"Feb. 20 (Bloomberg) -- A glitch in satellite sensors caused scientists to underestimate the extent of Arctic sea ice by 500,000 square kilometers (193,000 square miles), a California- size area, the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center said.
The error, due to a problem called “sensor drift,” began in early January and caused a slowly growing underestimation of sea ice extent until mid-February. That’s when “puzzled readers” alerted the NSIDC about data showing ice-covered areas as stretches of open ocean, the Boulder, Colorado-based group said on its Web site.
“Sensor drift, although infrequent, does occasionally occur and it is one of the things that we account for during quality- control measures prior to archiving the data,” the center said. “Although we believe that data prior to early January are reliable, we will conduct a full quality check.’’
The extent of Arctic sea ice is seen as a key measure of how rising temperatures are affecting the Earth. The cap retreated in 2007 to its lowest extent ever and last year posted its second- lowest annual minimum at the end of the yearly melt season. The recent error doesn’t change findings that Arctic ice is retreating, the NSIDC said."
The above is from a Bloomberg story now linked on Drudge, hwere you can link to the whole story. There are any number of lessons in this story as to the total fraud (yep, I use that word and mean it) of mand-made "global warming".
First, this is far from the first time (more like abouta the hundredth time) that "global warming" data has proven to be wrong, or misleading. These errors never "affect" the theory, as no new data affects the theory, because the "theory" is a religion rather than a true scientific "theory> For that matter, as the blog has shown you time and time again, the "theory" of "global warming" has never been a fully developed scientific theory, but a vague hypothesis that the Earth is warming because of greenhouse gases. In real science, this kind of "theory" is tested by evaluation o its specific predictions in a skeptical manner. "Global warming" "theory" has never been successful in specifically predicting anything, including the climate for any particular section of the Earth or of the Earth as a whole. As a scientific "theory", it is a total fraud. Even an error in the size of the polar ice cap the size of California does not "affect" "global warming" theory, because the "theory" is not specific enough to predict a damn thing.
Buried in the above story, along with the fact that the arctic ice cap has always "retreated" in summer and re-frozen in winter, is the fact that 2008 was the "second" smallest polar ice cap (in summer--notice there is really nothing prominent in the story about the total size now, in winter). Is that "retreating"? Of coure not. The arctic ice cap is EXPANDING (from the evidence of 2007 and 2008). This would be consistent with the abundant evidence, including the last two winters and temperature data since 1998, that the Earth is now COOLING.
The fraud does not stop there. Note the "global warming" "theory" is based primarily on "estimates", and indirect data. We have little direct data on the amount of arctic sea ice or on sea levels around the world (see Michael Crichton's "State of Fear"), "Global warming "theory" is not really a theory of "climate" or atmospheric physics at all. It is nothing but a set of computer models into which incomplete data and self-proving assumptions have been inserted. The actual data is fallible, and the assumptions are outrageously biased. Further, the failure of each predictiion is simply "explained" away by new assumptions, and new data is prettty much ignored in terms of its "effect" on the "theory".
It gets worse. Notice how the above story calls the melting of arctic sea ice as a "key measure" of the effect of "global warming" on the Earth. Let us pass by the fact that the Earth has warmed more than this before, without man. It is an outright LIE to say that 2007 represented a "record" low for summer sea ice, unless you mean "record" to refer only to the time when we have accurate? estimates of the size of the polar ice cap. But the Earth has been heer a long time, and it is clear that the arctic ice has melted much more in times for which we do not have accurate? records. I digress (not really).
WHY is the melting of arctic sea ice a "key measure" of the effect "global warming" is having on the Earth No reason. It is simply the measure upon which that "global warming priests" have chosen to concentrate, as other "measures" have ceased to support their "theory". NASA, for example (at least one part of NASA) has described the increase in summer melting of arctic sea ice as mainly the result of a natural cycle of ocean currents--the same kind of cycle that many scienists say is now COOLING the Earth, or significant portions of it (cycle of other ocean currents).
Remember Antarctica? "Global warming" priests used to concentrate on that (where most of the world's ice is locked on land--arctic sea ice having no real effect on sea levels). Unfortunately for those priests, data from antarctica has been conflicting--even suggesting that the amount of ice is growing on most of the continent. Everyone has realize that our data on most of Antarctica is not sufficient to determine what is really going on there. All of those pictures of ice sheets breaking off the peninsula have little or nothing to do with what is happening to Antarctica as a whole, and that fact finally became impossible to ignore. See, again, "State of Fear". Exit Antarctica as a "key measure", and enter the less significant arctic (lesss significant, because less ice is there, and it is floating ice). Here, of course, the "global warming" priests have to ignore those ocean currents, but these priests are experienced at ignoring more serious things than that.
For example, the summer melting of the arctic ice is WEATHER. Remember how "global warming" priests used to cite warming WEATHER in the U.S. as a "key measure" of "global warming". Thus, 2006 essentially tied with 1936 as the warmest year in recorded American temperatures. As MIchael Crichton said, this leaves the unfortunate conclusion that there is no real warming TREND in the U.S. since 1880. How could there be, when temperatures have gone up and down, with NO warming between 1936 and 2006. You should see where this is going.
Since 2006, temperatures in the U.S. have COOLED--significantly. We are not longer having even "third" warmest years. We are having averate to COOL years. What is the "response" of "global warming" priests? You know it. Well there is the feeble response that all climate chnge--including cooling--is the result of man's activities. But this leaves the entire basis of the "theory" behind. It is totally based on "warming", and without the "warming" there is no theory. That attempt to adopt all "climate change" as evidence of "global warming" is an obvious, ridiculous fraud. But "scientists" have a fall back position from that fraudulent position. This fall back is that the U.S. is only 6% of the Earth's surface, and that U.S. data is just "weather". That, of course, did not stop the "global warming" priests from citing U.S. data when they thought they could use that data (before the U.S. data became so obviously embarrassing to them).
Why is arctic data not merely "weather"? Indeed, why is all "global warming" data not easier explained as a result of natural cycles, which have occurred before, instead of a result of the activities of man? And, by the way, why did "global warming" theory not PREDICT the climate of the U.S. the last two years? "Global warming" priests have no answers for questions like this, and count on the mainstream media (and scientists who know where their bread is buttered) to cover for them.
Melting of arctic sea ice IS merely the result of weather, and ocean currents. There is no reason to suppose it is a "key measure" of "global warming", except that the "global warming" priests suddenly assert it to be so. If this "key measure" suddently fails them (as it really did this last summer--"second" indeed!), they wil come up with a new "key measure" This is a religion, and not a very good one (Christianity, in which I do not believe as I believe in no religion, actually makes more sense).
I know. I have become verbose again. You should get the idea. "Global warming" priests continue to pay attention only to the data they think supports them, and to ignore data which does not support them "Record" snowfalls in New Orleans and Houston are unimportant, while similar weather in the arctic (in the opposite direction) is "key". Deliver me.
"Global warming" is a total fraud as a "scientific" "theory".