Scientists reviewing the logbooks of polar explorers such as Robert Falcon Scott and Ernest Shackleton show there has been no significant melting of the continent’s ice sheets.

Experts were concerned that ice at the South Pole had declined significantly since the 1950s, which they feared was driven by man-made climate change.

But new analysis suggests that conditions are now virtually identical to when the Terra Nova and Endurance sailed to the continent in the early 1900s, indicating that declines are part of a natural cycle and not the result of global warming.

The log books have offered new insights into the weather, wildlife, and geography associated with this little known region of the globe.

The study implies Antarctic sea ice levels in the early 1900s were similar to today, at between 2 million and 2.8 million square miles (5.3 million and 7.4 million square kilometres).

Estimates suggest levels were significantly higher in the 1950s.

The research, published in the European Geosciences Union journal The Cryosphere, suggests the Antarctic is much less sensitive to the effects of climate change than the Arctic, which has seen a dramatic decline in sea ice.

Let’s take a look at that “dramatic decline in sea ice” statement for a moment. A less alarmist review of Arctic activity shows that ice is always in motion, subject to cyclical weather patterns, and that ice levels being evaluated by climate researchers have been based on estimates.

Researchers looking at paleontological and cosmogenic radionucleotides records have confirmed there is a solar-driven climate cycle with a period of approximately 2400 years. The scientists used actual test results with real historic records to show a correlation between solar activity and the type of weather with which our ancestors had to contend.

The Bray cycle has been recognized in glacier advances and re-advances, ice raft data, peat bog studies, δO18 data, and in 10Be and 14C records for almost 50 years. It is supported by historical accounts from Bray lows and archeological data. There is little doubt that the cycle exists, but its exact length and its ultimate cause are unknown. However, much work is being done that should bear fruit with time.

One inescapable conclusion, from the evidence presented, is that solar variability is an important cause of climate change in the centennial to millennial time frame.

But no matter how much past evidence shows solar activity being the most significant contributor to global climate changes, I suspect that climate alarmists will continue to offer explanations that point directly to man.

One biologist has actually gone from being alarmed to utterly panicked:

There’s no point trying to fight climate change – we’ll all be dead in the next decade and there’s nothing we can do to stop it, a visiting scientist claims.

Guy McPherson, a biology professor at the University of Arizona, says the human destruction of our own habitat is leading towards the world’s sixth mass extinction.

I predict that in 10 years I will still be challenging climate change inanity.