The Arctic ice cap grows by 60% in a year. I blame Gore

[petros]

Caution-Peligro-Avertissement* ​

Fact - The extra 533,000sq km is still reflecting 497,000,000,000 more Watts of solar energy back into space.​

That's enough energy to send 410,74402,000,000 people​

Or somewhere?​

Any ideas?
​

*This Message Is Approved By:
Pedro de la Pradera and
The Aluminatti Investigation Team​

 

[hunboldt]

Seriously? That's your greatest hope?

Wow.

he's having an excitable afternoon:lol:
Climate change to date has benefited Canada. and Greenland .
NOAA Paleoclimatology Global Warming - The Data

by the year 1,000 the Greenlanders were thriving..

 

[Kreskin]

Blame NASA.

NASA Time-lapse Satelite Imagery of Arctic Ice Cap Melt - YouTube

from Fark

And now it's global COOLING! Record return of Arctic ice cap as it grows by 60% in a year

• Almost a million more square miles of ocean covered with ice than in 2012
• BBC reported in 2007 global warming would leave Arctic ice-free in summer by 2013
• Publication of UN climate change report suggesting global warming caused by humans pushed back to later this month

Global cooling: Arctic ice caps grows by 60% against global warming predictions | Mail Online

There are plenty of arctic regions without ice that had ice not too long ago. Besides, if you go down 50% then up 60% does that mean you ended up higher? Don't get suckered by idiot math.

 

[petros]

15 year of stagnant warming and a rebound of ice and an albedo with libido means the big drop in energy is going to continue awhile yet.

Did we save the rainforest with paper cups or something?

 

[Johnnny]

There are plenty of arctic regions without ice that had ice not too long ago. Besides, if you go down 50% then up 60% does that mean you ended up higher? Don't get suckered by idiot math.

my question about the math is this...

Say 100 represents the ice when it was at its maximum. If it goes down 50%, that would give you 50. Then if the ice went up 60% from the 50 that remains would that mean that = 80.....So wouldn't that mean that pack ice is still 20% less of what it is?

im just curious if im going about my math wrong?

 

[hunboldt]

my question about the math is this...

Say 100 represents the ice when it was at its maximum. If it goes down 50%, that would give you 50. Then if the ice went up 60% from the 50 that remains would that mean that = 80.....So wouldn't that mean that pack ice is still 20% less of what it is?

im just curious if im going about my math wrong?

YOu are absolutely right. there is also a decrease of 20% and a further decrease in old ice density

 

[Cliffy]

The area of ice is irrelevant. What is the mass of ice, then and now? New ice is thin, old ice is thick.