) provides us with this image from the Norwegian Meteorological Institute in an attempt to show how little ice is in the Arctic.
This image took me a little while to figure out. First it is a regional area north of Norway, known as the Barents Sea, which begs the question; why did the RCI use this particular image? Wasn't there an image of the entire Arctic they could use? Well, of course there is, the only problem is that is does not support their argument. I have never before used the Norwegian Meteorological Institute's Ice charts and find it curious how they define the ice as various types of "drift ice". Those areas in red are what they call, "Very CLose Drift Ice". An unusual title that suggests there is little to no solidity to the ice and considering that DMI puts much of that ice well over three metres thick it seems somewhat deceptive of Norway . Let's call up today's image from the Danish Meteorological Institute, which is the database I prefer to use.
Here they show the Arctic Ice to be mostly between 2-4.5 metres(6.5ft-13.5ft) especilly around the North Pole which suggests to me that it is more than just very close drift ice. Also, take note how the DMI agrees with the chart from NMI used by Radio Canada International. Focusing on the ice conditions in one region to represent the ice conditions throughout the Arctic, is, once again, cherry-picking data and misrepresenting the truth. While we are at it, le't pull up NOAA ice chart.
As far as ice extent is represented all three seem to agree on the area in question that IRC used as a representation of the condition of Arctic Ice in its entirety. While Nullschool.net does not do Ice Charts per se, they do do Sea Surface Temperatures and when we pull up their image of SST we see an area in the Arctic with no temperature data as it is supposedly under ice which confirms to the other three charts.
Now the real question is whether or not the ice conditions in this region are typical or not and for this I will use DMI data, starting with 2004, the GIF below shows the ice extent and thickness for every year between 2004-2018 on Dec 10
And as you can plainly see that region Radio Canada International used as a representation of the state of Arctic Ice overall has not had ice there in fourteen years. What these images also show is how variable the state of the ice can be, that in some years it does get much lower than other years, but equally so, there are years that show much more thickness. One thing is certain is that it is in constant flux, coming and going but never disappearing altogether.
In the end, exclamations about it being the second warmest year of record in the Arctic or that it is warming up faster than the rest of the world are not science, as they do not paint a clear cut picture. These are political statements meant to trigger an emotional response and incite fear. A change from -31.7* C to -30* C cannot and will not have disasterous effects on the environmnet. Claims that such a fluctuation is the cause of the meridional jet stream has no basis in science. It is fear mongering for Christmas, so, as your family gathers you can all lament the end of civilization due to global warming, unaware of the true threat that faces the human species in the years to come. A threat that has nothing to do with how much manmade carbon dioxide is in the atmosphere and everything to do with the natural cyclicity of climate and the sun. It is the threat of global famine brought on by crop losses due to a Grand Solar Minimum.
Thank you for reading. To see more posts like this, please feel free to follow me. Leave an interesting question or comment and I shal follow you.
Compiled and written by Freddie Thornton
PEACE
@daemon-nice