The decades-long trend line in Arctic sea ice minimum is flat, making either claim untrue
.
Excuse me? The trend is very clearly going down in both extent and volume. I have no clue how you can claim that. Jeez man look around you. Everyone here is aware of the trend. You are only deceiving yourself with that one.
I have not ruled out that possibility, and consider it to be a major issue. However, convincing a majority of the people to think similarly requires accurate and honest reporting of the situation
Honest reporting? The Honest reporting should be that virtually all indicators (Air temps, ocean temps, sea ice, jet streams behavior, rate of extreme weather events, etc.) point towards significant changes all over the earth. The consequences are uncertain, but the assumption should be that it's going to be bad.
There is no way of saying that without it sounding scary. That's a big problem because extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Scientists and serious people in general would be naturally skeptic of the claim because it is extraordinary. The thing is, there is extraordinary evidence to support the claim. Climate change is real. It is happening. Chances are it will be very bad.
Making exaggerated claims that do not materialize is no way to convince the masses. They will view them both in the same light.
Exaggerated claims? I wish. The mass extinction is real. The loss of sea ice and trend of the sea ice is real. The rise in temperatures is real. The rise in extreme weather is real. The lack of seriousness from the authorities to tackle climate change is real.
Is that what you want?
What I want is for everyone to see the threat of climate change as the largest threat ever faced by modern humans, with the capacity to end everything that is good in our world. That way people with the right stuff will look at potential vulnerabilities and find solutions.
If the right people think there is no danger until 2100, they will ignore the danger and we'll face climate change without the ultimate human ability, planing. The right people are too busy doing great things in life to take the time necesary to examine the extraordinary evidence. That's why the risk must be acknowledged at every turn and should never be hidden under comfortable versions of the truth. People need to know so they can prepare.
Take for example Wadham's prediction, which was 2016,+-3 years. Strictly speaking, that prediction is still correct. Chances are it will be wrong given the conditions right now, but there is a small chance it will be right. Even if it is not, given arctic conditions and expected temperatures over the next decade, the chances the sea ice collapse increase every year. Wadhams prediction is much closer to the truth than IPCC predictions.