the ice is not all melting

It turns out that the data that suggested the ice was melting at a catastrophic rate was based on an older method of determining where ice exists. The scientists were sticking with an older, less accurate model for tracking the extents of sea ice. Why would they avoid using a newer, better model?

We do not use [the newer] data in our analysis because it is not consistent with our historical data.

Basically, their old data was inaccurate, but they kept using the old tracking model so it would match their old (may I reiterate, inaccurate) data. Well, I read a book by Plato that said there are only four elements: fire, earth, wind, and water. That is what all my old data is based on, so I’m going to ignore this whole periodic table of elements nonsense. This was all discovered when some people saw the charts showing “open ocean” in places that ice clearly exists. It turns out they could have underestimated the amount of ice that exists by up to 500,000 square kilometers.

Call me when the sea level rises fifty centimeters.

February 19, 2009 at 8:30 am

@skoda on @technochocolate on