Many of the readers of Wattsupwiththat.com seem to think they know why Arctic sea ice has grown to a normal extent, as shown in the graph above — something that hasn’t been seen in many years. I have no idea why, so rather than speculate I’ll wait for the National Snow and Ice Data Center to publish it’s next monthly report in the coming days. When it does, I’ll skip the snark and just report the news, under my usual heading of “The Climate Bats Last.”
One way or another, it always does.
This thing has 10 Comments
You’ll skip the snark until you have the official spin from another organization? How sad.
OT, but is the Aristocrat still in business in downtown Boulder? I miss their six egg omelette’s.
Mike: I’m a journalist and I like to think that I don’t fall for spin. I don’t trust what one source says; my journalistic reporting is based on multiple sources, including primary document sources such as peer-reviewed papers and reports, and interviews with multiple experts. Moreover, I’ve covered science in general, and climate science in particular, going on 30 years. So when I report a news item about Arctic sea ice from the National Snow and Ice Data Center, I’m not just taking the word of Mark Serreze. But I also think Mark Serreze speaks with much more authority on the issue of Arctic sea ice than does Anthony Watts, let alone readers of his blog.
I also have to say that I find it said that you and so many other people have grown so cynical about scientists, thinking that they are all spinmeisters out to advance some pre-determined political agenda. In my work, I spend a lot of time with scientists who work in many different fields, and I haven’t met a single one who is interested in anything but determining the truth about nature. Are they fallible? Of course. They’re human. But venality? I find the cynicism of that point of view dispiriting.
On a cheerier note, Boulder still has some great breakfast places, including Dots Diner, which maybe you remember. But as far as I know, the Aristocrat is gone, sad to say.
“But I also think Mark Serreze speaks with much more authority on the issue of Arctic sea ice than does Anthony Watts, let alone readers of his blog.”
The same could have been said by the critics (who were the authority of the day) of Galileo Galilei. How did that end for the critics through the retrospective eye of history?
D Bonson: I concede the point that critics of AGW theoretically could be correct. But do you seriously mean to suggest that there is some parallel between Anthony Watts, a blogger and former television meteorologist, and Galileo, a physicist, mathematician and astronomer who taught at a university, made major improvements to the telescope, and was responsible for very significant scientific discoveries including observations of the moons of Jupiter — all before he even became a champion of the Copernican view of the universe? Do you seriously suggest that there is any comparison between Anthony Watts, who is no doubt extremely intelligent and knowledgeable, and Galileo, who was a giant in the field of science even before he made his biggest mark?
Here’s another way to consider the question of authority: If you get a diagnosis of lung cancer, who would you go to for treatment? A medical blogger who knows a lot about the subject and holds some strong views about certain treatment options, or a cancer specialist who has extensive training in the field and a long track record of treating people successfully?
As a journalist, I do pay attention to what Anthony Watts and others like him have to say. But I can’t possibly consider him to have equal authority to speak about the science of Arctic sea ice as Mark Serreze, who has been working in that particular scientific field for decades. I don’t even think Watts would say that I should do that.
Watts’ blog is always interesting, but most interesting are his guest bloggers including Spencer and Curry. I find Watt’s along with Pielke Jr. my favorite blogs on topic — along of course with CEJournal
.
A for authority — Serreze is (in)famous for his “death spiral” comment (and insults to Watts for not understanding it). Science (and authority) require falsifiable datum to validate. 2007′s loss was wind… (i.e. weather) and hasn’t resulted in the death spiral.
Clearly, authority has to be more than simple seniority…
But, Tom — eschewing snark!? I wouldn’t want you to hurt yourself my friend.
Here is the climate data: http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20100303_Figure3.png
You can argue all you want about this year or that year, wind, Arctic Oscillation, whatever. But the trend is the trend. And it is just one piece of a bigger puzzle.
And btw, if I ever cancer, I’ll be going to a specialist for treatment, not a blogger. You, of course, are free to do otherwise.
A mea culpa from Dr. (Mr.?) Serreze …
Quote:
“In retrospect, the reactions to the 2007 melt were overstated. The lesson is that we must be more careful in not reading too much into one event,” Serreze said.
End quote:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7086746.ece
I couldn’t agree more. I mean, just because the BoSox beat the Yankees in any given game…
John: Mark’s mea culpa confirms my trust in him as a scientific source. He can be persuaded by evidence, and he admits when he’s wrong. How utterly shocking in today’s hyperpartisan environment!
John: In my haste I neglected to comment on your reference to the travesty of opening day. So here goes…
Despite all the evidence that the BoSox are, in the long run, losers, millions of people across the country, not just in Boston, continue to believe in them. I, however, am guided by the evidence at hand, which suggests that in the long run you’d really be crazy to bet against the Yankees.
Sea ice may expand more than expected during one month or another, and the Yankees may lose to the Red Sox this game or that, or even this series or that. But this is simply a matter of odds. You choose to bet on continuing expansion of sea ice. Sounds like a an emotional attachment akin to betting on the BoSox one day finally having a better record in their rivalry with the Yankees. All I can say is good luck. (And while I’m at it, can I interest you in a bridge in Brooklyn?)
Nothing so deep as that… I was just twitting you about the opening day loss.