The volume of Arctic sea ice has dropped around 75% between 1979 through till 2016.
The amount of multi year ice has dropped from about 20% to 3% over the same period, and the thickness of ice has decreased. These measures have been obtained from PIOMAS and satellite measure.

Islands off Siberia have been eroding due to permafrost thawing making them more susceptible to erosion from wave action. Permafrost thawing also allows for more CO2 and methane to be voided into the atmosphere. Supplementary evidence of things going awry in the Northern Hemisphere are the high mortality rates of puffins and reindeer. Starvation has been the issue for both species. In relation to reindeer, a higher amount of rainfall; and then, a freeze has meant ice has become thicker rendering it difficult to access their food. Rainfall being a sign of higher temperature; as a result the ice is much thicker than the couple of centrimetres the reindeer can normally cope with.

The amount of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean has an impact on global climate particularly in the Northern Hemisphere.

And the idiot Turnbull wastes more of our money on totally discredited climate rubbish. At least one nicampoop, 'ant' still believes the lies. 75% of the Artic ocean has disappered? He should be able to wade it, then!

The funniest bit is still to come. trump is the biggest RINO ever to get into office. the left maybe upset now but that will be nothing compared to the tea party types as they wake up to what Trump will actually do.
Trump didn't become a billionaire by accident, he is a smart guy, he is a great business man and business men tend to be very pragmatic rather the dogmatic.

As for this piece the world is experiencing climate change that will not change because the USA has a new president.

Is climate change real, and did we cause it? What if it is and we did? Who gives a flying french frankfurt!

And if the coal driven gravy train is hurtling at breakneck speed, thundering toward our own annihilation? Just blow that screaming whistle, bend the back, shovel that coal and rocket on!

More steam, full speed ahead and damn the rail head at extinction junction! At this speed we'll all die of terror long before we plow headlong into it? Go faster, we'll get there sooner, or die trying!

We was going round the bend doing ninety miles an hour, when the whistle broke into a scream. Going round the bend doing ninety miles an hour, and we were scalded to death by steam!

Can we do it? Can we do it? Yes we can! Yes we can!

All aboard the extinction express and no stops until the junction, we're making time and it's all downhill from here!

If only the Titanic had sailed now! There'd be no berg to run into and she'd still hold the record!?

Faster, faster, shovel that coal! Let's see if we run out of coal, before we run out of time? Isn't this fun!? Whoo, whoo!
Alan B.

Indonesia's certainly using more coal, together with China and India.

BP's Statistical Review 2016 revealed yesterday that the country's coal consumption had doubled since 2010. Last year, coal became its dominant source of fuel, accounting for 41 percent of total energy consumption.

And that, Alice, shows what a load of rot and waste of money the mitigation frenzy is for the rest of us.

Let us PREY indeed!
http://www.readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/40301-focus-mike-pence-will

Which is to say that what is depicted in this image will be ratcheted up bigtime: http://www.dartmouth.edu/~spanmod/mural/panel21.html

Trump's election may well bring down the curtain on the 'Green Age'.

When he walks away from the Paris 'agreement' it will send shudders through the we're-all-gunna-die industry. Those nations that signed up reluctantly or because there was no downside to promising to do something in a decade's time while not committing to do something in a decade's time, will feel more empowered to stand up to the climate scaremongers. Very few states are actually going to reduce their emissions over the next generation and they'll feel less need to pretend otherwise. But without those pretend promises the gravy-train may well derail.

As Trump begins to re-orient the US power industry back to fossil fuels by the simple expedient of no longer subsidising those power sources that can't exist without subsidy, US manufacturing will obtain a massive commercial advantage. For how long can the truncated EU ignore that and for how long will those EU states like Hungary, Czech and Poland, who have been dragged kicking and screaming to the current EU promises, remain docile?

If Trump stops funding UN climate-alarm agencies and re-orients NASA back to space and away from temperature fiddling, while running a red line through the EPA and Obama's executive orders, powerful advocates for the scare will be neutered.

Meanwhile, all those developing states who have been happy to go along for the ride since it didn't require them to do anything, will be less likely to play games and will just get on with their development, especially if faced with a resurgent US manufacturing juggernaut.

I have asked this question of MMCC deniers countless times, possibly nearing 100, and am yet to receive a single sensible reply.

Let us suppose you are right, and we stop all efforts to counter global warming, and let's say in 50 years time we find out, too late, that you were wrong. How does your reasoning now compare to my reasoning? What if we try to slow GW down, and in 50 years time we discover you were right, how do the two scenarios compare?

I can tell my grandchildren I did what I thought was right, and I was wrong, but at least we have a cleaner, less polluted planet.

What will you say?