Dear Ant, that latest link of yours, copied below, really tells it all.

http://nsidc.org/cryosphere/sotc/sea_ice.html

I wonder what response Cohenite may have to that.
The data appears most compelling.
Good luck with your quest to convince, or at least to open the minds of, those who refuse to recognise possibility.

Take human activity out of the equation, and what credible explanation remains?
(God's will, or orbital decay? Too much 'hot air' expended on the subject, maybe?)

haven't you learned about providing links. mate you are just so slow.

If you took the activities of mankind out of climate change, it would make virtually no difference.Over the years I’ve had dealings with media people, politicians and environmentalists on the matter of climate change. It has became obvious to me that many committed to environmentalism, and who are on some sort of a jihad to `save the planet’, are modern day Pharisee’s. They have some knowledge, not enough to be an expert, but enough to be a menace to the truth.

Many environmental zealots, and there seem to be no shortage of deluded `useful idiots’ as Lenin would say, who are prepared to cause enormous disruption to society in order to `save the planet’. Events such as sabotaging coal power stations, putting spikes in trees to thwart loggers, breaking into private property to film battery hens, holding disruptive public rallies and hogging open lines on talk back radio have unfortunately become all too commonplace.

Those dedicated to environmentalism suffer under the allusion that they alone have the truth. It is they alone who understand the `climate change science’. Thus from their elevated status which they have conveniently bestowed upon themselves, they denounce those who disagree with them as `deniers.’ The use of pejoratives and decorous labels is a tactic designed to embarrass and alienate. I’m constantly amazed and disappointed that the mainstream media, politicians as well as green lobbyists use the word `denier’. This is emotive and not the proper way to hold a rational, informed – indeed scientific based discussion. What has happened to `Climate Sceptic?

Monsignor Red Baron,

I take it you haven't checked out Ant's link (which I repeated in my considered response).
Else, how could you make such bland and unsubstantiated statements like:

>If you took the activities of mankind out of climate change, it would make virtually no difference.<

So, we can just take your word for this grand declaration?
(Or is it all down to disillusioned environmentalists 'corrupting' the 'scientific' evidence, or, worse still, making up their own minds based solely on the evidence and acting accordingly?)

You will of course inherit the 'environment' you 'envisage'.

So, Nutter, I take it you reject the evidence presented in the link out of hand, and purely on the basis of the source?
I'm sure of course, that you duly considered the 'evidence' on its actual merits, before coming to your totally unbiased opinion of it?
Yes, of course, couldn't be otherwise, from such as yourself, with your demonstrated 'open mind'.

'Mate', you are just so fast. (It's so much easier if one simply rejects the 'facts', eh?)

from the salty ant sukker up/TO
DEAR SALTY..FROM YOUR INK..PLEASE NOTE THE DATES
8 YEARS OLD THE 'LATEST'

Passive microwave satellite data reveal that, since 1979, winter Arctic ice extent has decreased about 3 to 4 percent per decade (Meier et al. 2006). Antarctic ice extent is increasing (Cavalieri et al. 2003), but the trend is small.

AND NOW ITS NON EXISTANT
YOU GUYS LIVE IN THE PAST/the green carbon credit..scam..is winding down.

its lobby will no doudt move onto some other moralizing regulation...sin-tax..cash cow..as scientists will always sell their souls for funding[and lets face it there is riches in taxing a weightless gas/by the ton..just like having a money tree.only you sell licences to polute...thats really catholic of you.

what motrivates my anger is the one tax fixes it all
plus those 'in the know'..sellingv their free-solar cell power for three times the rest of us must buy it for..how low can you go..how much cassh have you sold your soul..for>

YOU DONT TAX AIRPLANE FUEL..NOR SHIPPING DUEL
BETWEEN THOSE TWO..plus transport they use 2/3 rds the petro polution

yet bug abusers still get the fuel tax excise exemption of 12 billion
yet these huge polluters still get govt cash..[so much for ya stinking lobby..you avoid taking on the biggest poLLuters

then all ya freaking lies..and the nutters keep coming and comming like greedy cash monkeys..seeking the next carbon credit fication[on stale data

your stinking models made absurd predictions
they were wrong/but because we dont resist you mongrels professionally the useful idiots keep parroting on the babble.

ITS YOU MUGS THINKING WE BELIEVE YOU
when mostly their just ignoring your latest blaH BLAH BLAH

AND THEIR RIGHT.so what motivates you some greenie bonus points
or the cold hhard cash they give you for fooling and foiling the opposition.

regardless you professing fools win/not by the science/but by persistence akin to rape..and the thief caught lying yet again

and still you lot bounce back..pretending its true
then one day you going to look and see the fruit..of all you screwed

"God's will, or orbital decay? Too much 'hot air' expended on the subject, maybe?"

Nah, natural variation!