The Motley Fool Discussion Boards

Previous Page

Investment Analysis Clubs / Macro Economic Trends and Risks


Subject:  Re: Arctic Ice Date:  2/24/2014  1:16 AM
Author:  1poorguy Number:  445358 of 479890

Area Of Old Arctic Sea Ice Has Tripled Since Mid-2011

Here we go again. Novices having a "scientific debate" about the data. I looked this up only because I never heard of Steven Goddard before, and didn't know if he might actually be worth listening to. Turns out he isn't. He has a masters in electrical engineering. And further, the article you cite was very quickly refuted by the organization he tried to use in support.

What’s really refreshing and amusing is how “Goddard” was immediately taken to task by none other than Julienne Stroeve, National Snow and Ice Data Center researcher whose iconic graph of accelerated sea ice loss I recently featured in a post. See here:

“Steve chose a graph that shows what he wants to portray while ignoring all the other institutions that show either a record low for 2011 or a “tie” with 2007. University of Bremen already announced it is a new record low. In my opinion, given the error margin of the measurement and algorithms, 2007 and 2011 basically tied in their extent this year. NSIDC will likely show 2011 as the second lowest, but again it’s within the error margin (which is about 50,000 sq-km).”

I said it before, and I'll say it again. It is ludicrous for bloggers and posters to think they can read an article, find a graph, or whatever, and stumble on some gem that proves that "the entire climate science community is wrong!!!!". It indicates a woeful lack of understanding how real science works.

Sure, it's fun to read the articles and learn new stuff. But don't kid yourself that you or any other novice (includin