Putin has said that he sees warming as a benefit to Russia, and environmental protection has always been one of Russia's lowest priorities. Look for the Arctic to be thoroughly trashed by Russia.

The melting permafrost at Siberian oil fields is due to disruption of the tundra, not global warming. When the natural vegetation is replaced by dark roads and mud, the permafrost below melts. The oil industry is filthy and if America has any common sense it will invest heavily in new technologies which can replace it's dependence on oil and gas.

5'-3" Putin wants to rule the world.

If there is such a large reserve of oil and natural gas in the Artic, how did it get there? I thought such reserves were generated by decaying plant and animal life. Guess it must have been tropical there at some point?

Don't panic, it shall all freeze over again soon

Putin's only 5'-3"? Great, a little man trying to rule the big world.

Interesting:

Nice point, was probably due to the SUVs the dinos drove.

Gee, you really think a bunch of governments will make this political, nah, never would happen.

Arctic sea ice is increasing by almost 1,000,000 km2 per week.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.365.jpg

Antarctic sea ice is holding steady at almost 1,000,000 km2 above normal.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.365.south.jpg

If current trends continue, worldwide sea ice will be near it's highest level in many years by the end of 2007.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg

Very interesting article Brett.
It answers a lot of lingering questions around why Putin suddenly did his about face in 2004 and rescued the Kyoto Protocol.

http://www.culturechange.org/global_warming_crisis_councilRussiaKyoto.html

With the world scared stupid by the AGW alarmists there is a strong push to convert power generation away from coal to .....
Natural Gas.
Putin will coincidentally have a bunch of it to sell.
Hmmmmm. AGW never was about climate change. It is about money, power and control of all us little people who blindly dance to the piper on command.

"Arctic sea ice is increasing by almost 1,000,000 km2 per week."

Patrick, do you even look at your own graphs? Do you see that we're about 3 million square km below normal up in the Arctic?

Yes, Patrick, the Arctic gains ice as we approach winter. Thanks for letting us know that. What an unbiased observer -- which you are not -- will notice is that as the Arctic was gaining ice in October, as it does during every October, the anomalies significantly decreased during that month. What this tells us is that the rate of ice expansion during October is much lower than it's supposed to be.

"If there is such a large reserve of oil and natural gas in the Artic, how did it get there? I thought such reserves were generated by decaying plant and animal life. Guess it must have been tropical there at some point?"

Gee, I wonder how many humans lived during that time. Hmm...maybe...NONE?

But hey, if the climate was great for the dinosaurs, surely it's great for us, too.

Oleg is absolutely correct. Russia has ambitions of regaining World Supremecy, make no questions about this.

Russia is a growing powerhouse and a key player in end of times prophecy. Control of some of these arctic reserves will help reinforce their strength. Compile this with the Kremlin encouraging its citizens to produce children, through incentives, and you will have a well funded army. Putin just visited Iran and it wasn't to have cous-cous and hummus. Russia is laying the foundation for a hostile take over. They will join an Arab federation geared to destroy Israel and gain control of the middle-east. They can rule by controlling the fuel that drives economy and military.

Can we drill for more oil in Alaska yet?

Mark, I am neither an optimist nor a pessimist. I am a realist. War is coming brother, no doubt. There is nothing we can do to stop it. I pray for mercy and forgiveness. Trust me Mark, I wish it wasn't supposed to be like this. I wish we could live in peace. If everyone believed in Jesus and followed his teachings, this world would be a much better place. He knew what he was talking about. Most did not listen. Now look at us.

Temperatures in the interior of Greenland averaged an amazing -30F in October. Alaska was also quite cold. Without the warm El Nino weather that influenced the arctic last October - February it is quite likely that arctic ice extent will make a large recovery this winter.
http://www.wunderground.com/history/station/04416/2007/10/1/MonthlyHistory.html

For those numerically and graphically challenged members of our community, compare the steep slope this year vs. the shallow slope at this time last year.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.365.jpg

Mark,

...we're about 3 million square km below normal up in the Arctic...

Who decides what is "normal"? Would "normal" be the ice extent during the 60s and 70s? What was the ice extent in the 20s and 30s, Mark? Was it below "normal" then, also?

Can we see what is making headlines today please, 11/01/07.

Oil nears $100.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20071101/D8SKQ1PO0.html
Russia and China (both key players in end of times prophecy) block Iran sanctions.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071101/ts_nm/iran_nuclear_dc_17
Hezbollah can strike Tel Aviv.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071101/ap_on_re_mi_ea/un_lebanon_israel_1
China hikes fuel prices amid shortages.
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/071101/china_fuel_prices.html?.v=9
Dollar Slumps Against Euro, Pound and Canadian Dollar
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/071031/dollar.html?.v=3

A lot of tension. Im sure there is a report out there that we are doomed because of AGW.

As promised, here are some numbers on temperatures in Nunavut this October. All data comes from the Weather Underground. As a note of warning, they don't really list the time periods for their climactic normals.

Location High Low

Shepherd Bay +4 +10
Taloyoak +3 +4
Iqaluit +1 +1
Nanisivik +2 +1
Kugluktuk +3 +4
Eureka +4 +9

High and Low are the temperature anomalies in degrees F for the daily high and low, respectively. Of course, this is not an exhaustive survey of the territory
but it certainly is worrying.

"For those numerically and graphically challenged members of our community, compare the steep slope this year vs. the shallow slope at this time last year."

There is no data on that graph for this time last year, Patrick. The first month it starts with is November 2006. So you're basically extrapolating the steepness of October's curve onto November, then comparing it with last November. Good job, Patrick. I see they taught you well in school.

Also, the fact that on November 1, 2006 we were at about 7 million sq km of ice, while today -- exactly one year later -- we are at 5 million sq km of ice, is apparently lost on you.

Do you even bother to check your own links? The only way a person can post such misleading information is: 1) if they're deliberately doing it or 2) they're intoxicated.

RICH,

I was at a Halloween party last night talking to a Catholic Priest who is convinced that CO2 will kill off all developed life forms on our planet. It is remarkable how politicians and the mass media have managed to divert large sections of the population away from any issues having to do with reality.

Man seeks to escape himself in myth, and does so by any means at his disposal. Drugs, alcohol, or lies. Unable to withdraw into himself, he disguises himself. Lies and inaccuracy give him a few moments of comfort.
Jean Cocteau

RICH,

Here ya go:

Monkey Sighting Stirs Climate Fears in Kenya

and

Lake Superior called 'early victim of climate change'

Then, there's this (I'm not sure that it qualifies as doom and gloom, but it's close.):

Northern Pebbles New Pawns in Arctic Chess Game

But, wait. There's more:

Rising fear of energy crisis this winter

and

La Nina to Persist into 2008 - UN Weather Agency

Wait, La Nina is the cooling of the oceans. What the...???

What this tells us is that the rate of ice expansion during October is much lower than it's supposed to be.

Mark,

What is the rate of ice expansion during Oct "supposed" to be and what is your baseline?

Thanks,

Steve

Rich,

Turn off your TV, stop googling on the computer and don't read any newspapers for 6 months. You will be a much better man for it. You're worrying over everything you can't control.

When you turn the TV back on and read the papers, you'll see that it's all the same types of bad news headlines about political corruption, wars, droughts, wildfires, hurricanes, tornados, floods and starvation.

These topics have been the main focus of newscasts for the last 50 years, because bad news and sensationalism sells and you've been caught up as a buyer, and now, unfortunately, it is what drives your everyday life.

Global warming is no different. It has been spun from a Hollywood studio and has developed dedicated followers, much the same as Star Wars or Star Trek fans worldwide, who were missing some sort of unquestioning fulfilment and direction in life.

Hi Mark,

on November 1, 2006 we were at about 7 million sq km of ice, while today -- exactly one year later -- we are at 5 million sq km of ice

I've got a proposal for you. If it turns out on December 15 that arctic sea extent is greater than on December 15, 2006 - will you agree to stay out of any technical discussions in the future? How could we possibly catch up 2,000,000km2 in only six weeks? Seems like a sure win for you.

Deal?

PH, a real priest or one in costume? Thats sad if a real one. A priest should know better. Things are happening now for a reason. God gave us the ability to figure this out. We have so much at our disposal to connect the dots. However people choose not to connect the dots. If God is even in the car, he is certainly in the backseat. Gods rival is driving the car and his direction is south. This rival has always been good at creating distractions and division.

Paul, thanks, I guess...LOL. I knew there were distractions out there.

Understanding how things work does not make us God.

Patrick,

When have you ever had a technical discussion? Most of the stuff you post is either data that was either 1) carefully cherry-picked to support your preconceived position, or 2) taken completely out of context and thus losing its meaning.

Also, I don't make "bets," Patrick. That's not how science works. Scientists do not sit there and "wish" or "hope" for the results to turn out a certain way. Your credibility is already on shaky ground, but this really makes you look foolish.

"I've got a proposal for you. If it turns out on December 15 that arctic sea extent is greater than on December 15, 2006 - will you agree to stay out of any technical discussions in the future?"

Translation: Please, Please, PLEASE, Mark, stop exposing my arguments for the frauds that they are!

My answer: No.

Mark,

I'm giving you a 2,000,000 km2 head start and you won't take me up on even odds? Sounds like you are not very confident of your position.

Scientists do not sit there and "wish" or "hope" for the results to turn out a certain way.

Mark,

He's not wishing or hoping. He's flat out telling you that Arctic Sea Ice will surpass that of last year on Dec. 15th, even giving you a 1,400 km X 1,400 km spread.

Your credibility is already on shaky ground, but this really makes you look foolish.

Credibility smed-ability. Credibility is SUBJECTIVE. Science is OBJECTIVE. Meaning the words I, ME, YOU, YOUR, MEANINGFUL, SIGNIFICANT, ETC have no place in it.

Your "credibility" shows you can't/won't finish a debate you are losing. How about our debate on how the Stratosphere is cooling because supposedly less IR radiation is getting to it from the troposphere from a while back? You pointed out an error I made, I corrected it and you disappeared.

Care to take it back up? Or there is a similar topic (Ozone) in the next thread and you even have a post from me to start with.

PH,

You are spot on in saying it is time for us to fight back. For too long we have ignored these Anthropogenic Spoiled Brats and given them room to throw tantrums.

Let's start nailing them down to actually debate a topic rather than just letting them name call (some are pretty good, I like Contrarian the most:), dropping debates, and whining about "credibility".

Recently, Steve Bloom simply stopped replying in a debate and BT went off into fantasy land. We can "wish" and "hope" to actually get one of these AGW'ers to finish a debate, but I won't hold my breathe.

Y'all have a nice weekend,

Steve

NGW Steve,

Now that you mention it, I've noticed the same thing. I was having a nice little debate on subglacial lakes and moulins a while back with bt, when I asked him some questions, the boy disappeared. He sounded like he had all the right answers, at least he thought he did. I figured he get back to me so we could continue our little discussion. Nothing.

I can't remember anything coming out of Mark's posts other than some hot air and bluster. No substance, no backup.

Come on, bt, Mark, Mr. Bllom, Andrew, etc. Get a backbone and continue the debate, instead of running and hiding. Sheesh!!

Come on, bt, Mark, Mr. Bllom, Andrew, etc. Get a backbone and continue the debate, instead of running and hiding. Sheesh!!

I wasted far too much time on Steve's recent "specific heat" red herring and Paul's earlier rants about Correll's interpretation of recent data. When Paul, "NGW Steve", or anyone else offers something substantive to respond to, I will.

In the meantime, I'll cast my lot with the IPCC, realclimate, and peer-reviewed journals like Nature and Science.

In the meantime, I'll cast my lot with the IPCC, realclimate, and peer-reviewed journals like Nature and Science.

See you picked some real winners there, bt. Predictable.