At the bottom of this post is a screen capture of an article at NSIDC concerning some early satellite pictures of the Arctic and Antarctic.
The article is titled “Earliest satellite maps of Antarctic and Arctic sea ice”.
Go ahead an read it at NSIDC (link) or in the screen capture.
Some things jumped out at me right away:
1) The Antarctic data is very specific comparing September 1964 to September 2012 and August 1966 to September 1986.
2) Why did they compare August 1966 to September 1986? The lowest average for August is 1986, but it was 17 million sq km, not 17.5 million.
3) The 15.9 million sq km for August 1966 is 1.1 million sq km lower than the lowest “modern” mean for August. Which means Antarctic Sea Ice has been growing since 1966 (at least in August).
4) Why are they so incredibly unspecific about the Arctic? “early satellite data” for September is compared to “broadly similar to the 1979 to 2000 average”. Why not give values for specific years?
5) 6.9 million square kilometers for some September in the 1960s would be 700,000 sq km lower than the highest Arctic Sea Ice which occurred in 1980. Isn’t that evidence of Arctic Sea Ice being cyclic?
6) I smell a rat. Why so ambiguous about the years in the Arctic? What are they hiding?