polar bear
Arctic sea ice data is in plain view of the world's media, yet outlets would still rather quote activist-scientists than show an unambiguous chart. Articles of "catastrophic ice melt" still pepper the global news feeds, even as signs point to a cyclical shift in the northern polar region.

I'm being consciously naive here. I'm fully aware that the media's job isn't to inform; rather, it exists to propagandize and to push the agendas and narratives of its backers. Still, I can't help but wonder, when a placard-brandishing climate alarmist yells "the end is nigh!", who exactly is it that they've put their trust in? Who told them that the sky is falling? I ask because you do need to be informed of the 'climate crisis' in order to discern it — your own senses aren't enough. People aren't opening their front doors in the morning to an 'existential emergency', they aren't retreating back inside, calling their bosses and saying "I wont be coming in today, you know... 'cause of the climate". This is supposed to be 'catastrophic global warming', remember? Not 'random, cherry-picked extreme weather events'? For what is billed as a 'worldly cataclysm', this warming sure is illusive, periodic and localized.

The power of propaganda, I guess.

The blind acceptance of sheep.


The poster child for AGW is of course the Arctic. For years, dire tipping point deadlines of an "ice free Arctic" have been prophesied by pedestalled climate 'experts', and for years, dire tipping point deadlines have uneventfully passed us all by.

See: Decades Of Failed Tipping Point Prophesies

And: Years Of Failed Arctic Sea Ice Predictions

In a further blow to the credibility of the climate ambulance chasers, there is, as of Nov 17, significantly more ice in the Arctic than there has been in recent years — the difference is stark.

This week, Arctic sea ice is approaching 10,000,000 km2 — the second highest ice extent of any of the last 15 years. Furthermore, the years 2008 and 2005 are on course to be eclipsed in the coming days/weeks, as are many from the early-2000s and mid/late-1990s — this means that 2021 will soon claim the title of 'the highest Arctic sea ice extent of the past two decades' (since 2001).

In addition, extent is now comfortably above the 2011-2020 average, and, by next week, is expected to have taken out the 2001-2010 average, too, according to NSIDC data.

Also worth noting is that 'extent' is actually highly variable and susceptible to changing wind patterns, etc. A more reliable metric to use when trying to determine the health of an ice sheet is its thickness or volume.

According to the latest data from the Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI), Arctic sea ice 'volume' has been on something of a tear in recent weeks — it is now tracking above all recent years (black line on the below chart), and shows no signs of abating:



Here's a closer look:



"Cold and snow came early to much of the Arctic this year," reports woodtv.com. This reality, as hinted at above, is a big shift from recent years, and I believe it could indicate a more permanent 'trend change' as low solar activity's impact on Earth's climate continues to 'snowball'.

Only time will tell on that front, but backing up my contention is the fact that the South Pole also just witnessed a historically cold winter. As reported last month: "Between the months of April and September, the South Pole averaged a temperature of -61.1C (-78F). Simply put, this was the region's coldest 6-month spell ever recorded, and it comfortably usurped the previous coldest 'coreless winter' on record: the -60.6C (-77F) from 1976 (solar minimum of weak cycle 20)."

Unsurprisingly, the mainstream media remains silent on all of this.

It doesn't fit the narrative, and so it isn't reported on — this isn't how journalism (and indeed science) is supposed to work.

In the absence of open debate, questioning and accountability, authoritarian forces rise.