Comments on: Data Error: Arctic Sea Ice Extent Underestimated by 500,000 Sq Km http://climateresearchnews.com/2009/02/data-error-arctic-sea-ice-extent-understimated-by-500000-square-kilometers/ Bridging the gap between reality and official science Wed, 17 Mar 2010 21:06:38 +1000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8 hourly 1 By: Tim http://climateresearchnews.com/2009/02/data-error-arctic-sea-ice-extent-understimated-by-500000-square-kilometers/comment-page-1/#comment-36182 Tim Tue, 08 Dec 2009 03:08:43 +0000 http://climateresearchnews.com/?p=815#comment-36182 Bryan, Of course you only measure ice of certain thickness! Pack ice is very different than the thinner ice, and you CAN NOT equate the two. And yes sometimes you can get rapid growth of thin ice in a particular year, butthen it ALL can be gone come summer. Whereas pack ice takes a lot more thermal energy to melt. Bryan,

Of course you only measure ice of certain thickness! Pack ice is very different than the thinner ice, and you CAN NOT equate the two. And yes sometimes you can get rapid growth of thin ice in a particular year, butthen it ALL can be gone come summer. Whereas pack ice takes a lot more thermal energy to melt.

]]> By: Bryan http://climateresearchnews.com/2009/02/data-error-arctic-sea-ice-extent-understimated-by-500000-square-kilometers/comment-page-1/#comment-13945 Bryan Tue, 10 Mar 2009 15:44:56 +0000 http://climateresearchnews.com/?p=815#comment-13945 Just like how they only measure ice of a certain thickness, totally excluding the rapid growth of new forming, thinner ice. Just like how they only measure ice of a certain thickness, totally excluding the rapid growth of new forming, thinner ice.

]]> By: Sam http://climateresearchnews.com/2009/02/data-error-arctic-sea-ice-extent-understimated-by-500000-square-kilometers/comment-page-1/#comment-12247 Sam Wed, 25 Feb 2009 13:21:36 +0000 http://climateresearchnews.com/?p=815#comment-12247 There has to more to it than wanting to be "consistent with our historical data". It seems like it would be pretty easy to provide an equation that relates the AMSR-E data to the old data, so that you could still use the new sensors to track the "long-term changes". It's sort of like using Celcius and Fehrenheit. As long as you know their relationship, it doesn't matter if the numbers are different. There has to more to it than wanting to be “consistent with our historical data”. It seems like it would be pretty easy to provide an equation that relates the AMSR-E data to the old data, so that you could still use the new sensors to track the “long-term changes”. It’s sort of like using Celcius and Fehrenheit. As long as you know their relationship, it doesn’t matter if the numbers are different.

]]> By: James Mayeau http://climateresearchnews.com/2009/02/data-error-arctic-sea-ice-extent-understimated-by-500000-square-kilometers/comment-page-1/#comment-11771 James Mayeau Sun, 22 Feb 2009 00:52:09 +0000 http://climateresearchnews.com/?p=815#comment-11771 They want to be consistent with the Gore agenda. That's nice of them to admit. They want to be consistent with the Gore agenda. That’s nice of them to admit.

]]> By: NSIDC: We know it’s better, we don’t want it « Bob’s Bites http://climateresearchnews.com/2009/02/data-error-arctic-sea-ice-extent-understimated-by-500000-square-kilometers/comment-page-1/#comment-11740 NSIDC: We know it’s better, we don’t want it « Bob’s Bites Sat, 21 Feb 2009 18:37:39 +0000 http://climateresearchnews.com/?p=815#comment-11740 [...] Climate Research News [...] [...] Climate Research News [...]

]]>