Recent Comments
Prev 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 Next
Comments 53451 to 53500:
-
SirNubwub at 07:12 AM on 22 September 2012SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
Doug bostrom @47 probably. I don't have the line-by line expenditures for the oil lobby, nor the government, nor the NGOs. Shall we just drop the debate and just say that lots of money is being spent by both sides? Actually, the most important thing to me is understanding the real science foundation of AGW, that being whether or not human-produced CO2 is the main cause of the last degree of warming. I will address those questions in other areas of this site. I guess I don't want to "go to the mat" on this funding issue. I will say that I may be wrong to some degree and stop here. -
John Hartz at 07:07 AM on 22 September 2012SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
@SirNubwub Before staking out a position on a particular issue, it is always advisable to view the issue from a variety of perspective. That is why I recommend that you read the article, Myth of the climate science gravy train: scientists studying Greenland forced to pay their own airfares -
SirNubwub at 07:06 AM on 22 September 2012SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
In #46 I should have said "he compares them as being similar in type by saying that one pales in comparison to the other" -
Doug Bostrom at 07:02 AM on 22 September 2012SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
Sort of a "one apple and a lot of oranges" thing going on here. All expenditures by the fossil fuel industry on legislative relations as well as PR w/an eye to influencing the electorate are an apple. Expenditures on a myriad of scientific research endeavors some small fraction of which may be indirectly or directly relate to climate change are a lot of oranges. The two don't compare easily. -
SirNubwub at 07:01 AM on 22 September 2012SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
Composer99 @44 Hartz didn't make the differentiation, (he compares them as similar in saying that one pales to the other) so I didn't differentiate them either. If I misinterpreted Hartz, then I will retreat. I am awaiting his reply to my statement #45 -
SirNubwub at 06:56 AM on 22 September 2012SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
doug_bostrom @39 (and John Hartz #41) Doug: Yep, I probably over-reacted/misread his actual words. I will concede that. But John: aren't you really saying what I addressed? that the oil lobby spends more than the science gets? (by the way, I only included government spending and not all the NGOs and their money) If I am wrong in thinking that, then I will admit my error and retreat. -
Composer99 at 06:46 AM on 22 September 2012SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
SirNubwub: It has already been explained to you that monies pouring into science research from governments are for research, which is rather different from legal & political advocacy or marketing/propaganda. Is there some reason why you persist with conflating research with advocacy/lobbying/propaganda? -
SirNubwub at 06:45 AM on 22 September 2012SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
DSL: (-snip-). You say: "Further, you would have to establish that the research supported by the government was fraudulent. I know you believe that, but you have no evidence." So you know what my beliefs are on the credibility of research and you know the quality of research I have in my possession just by my posting two links. And you call ME a bad critical thinker. I know that I make mistakes, but lets try to tone it down a bit. I am a skeptic but I am open to being swayed if people take the tone of Mal Adapted and (-snip-) show me good information. I have many graphs from skeptic's websites that I would like to post on SkS. Hopefully, you folks here at SkS can (-snip-) explain to me why I shouldn't believe what that data says. I will post those on the appropriate sections of SkS at later times.Moderator Response: [DB] Inflammatory tone snipped. -
john byatt at 06:42 AM on 22 September 2012SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
SKS gets around alright, It is even copied into regional QLD newspapers. http://www.theweeklyobserver.com.au/wordpress/?p=1003 Positive feedback? , -
John Hartz at 06:40 AM on 22 September 2012SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
@SirNubwub: Doug_bostrom beat me to the punch. He has accurately articulated what I said and why I said it. If you want to engage in serious discussion on this website, you have to do better than merely regurtitate some worn-out and debunked talking point generated by the Climate Denial Spin Machine. -
SirNubwub at 06:32 AM on 22 September 2012SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
Mal Adapted So the link you showed me has a graph that shows that science reseach only received an average of about a billion dollars a year for the last 20 years. And it states that "a lot" of the 20 billion dollars goes to equipment instead of people. I maintain that the balance of 20 billion dollars is still significantly more than the "millions" that is credited to the oil lobby. -
anon1234 at 06:32 AM on 22 September 2012Extreme weather isn't caused by global warming
DSL, you said, " Land mismanagement is at the root of some types of desertification, but not desertification in general. " But it is (especially if you believe that human CO2 emissions cause Hadley cell widening)- changing rainfall patters or widening Hadley cells do not always cause desertification, ecosystems can and do adapt to changing rainfall patterns (a grassland, which can be much more tolerant of drought, can replace a rainforest and vice versa). The human element which directly reduces the efficiency of the water, mineral, solar, and decomposition cycles create desertification. So to be more precise, the vast majority of desertification is the result of mismanagement of land, as opposed to humans burning fossil fuels (burning trees and grass are land management issues). -
Doug Bostrom at 06:29 AM on 22 September 2012SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
What John Hartz actually said: Given the big picture of what happens on a global basis, the fossil fuel industry has spent and continues to spend enornmous sums of money throughout the world to perpetuate the Business As Usual conditions that allow it to generate trillions of dollars annually in revenues. Revenue is not expenditure, a simple accounting principle. John can speak for himself better but for me the implication is that if an industry is defending trillions in revenue and many billions per year in profits it has ample motive and means to pursue fiduciary duties on behalf of shareholders, including helping foster a favorable legal climate for business. Is anybody claiming that fossil fuel firms are not faithfully executing their duty to their shareholders? I've not seen such an assertion but perhaps I missed it. -
SirNubwub at 06:21 AM on 22 September 2012SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
Mal Adapted Thank you for the link. I will read it with interest. -
SirNubwub at 06:19 AM on 22 September 2012SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
DSL: Hartz claims that trillions of dollars could be spent by the oil industry. Why aren't you yelling at him for saying this without any sources? (trillions????) Even his response to me is without sources. -
Extreme weather isn't caused by global warming
No, AH. It's best to be precise. Small-scale desertification can occur through land mismanagement. Large-scale desertification can occur through climate-scale changes in atmospheric and oceanic circulation. Land mismanagement is at the root of some types of desertification, but not desertification in general. -
Robert Murphy at 05:35 AM on 22 September 2012Record Arctic Sea-ice minimum 2012 declared - it's the Silly Season!
How about a #6: Pretend that the ice has been recovering since the end of August? -
anon1234 at 05:32 AM on 22 September 2012Extreme weather isn't caused by global warming
DSL, the second quote doesn't suggest that I am unaware of such mechanisms (which I already acknowledged, and explained how Hadley cell widening fits into my understanding of desertification). My point is that desertification as we know it is primarily dependent on the biodiversity of a given region, and the extent that humans choose to degrade or enhance the local ecology. Widening Hadley cells are responsible for some changing rainfall patterns, but any environment on earth that already experiences extreme temporal variations in moisture are at risk of desertification via human mismanagement of land (thus desertification spreads far beyond the Horse latitudes). Land management is at the root of desertification. -
Composer99 at 05:10 AM on 22 September 2012It's not bad
All that and still no answer to Dikran's questionSo please answer this question directly and unambiguously: Is there anyone other than yourself that is promoting this hypothesis, yes or no?
-
It's not bad
Moderators - At this point, given the large number of recent posts on this thread circling around a single sub-issue, a side-track, raised by (but really, IMO, not supported by) a single poster, perhaps it's time to invoke the Comment Policy stating: "Comments should avoid excessive repetition"?Moderator Response: [DB] Agreed. That also constitutes sloganeering/PRATT. -
anon1234 at 04:49 AM on 22 September 2012It's not bad
Philippe Chantreau, you said, "Walker and Winslow showed as early as 1932 the ability of E.Coli to grow in the absence of CO2 on a medium more complex than the very basic one. That's obviously not the kind of depth where AH1 will go. Whatever." Whatever, indeed. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2065164/pdf/brjexppathol00219-0137.pdf Please cite the article (and medium for that matter) you are referring to. you said, "I had to introduce the concepts of PaCO2 and PaO2 [...]" When I have introduced biological concepts on this thread, I have had to repeatedly describe them in great detail (when wikipedia is available). I didn't want to make extra work for myself by introducing PaCO2. Internal CO2 to O2 ratios are a simple way to describe PaCO2 to PaO2. I am very glad that you wield knowledge of biology, and are willing to criticize my information- thank you, btw. you said, "from a purely physiological point of view, CO2 elimination should be easier at high altitude." Of course it is, this is why adapted organisms have a reduced rate of respiration, thus having higher PaCo2 (and be slightly more acidic) than someone actively adapting. sou said, "If one was suddenly exposed to high levels of CO2 at normal pressure, ventilation would increase in order to restore normal PaCO2, then would stabilize as that goal would be reached and alkalosis would not develop." You are absolutely right. I concede this point, although atmospheric CO2 increasing as a result of burning (of fossil fuels or trees and grass) would cause a reduction in concentration of O2, all else being equal. Reduced atmospheric O2 pressure is a large potential effect of widespread human fires. you said, "I note that this paper represents a change from the previous dominant idea, which was one of chronic alkalosis." Thanks for fixing the link! It is an interesting paper which does change the previous (or current depending on who you ask)dominant theory as to acid/base imbalances at altitude. I am skeptical, though, because the mechanism for lower atmospheric O2 pressure causing alkalosis in Sherpas makes sense. you said, "AH1 made an argument about people's death rates at high altitude. I took the bait and looked at life expectancy," Well you took bait that I didn't provide. I did say mortality rates (as did the wikipedia, and study I posted). you said, "The vascular changes associated with low Co2 and low O2 are currently believed to be the most likley causes of vessel permeability leading to pulmonary edema and cerebral edema" This is an interesting theory, but mortality rates from cardiovascular disease are significantly lower in people adapted to low pressure (whats a bigger problem, edema or heart disease?). this study http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/120/6/495.full (which I have already posted), shows significantly decreased mortality rates for people with cardiovascular diseases who are exposed and adapted to the low pressure of high altitudes (reduced respiratory rate, increased PaCO2 in relation to a steady PaO2 or higher internal CO2/O2 ratio). you said, "Sherpas limit alkalosis by a more efficient response to hypoxia but still experience it." Of course they do; to quote myself, in post #308 "the more extreme elevation a person is at (everest like), the more alkaline they would be in general (because of a respiratory response to reduced internal O2 levels)" you said, "Dikran, there is no PaCo2 to PaO2 imbalance. " Adaptation to lower pressure increases PaCO2- PaO2 is relatively stable at all altitudes. I am glad that you seem to accept (or at least not reject) the evidence I have presented regarding CO2's antioxidant activity. and again, thank you for addressing the points that I did make, I sincerely appreciate it. gws, thank you for pointing that out (perhaps this is what doug was on about), that totally should have read ~ 0.4% (or ~ 4000 ppm). Remember that 4000 ppm is a tenfold increase in current atmospheric levels. Dikran Marsupial, you said, "You are missing the point. How do you know that the effect is due to the difference in CO2 to O2 ratio rather than to other changes in body chemistry due to lower atmospheric pressure and lower oxygen availability. " Thanks for clearly making the point; The effects of adaptation to high altitudes (increased metabolic rate etc.) are consistent with what one would expect from increased exposure to CO2 (because of its antioxidant activity, and its role in protecting and properly distributing the body's O2 supply) which is one result of adaptation. -
Doug Bostrom at 04:20 AM on 22 September 2012SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
$79 billion, which includes many things that happen to produce data useful to climate research, such as weather satellites, the synoptic weather network, etc. but are mostly intended for other purposes. You occasionally drive your car to town to see a movie. You mostly use it to drive to work. Does the line item for operating your vehicle go entirely to "entertainment?" What a lousy and porous line of argument UCResearch is offering. -
SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
I meant to point out also that UCResearch does not provide any kind of sourcing for the figures it claims. -
Mal Adapted at 04:12 AM on 22 September 2012SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
SirNubwub:According to UC Research(http://www.ucresearch.com/tag/global-warming-research)the US government alone has spend $79 BILLION in the last 20+ years.
Wow, that's some weapons-grade denial at that site. The "$79 BILLION" figure is given without attribution, but may be from Jo Nova. John Timmer takes the claim apart at ArsTechnica. The point is made:None of that money goes to the researchers who are actually generating the results that point to anthropogenic warming, so it can't possibly provide an incentive to them.
-
SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
SirNubWub, what sort of critical thinker are you who accepts the word of a blogger at face value. I say UCResearch is wrong. According to your apparent methodology, my opinion is as valid as that of UCResearch. Upon what basis do you choose one opinion over the other? Further, you would have to establish that the research supported by the government was fraudulent. I know you believe that, but you have no evidence. If the research is not fraudulent, then it has social value within the general human project of science. Even if that value is only worth a whole dollar, it is greater than the value of industry-created doubt. The doubt machine created by industry through entities such as the Heartland Institute constitutes a social cost. Through the products we buy, we pay for a future of diminished food and water security, and we pay to be more ignorant. Our quality of life declines because such organizations cast doubt on the project of science, and the impact of scientifically derived knowledge on democratic choice diminishes. The authenticity of the democracy is thus diminished. You are advocating for the un-hitching of the democracy from the more neutral and controllable mechanism of democratic government, and the re-hitching of the democracy to the interests of private property. You are simply a shill, a bot, within that process, and you probably think you're exercising your freedom and doing everyone a favor. -
bibasir at 03:59 AM on 22 September 2012Record Arctic Sea-ice minimum 2012 declared - it's the Silly Season!
Another part of Judith Curry's comment is as follows: "Judith Curry said that while global warming is “almost certainly” affecting Arctic sea ice, she cautioned that there is a great deal of annual and decadal variability in sea ice cover. She said that the next 5 to 10 years could see a shift in Arctic sea ice behavior, though exactly in which direction is difficult to predict." If she thinks there will be a "shift in behavior" it can only go up, because we have already seen a shift downward since 2007. In addition, looking at your chart of the IPCC prediction, the red line shows almost no Decadal variability after the initial period. The 9 year average shows no variability. -
John Hartz at 03:58 AM on 22 September 2012SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
@SirNubwub #30: The fossil fuel industry is composed of multinational corporations doing business in countries throughout the world. Go back to your drawing board and calculate how much money these corporations annually spend on lobbying and bribing the governments of the countries they do business in. While you’rer at it, compute how much money the fossil fuel industry spends annually in the US on greenwashing advertisements (i.e., “clean coal”) and on infomercials designed to motivate voters to support Republican candidates for office. While your at it, compute compute how much money the fossil fuel industry spends annually in Canada on greenwashing advertisements (i.e., “clean coal”) and on infomercials designed to motivate voters to support Conservative candidates for office. Repeat the above calculations for every other major industrialized country in the world. Given the big picture of what happens on a global basis, the fossil fuel industry has spent and continues to spend enornmous sums of money throughout the world to perpetuate the Business As Usual conditions that allow it to generate trillions of dollars annually in revenues. -
John Cook at 03:51 AM on 22 September 2012SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
SirNubwub, money spent on climate research is to measure and understand what's happening to our climate. A key question is how many millions have the oil lobby spent conducting climate research versus funding of PR misinformation. -
dana1981 at 03:41 AM on 22 September 2012PBS False Balance Hour - What's Up With That?
Yes that explains why the segment was more about 'why are you a skeptic?' than 'what do you think is wrong with the science?'. It's rather absurd that PBS excludes their science correspondent from climate science stories. -
Doug Bostrom at 03:29 AM on 22 September 2012PBS False Balance Hour - What's Up With That?
Intriguing detail. Bud Ward of the Yale Climate Media Forum wonders why regular News Hour science correspondents didn't handle the Watts segment:Why not use veteran science correspondent Miles O’Brien, who NewsHour brought in to cover complex science issues after he and the science staff had been let go by CNN? Climate change is an issue on which O’Brien has done substantial earlier coverage, and it’s a subject he says he is eager to continue reporting on. There’s an answer to that question, actually. O’Brien said in a phone interview that he is a freelancer with a contract to do 15 science stories a year for NewsHour … specifically excluding climate science.
From this article: A PBS ‘NewsHour’ Blog Post and Broadcast Provoke Viewers’ Ire That suggests News Hour has cast climate science completely into the political affairs bucket, a sad mistake because dragging politics into science promotes exactly the sort of cloudy thinking we saw from Watts. Was the segment about politics, or climate science? Impossible to tell. -
Philippe Chantreau at 03:29 AM on 22 September 2012It's not bad
Dikran, there is no PaCo2 to PaO2 imbalance. It's rather the opposite. The article by Dr Zubieta-Calleja I cited above has the complete discussion. BTW, the address was damaged, this is the real link: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3068777/?tool=pmcentrez The tutorial on altitude sickness I cited earlier is also very clear. Hypercapnia is not involved. Hypoxia is the primary cause of hyperventilation that persists to and beyond alkalosis. AH1 has no clue what he's talking about, he really should be ignored. -
Doug Bostrom at 02:52 AM on 22 September 2012PBS False Balance Hour - What's Up With That?
Weart's often the first and best answer to many questions. :-) -
vrooomie at 02:42 AM on 22 September 2012PBS False Balance Hour - What's Up With That?
doug_bostrom@163: One knows that one has been away from one's Favorites list a while (or one simply doesn't pay too good attention to it), when one sees a link like yours above (*squirrel!!!*), excitedly adds it to one's favorite's list... ..and gets a pop-up saying "It's already here, dumkopf!" Thanks for posting that link. Again. Squirrel......! -
SirNubwub at 02:39 AM on 22 September 2012SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
Hartz: According to Grist magazine (http://grist.org/article/2010-09-27-oil-companies-and-special-interests-spend-millions-to-oppose-cli/) the oil lobby spends "millions" to defeat AGW legislation. According to UC Research(http://www.ucresearch.com/tag/global-warming-research)the US government alone has spend $79 BILLION in the last 20+ years. I have seen these kinds of numbers from numerous sources. -
Doug Bostrom at 02:33 AM on 22 September 2012PBS False Balance Hour - What's Up With That?
Good point from Vroomie on Spencer Weart's book. It's available free, online, from the American Institute of Physics website: The Discovery of Global Warming
-
John Hartz at 01:20 AM on 22 September 2012Antarctica is gaining ice
Here’s yet another article hot off the press about the topic du jour. Does the expanding Antarctic sea ice disprove global warming? by Eric Berger, SciGuy Blog, Houston Chronicle, Sep 21, 2012 Berger’s opening sentence: “Ice is a hot topic in the climate science community right now so let’s talk about it.” Berger’s concluding statement: “The bottom line is that scientists generally have predicted that the Antarctic sea ice will not begin substantially melting until the second half of this century.” Berger’s blog post was created in response to the recent pious pontifications about polar ice by non-scientists James Taylor and Steve Goddard. -
John Hartz at 00:57 AM on 22 September 2012Antarctica is gaining ice
@KR #142: Proving once again that Watts hs spent wat too much tiome rattling around in the Climate Denial Spin Machine. He can no longer distinguish between up and down, right and left, forward and backward, etc. What is even sadder is that his minions automtically lap up every pile of poppycock that he deposits. -
Composer99 at 00:50 AM on 22 September 20122012 SkS Weekly News Round-Up #1
Thanks, vroomie. I did end up reading Tamino's post on sea ice, and of course mere hours after my comment went up SkS had republished the announcement of the end of melt season & the sea ice minimum. -
Antarctica is gaining ice
John Hartz - Watts (at the hometown of denial) has already commented on this paper, dismissing it with "Oh wait, it's modeling, never mind." Golledge et al 2012 actually looks to be a very interesting paper - considering how fast moving peripheral glaciers in Antarctica may respond to warming oceans, with the potential to drawdown ice over very large areas. Essentially, at how speeding up these fast glaciers may "unplug" the ice stores over significant portions of Antarctica, allowing it to drain into the oceans. -
vrooomie at 23:40 PM on 21 September 20122012 SkS Weekly News Round-Up #1
I believe Tamino and Nevin have both addressed this topic, on their respective blogs, Composer99. -
vrooomie at 23:32 PM on 21 September 2012PBS False Balance Hour - What's Up With That?
Bernard J@158: that was a *hoot!* Good way to start off my science-y day...tanks! Dale@159: I will accept your apology, such as it was, as an honest effort to mend the error of your previously *doltish* ways..which leads me to... doug_bostrom@160: Indeed, let s/he who is w/o sin, cast the first prosaical stone. I too, occasionally 'fall off the wagon' of polite discourse and revert to Advanced Trolliana. Dale, you seem to have at least begun to listen to, and analyze, the real conclusions and findings of the past 50+ years of climate research. I hope that you continue to add *positively* to the discussion, and perhaps your postings on WUWT will be eventually moderated there, due to your coming over to the Light Side..;) If you've not already done so, I *highly* recommend Spencer Weart's book, "The Discovery Of Global Warming." truly a seminal work in the lexicon of those who want to learn of the history. -
John Hartz at 23:21 PM on 21 September 2012Antarctica is gaining ice
NEWS ALERT: What’s happening to the Antarctic ice sheet doesn’t bode well for the future according to the latest research described in: Warming Oceans Will Start Massive Changes In Antarctic Ice Sheet , by Nathan, PlanetSave, Sep 20, 2012 It will be interesting to see how the results of this new research is spun in Deniersville. -
John Hartz at 21:49 PM on 21 September 2012Arctic sea ice reaches lowest extent for the year and the satellite record
@70rn #3: Link fixed. Thanks for bringing this to our attention. -
Mikemcc at 21:38 PM on 21 September 2012Antarctica is gaining ice
Tamino has another look at Antarctic sea ice based on 2012 data: http://tamino.wordpress.com/2012/09/20/poles-apart/ -
Dikran Marsupial at 19:17 PM on 21 September 2012It's not bad
AHuntington1 wrote: "Dikran Marsupial, but adaptation to high altitudes does provide a perfect illustration of higher internal Co2 to O2 ratios." You are missing the point. How do you know that the effect is due to the difference in CO2 to O2 ratio rather than to other changes in body chemistry due to lower atmospheric pressure and lower oxygen availability. How do you know that the same effect will also be seen at sea level pressure with the concentration of O2 to which we are evolutionarily adapted? Now I suspect that if this were the case, then competent scientists would have performed the experiment to find out (e.g. monitor glucose metabolism in a sealed environment in lab conditions where all other factors can be controlled). The fact that you can't supply a single study where this has been done suggests to me that the scientists who work on this don't suspect that mechanism has a significant effect. So please answer this question directly and unambiguously: Is there anyone other than yourself that is promoting this hypothesis, yes or no? -
It's not bad
one more thing AH1 (@313) is off by a factor of ten regarding harmful CO2 levels: "In summary, OSHA, NIOSH, and ACGIH occupational exposure standards are 0.5% CO2 (5,000 ppm) averaged over a 40 hour week, 0.3% (3,000 ppm) average for a short-term (15 minute) exposure [...], and 4% (40,000 ppm) as the maximum instantaneous limit considered immediately dangerous to life and health. All three of these exposure limit conditions must be satisfied, always and together." available here -
Philippe Chantreau at 18:39 PM on 21 September 2012It's not bad
Last detail: "incidental cause" above should be "incidental consequence." -
Falkenherz at 17:35 PM on 21 September 2012Solar cycles cause global warming
Has anybody found more details on the source of the TSI data in the graph of the Washington Times, which is named "University of California-Berkeley Earth-Surface Temperature Project"? -
Thiella at 16:07 PM on 21 September 2012PBS False Balance Hour - What's Up With That?
I don't have anything to add regarding the thorough treatment of misreporting of the NewsHour on climate change, but it should be remarked that its general reputation for fairness, intrepid investigativeness, and veracity should be challenged: http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=19&media_outlet_id=37 http://www.fair.org/blog/tag/newshour/ -
70rn at 16:03 PM on 21 September 2012Arctic sea ice reaches lowest extent for the year and the satellite record
The link to the NSIDC's Arctic sea ice News and Analysis website in the body of the text (under the final Serreze quote) seems to 404. I think there's something wrong with the URL.
Prev 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 Next