You are literally using sea ice extent lost crime to quantify ice melting. Or volume loss or thickness loss which is a three dimensional observation.
OK, so I had time and hopefully my battery doesn't die while I'm typing this...
As I said, you are making illogical assumptions. I have *only* talked about extent. Not being an idiot, I *do not* equate that with area nor volume.
Between July 15th and August 5th 2012 which was the day before The Great Arctic cyclone bombed-out.
I understand your point, but you are also cherry picking. The storm formed on the 2nd. It entered the Arctic Ocean on the 5th, officially, which means that is when the *center* of the cyclone hit the water's edge. These storms are huge. Anyone who has ever seen a hurricane tracked knows the hurricane effects come long before the eye passes, so, no, the effects do not occur only beginning the 5th. That's just incorrect logic. The drop begins on the second and goes through the 9th. This fits perfectly with the timing of the GAC.
The quality of the ice at that time, the concentration, the area, are all different issues. They are not measures of extent. Was the ice area and volume already low? Sure! Why not?! When did I say otherwise? Never, that's when.
In fact, I have said more than once it would be interesting, and telling, to look at ASI Area over the same time to see what the change in extent really means. I mean, it could have been compaction, melt out, aliens, whatever. I have not addressed that. I have said the extent dropped 990 over those seven days, and that, unfortunately for your efforts, remains an absolute fact. At least via JAXA.
You're arguing with yourself, Frivolous. It's a bit frustrating, but also really funny. (But, then, I teach language communication for a living and find humor in miscommunications like this.)
So almost all of the Ice Melt Away.
Using sea ice extent to quantify this means nothing.
Good thing I haven't been, then, eh?!
LOL...
I'm just going to animate July 15th and August 5th and if you can't see did decimation on the Pacific side of the Arctic between those dates right before the Great Arctic cyclone took place then you are being disengenous.
Please really try to understand this: You are arguing a point I have quite literally not made, at all, period.
Its pretty freaking obvious that on July 15th you can see that the ice had that mostly whitish color.
LOL... what's "pretty freaking obvious" is you just don't seem to understand what I have been saying. So be it. Others have.
The GAC came along and finished the job.
Great! Who are you arguing with about that...? I have never said anything to contradict that... at all... in any way. Extent does measure the imaginary circle drawn around *all* the ice over 15%, right? So when I say the ice extent fell 990k... it did... right?
Thanks for the entertainment. I hope you can see you are arguing points that only you think have been made. I'm sure you are acting in good faith, so no big deal, but you can probably use your time more productively on some other issue.
Cheers