A Tale Of Two Poles

The North polar region and South Polar regions are not just literally polar opposites; they are opposites in another couple of fundamental ways. The arctic ocean is a body of water surrounded by land--Canada, Alaska, Russia and Greenland. The South is covered by a continent with a sea around it--the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian oceans.

It is well known by followers of "climate hysteria science" that while the arctic sea ice is declining, the antarctic sea ice has been setting records in the opposite direction.

Here is an experiment to try: Google "why is the arctic..." it will autocomplete to "why is the arctic sea ice melting" You will get a bunch of hits that all agree with the first thing that pops up:

"Increased water temperatures and air temperatures due to human-caused global warming are the dominant reasons for the record melting of the Arctic sea ice."

Let us try this for the Antarctic..."why is antarctic sea ice growing". You will get a bunch of articles that essentially say what the first hit say:

"Antarctic sea ice has been growing over the last few decades but it certainly is not due to cooling"

If it were still the 1970's, one might expect the opposite result: Back when global cooling was the problem, the Antarctic sea ice would have been because duh! Global cooling and fancy explanations would have been foisted on the strange decline in the Arctic sea ice.

Similarly: Look for "difference between models and temperature measurements" and you will find two kinds of articles--ones that spin theories of various levels of complexity to justify the discrepancy between the climate models and actual temperature measurements. They almost never show the kind of graphic below: This is found mostly in skeptical articles:

A picture is worth a thousand words and who wants to write an extra thousand when you could just not include the troublesome image?