Mhaze first glad to see you back many wished you well in that link before your op
Well let me be honest Hasbeen take note, please
See I believe some conspiracies are very very real
And that the anti climate change story is one
As well think, totally, *fake news * is too
That those who charge others with it, *invented it*
And use it to protect wealth privilege and defy the truth, DAILY
Science I trust science, know mother nature is a myth, no such thing exists, *only natural selection*
Can any one show me some thing humanity has not damaged in the post birth of the industrial revolution, just one thing
So yes I believe in mans damage to the climate, I understand [ham radio operators do] the earths different layers, they affect radio communications
See sporadic ionisation of the E layer, love some now
Do we admit to adding anything to any of those layers?
I do, man has not stopped putting profit before planet

Climate scientist says she resigned because it has become too political to disagree with the politics.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eg_I8QypcvM&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR2nPIHTdWj6srZ7IoJv0YrohMqRS8M4i36DV8rHHR4QgXX26IM932w2FFw

It is unfortunate that so many things are being politicised
these days.

Dear Foxy,

The only thing that can save the environment and humankind from destruction is socialism. We cannot escape from political action. Socialism or capitalism? The choice is ours.

Dear Mr Opinion,

Socialism is not as innovative or productive as capitalism.
It also gives the government a great deal of
power. Government leaders can abuse their
position and claim power for themselves.

Not an ideal situation.

Perhaps a combination of socialism and capitalism
would be a better result?

Dear mhaze,

Utter rot. Now you are just making things up.

Firstly you say; “You manage to find one guy in there that has a slightly longer time frame”

Not at all, there was one other scientist mentioned in the article a Professor Peter Wadhams from Cambridge University, UK, who is an expert on Arctic ice, and he too said it may not be as early as 2013 as well.

Then I asked you to substantiate this;

“And the Arctic isn't even moving in the right direction for your claims to be true. While the trend-line (you remember trend-lines, I taught you about them a few years back) for 1979-2006 was for progressively less ice, the trend-line for 2007 to 2018 has been progressively more ice. So your assertion (ie a claim without basis) that "the fact that the trajectory is very much headed in that direction." is utterly wrong.”

You replied with;

“As to the facts...minimum sea ice extent has INcreased by 10% since 2007. The lowest ever (well since 1981) was 2012. If its moving in the direction you say, why is it higher now than then?”

I had said; “As to trend lines (sigh) all you did was reveal how much your cherry picking was breath-taking back then and I have little doubt that is what you are trying to push here.”

And boy was I right. You picked what you thought was the second lowest year on record (2007) and then tried to say there isn't a problem because the subsequent years did not reach that far.

Well it so happens the minimum extent reached on Sept 18 2007 was 4.16 million km2. The provisional results for this year was 4.15.
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2019/09/arctic-sea-ice-reaches-second-lowest-minimum-in-satellite-record/

Hardly an increase of 10%. was it, rather a decrease. Grow up.

As to the animation it came from NASA. Why do you struggle with it?