If only someone made the effort of reading my previous posts before raising discussions about the meaning of the word "recovery", so many words would have not been spent uselessly.
"This of course does not challenge the long term trend, which is quite clear. But I would not be surprised if there was a temporary recovery in ice extension and volume, from now on and for the next one-to-two years." I thought this sentence was clear enough. Recovery to me means, for example, passing from the last position to the second-last. Is that clear enough now? It's honestly tiring sometimes, and disappointing being forced to add a disclaimer to any discussion like "I don't mean to say that ice won't disappear, or the like". And references to tea parties and Fox news then... For an Italian like me
... it sounds just like complete and unwillingly funny nonsense.
I'll take Neven's request to close this senseless argument and focus on more sensible issues. I have the greatest respect for his work, his professionalism and intellectual honesty as I've been following his blog for the several years, and I beg your pardon if my post led someway to this senseless off-topic discussion. It was not my intention.
Regarding the recent JAXA extension increase, I maintain my opinion that with such low temperatures in Bering area, freezing is just what one should expect. There's -25C in Savoonga and -27C in Mekoryuk as we speak. Dispersion IMHO is in most cases associated with cold air advections and therefore it's a difficult and probably useless exercise to try separating the two issues which generally tend to act concurrently. For example, the LP currently forming in the Pacific will activate strong, and cold winds from Alaska to Russia, thus leading to extension increase for both advection of colder air, and dispersion of the existing ice offshore Alaska.
The same has happened recently for Barents, where cold air from the CAB has moved to Svalbard and Kara Sea. Again, combination of two concurring factors: colder air moving southwards and dispersion. The same typically applies to Hudson as well, associated with cold westerlies moving from Manitoba or Nunavut to the Atlantic. There is therefore not much point in justifying the current extension increase with "dispersion" only. Dispersion and advection of cold air just tend to act concurrently in most cases.