Climate Model Predictions and the Reality of Arctic Sea Ice

Climate change caused by humans is expected to be particularly rapid in the Arctic region. As a result, the northern sea ice is expected to melt, perhaps as early as the next decade.

These predictions are based on such complex climate models that even researchers cannot fully understand them, let alone ordinary tax-paying citizens. Therefore, it is extremely interesting to follow the statistics on ice area development published by the National Snow & Ice Data Center (NSIDC).

NSIDC publishes ice area statistics monthly. And now the statistics for June are available, from which I drew the picture below.

As seen in the figure, the ice area in June has varied over the years, but it is not possible to say that it has decreased any further since 2007. It remains to be seen when its development will return to the downward trajectory predicted by climate models—or if it will at all.

In addition to the Arctic ice area, the NSIDC publishes daily statistics on ice extent, which differs from area in a similar way that the surface area of a slice of Swiss cheese including the holes differs from its area without the holes. According to this statistic, the ice extent yesterday was the fourteenth largest for that date in its measurement history.

I have been following these statistics for a long time and have been puzzled by the fact that they are rarely reported in the media aimed at the general public. However, I am sure that many readers would find following the melting of the northern sea ice quite interesting.

Aiempia ajatuksia samasta aihepiiristä:
Can climate models predict the distribution of warming?
The area of Arctic sea ice was exceptionally large in January
Does Arctic sea ice melt as atmospheric greenhouse gases increase?

 

Could Kenyans serve as a model for Somalis and Iraqis?

Finnish immigration policy is somewhat unsuccessful in the sense that people from major refugee-producing countries - excluding Ukrainians - have adapted poorly to the job market. Consequently, a significant portion of them relies on social welfare, and many also turn to criminal activities. These facts have led to a negative perception of immigration from elsewhere than Western or East Asian countries by a substantial portion of Finns.

Therefore, I read with great interest an article about a company operating in Kenya that acquires and trains healthcare personnel for Finland. In practice, these individuals have existing education in the healthcare field, and they also receive additional training, including independent study of the Finnish language. The latter is intended to gauge their motivation.

Foreign nurses are welcome in Finland because the country is facing a severe shortage of healthcare professionals. Kenyans have already proven to be good workers, with an employment rate even higher than that of EU citizens.

The facts I've presented above have left me thoughtful, as it seems strange that if Kenyans are thriving in Finland, why can't Somalis or Iraqis achieve the same and settle for living off society's support without making an effort for their own success? If we exclude politically incorrect factors such as genetics and culture when seeking an answer, what remains?

When searching for an answer, it's important not to overlook the possibility that Finns may be doing something fundamentally wrong when trying to ease the lives of people from major refugee-producing countries coming to Finland without expecting them to contribute. Could the solution lie in requiring them to take responsibility for their own lives in the same way Kenyans do when they come to Finland?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Why doesn't immigration cause protests in Japan?
100 percent of the violence is related to migration
A Finnish police officer is afraid to speak about the problems of immigration