David Appell was kind enough to alert me to a paper written by I. Eisenman, W. N. Meier, and J. R. Norris.
They titled their paper “A spurious jump in the satellite record: is Antarctic sea ice really expanding?”
I don’t plan to demean myself by spending a lot of time on this silly hail mary pass attempt. But I will post the evidence from the papers own supplemental materials.
That evidence was pointed out by P.R. Holland in an interactive comment here.
“This paper contains solid and important science and I congratulate the authors on their
vigilance. It is certainly important to know that the uncertainties in the ice area/extent
timeseries might be larger than thought (depending upon how this finding is addressed
by the author of the timeseries in question).
However, doesn’t Figure S5 in the supplementary material show that whatever the
source of the Bootstrap issue, there is no doubt that Antarctic sea ice is increasing in
both area and extent? The trends appear significant whichever of the three time series
one chooses. Even if one discards Bootstrap altogether on the basis of this paper, the
NASA Team series clearly shows significant increases. These two facts imply that the
title of this paper is misleading, and so is much of the discussion and abstract. The
clearly significant increases in all 3 datasets are not accurately reflected by the paper
text, abstract, or title.
With the eyes of the climate change lobbies (on both sides) watching this debate, it
is very important that papers’ titles, abstract, and conclusions accurately convey the
facts. Very few journalists will check the content of the paper before reporting its title,
and no-one should be expected to examine the supplementary figures of a paper.”
Figure S5 from supplement here. The yellow circled items are the NASA team data that is not using the bootstrap algorithm.
sunshine hours 