reading up on environmental stuff

I've got an interview on Tuesday... well a 'chat' apparently, with a company that is doing exactly what I want to do... for the time being. Until I get enough experience under my belt to start dictating policy, that is. :D

But anyway I am reading up on environmental stuff at the moment and I am *not* impressed with this article, and this is why:

"Dr Stroeve and colleagues have now analysed Arctic autumn (September, October, November) air temperatures for the period 2004-2008 and compared them to the long term average (1979 to 2008).

The results, they believe, are evidence of the predicted amplification effect.

"You see this large warming over the Arctic ocean of around 3C in these last four years compared to the long-term mean," explained Dr Stroeve."

1979 to 2008 is not long-term. It may be long-term in terms of say a relationship. But it is not long term in terms of the climate. Climate variability needs to be looked at over much longer terms than 29 years. We need to go back to at least the end of the last ice age if possible. If that is the only data they have, then there's nothing much they can do about it, but they shouldn't call it "long-term". The earth and its climate has been around a lot longer than 30 years.