Latest From The Greenland Meltdown

Climate experts insist that Greenland is melting down, despite the fact that there is zero evidence to support that idea.

Greenland has gained nearly 500 billion tons of ice and snow over the past six months.

ScreenHunter_1387 Mar. 30 08.10Greenland Ice Sheet Surface Mass Budget: DMI

Scientists at the center of ice sheet are nearly buried in snow again this year, with temperatures still below minus 40 degrees.

ScreenHunter_1385 Mar. 30 08.09


And the coastal regions of Greenland are also having a difficult time keeping up with the massive amounts of snow.

ScreenHunter_1384 Mar. 30 08.03

Meanwhile, experts continue to lie about Greenland in peer-reviewed publications, and the press happily parrots their lies.

ScreenHunter_1389 Mar. 30 08.17

Let’s pretend for a minute that their BS was true.  What would be the consequence of a slowing Gulf Stream? It would mean less warm water transported to the Arctic, lower Arctic temperatures, less Greenland melt, and growth of Arctic ice.

They are shooting themselves in the foot with their own nonsense.

About Tony Heller

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

53 Responses to Latest From The Greenland Meltdown

  1. Ray Kuntz says:

    Nice analysis.

  2. emsnews says:

    It is melting here, too…NOT.

    More snow today! Snow this weekend! I fell into a snowbank yesterday while trying to use my trailer and it went up to my waist! And this isn’t the piles of snow from snow plowing, either.

    It will be below freezing every night for the next week into April which is crazy cold. Ten degrees below normal all this last three months.

  3. Winnipeg Boy says:

    Obviously from my signature i am from Winnipeg, one of the coldest major cities on the planet. I can tell you from experience that snow melts way faster at -29.9c than it does at -30.0c.

    • Ernest Bush says:

      Uhhh…Snow is ice, which certainly doesn’t melt at temps way warmer than that. It might melt because the ground temperature is above freezing and/or it absorbs enough heat from the sun.

    • nielszoo says:

      You’re in better shape than we are here in the US. Dear Leader Barak the Oneth was unhappy that all the snow and ice this year kinda killed his “hottest year evah” story so he wrote an Executive Order, number 2015-273.15-459.7 directing NOAA, NWS and NASA to write new regulations increasing water’s latent heat of melting by 10 kJ/kg°K per year over the next 10 years. This will insure that the IPCC’s models will show that “extra” melt energy would have made it much hotter than those lying satellites said it was. So here in the US ice will be melting at -30.0°C sometime during the winter of 2021-2022 as long as the evil Republicans don’t defund his efforts to save the planet. ‘Cause -30°C is the new zero.

  4. rah says:

    I believe that the last two winters, and the fact that not a single catastrophe they have been predicting for so long has actually occurred, has significantly damaged the credibility of alarmists with the US and Canadian citizens.

    They can make up all the claims they want but they’ve lost the PR battle here and so while have to implement their plans without the consent of a majority of the people just as the democrats did with Obama Care.

  5. The Ol' Seadog. says:

    I have invented a new science, which I call Cowpatology. It’s the study of scientific claims of discoveries and predictions based on incomplete and /or manipulated data and statistics, which are a waste of time and money. A person who studies this will be called a Cowpatologist. I am writing to the Chancellor of the University of Bangor ( North Wales), inviting him to start a School of Cowpatology, awarding degrees and diplomas in the Subject. I will offer to become the first Professor of Cowpatology.( Cowpatology was previously referred to as ” Bullshit”)

  6. gator69 says:

    They probably think the name ‘Greenland’ was a prediction.

  7. omanuel says:

    Climategate confirmed the validity of George Orwell’s predictions made in the book he started writing in 1946:

    “Nineteen Eighty-Four”

    CHAOS and FEAR that nuclear energy might annihilate the world convinced world leaders to Unite Nations in 1945 and forbid public knowledge of energy in cores of heavy atoms and stars. In 1946 Big Brother started changing the internal composition of the Sun (from iron to hydrogen) and nuclear stability (from Aston’s “nuclear packing fraction” to Weizsacker’s “nuclear binding energy”).

    The neutron is the key to the entire universe, physically composed of two forms of the neutron and enlivened by slight difference in rest masses and hugh difference in volumes and force fields for interaction with others:

    1. The compacted neutron is a proton-electron pair in close combination, as Chadwick described it in 1932. A powerful, short-range force repels neutrons from others.

    2. The expanded neutron is a proton-electron pair, 0.08% less massive and separated by a distance five-orders of magnitude greater. A weak, long-range gravitational force attracts hydrogen atoms to others.

    All mass and energy in the universe arise from this design.

    The abstract to the “Teacher’s Supplement to Solar Energy” was rewritten to better communicate the intelligent design, elegant simplicity and incredible functionality of the
    Sun and the cosmos powered by the reversible converstion of hydrogen atoms into/from neutrons:

  8. gator69 says:

    Something the Gaia worshipers should learn…

    Mother Nature is a serial killer. No one’s better. Or more creative.

    • Gail Combs says:

      No only that but Mother Nature commits GENOCIDE.

      From PBS: “Scientists say that only one in a thousand species that have ever lived survives today. The other 99.9 percent are extinct.”

    • Snowleopard says:

      “Something the Gaia worshipers should learn…
      Mother Nature is a serial killer. No one’s better. Or more creative”

      Seems to me some of them are learning, and are busy attempting to emulate this facet of their god. They are just a bit shy of taking credit in advance though.

  9. Bill Illis says:

    I can’t imagine what the Hendrik’s webcam’s dog is doing with all that snow. Anybody see him lately?

  10. Fred from Canuckistan says:

    Obvioulsy this is New Age ice and snow that melts at -40 and is actually increasing in mass as it wastes away.

    You need to get with the New Age thingy to truly understand how simple this is.

    NSIDC gets it.
    NASA/GISS gets it.
    Al Gore gets it.

    The Danes are still a bit iffy with their “getting” but have their moments of New Age clarity.

  11. darrylb says:

    I’m going to rise repeating myself. There is more ice showing in the North Atlantic region and Greenland is sowing signs of getting cooler. Why?
    The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation has gone past its warmist point and is now moving into its cold phase.
    This should give Steve a lot of ammunition for the coming months/years.
    If there were observant scientists with integrity they would state this. Then again, they might not have a job.

  12. darrylb says:

    Doggone it Darryl, proof read before you post. Should say ‘I’m going to risk repeating…
    and Greenland is showing signs…

  13. Edmonton Al says:

    The thing that bugs me is that the golf course has held up tee times because of a frost delay.
    AND, they moved the clubhouse last year or so and now it is nearly covered in global warming again.

  14. Psalmon says:

    With the big AMO flip to negative, that’s what is coming, more Arctic ice, and they are prepping the explanation: Warming causes cold.

    • Snowleopard says:

      Cold is warming. Fits nicely with Orwell’s.
      “war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength”
      Perhaps we delayed it a little, but the “1984” meme is mostly in place now.

  15. Bob Knows says:

    Have you heard about the big scandle breaking in the “peer review” business? Some science publishers are rejecting fake “peer review” articles and apparently the scandal is much wider than the 40 or so already rejected. Its all fake. Even the “peer reviews” are fake.

    • gator69 says:

      peer noun \?pir\ 1- a person who belongs to the same age group or social group as someone else

      So they are finally catching on to the fact that the peer of a fraud, is a fraud.

      • rah says:

        part of the problem is that the A-holes think only a few are peers and everyone else are their constituents. They hide out in their Ivory towers and are afraid to be questioned by anyone on their proclamations in forum which they cannot control. When they are questioned by what they consider to be a peer they get angry and nasty and will use what ever method they can to stop the debate and denigrate that peer.

    • darrylb says:

      Bob, thanks for the heads up. I will be looking into it. Please post if you have more into as it comes

    • Gail Combs says:

      I have a bookmark file folder full of the ‘science’ scam/fraud. The whole business was bound to come back and bite the government/academic colluders on the butt.

      Here are five good ones:
      NATURE: Publishers withdraw more than 120 gibberish papers

      Medial Daily: The FDA Underreports Scientific Misconduct In Peer-Reviewed Articles

      A new JAMA study found the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is silent on matters of scientific misconduct and fraud.

      Researchers reported in at least 57 clinical trials, the FDA found evidence of one or more of the following problems: falsification or submission of false information, problems with adverse events reporting, protocol violations, inadequate or inaccurate recordkeeping, failure to protect the safety of patients or issues with informed consent. Yet, only three of the 78 publications that resulted from these trials made note of this. There were largely no corrections, retractions, or listed concerns….

      American Association for the Advancement of Science: Who’s Afraid of Peer Review?
      …..good news arrived in the inbox of Ocorrafoo Cobange, a biologist at the Wassee Institute of Medicine in Asmara. It was the official letter of acceptance for a paper he had submitted 2 months earlier to the Journal of Natural Pharmaceuticals, describing the anticancer properties of a chemical that Cobange had extracted from a lichen.

      In fact, it should have been promptly rejected. Any reviewer with more than a high-school knowledge of chemistry and the ability to understand a basic data plot should have spotted the paper’s short-comings immediately. Its experiments are so hopelessly flawed that the results are meaningless.

      I know because I wrote the paper. Ocorrafoo Cobange does not exist, nor does the Wassee Institute of Medicine. Over the past 10 months, I have submitted 304 versions of the wonder drug paper to open-access journals. More than half of the journals accepted the paper, failing to notice its fatal flaws. Beyond that headline result, the data from this sting operation reveal the contours of an emerging Wild West in academic publishing….

      ……open-access scientific journals have mushroomed into a global industry, driven by author publication fees rather than traditional subscriptions. Most of the players are murky. The identity and location of the journals’ editors, as well as the financial workings of their publishers, are often purposefully obscured. But Science’s investigation casts a powerful light. Internet Protocol (IP) address traces within the raw headers of e-mails sent by journal editors betray their locations. Invoices for publication fees reveal a network of bank accounts based mostly in the developing world. And the acceptances and rejections of the paper provide the first global snapshot of peer review across the open-access scientific enterprise…..

      How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data

      ….A pooled weighted average of 1.97% (N = 7, 95%CI: 0.86–4.45) of scientists admitted to have fabricated, falsified or modified data or results at least once –a serious form of misconduct by any standard– and up to 33.7% admitted other questionable research practices. In surveys asking about the behaviour of colleagues, admission rates were 14.12% (N = 12, 95% CI: 9.91–19.72) for falsification, and up to 72% for other questionable research practices. Meta-regression showed that self reports surveys, surveys using the words “falsification” or “fabrication”, and mailed surveys yielded lower percentages of misconduct. When these factors were controlled for, misconduct was reported more frequently by medical/pharmacological researchers than others.

      Considering that these surveys ask sensitive questions and have other limitations, it appears likely that this is a conservative estimate of the true prevalence of scientific misconduct.

      Why Most Published Research Findings Are False


      There is increasing concern that most current published research findings are false. The probability that a research claim is true may depend on study power and bias, the number of other studies on the same question, and, importantly, the ratio of true to no relationships among the relationships probed in each scientific field. In this framework, a research finding is less likely to be true when the studies conducted in a field are smaller; when effect sizes are smaller; when there is a greater number and lesser preselection of tested relationships; where there is greater flexibility in designs, definitions, outcomes, and analytical modes; when there is greater financial and other interest and prejudice; and when more teams are involved in a scientific field in chase of statistical significance. Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true. Moreover, for many current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias…..

      • oeman50 says:

        How do we know these papers are true? Just asking.

        • Gail Combs says:

          We don’t of course but the fact that papers like these are appearing in scientific type journals and mags points to an awareness of a problem. It also means the 100% belief in the honesty and integrity of scientists is being brought into question. A good thing in my opinion.

          Heck you even get papers like this: US scientists significantly more likely to publish fake research, study finds

          And you get news that scientific fraud has moved out of discussion in journals in to academic dismissal proceedings and even into the courts.
          University World News: NETHERLANDS: Dean may face data fraud charges

          Med City News FDA says CRO Cetero faked trial data; pharmas may need to redo tests “….the U.S. Food and Drug Administration describes the falsification as “extensive,” calling into question all bioanalytical data collected by Cetero’s Houston bioanalytical laboratory from April 1, 2005 to June 15, 2010. The FDA said Cetero manipulated test samples so the tests would yield desired results….”

          CBS News: Red wine researcher flagged for fake data

          ….UConn officials said their internal review found 145 instances over seven years in which Dr. Dipak Das fabricated and falsified data, and the U.S. Office of Research Integrity has launched an independent investigation of his work….

          The university’s health center recently declined to accept $890,000 in federal grants awarded to him as its review was under way, and has frozen all other external funding for his lab.
          Dismissal proceedings have also been launched against Das, who has been employed by the Health Center since 1984 and was granted tenure in 1993….

          And even the New York Times is reporting on scientific fraud: A Sharp Rise in Retractions Prompts Calls for Reform

          ….In the fall of 2010, Dr. Ferric C. Fang made an unsettling discovery. Dr. Fang, who is editor in chief of the journal Infection and Immunity, found that one of his authors had doctored several papers.

          It was a new experience for him. “Prior to that time,” he said in an interview, “Infection and Immunity had only retracted nine articles over a 40-year period.”

          The journal wound up retracting six of the papers from the author, Naoki Mori of the University of the Ryukyus in Japan. And it soon became clear that Infection and Immunity was hardly the only victim of Dr. Mori’s misconduct. Since then, other scientific journals have retracted two dozen of his papers….

          ….Dr. Fang worries that the situation could be become much more dire if nothing happens soon. “When our generation goes away, where is the new generation going to be?” he asked. “All the scientists I know are so anxious about their funding that they don’t make inspiring role models. I heard it from my own kids, who went into art and music respectively. They said, ‘You know, we see you, and you don’t look very happy.’ ”

          As I said I have a folder full of information on scientific fraud.

        • Gail Combs says:

          CBS News: Red wine researcher flagged for fake data


        • rah says:

          Every once in awhile a good University hangs one of their own out to dry. For example a few years back Dr. Michael Bellesiles, Professor of History at Emory University, wrote a book that was supposedly an academic work titled: ‘Arming America’. It was awarded the supposedly prestigious Columbia University Bancroft prize for works on history.

          The “work” claimed that wide spread private firearm ownership was really not a part of the history or heritage of the United States. That the history we had been taught was a myth.

          The gun grabbers embraced it just like the Alarmists embraced Mann’s Hockey Stick and Cooks survey. And hey used it the same way to beat 2nd Amendment rights proponents over the head.

          Emory ended up hiring an independent panel that found the work was riddled with fraud after Bellesiles could not produce the documents and records he cited in the book and those they did find did not say what Bellesiles had claimed.

          Bellesiles was forced to resign.

          This is EXACTLY the sort of thing that needs to start happening to the climate fraudsters.

        • oeman50 says:

          Thanks, Gail. I have seen a considerable amount of information in the press that I know is wrong because it is in my specialty. So that makes me think it is possible the same percentage of wrong applies to the areas I don’t know about…..

  16. IbSnooker says:

    It’s becoming clear that AGW is caused by a buildup of excess PO2 in the atmosphere. By atmosphere, I mean alarmists’ underpants, and by PO2, I mean P00.

  17. Andy DC says:

    But when July comes and it gets above freezing for 2 hours, the ice sheet will crumble and we will all die!

    • Disillusioned says:

      And NASA will provide pink satellite images of the fake two-hour total meltdown, which the MSM will surely bundle with stock video of blue moulins – all made to scare the sheet out of noisy movie stars like Leo diCaprio, the Union of Concerned Scientists and other useful idiots.

      Paris, here we come! 🙁

  18. Bob Tisdale says:

    Are they shooting themselves in the foot, Steven? Or are they furnishing a background for an anthropogenic excuse when Arctic sea ice rebounds?

    • AndyG55 says:

      I suspect that they know full well that the solar cycle indicates a coming cooling trend.

      I’m guessing we will see much more worming and squirming as it starts to take hold.

      • Disillusioned says:

        It was a “travesty” they couldn’t account for the lack of any real warming. So, they – methodically – chipped away at the 1940s blip until it matched up with their junk science.

        “Methodically” is the key word to this unraveling.

  19. Joe says:

    Never mind that Greenland is buried in ice and snow, are there still any spring tee-times available?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *