Climate Religion
11 responses | 1 like
Started by metmike - Nov. 13, 2022, 12:51 p.m.

Climate Religion: Egypt’s Mount Sinai to receive ‘Climate Justice Ten Commandments’ during UN summit – Interfaith ‘Climate Repentance Ceremonies’

From Climate Depot

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/11/12/climate-religion-egypts-mount-sinai-to-receive-climate-justice-ten-commandments-during-un-summit-interfaith-climate-repentance-ceremonies/

Comments
By metmike - Nov. 13, 2022, 12:54 p.m.
Like Reply

I guess worshiping an angry, anti science, Marxist slogan spouting teenager didn't work out so well (-: (Greta)


Or the polar bears dying off fake crisis. Or any of the other ones the past 3+ decades.

They removed the 1989 date and title on this article below to try to hide it.

Here's the original one:

"United Nations Predicts Disaster if Global Warming Not Checked

Associated Press – Jun 29, 1989"

https://apnews.com/article/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0

If you want to REALLY scare people about a crisis, creative marketing schemes will have a limited impact..............when there is no real crisis!

By metmike - Nov. 13, 2022, 11:02 p.m.
Like Reply
Four HUNDRED Private Jets Attended the COP27 Climate Conference Essay by Eric Worrall
h/t John Galt III: Climate hypocrisy on steroids – four hundred delegates and their retinues arrived by CO2 spewing private jets, to discuss how to restrict everyone elses CO2 emissions.

 

FOUR HUNDRED private jets arrived in Egypt during COP27 as climate delegates are accused of ‘hypocrisy’

 
  • Climate delegates accused of hypocrisy as 400 private jets in Egypt for COP27
  •  
  • Numerous posts on social media criticised delegates for travelling by private jet 
  •  
  • Posts and reports included various estimates for the number of such planes 
 

By CHRIS MATTHEWS FOR MAILONLINE and AFP

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/11/12/four-hundred-private-jets-attended-the-cop27-climate-conference/


Climate delegates were accused of hypocrisy after 400 private jets arrived in Egyptfor COP27.

 

Numerous posts on social media criticised delegates for travelling by private jet to the UN climate summit.

 

Posts and reports included various estimates for the number of such planes bringing delegates to the gathering in the beach resort of Sharm el-Sheikh.

 

Climate Action Against Disinformation, a group that analyses trends in false information on social media, said in a report on Thursday that narratives of supposed ‘hypocrisy and elitism’ were one of the main focuses of climate-sceptic messages during COP27.

 

Read more: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11416209/FOUR-private-jets-arrived-Egypt-COP27-climate-delegates-accused-hypocrisy.html

 Why should any of us even consider taking the alleged climate crisis seriously, while the leaders of the green movement act like their CO2 emissions don’t matter?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

After more than 3 decades of this same stuff........and the media giving them publicity, credibility and support, it makes you realize what the REAL crisis is in our world.

Many thousands of these hypocrites are shirsting on the environment huge time according to their definition and  doing exactly what they say is causing the climate crisis only  X 100 compared to you and me.......... while preaching to the rest of us to not do what they do or we'll lose the planet.

Even, worse..........while they completely ignore all the real environmental crisis's. 

The real environmental crisis's/insects dying-dead zones-aquifers drying up-plastics in the ocean-landfills/trash-over consumption of natural resources-REAL pollution in the air/soil/water-WIND TURBINES (metmike is a PRACTICING environmentalist): April 2019

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/27498/

By metmike - Nov. 13, 2022, 11:06 p.m.
Like Reply

The BBC Defends Special People Flying Private Jets to COP27

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/11/12/the-bbc-defends-special-people-flying-private-jets-to-cop27/

h/t Peta of Newark; In 2020, the BBC asked “should we give up flying for the sake of the climate?”. That same BBC defends the right of the climate elite to continue using private jets. 

 

How many private jets were at COP27?

 

By Reality Check team

 

BBC News

 

There has been criticism on social media of delegates arriving at the COP27 United Nations Climate Change Conference, in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt.

 

The day before the conference began, hundreds of environmental activists stopped private jets leaving Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport, by sitting in front of their wheels and riding around the airfield on bicycles.  

What is the carbon footprint of private jet travel?

 … 

Emissions per kilometre travelled are significantly worse than any other form of transport.…

 

A government spokesperson said: “This delegation travelled on one of the most carbon-efficient planes of its size in the world and carbon emissions from these flights are also offset.” 

 

The Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit’s international lead told BBC Newsthat focusing on world leaders taking private jets to COP27 was “missing the point”.

 

“The emissions are negligible compared to the impact of decisions and commitments made at these summits,” he said.

 

“If you want emissions to come down, you want leaders in the room and media, scientists and stakeholders asking the important questions.” 

 

Read more: https://www.bbc.com/news/63544995

Start as you mean to continue?  

I love articles like this, because they give us a glimpse of the cruel medieval world I believe our climate elites are attempting to engineer.

 The picture in my mind is the movie “The Hunger Games“, in which ordinary people are coerced into giving up automobiles, clothes washing machines and driers, air conditioners, home heating, and other modern conveniences. A world in which ordinary people are continuously exhorted to live low carbon lives of manual labor, drudgery and hardship, for the sake of the planet, while the elites continue to live high on all the luxuries they deny to everyone else, because of the alleged importance of their work.  

If you have any doubts, ask yourself when the BBC and British Government plan to stop trying to grant moral passes to the elite, because of the alleged importance of their work.

By metmike - Nov. 13, 2022, 11:13 p.m.
Like Reply

The craziest thing about this is the continued acceptance of the term “green” energy for what is actually ANTI green energy or FAKE green energy.

Fossil fuel emissions of CO2 are massively greening up the planet and causing a booming biosphere.  Nobody has repealed the law of photosynthesis.

It should be enough to just know that we are taking that away by eliminating fossil fuels which means LESS planet greening.

But the worse part is replacing it with a source like wind…………the energy source from environmental hell………..and calling THAT the green energy!


Wind turbines and fake green energy is what’s wrecking the planet.

https://www.masterresource.org/droz-john-awed/25-industrial-wind-energy-deceptions/

CapitalCronyism in leading wind producer Texas.

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/88534/#88536


Big failure during peak energy loads in California

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/88534/



Fake inflation reduction act. Wind, the energy source from environmental hell.

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/88185/


Death by Greening:

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/69258/

            +++++++++++++++                                                    

         

Photosynthesis using the building block for life and beneficial gas, CO2. All animals eat plants or something that ate plants.  The optimal level of CO2 for life on this planet is double the current level. There's no chance for us to ever get close to that.

Wind turbines KILL birds and bats. Fossil fuels increase food for them. 

The planet was close to CO2 starvation before humans rescued life with beneficial CO2, during this current SCIENTIFIC climate optimum.
The fake climate crisis, is entirely manufactured based on science DISinformation. 

We were this warm 1,000 years ago during the Medieval WARM period, the last climate optimum. During the Holocene climate OPTIMUM just over 5,000 years ago, it was 2 deg. C warmer than this in the higher latitudes(that always warm the most) with LESS Arctic ice that we have today.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_climatic_optimum

With today’s fake climate crisis, ALL extreme weather events caused by natural variability(most that have occurred numerous times in the past) by the new, political/non scientific definition of climate change……..were caused by the fake climate crisis as a result of the 1 deg. C of mostly beneficial warming(that is saving lives) the past century.


By metmike - Nov. 14, 2022, 9:46 p.m.
Like Reply

New ClimateTV Video Debunks ‘97% Climate Consensus’

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/11/14/new-climatetv-video-debunks-97-climate-consensus/

A new poll of scientists conducted by Fairleigh Dickinson University found that only 59 percent of respondents think global climate change will cause “significant harm” to the “living conditions for people alive today.” That is far short of the “97 percent consensus” narrative pushed by climate alarmists and their media allies across the globe.

 

The survey, conducted in September and October 2022 by Fairleigh Dickinson University and commissioned by The Heartland Institute, polled only professionals and academics who held at least a bachelor’s degree in the fields of meteorology, climatology, physics, geology, and hydrology.

 

The key question of the survey asked: “In your judgement, what will be the overall impact of global climate change on living conditions for people alive today, across the globe?” Fifty-nine percent said “significant harm.” Thirty-nine percent said either “significant improvement,” “slight improvement,” “no change,” or “slight harm.” Two percent were not sure.

Among respondents with the most experience – those at least 50-years-old – less than half expect significant harm for people alive today. Scientists 30-years-old and younger were the only age group for which more than 60 percent expect significant harm. 

 

For more information, and to see the poll results, click on the link below.

 

https://www.heartland.org/news-opinion/news/97-consensus-on-climate-change-survey-shows-only-59-of-scientists-expect-significant-harm

By metmike - Nov. 14, 2022, 9:52 p.m.
Like Reply

    meteormike      

        November 14, 2022 6:41 pm

                

Wonderful video!

What if we did a poll of life on this planet, asking life if it prefers the current level of ambient atmospheric CO2 or did it prefer the one a century ago that was more than 100 parts per million lower?

We’d likely get at least 97% agreement from life that the level in 2022 is much better than in 1922.

And the same response when asking life about increasing CO2 even more, since the optimal level for much of life is around double the current level of CO2.

This wouldn’t be a survey about real pollution or natural resources being over consumed or environmental issues or habitat destruction from humans that are for real. 

Just a poll on  CO2.

Was sub 300 ppm optimal for life?

Is the current 420 ppm optimal for life?

Is 500 ppm better or worse for life?

The planet has been giving us the answer loud and clear for 4 decades now.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth


https://phys.org/news/2013-07-greening-co2.html

Deserts 'greening' from rising CO2



https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/146296/global-green-up-slows-warming

"The paper’s authors reviewed more than 250 published articles that have used satellite data, modeling, and field observations, to understand the causes and consequences of global greening. Among the key results, the authors noted that on a global scale greening can be attributed to the increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Rising levels of carbon dioxide increase the rate of photosynthesis and growth in plants."

+++++++++++++++++

The law of photosynthesis has not been abolished.


By metmike - Nov. 17, 2022, 3:54 p.m.
Like Reply

Thanks, Colorado Springs Gazette, for Warning of the Dangers of “Climate Change Catastrophism”

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/11/17/thanks-colorado-springs-gazette-for-warning-of-the-dangers-of-climate-change-catastrophism/

The authors also cite the recent banning of synthetic fertilizers—a long supported policy goal of environmentalists and climate alarmists—in Sri Lanka, which led to a food crisis that Climate Realism covered, here.

The editorial board of the Colorado Springs Gazette published an article describing the harm being caused by “climate change catastrophism,” the constant repetition of woefully overstated claims about the risk of climate change. The story cites a recent letter published in the peer reviewed Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), in which a team of international scientists urge their fellow researchers to avoid exaggerating the likely impacts of climate change, warning it may be contributing to mental health problems, particularly among young people. This represents a much more balanced and practical position, avoiding sensationalist claims and focusing on a realistic assessment of the state of climate knowledge.

The Colorado Springs Gazette article, titled “Boulder scientists warn of ‘climate change catastrophism,’” says “[e]nough with climate-change scare tactics. They hurt people, possibly more than they will suffer from climate change.” They cite a letter published in PNAS under the title “Catastrophic climate risks should be neither understated nor overstated,” penned by climate scientists Matthew G. Burgess, Roger Pielke Jr., and Justin Ritchie.

This is consistent with what many scientists, like those cited at Climate Realism, have warned. RCP8.5 and similarly high emissions scenarios are unrealistic, likely impossible. Unfortunately, despite its implausibility, RCP8.5 is widely used in climate science and climate policy literature to promote extreme climate change disaster scenarios that are not supported by the data. The goal being to spur world governments into an extreme and immediate, “great reset,” of global economic and political systems.

 The letter’s authors correctly point out that “[o]veremphasized apocalyptic futures can be used to support despotism and rashness.”

Climate alarmists exaggerate the rate of recent warming and the risks of extreme weather to motivate radical political actions. The editorial board of the Colorado Springs Gazette and the PNAS should be thanked for making this point. The Earth’s climate does change, and will continue to do so, and it is wise to meet this change with realistic mitigation efforts. An overcorrection imposed by world governments, like banning fossil fuels, is likely to cause far more harm and destruction than climate change itself.

+++++++++++++++++++++++

Sometimes, the comments section will yield great points, articles or graphs like this one:

    E. Schaffer               

        November 17, 2022 6:42 am

                

For those interested in the core of the science, I think this here is a beautiful twist. According to the orthodoxy there are two main anthropogenic drivers of climate change – GHGs and aerosols. The latter shall be cooling and hold back the otherwise GHG related warming by about 1/3. Now that is a 1/3 globally, despite aerosols being concentrated in mid NH latitudes. There this negative forcing should even dominate GHG forcing. So how did it turn out..

comment image

Funny, isn’t it?

https://greenhousedefect.com/contrails/aerosols-in-climate-science

From that article:

++++++++++++++++++++++

Here's NASA passing on a study that LIES to us. The video shows the model NOT getting future warming projections right. Compare it to the above ACTUAL data.

Study Confirms Climate Models are Getting Future Warming Projections Right

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2943/study-confirms-climate-models-are-getting-future-warming-projections-right/

By Alan Buis,
NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory

An animation of a GISS (Goddard Institute for Space Studies) climate model simulation made for the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report, show

+++++++++++++++++++++++

I captured a couple of frames of their "accurate global models" below.

Compare this modeled forecast below to the empirical data above, showing the REAL warming increasing in the higher latitudes of North America at 4 times the rate as warming close to the equator and 7 times the rate of warming in the high latitudes of South America.



This is the forecast at the end of the century.  It just continues with the same very wrong temperature profile of the planet for another 75+ years. And these are the models that are the entire basis for eliminating fossil fuels........that have gifted us with almost every technological advancement in this age and are feeding half the planet with synthetic fertilizer and beneficial atmospheric  CO2.

An extremely wrong global temperature profile for another 75+ years.

These are the models that are the entire basis for eliminating fossil fuels........that have gifted us with almost every technological advancement in this age and are feeding half the planet with synthetic fertilizer and beneficial atmospheric CO2.

By metmike - Nov. 21, 2022, 2:58 a.m.
Like Reply

Hudson Bay Sea Ice Freeze-Up in 2022 Like the 1980s for the 5th Time Since 2015

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/11/18/hudson-bay-sea-ice-freeze-up-in-2022-like-the-1980s-for-the-5th-time-since-2015/


2022 in bright blue is above the 2012 low in red and also above the 2011-2020 average in faint blue. Hardly a death spiral in Arctic Ice and it did not all disappear in Summer by 2013 as predicted by Al Gore and others. 




Last 10 years below.




Facebook posts

stated on February 22, 2021 in a Facebook post:

Says Al Gore said in 2009 that “the North Pole will be ice-free in the summer by 2013 because of man-made global warming.”


mostly-true


  • In 2009, Al Gore loosely cited researchers and said there was a “75% chance” the ice could be gone during at least some summer months within five to seven years. 
  • He made similar statements multiple other times in the late 2000s.

The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.)

In a Dec. 14, 2009, speech at the Copenhagen Climate Conference, Gore suggested the possibility of the Arctic losing some or all of its ice in the summer months within five to seven years, citing researchers associated with the Naval Postgraduate School.

"Some of the models suggest to Dr. (Wieslav) Maslowski that there is a 75% chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during some of the summer months, could be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years."

See the sources for this fact-check

+++++++++++++++++

Antarctic sea ice below in red. Record low for this date was in 2016.

2016/2017/18/19/21(5 of the previous 6 years) had less ice/were all lower than this on November 16. 

https://earth.gsfc.nasa.gov/cryo/data/current-state-sea-ice-cover


By metmike - Nov. 21, 2022, 10:04 a.m.
Like Reply

As we know, anything and everything that is extreme weather, no matter that it's happened before, no matter that its extreme cold or snow..........WAS CAUSED BY GLOBAL WARMING (even when there hasn't been global warming in 6 years and even when its the opposite of global warming-COLD)

Massive snowfall fueled by climate change hits Buffalo and Great Lakes region

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2022/11/19/meuz-n19.html

"As global warming continues, extreme weather events, such as hurricanes, droughts and lake-effect snowstorms(and record cold) will become more frequent, intense and deadly with no serious response from the capitalist ruling elite."

By metmike - Nov. 23, 2022, 8:16 p.m.
Like Reply

BBC Response to Svalbard Complaint

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/11/23/bbc-response-to-svalbard-complaint/



+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    meteormike

                           Reply to             Dave Burton        

        November 23, 2022 5:11 pm

        

Excellent point Dave!
We are supposed to believe that the ideal temperature and CO2 level for life on planet earth was when humans started burning fossil fuels and the increase since then is causing us to get farther and farther away from the optimal level.

Never mind all the indisputably proven science based on empirical data from thousands of studies that tell us the optimal level for plants is more than double the current level.

Never mind earth massively greening up, which are plants screaming “Thank you for the CO2 and climate! Can we have more, please?” in plant language.

All animals eat plants or something that ate plants. Besides the extra food, most creatures do better when it’s a bit warmer like it is now. Cold kills!

Before climate science was hijacked, it was universally accepted/agreed on by scientists that the period that featured temperatures as much as 2 deg. C WARMER than this in the high latitudes and even less Arctic ice between 9,000 and 5,000 years ago was a climate OPTIMUM. Not despite those conditions but exactly BECAUSE OF them. 

Holocene climatic optimum

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_climatic_optimum

By today’s redefined climate standards, the historical Holocene climate OPTIMUM was actually a more severe climate crisis than today’s climate crisis.

Fact: Warming the coldest places on the planet the most actually reduces the meridional temperature gradient and decreases some types of extreme weather.  

In addition, CO2 is the building block for life. It’s a beneficial gas. We rescued the planet from near CO2 starvation.

Another thing is the absurdity of calling energy forms like wind “green” energy.
The truth is that it’s the ANTI green energy. Energy from environmental hell, replacing the energy form that is indisputably greening up the planet……..CO2 emitting fossil fuels.

Wind turbines and fake green energy are actually what’s wrecking the planet more than fossil fuels by an extremely wide margin.

https://www.masterresource.org/droz-john-awed/25-industrial-wind-energy-deceptions/

This is mostly about:

  1. Crony capitalism.
  2.  Political agenda that includes wealth  REdistribution and carbon penalties that generate income/power for governments .
  3.  Misled/brainwashed (but very sincere) science illiteracy  and environmental groups.
  4. Extremely biased scientists that should know better but have rejected the scientific method in this particular realm because they let politics or money/funding or mainstream, group think rule their mindset and sabotage their independent, critical  thinking because it’s better for their career than opposing those things.

How did we get here?

The world today has completely transformed the way that we communicate compared to how we got information 30 years ago. People’s way of thinking has been permanently altered.

Compared to before the internet, for instance, there’s a billion+ times more information available in an instant here in 2022. 

As we all know, if you have a bias, even a small one it affects the way that you process information. 50 years ago, people with a bias 1 way would mostly be subjected to the same information that everybody else was, including people with a bias the other way.

Not so in the last couple of decades. Now, there are many hundreds of  thousands of choices that we can make about where to get our information from.
Unlike 1972, when everybody had the same 3 tv news networks and the local newspaper for their city, in 2022, they have limitless choices.

It’s human nature, because of our bias to pick sources that tell us the news/information which lines up with what we already believe….our ideologies. Almost nobody goes to sources that give them the other sides views to try to understand them and learn new things.
People gravitate towards echo chambers…………which feeds bias with constant positive feedback to amplify whatever it is you already believe. 

In this age, this means whoever can control the messaging, controls peoples thoughts. Just getting people to initially connect to a part of a message is often enough to capture their attention. Then they will respond by going to sources that tell them more of what they now believe and it amplifies enormously over time. In today’s world, the amplifiers are astronomically greater than 50 years ago. 

After several years of this, people are completely unable to recognize any truths that contradict the messaging of the sources they have relied on for years. 

That’s great if their sources are always 100% right about everything all the time. 

For instance, the planet greening up can’t be comprehended by a brain that is programmed to think that the planet is dying from the pollutant, CO2. 

That same brain goes only to sources that tells it things that line up with CO2=pollution and rejects information that contradicts that.
The brainwash on the fake climate crisis starts with the sources altruistic motive of  “saving the planet”. This imposes an unwavering amount of impenetrable  trust and great sense of urgency on that brain. 

It’s profoundly stunning to see that this defines our world today. Not just on the fake climate crisis but in numerous other realms. 

Even after 3+ decades of making extreme predictions that continually bust, the millions of  captured brains are unable to recognize the big busts and unable to appropriately reconcile the massive disparity between the predictions and what actually has (not) happened. There is 0 accountability for being wrong by these sources because the captured brains are programmed to assume everything stated about the climate crisis is correct and ignore everything that shows otherwise. 

Fact: The exact same things that caused the scientific Holocene Climate OPTIMUM, 6,000 years ago are causing a climate CRISIS in 2022……based on NON scientific elements and dishonest science.  

It’s hard to imagine this going on forever. At some point, authentic science and truth should be able to break thru. Maybe we are in the early stages because of the fake green renewable energy schemes are massively failing and its started to really hurt in many countries. 

There is no magic, green energy fairy that will come to the rescue to fill in for all the huge deficits in physical laws that make these fake green energy schemes impossible. The bigger the commitment, moving forward, the greater the damage to economies and energy security. 

At some point, hopefully very soon, the impossible fake green energy promises, thriving on promises alone and captured brains for 2 decades,  will cause an increasingly strong dose of awakening (penalties) as they are imposed, that’s  great enough in the real world  to sink deeply enough into brains for them to snap out of the brainwash and come to their senses.

That will be the starting point of a new age for authentic climate science and energy truth. 

When fully realized, mankind will look back and appreciate this current age for being the “Dark Ages” for climate science and corrupt energy schemes.

By metmike - Nov. 25, 2022, 12:25 p.m.
Like Reply

Eastern Canadian Arctic Has Much More Sea Ice Than Usual While Svalbard Polar Bears Deal with Less

Dr. Susan Crockford 

Svalbard is still ice-free this fall, which it has been rather consistently for at least ten years but the amount of sea ice greater than ‘normal’ in the Eastern Canadian Arctic at this date is something to behold. Yet contrary to predictions, polar bears in Svalbard are thriving.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/11/25/eastern-canadian-arctic-has-much-more-sea-ice-than-usual-while-svalbard-polar-bears-deal-with-less/

++++++++++++++++

    Tom in Florida

                                  November 25, 2022 7:29 am

                

Perhaps the idea that polar bears need lots of sea ice is just wrong.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++    

Ben Vorlich

                    Reply to             Tom in Florida        

        November 25, 2022 8:49 am        

As we’ve very little data about Polar Bears and very little sea ice how can anyone say for sure?
All we can say is that they’ve survived previous warm periods

++++++++++++++++++


    meteormike

                                    Reply to             Ben Vorlich        

        November 25, 2022 9:19 am        

All we can say is that they’ve survived previous warm periods

Exactly Ben!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_climatic_optimum

“Of 140 sites across the western Arctic, there is clear evidence for conditions that were warmer than now at 120 sites. At 16 sites for which quantitative estimates have been obtained, local temperatures were on average 1.6±0.8 °C higher during the optimum than now. Northwestern North America reached peak warmth first, from 11,000 to 9,000 years ago, but the Laurentide Ice Sheet still chilled eastern Canada. Northeastern North America experienced peak warming 4,000 years later. Along the Arctic Coastal Plain in Alaska, there are indications of summer temperatures 2–3 °C warmer than now.[9] Research indicates that the Arctic had less sea ice than now”