SEPTEMBER 20, 2021
NY Times: Arctic Sea Ice Hits Annual Low, but It’s Not as Low as Recent Years
Cool conditions north of Alaska in August reduced melting, scientists say, but the overall is still downward.
Greta Gloomberg can’t be too happy about this news. Actually, even when that demonic front-child for the Globalists is happy, she’s still miserable. According to this limited hangout piece — based on analysis from crooked crackpot “scientists” at the National Snow and Ice Data Center at the University of Colorado — Arctic sea-ice coverage is 25% greater than it was at this time last year. Given the propensity of these whore-scientists to lie and lie and lie (cha ching and cha ching and cha ching) — we can probably infer that the true increase year-over-year may even be closer to 50%. But gloom up, Greta — the distinguished PhDs. assure us that “the overall trend remains downward.”
Let’s melt down this Fake Science / Fake News article, starting with the “heart-breaking” image and caption of a Polar Bear, “stranded” on a piece of ice. Parkas and snow boots on, boys and girls. Into the Slimes’ thin ice of “logic” we go for some easy debunking of the Climate Con.
Times Photo Caption: A polar bear on an ice floe….
Rebuttal: These emotionally manipulative images of the “stranded” lovable giant fur-balls are calculated to induce the teary-eyed boobs into “do something” mode. The pictures are real, but what (((they))) omit is the fact that these blubbery buoyant beasts can swim for days at a time over tremendous distances. One polar bear was monitored as it swam for nine days straight — traversing 426 miles — which is about the distance between Washington, D.C. and Boston (here). And when one of these super-marathon swimmers stops to take a break on an ice floe — CLICK! The felons of Fake News take their made-for-Normiedom photograph and use it for scare content.
Times: The (ice) total is a reminder that the climate is naturally variable, and that variability can sometimes outweigh the effects of climate change.
Rebuttal: Sea ice retreats: “Aha! You see! You see! It’s Global Warming !” — Sea ice spreads by 25%: “Don’t confuse weather and climate. These are natural variations.” See the rhetorical trick?
Times: But the overall downward trend of Arctic sea ice continues,
Rebuttal: First of all, these greasy characters have been caught fudging data so many times, that no rational person ought to even believe that there is a “downward trend,” at all. But why would researchers rely upon something as vast, as vague and as variable as Arctic ice observation to support the Climate Con when we have the capacity to accurately measure — hour by hour — the exact temperature of every square mile of Earth? That’s about as ass-backwards as estimating the temperature inside of a refrigerator by touching the milk bottle, when all one has to do is read the digital temp monitor!
Times: … as the region warms more than twice as fast as other parts of the world.
Rebuttal: You see, it’s easy to make such bold claims about rising Arctic temps because nobody lives there. Whereas Boobus Normie, on the basis of his own experience and observation, might be skeptical of claims that Anytown, USA is now hotter than ever; he would have no basis to raise any questions about the “twice as fast” warming of the Arctic. Trickery, trickery, trickery.
Times: But thinning or complete melting of thicker Arctic sea ice (there is now about one-fourth as much as there was four decades ago) is troubling.
Rebuttal: Why exactly would that be “troubling?” Ice that sits on top of water (Arctic Ocean) doesn’t raise sea-levels (another scare hoax) when it melts. Only ice that is packed a mile deep on land (such as Antarctica) could do that.
Times: The thinner sea ice gets, the more sunlight it lets through to the water underneath, which can generate even more warmth as more of the sun’s energy is absorbed and re-emitted as heat.
Rebuttal: Oh. I see. Then perhaps we can spread giant floating white tarps over the Arctic? (Better watch my jokes here. These psychopaths might actually do such a thing.)
Times: And since first-year ice, being thinner, is more prone to melting completely, as it replaces older ice the region overall becomes more susceptible to melting.
Rebuttal: The alleged decades-old melting of old ice will have a synergistic effect as it combines with the warming atmosphere — thus leading to the melting of even more old ice. So then — why is ice up 25% this year? — Oh, that’s right. Weather is not to be confused with climate — unless the weather gets warmer. Then it’s one and the same.
Times: Many scientists expect the Arctic may become ice-free in summers …..
Rebuttal: No doubt the same crooked ass-clowns whose “computer models” predicted that our winters to have become snow-free by now — or that lower Manhattan would have been underwater by Year 2000.
Times: … within a decade or two.
Analysis: Ever notice how the gloom & doom forecasts are ALWAYS “within a decade or two?” The reason for this is simple. You see, if the crooked scientists set doomsday too close, then the normies will start to question their expertise when the doom fails to materialize. But if the date is set too far in the future — like say, 50 years or more — then normie won’t feel any sense of urgency. Therefore, “a decade or two” (always adjusted to remain at “a decade or two”) is just about right. Trickery. Trickery. Trickery.
The deceptions are easy to spot once you know (((their))) playbook. The real problem now is that so many children are getting brainwashed with this, starting in the first grade.