8 Comments
Feb 17, 2023·edited Feb 17, 2023Liked by John Dee

Another very interesting piece of analysis. I have already learned more than I ever expected to know about immunology, virology, vaccinology and herbology/natural medicine over the last few years and I can definitely feel the beggining of a budding interest in statistical techniques and wizardry although the latter does seem more of a mystery to me from the starting line so I shall keep reading your pieces and hope some shoots of knowledge start to appear to guide me on my way.

Expand full comment
author
Feb 17, 2023·edited Feb 17, 2023Author

Thank you! The field can indeed seem arcane at first but, like spaghetti flung at a wall, some will stick (though I've never been quite sure why folk don't use a kitchen timer).

Expand full comment
Feb 17, 2023Liked by John Dee

that was my hope :)

Expand full comment
founding

My first thoughts, looking at your graphs, were that we can't assume that the ice is of uniform thickness and that maybe the first half of the 1900's just reduces the thickness and not the area, and once reduced, the rising temperatures then started affecting the extent. Rather like when I microwave frozen soup. The first half of the time is to do with melting the blob of iced soup, then the overall soup-heating comes after that. (I know you like kitchen analogies!)

Expand full comment
author

A rather excellent point! Somewhere in an early preamble I mention that ice extent is not ice mass and that weather conditions can induce rapid expansion (and thus rapid decline) of sea ice.

Expand full comment
founding

JD, your last few climate articles don’t allow comments. Are we in detention?

Expand full comment
author

Oh bugger - I might have hit the wrong buttons. I've been using my smartphone and find this far too fiddly! Will get this sorted...

Expand full comment
author

All posts now sorted - my phone has been sending them out with wonky settings!

Expand full comment