If there was no ice in 1960, how can claims of arctic ice decline since 1980 possibly be true? None of this is making any sense. Here is a so-called graph from the National Snow and Ice Data-center:
Arctic Sea Ice summer minimas since 1979 (according to the NSIDC). Note they leave off the Submarine Warming Period (SWP)
Why do they start in 1979? Well putting my blog science skills to good use, I navigated a browser client through their website and found a secret folder link named disclaimer1 - hmm a suspicious name. Nicely hidden but I uncovered it anyway (if you are a journalist for The Australian or another leading media publication, please give me due credit for uncovering this on my own)
The folder contains very interesting information. I have added some bold highlighting at random points:
"Image derivation is from the Sea Ice data product, which relies on NASA-developed methods using passive-microwave data from the Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP) F13 Special Sensor Microwave/Imager (SSM/I). The basis for the Sea Ice Index is the data set, "Near Real-Time DMSP SSM/I Daily Polar Gridded Sea Ice Concentrations", and the NASA-produced "Sea Ice Concentrations from Nimbus-7 SMMR and DMSP SSM/I Passive Microwave Data". The Sea Ice Index was developed with financial support from NOAA NESDIS and in cooperation with NOAA NGDC. Please note that our daily sea ice images, derived from microwave measurements, may show spurious pixels in areas where sea ice may not be present. These artifacts are generally caused by coastline effects, or less commonly by severe weather. Scientists use masks to minimize the number of "noise" pixels, based on long-term extent patterns. Noise is largely eliminated in the process of generating monthly averages, our standard measurement for analyzing interannual trends."*
So NASA are behind this afterall. And worse we find out that satellites are being used to measure ice. Denial Depot has reported numerous problems with the satellite record before. NASA and the NOAA have yet to respond to these problems or even acknowledge my importance.
But worse we find out these satellites are using microwaves to measure ice! As an experiment I took a glass of ice and put it in a microwave oven. This of course proves nothing, but it does raise some questions. I figured that 30 seconds in the microwave oven would be at least equivalent to 30 years of satellite microwaving. Well my microwave didn't tell me how thick the ice was (of course immune from Team Science I never thought it would), but I did observe the microwaves melting ice.
So is in fact arctic ice decline being caused by sustained subjection of arctic ice by microwave radiation emitted from NASA satellites? Is NASA literally cooking the books (ie ice)? Is it a coincidence that satellite "measurements" of sea ice and temperature both began in 1979, the year in which Jimmy Carter resumed diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China?
I am only concerned that the reputation of science will be harmed for decades. That and taxes.
I propose to salvage science we must abandon the lunacy of the satellites. Measuring from so far in space is prone to manipulation. A blog scientist cannot go check on the satellites themselves can they? We have no idea what codes and adjustments they have loaded aboard those bloated machines. We should go back to the tried and tested method of deploying fleets of surfacing submarines to measure arctic ice thickness.
Clarification: Despite what the NSIDC claim, real scientists would never use masks.
Update: In the comments Lars Karlsson points out that
"There is already extensive research proving beyond any doubt that microwaves from satellites cause global warming!"
I haven't read that site enough to bank my reputation on it's concusions, but it does show that the debate over the use of satellites and their role in "warming" certainly isn't over.