Well, up here in the real Arctic, which lies about five feet away from my keyboard right outside the window, we are having the third cold summer in a row. Anchorage just had the coldest July on record. There was record ice in the Bering Sea this winter. Yesterday on the “Alaska Weather” program (yes, our state is so big we have a 30-minute show dedicated to just telling us the weather) there was concern that a northwesterly wind might blow sea ice against the shore up near Barrow, effectively blocking passage between the Chukchi Sea and the Beaufort Sea. The leaves are already changing. It’s been raining since the Fourth of July, the temperatures remain in the 50s, the beans have turned into a brownish-gray glop, and it looks like a cold front from Russia will send temperatures even lower in the next few days.
From what I’ve heard, global warming will be most apparent here in the Arctic. Instead, it seems to be most apparent in Oklahoma and the Deep South, where it’s been hot and dry for a while.
Of course, weather isn’t climate. On the other hand, the guys at the “Alaska Weather” show don’t forcast any further than two days out.
I believe that the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has increased due to the burning of fossil fuels. And even if that carbon dioxide does lead to an overall increase in temperature, the smart thing would be to adapt to the changed climate. Starting with some apple trees here along the Yukon River.
There's a reason professional meteorologists don't forecast more than 10 days out, while climate "scientists" project 100 years out. Projection is a good word here because it is accurate, and also because the climate "scientists", like other hard-core leftists, project their psychological failings on conservatives.
World climate is heating up at 50% to 70% of the numbers claimed. At least 50% and as much as 100% of the actual change is something other than that evil gas CO2, and we are due for another 15-30 years of cooling, on top of the 14 years of cooling we have had since 1998, before the warming trend resumes.
And in the Arctic, ice doesn't melt from the top down, as temperature get as high as 34F over parts of Greenland during 24 hour days (warmer on the airport runway 30 feet behind jets warming up, which is where the weather station was moved a few years ago). In ocean, it melts at the water line, because the specific heat of water is 1-3 orders of magnitude more than the atmosphere - don't have the table in front of me or would quote specific numbers.
The ice melts and blows away with the strong winds in summer, and freezes up solid long before winter begins. The heat from the Arctic sun barely makes a difference, as it maxes out at 46 degrees at the Arctic Circle on noon at summer solstice, is usually less than 23 degrees, and light on water at 23 degrees mostly reflects off the surface and back into space. So you get 700 W/square meter a few minutes per year, and less than 175 W/sq. m. most sunlight hours (down 50% on angle and another 50% due to reflection). Less than that when clouds cover the sky, maybe 100 W/sq. m.
The Arctic gets most of its thermal energy from convection, as air and water move north from the tropics. And as the ice melts, water, with its higher specific heat, will give up more thermal energy from late May to mid-October, thus acting as negative feedback as part of a 55-65 year cycle. In 1957, the North Pole was ice-free. In 1922, there was an ice-free Northwest Passage, and around 900-1000, there were villages in Greenland that have been under ice for 1000 years. These things run in cycles, many of which last 1000 years to 100,000 years or more.