« Consensus and consequences | Main | Giant metaphor crashes through the ice »

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

wayne

Neven , the biggest player is far away from the Arctic:

http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/enso/indices.shtml?bookmark=nino3.4

Apparently falling from warm to cold very fast, and so says the Arctic sky, greatly clearer with near constant High pressures over the Gyre. I'd expect a near max extent stall then a sudden very early melt pond season like 2008. The ice, which I will report soon, is very much thinner, and is causing the interface between ice and air to be the weirdest I have observed yet. Refraction wise , when the sun appears , the horizon drops at local noon, then rises at night. Not this year, it drops and stays low or easily drops more in darkness, the sea ice core temperature is much warmer. This bodes for an all time super fast melt, however not before sea ice appears "to recover" because of clear La-Nina trending Equator.

Neven

Thanks, Wayne. If this winter is followed by a 'very early melt pond season', ie lots of preconditioning, all bets are off. That's the next thing to look out for after assessing the past winter in comparison to previous years.

---

JAXA reports a small 5K increase for the 6th, still 162K below the preliminary peak.

Rob Dekker

A nice and appropriately conservative assessment, Neven, thank you !

It seems to me that for ice "area", 2016 is likely to break the 2011 record, since it is hovering about 800 k km^2 below it right now and not moving much up or down.

As for ice "extent", it may be harder to break the 2015 record, as we have seen many 'upticks' in March of previous years, which in this case (2016) could push extent above 14 M km^2, ever so briefly.

DavidR

Based on the weather maps above the only area that is likely to gain significantly in the next week is the Bering and there is no way it will gain more than 400k.

Tomorrow (8 Mar) NOAA will announce Feb as the largest temperature anomaly globally and for the Arctic (67N+). Showing a more than 1.5 degC jump in the record for both SST and Air Temp in the Arctic. SST's, in particular, are a good predictor of melting/growth in the following month so any increase in area / extent should be very short lived.

idunno

Hi Neven,

I think that by far the most significant and notable feature is the record low max in the Arctic Basin, which doesn't show up well in the regional graph...

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/recent365.anom.region.1.html

...because of the scale of the y axis.

But the extra open water, within the 80°N circle, at anything from 5°C to 40°C hotter than ice would be in these latitudes has pushed daily SATs up to over 20°C anomalies in the area just North of Svarlsbard across to Northern Novaya Zemlaya, consistently for months on end. The monthly anomaly maps, with a scale that ends at 6°C don't do it justice. A collossal amount of heat is being pumped into the Arctic atmosphere here.

Bill Fothergill

"Tomorrow (8 Mar) NOAA will announce Feb as the largest temperature anomaly globally and for the Arctic (67N+)"

David, based on the fact that the RSS TLT data for February was the highest - for any month - in their entire dataset, I certainly agree that the forthcoming NOAA data should be "interesting".

However, I'm not certain about the release date. NOAA normally produce this data around the middle of the following month, and, if memory serves, the Jan 2016 data came out on the 17th Feb.

I use NOAA's "Climate at a Glance" app, and I've just had it set to show global temps (L+O) over the averaged 12-month periods running from Feb - Jan each year. Even allowing for the current el Nino, the way 2016 sticks out is simply scary.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-series/global/globe/land_ocean/12/1/1880-2016

On the above "Climate at a Glance" page, the March 8th release date appears to relate only to the US, rather than global.

You mention that NOAA will also release monthly data for the Arctic. I don't know where to find that, so could you please give a link. (It's probably somewhere obvious - but my eyes are about as decrepit as the rest of me.)

cheers

DavidR

Bill,
Unless they are doing a Santa Claus and checking it twice, which would be understandable, their web site says 11 am on Mar 8th.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/summary-info/global/201601
Check on the appropriately black band at the top of the page.

Of course the basics are already available from the data site:
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/cgi-bin/data/timeseries/timeseries1.pl

Bill Fothergill

David,
Thanks ever so much for that ESRL link. I had been on that page before, but, as the old memory is going, simply could not find my way back there. (That's why I have a large printed card on my bedside table which reads: Your name is Bill, You are from Glasgow, You can no longer run as fast as you think you can.)

Both the SotC page (your link) and the CaaG page (my link) use the black band near the top to display forthcoming release dates. However, up until now, when I've been on the Global tab on the CaaG page, the next release date has explicitly stated "global release", rather than "US release".

Whether this is a typo, or what, is any one's guess.

D_C_S

It states at the top of the page that the February US release is on March 8.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201601

Sarat

Ha, thanks Naven! I've been following your blog since 2011, good stuff!

Bill Fothergill

@ D_C_S
"It states at the top of the page that the February US release is on March 8."

Yes, that's precisely what David and I had each said. The question mark was whether this was a "typo" and the global data was also to be released on that date, or whether it meant what it said on the tin - i.e. US data only.

As I live on the other side of the pond, I rarely look at the US data, so I've no feel for the date on which this tends to get released.

However, as I said in my earlier post (timed at 12:17 March 7th) the global data is normally released around the 16th or 17th of each month. More specifically, the notification of a forthcoming global release, has, at least until now, explicitly declared itself as such.

Neven

JAXA reports a relatively large uptick of 62K, just 100K left to go to top the preliminary peak.

DavidR

Bill,
I am probably wrong about release of the global data as I had never noticed a separate announcement about the US data. Perhaps they are just becoming more helpful all the time.

I notice even Roy Spencer has commented on how much the satellite data jumped in February. UAH shows a jump of 0.29 degC between Jan and Feb.

Bill Fothergill

David,
Perhaps the good doctor has forgotten that the UAH TLT figures also went up rather rapidly as a result of the 1997/98 El Nino?

Nov 97 ____ 0.09 degC
Dec 97 ____ 0.22
Jan 98 ____ 0.47
Feb 98 ____ 0.65

Can I again ask from whence you obtained the Feb 2016 data?

I have been going to ...
http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/uahncdc_lt_5.6.txt
but that is still stuck on January.

D_C_S

Now that the US report has been released, the date of the global report is stated in the box, which date is March 17, as expected.

Bill Fothergill

@ D_C_S

Thanks for that update.


@ David

I think I see where you got the UAH Feb 2016 TLT value. Was it from drroyspencer.com? Specifically his "Latest Global Temp Anomaly" tab?

That means both RSS and UAH will have hit all-time record highs in February 2016.

It seems that Beta testing is pretty well advanced (Beta 5) for the V6.0 product, and that this will officially replace V5.6 as of April this year.

Given that the Feb value on V6.0 Beta5 is showing as +0.83 degC, I suspect that it will be around +0.9 degC when it appears on V5.6

If my estimate is correct, that would make the rolling 12-month average for Mar2015 - Feb2016 equal to +0.429 degC. Currently, the highest rolling 12-month value in the V5.6 data is 0.423 degC. There are two of these, ending in either Oct or Nov 1998.

Given that the March and April 2015 values are the lowest in the current rolling 12-month period, that figure of +0.429 degC is unlikely to stand as a record for very long.

DavidR

Bill,
Based on the 1998 El Nino, one would have to suspect that the satellite record responds a few months after the surface record. I am expecting the satellite figures to stay very high all year.

Jim Hunt

A Carl Mears blog post about RSS TMT V4.0

http://www.remss.com/blog/RSS-TMT-updated

The method used to make adjustments for drifting satellite measurement time was changed. In the new method, the model based diurnal cycle climatology used for these adjustments was optimized so that it more accurately removes intersatellite differences due to drifting local measurement times. This is the most important change, and leads to substantially more warming during the 1999-2005 period when the NOAA-15 satellite was drifting rapidly.

Steven Mosher from BEST has a blog post about this sort of stuff at:

https://andthentheresphysics.wordpress.com/2016/03/08/guest-post-surface-and-satellite-discrepancy/

wayne

We need a model, yes more specifically a sea ice core average temperature model, only Jim may be able to say if sea ice is essentially warmer than previous years, Even more complex, core temperature of multiyear ice would be key.

Neven

Another 62K uptick reported by JAXA. Just 37K left to go to top the preliminary peak.

Bill Fothergill

@ Jim

Thanks for the two links - they make interesting reading. The relevant detail may be paywalled somewhere (or I could just be blind), but I'm not sure how any adjustments will play out as regards TLTs.

By the way, I mentioned at the Exeter University event that I was doing a little paper on RSS TLTs. I think it's now just about finished, so would you mind doing a quick bit of reviewing/proof reading?

The RSS TMT V4 adjustment mentioned by Jim is also discussed by Roy Spencer.

http://www.drroyspencer.com/

As this is on his home page, it will obviously be superseded in the near future. The search string "Comments on New RSS v4 Pause-Busting Global Temperature Dataset" should be able to locate the article after it has moved from the home page.


Jim Hunt

No problem Bill. Feel free to send your paper to Snow White at the usual address.

JAXA extent has fallen a fraction today, so for the moment at least the "preliminary peak" still stands.

Neven

Yes, after a drop of 23K, the difference with preliminary peak is now 60K.

Arctic Nev

CT SIA has been going up too in the past 2 days, and is now 89K below the preliminary max. But again, it's still 390K below the 2011 lowest max record which was reached on March 8th.

Wipneus

my CT-like calculation results for today

(NH, SH, global)
Wed 2016.1808 +8.0 12.731853 +50.7 2.010823 +58.8 14.742676
Thu 2016.1836 +23.8 12.755649 +62.0 2.072837 +85.8 14.828486
Fri 2016.1863 +20.2 12.775896 +64.5 2.137373 +84.8 14.913269
Sat 2016.1890 +77.8 12.853706 +51.4 2.188778 +129.2 15.042484

(All calculated from today's NSIDC sea ice concentration data and only occasionally differ more than a few k from the final values released by Cryosphere Today.)

If correct, CT arae will report a new maximum this Saturday.

Arctic Nev

Thanks, Wipneus!

Neven

And as 'predicted' by Wipneus, the preliminary peak reached on February 26th has been topped by 9K. The current SIA number is 12.852 million km2, still 292K below the 2011 record.

If this preliminary peak becomes the maximum, the date will be more or less average compared to other years in the 2006-2016 period. But it will be a new record low max.

JAXA SIE has dipped, but then gone up a bit again, and is now 87K below the preliminary peak reached on February 29th (second lowest on record if it remains standing).

Kris

For a few days it looked like the big polinea in front of Barrow would have been closed, but on the contrary, it has grown quite a lot.

Rather puzzling considering the temperature there hovers between -16 ºC and -23 ºC.
Of course, the sun now at noon stands high enough to warm up open water, but than can be only partial an explanation...

navegante

Because a polynya goes and another one grows?
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/beaufortictn_nowcast_anim30d.gif

AbbottisGone

Oh, Polnyas are like night forks: they breed!

Gotcha!!

Wipneus

my CT-like calculation results for today

(NH, SH, global)
Sun 2016.1918 -12.6 12.840884 +33.7 2.222478 +21.1 15.063362
Mon 2016.1945 +10.9 12.851816 +43.4 2.265887 +54.3 15.117703
Tue 2016.1973 +9.0 12.860785 +93.0 2.358840 +101.9 15.219625
(All calculated from today's NSIDC sea ice concentration data and only occasionally differ more than a few k from the final values released by Cryosphere Today.)

If correct, CT area will report a new maximum this Tuesday (and possibly on Monday, that is too close to tell).

Wipneus

my CT-like calculation results for today

(NH, SH, global)
Mon 2016.1945 +10.9 12.851103 +43.4 2.265887 +54.3 15.116990
Tue 2016.1973 +8.8 12.859880 +93.0 2.358840 +101.7 15.218720
Wed 2016.2000 +26.1 12.885960 +37.8 2.396603 +63.8 15.282563
(All calculated from today's NSIDC sea ice concentration data and only occasionally differ more than a few k from the final values released by Cryosphere Today.)

Also on Wednesday a new max.

Neven

Anomalously cold temps (finally) and northerlies, but SIA/SIE in the Bering Sea didn't budge. It seems Baffin and Okhotsk caused the small uptick that has the maximums not coming in (near-)record early this year:

The GFS weather model forecast was for a cooldown in the Arctic (first negative anomaly for the region in a long time), but the forecast has now changed again and though not as 'warm' as in Jan and Feb, things are staying anomalously warm for the coming week. I think that if anyone feels the need, he/she can call the maximum before the start of next week. A new record low for CT SIA, second place for IJIS SIE.

Neven

JAXA SIE has gone down by 36K, and is now 121K below the preliminary peak reached on Feb 29th. Given the forecast I don't see how that can be beaten, but who knows.

Wipneus

my CT-like calculation results for today

(NH, SH, global)
Tue 2016.1973 +8.8 12.859880 +93.0 2.358840 +101.7 15.218720
Wed 2016.2000 +25.6 12.885500 +37.8 2.396603 +63.4 15.282103
Thu 2016.2027 -174.9 12.710576 +81.5 2.478095 -93.4 15.188671
(All calculated from today's NSIDC sea ice concentration data and only occasionally differ more than a few k from the final values released by Cryosphere Today.)

Seems like a good start of the melting season, an almost-near double century drop.

John Christensen

With the strong low in southern Kara, DMI is forecasting some ice increase on the Atlantic side of the central Arctic Ocean as well as Barents where the CT area is most negative, so I would hold on calling the max at least for another 3-4 days.

If Okhotsk ice holds that is..

John Christensen

Hi Wipneus,

Your calculations are very helpful, but for the 174K drop, could you please share from NSIDC where this drop is happening?

John Christensen

Hi Wipneus,

A second question - and sorry about my ignorance: Is the NSIDC sea ice concentration data projected values, while CT is based on actual concentration data obtained from satellite images?

Jim Hunt

John - Both numbers come from the same "satellite images". For details on the number crunching involved see the "Developers Corner" on the ASIF:

Calculating area and extent from gridded concentration data

John Christensen

Hi Jim,

Thanks, I know the mechanics of calculating the numbers, once the grid data is available.

However, from Wipneus' email above, it seems like he has projected numbers for Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday this week:

Tue 2016.1973 +8.8 12.859880 +93.0 2.358840 +101.7 15.218720
Wed 2016.2000 +25.6 12.885500 +37.8 2.396603 +63.4 15.282103
Thu 2016.2027 -174.9 12.710576 +81.5 2.478095 -93.4 15.188671

Since this is in the future, it must be based on a model/projection and not actual satellite images.

So my question was that while NSIDC extent is based on projection (apparently), then if CT is based on grid information from an actual satellite image, or if the CT data also is based on projected grid information?

me.yahoo.com/a/nSjChi4X3vr8X3DRw93GkY1.cerja.8nvWk-

John, the CT data as published is 2 days behind the NSIDC and Wipneus calculates the upcoming values based on the current NSIDC values. He just does what CT does with the same data, he just does it 2 days faster.

Phil.

John Christensen

So the CT NH area reduction for Thursday this week, -174K above, is based on projected data, right?

Neven

No, it's based on NSIDC concentration numbers. I'm sure there's a difference with the NSIDC Sea Ice Index because it is based on extent, vs CT sea ice area.

The drop of 99K reported for yesterday's date, the 14th, will be reported as a 175K drop for the 14th tomorrow, ie Thursday by CT, because it lags by two days.

Have I got that right, Wipneus?

John Christensen

Sorry, you have me lost here Neven.

You say that the extent drop indicated for March 14th will be what we see as the CT area number for March 16th, so that if we see a spike up or down in the extent/concentration data, then this spike will occur on a different date in CT?

Neven

I believe it works like this:

NSIDC SIE number for March 14th (last Monday) was reported on Tuesday March 15th.

Wipneus then uses this number (actually the concentration data on which NSIDC SIE is based) to calculate the CT SIA number for March 14th, which will be reported Thursday the 17th, two days after NSIDC.

Or something like that.

It's confusing because CT SIA reports later than JAXA/NSIDC, because of the way the dates are numbered, and on top of that, it's a leap year.

But either way, none of the data is based on projections/models, but on actual observations by passive microwave sensors.

John Christensen

OK, thanks Neven!

The 174K drop then actually happened yesterday Tuesday, March 15th, but will then reported by CT on Thursday, March 17th, and CT will use the date of March 16th. for this drop.

Yes, that is somewhat confusing, but helps when trying to consolidate across the different ice measures.

wayne

The drop may be in part due to snow floating on sea water, there is plenty of snow cover and snow fall throughout the Arctic, the only thing which may make the snow melt is warmer surface water in the seas at edge of the greater pack where the snow is much colder than 0 C. .

Wipneus
The 174K drop then actually happened yesterday Tuesday, March 15th, but will then reported by CT on Thursday, March 17th, and CT will use the date of March 16th. for this drop.

Almost. NSIDC reports concentration data of the day before. So yesterday that was 14th. NSIDC calculates extent and reports that as the 14th. CT does not report its Arctic area figures (based on this data) two days later (Thursday). The Southern Hemisphere area and Global area numbers follow one day after that (Friday).

Wipneus
Your calculations are very helpful, but for the 174K drop, could you please share from NSIDC where this drop is happening?

The opportunity to quote the exact values per region has gone (overwritten by totday's update).

Here are some numbers from from area, calculated the NSIDC way:

Area:
Arctic Basin East Siberian Sea Laptev Sea
-16.3 0.6 -7.4
Kara Sea Barents Sea Greenland Sea
-22.4 -17.0 4.0
Baffin/Newfoundland Bay St. Lawrence Hudson Bay
11.6 -14.7 -41.1
Canadian Archipelago Beaufort Sea Chukchi Sea
3.3 2.2 3.4
Bering Sea Sea of Okhotsk Total Area
-3.7 -58.7 -156.4

(sorry, I forgot how to align such tables on the blog)
Here the drop is "only" 156k, CT exaggerates the area at lower latitudes.

So the drop is mostly caused by Okhotsk, Hudson and the Bering/Kara/CAB section.

I have uploaded in the forum what I call the delta map. Bright red and blue is where concentration crosses the 15% cut-off. Blueish where concentration increases by 7% or more, pinkish where concentration drops more than 7%. This should serve as a nice illustration.

More information on the calculation is mentioned in the post just above that image.

Wipneus

Ah, I remembered. Between "pre" tags, the alignment is preserved.

Area:
         Arctic Basin       East Siberian Sea              Laptev Sea 
                -16.3                     0.6                    -7.4 
             Kara Sea             Barents Sea           Greenland Sea 
                -22.4                   -17.0                     4.0 
Baffin/Newfoundland Bay          St. Lawrence              Hudson Bay 
                 11.6                   -14.7                   -41.1 
 Canadian Archipelago            Beaufort Sea             Chukchi Sea 
                  3.3                     2.2                     3.4 
           Bering Sea          Sea of Okhotsk              Total Area 
                 -3.7                   -58.7                  -156.4 

Neven

Meanwhile, JAXA SIE hasn't been showing a large drop. On the contrary, there's been another small uptick of 7K, so potentially the preliminary peak can still be topped as the difference is 'just' 77K.

But I think there will be a couple of drops and then the max will have been virtually reached, back on February 29th.

John Christensen

Thank you very much for the additional detail on both the dating principle and the regional numbers Wipneus!

Neven,

I agree with melting commencing in the southern-most seas, it will be difficult for the CT area number to reach the prior peak after the drop today.

DMI has Atlantic Arctic and Barents ice concentration increasing in their forecast, at least until 3/21, but it does not seem it would be able to do much more than keep overall area near flat.

John Christensen

For today, CT SIA overall improved slightly due to the forecasted spreading of ice plus some growth in the Atlantic sector of the Arctic, while Hudson, Baffin, Bering, and Okhotsk have gone down further, but not fully offsetting the increase in Barents and Atlantic central arctic.

And then the leads clearly are freezing over again in Beaufort and should be safe at least for another two days, until warm temps reach that area.

John Christensen

Hi Neven,

Even with the relatively large increase reported today, CT SIA is still $77K below the peak so to me would be surprising, if this could be reached - but let's see..

Neven

Our forum oracle, Wipneus, announced another increase of 18K (that will be reported tomorrow), so just one or two fluke days could do the trick.

As for JAXA: it has gone down 27K, so the difference with the PP is now 59K...

Neven

Wipneus predicts another 4K uptick, so just 55K will do the trick. That rhymes, and so it must be true.

Neven

In the meantime, JAXA SIE has dropped another 39K and is now 135K below the preliminary peak. So, unless there's a backlash from all those drops, this could really be it for the max.

CT SIA max isn't quite certain yet. On the forum Wipneus reports the preliminary peak will be equalled, depending on the final reported number.

idunno

Best not call the maximum until we find out if the ice area has gone up from March to September...

http://denialdepot.blogspot.fr/2016/03/ice-age-confirmed.html

John Christensen

That you for sharing idunno!

I honestly had no idea something as outrageously stupid as that blog existed - hilarious!!

Kevin McKinney

"Stupid"!?!?!?

Really, could a stupid person write this:

I have theorized that if we could somehow bring the 1988 testimony of James Hansen to the volcanic peak of Mauna Loa and drop it into the fiery bowels of the infernal mountain itself, we would finally end the reign of Al Gore for good. It would be an arduous and perilous quest for some brave blog scientists, for Mauna Loa is said to be circled by predator drones controlled by the all seeing eye of Obama. Even more dangerous however is the corrupting nature of logic and facts. The person we send would have to carefully chosen, someone who possesses an inate immunity to reason. I would volunteer to do this myself, but I have been drinking a lot of wine lately and plan to drink quite a bit more.
John Christensen

Hi Kevin,

After the prediction of the next ice age and the bizar comments regarding the CT chart context menu, where the blogger pretends that an embedded picture should work like a web page, I felt no need to read on:

"This appears very much to be a menu button. Let me explain to you how these work. A menu button is a piece of technology designed to always display a menu when they are clicked on. But if you click on the University of Illinois menu button in the above image no menu appears. Go on, try moving your mouse over it and clicking, it does nothing except making the image larger."

I actually don't think the blogger is very stupid, since at least he/she managed to establish a blog, but the content is certainly stupid.

John Christensen

And you were right, Neven, not to call the CT NH area max a week ago..

Neven

Dr. Inferno may be a skeptic, but I respect him a lot more than any other skeptic out there. His is a sharp mind with many an original thought. Please, don't call him or the content on his blog stupid.

You may want to re-read, John. ;-)

Neven
And you were right, Neven, not to call the CT NH area max a week ago..

It's really difficult to predict/call the maximum, more difficult than calling the minimum.

CT SIA will go up a few K more, according to Wipneus. It'd be cool if it were followed by two more daily upticks, as it will then be the latest max on record, as well as the record lowest, of course.

JAXA SIE has turned the corner, I believe. The difference with the preliminary peak is now 154K (and 2016 is lowest again, for the 2007-2016 period).

John Christensen

OK, OK, Kevin and Neven, but could you then please explain what makes sense in the entry that idunno provided a link for:

"This appears very much to be a menu button. Let me explain to you how these work. A menu button is a piece of technology designed to always display a menu when they are clicked on. But if you click on the University of Illinois menu button in the above image no menu appears. Go on, try moving your mouse over it and clicking, it does nothing except making the image larger.

Software engineers are not like climate scientists, they have to make sure the computer programs they write work all the time, every time, and so they learn to never make mistakes. So I have to assume that someone at the University of Illinois has deliberately sabotaged the menu button. I wonder why.

What could be on the hidden menu?

Perhaps the menu contains links to scientist's emails which They don't want made public. Perhaps there is an option to display the real undoctored sea ice data that are being hidden from us. Or perhaps the button is just another one of Lewandowsky's little traps to try and falsely paint us as conspiracy theorists. Yes I can well imagine Stephan Lewandowsky meeting with suited UN figures at the Paris COP21 in a closed meeting room, discussing a demented form of button over taxpayer funded mugs of hot coffee. A button that can be deployed onto websites that will capture not only the imagination of climate skeptics, but also their IP addresses which are subsequently loaded into a database named agenda21.

Someone more proficient at being unethical than me should probably try to hack that button and find out what is behind it.

If not I sense an FOIA request in the making.

*These are actual files I keep in my house, in a large binder.

Update: A commenter, now banned, has kindly pointed out that a button in a copied image from a website isn't necessarily going to work when copied onto a blog. While this may potentially explain why the menu button doesn't work, I stand by my comments and the general thrust of my argument remains. I would think the University of Illinois should really put a disclaimer on their website pointing out that buttons will not work when an image is taken. This kind of lack of attention to detail is becoming a hallmark of climate science."

Ghoti Of Lod

John,
Have you never read The Onion, The Beaverton, or the Daily Mash?

Neven

Maybe you need to read something else to get enlightened. Here's another gem from January, called The Vineyards of Vostok:



Vikings fighting on the Antarctic Peninsula.
Note the lack of sea ice.

Long ago the world was a much warmer place; The oceans boiled at the equator and griffin were seen flying as far North as Lancaster. Less well known are the Vikings, a fierce people from Northern Europe who travelled the world in ridiculously long boats, performing various acts that would ultimately derail the globull warming gravy train, including:

1) Putting the word Green in Greenland to prove it had no ice whatsoever back then
2) Setting up vineyards all over the Earth to demonstrate how warm it was everywhere
3) Plundering the abbeys of the global warming high priests
4) Sodding off back to Denmark when it got cold, therefore proving how hot it must have been in the first place

Sheer brilliance!

John Christensen

I feel my fact-oriented eyes are being opened for the first time, seeing that there is no black or white, and that the black knight could be mocking the other knights for the sheer fun of it.

I will leave Dr. Inferno to his business, which I am sure will have no relevance to my future endeavors..

Bill Fothergill

Neven,

I'm pretty certain that photo you posted of the Vikings landing on the peninsula is a fake.

It is a well established fact that they much preferred to use black&white film for their holiday snaps. (Or should that be Schnapps?)

John Christensen

Hi Bill,

Yes, the photo is certainly a fake - not just because of the colors - but also because:
- The helmets have no horns
- There should be barrels of akvavit (Older name for snaps) visible on the boat, as Vikings (Still to this day) going south of equator always bring barrels of akvavit with them. If they cannot drink it all during the journey, they sell the leftovers as 'linie akvavit' in Norway: http://linie.com/

AbbottisGone

..that was a strange web-site!!

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)