harryagain wrote:
The majority of the statements in that article are simply lies. There is
just not enough time to refute the lies of those propagandists.

Oh and you're an expert?

The likelihood of anyone here (on any of the sides of the argument)
being any kind of climate expert is pretty minimal. But here

http://www.see.ed.ac.uk/~shs/Climate change/Arctic ice/Jeffries Overland Arctic new normal%23.pdf

is something semi-technical about arctic sea ice that was published
in reputable physics magazine. Might be interesting.

I doubt very much it contains any lies, although some here might (perhaps)
take issue with some parts. If so, note that the letters section of Physics
Today often contains quite robust technical discussion, so feel free
to write in with a criticism at whatever level of detail you fancy.

Lastly, please do not confuse news reporting of science with the science
itself: I expect you can see a difference in style quite easily between
stuff in the telegraph/guardian/indy/whatever and the linked pdf. Also,
note that the article I link to is not even in itself a scientific journal
article, it is a less technical version aimed at a general audience of
physicists.

Have fun,

#Paul