At http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/08/29/noaa-showing-18-more-ice-t… … is a story of two methods of measuring the ice at the Arctic. NOAA is the traditional methodology and it shows ice is above 2007 levels. However, the other method, by satellite measurement, is showing less ice than in 2007. Guess which method the alarmists are getting excited about. It seems a storm in the Arctic has broken up the ice into small pieces and the satellites are apparently failing to pick up all the redistributed ice. However, the fact that ice has broken up is worthy of the news by itself – but is it worrisome? Depends on your fancy. If you like the horror movies you might like the idea the world is going to the dogs. Everyone else just carries on with a yawn. It is worth noting that a similar thinning of Arctic ice was endemic in the 1930s and 1940s and sparked a similar round of scary stories. People in those days were more robust – they weren't constantly bombarded by media idiot stories and could take things in their stride but in academic circles HH Lamb was a bit of a hit. See also http://phys.org/print265287957.html … which makes the point satellites have only been measuring the ice extenct since 1979 – so it is, basically, a 30 year record ice loss. This did not stop some geezer on BBC television inform us of the situation with a suitably po face and a syrupy liquid tone of concern, like licking treacle off the microphone, that this year was the lowest 'ever' level of ice in the Arctic. A deliberate lie. Why?
Over at hyttp://phys.org/print265304250.html … we are informed Shell has still not been able to drill any holes in the Arctic sea bed. This will obviously please Greenpeace who have an active campaign against drilling in the Arctic in progress, but somewhat frustrating because if Shell doesn't hurry up and get its drilling apparatus out they will have to go home having done nothing much but poke their tongues out at some Russians.