"Third worst was in 2005."

That can only be said [with some confidence] since 1979 when satellite monitoring began

"Incredible that anyone would think the second worst year ever is good news."

I didn't say [or think] it was good news. In fact I would prefer less ice in the arctic during the summer. The point you are missing is that beginning around last year, some people were predicting and generally making making a lot of noise [about the polar bears, etc] and claiming that there would far less polar ice this year as compared to 2007. And the news [such as BBC] was was running stories saying within a decade or so all the arctic ice would disappear.

So, their predictions were wrong and none were predicting that there would more polar ice in 2008 as compared to 2007. Which should inform you regarding their ability in this area.

"The denialist pattern is to say any new record is just random, and anything falling short of a record is good news."

You can be sure that BBC isn't going to run a story telling you that their stories last year were completely wrong. Instead they will say "this was the second worst year ever for Arctic ice". Which is lie, because we don't have enough data prior to 1979 to make such a statement

"Keep repeating this, and you'll get into hot water. "

Btw, would you say you would be losing your bet had you made it?

[I thought not.
You are so predictable.]