Jim I'm not familiar with CCI charts so can't comment, but I did notice that on 'Reanylizer' the north pole was showing above freezing temperatures at 0300 on Monday. I had presumed that 'after the fact' charts were actual temperatures and not still projections. There are reasons I hesitated to post; I'm not an expert, I'm fairly sure 'unfreezing' isn't even a word and I'm not going to die in a trench defending any cause However, yes - I do feel you are being just a tad pedantic about it. It doesn't really matter if the North Pole was still a half degree below freezing after all. The point I was trying to make was that these temperatures are, in my limited experience, absolutely extraordinary and likely unprecedented. UCAR’s North Pole temperature data record, for example, shows not a single day above freezing at the North Pole during January since records began in 1948. I just thought this was worth a mention. This might also be off topic but it's currently colder in Vietnam than it is on the northern Siberian Arctic coast.

Turns out Colorado Bob was right and the temperature DID briefly rise above freezing almost all the way to the north pole. Check out Reanalyzer at 0300 Monday 25th Jan. Not that I'm claiming the first recorded time the temperature has ever risen above freezing at the north pole in January is important or anything but I think it IS important to be accurate and note that it did indeed happen.

@Rob Dekker "You can bring a horse to water, but you can't make it drink" Alternatively; "You can bring a denier to data, but you can't make it think" Sorry - couldn't resist that one.

"I won't allow any of this BS during the melting season." Praise be. I don't know how you found the patience for as long as you did. I have only posted here once or twice but I have been reading this blog almost every day for years and I was beginging to despair that the comments section was heading the way of almost every other climate blog. Thank goodness we can now get back to informed and rational discussion without the distraction of irritating, ignorant and infantile nonsense. Keep up the great work Neven - your blog is literaly the best on the web for Arctic info. Back to lurking now - but much happier.

Ostopop Please show at least some kind of credible evidence that Mann's hockey stick has been 'debunked' somewhere other than in your imagination. And while you are at it you could show some kind of credible evidence that the dozen or more subsequent studies that verify and corroborate Mann's work have also been 'debunked'. And yes, of course it is the pages2K project. I presumed that in your semi-professional capacity as a libeler of the original hockey stick you would have heard of it and obviously everyone else here has. But actualy *citing* a notorious denier-blog and it's discredited creator as the source of your 'information' makes it perfectly clear that 'debating' with you on any scientific point or study would be completely pointless. As jdallen points out - the tired old 'the hockey stick is broken' myth has been done to death for years and shredded to the point where it has reached a dropping consistancy. How about you comment on something more relevant - like how JAXA shows the Arctic sea ice extent at a new record low for the time of year for example. http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/Sea_Ice_Extent_v2_L.png Far more interesting than debunking ancient denialist myths for the nth time.

Recently 78 climate researchers from 24 countries, together with many other colleagues, worked for seven years on a new climate reconstruction covering the same period as Mann. Their new study was published in Nature Geoscience. It is based on 511 climate archives from around the world, from sediments, ice cores, tree rings, corals, stalagmites, pollen or historical documents and measurements etc All data are freely available for you to check. And guess what this 500 man-years or research shows? Yep - it's a 'Hockey Stick'! Almost identical to Mann's brilliant original. There are also at least a dozen other 'Hockey Sticks' that also verify and corroborate Mann's original making it one of THE most robust theories in science history. Don't you just hate that? The rest of your mishmash Gish-gallop of the same old wearisome thousand-times-falsified junk and baseless slander isn't even worth parsing for the nth time. Whatever you are being paid to write this nonsense it's too much.

In jolly old England we don't say 'gotten'. We say 'got'. Though, oddly enough, it's one of the few words that has kept its originaly form in the US but changed in England.

"...I try to give people the benefit of the doubt...." I spotted him in 5 seconds flat - but then, after 15 years of debunking climate concern trolls every day, I've developed a keen eye for them. Also I'm not such a nice guy as you. They are a complete waste of time every time in my experience. Thanks for taking the trouble to reply however. I'll go back to lurking now. : )

"...we are not yet as warm as it was in medieval times. I am just trying to say that the present amount of warming is not without precedent..." Hi Neven and all. Been lurking here for two years and never posted before. However, I would just like to say that one reason this blog is one of my favourites is that tiresome concern trolls are not generaly permitted to disrupt informed discussion. So I am confused as to why you seem to have realaxed this policy with regard to the obvious concern troll above? Are we now expected to tolerate this level of myth-parroting from now on? I sincerely hope not. Thanks for all your efforts and thanks to (almost) everyone who contributes to the BTL comments to make this the most informative source on Arctic Ice on the web. Please don't feel the need to suffer fools. There are hundreds of denialist blogs where they can go to spout nonsense - just not here please.