3 ms·
>Steady rise then big rise and then a crash regressing to the mean. Point is - we don't know. What's being observed is not a regression to the mean, it's a sys
by scythe 3y ago
>Steady rise then big rise and then a crash regressing to the mean. Point is - we don't know.
What's being observed is not a regression to the mean, it's a system under external forcing. That's hard to predict, but it doesn't justify pseudoscientific denialism.
>The long-term increase in sea ice near the coast of Antarctica has been explained by a delayed response to orbital forcing and the long memory of the SO (Renssen et al., 2005).
The "rise" since 1975 also has not been "steady", as can be seen clearly in the graph:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ClimateDashboard-Antarctic-sea-ice-summer-minimum-graph-20230307-1400px.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ClimateDashboard-Ant...
- nemo44x 3y agoData isn’t denialism. I literally posted factual observatory data. Here’s a better chart: https://www.climate.gov/media/15124 https://www.climate.gov/media/15124 Certainly recent correction but an upwards trend since 1979 (when satellite data started) and a recent large spine up followed by a more recent large spine down. There are many potential inputs to thus. Man made climate change is possibly one but not a dominate one probably.