Walt Meier Spreading Antarctic Ice BS Now

NASA polar propagandist Walt Meier claims Antarctic sea ice is at record low levels due to global warming.


(CNN)For what appears to be the first time since scientists began keeping track, sea ice in the Arctic and the Antarctic are at record lows this time of year.  “It looks like, since the beginning of October, that for the first time we are seeing both the Arctic and Antarctic sea ice running at record low levels,” said Walt Meier, a research scientist with the Cryospheric Sciences Laboratory at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, who has tracked sea ice data going back to 1979.

Sea ice in Arctic and Antarctic at record lows – CNN.com

Walt pulled his usual trick of ignoring pre-1979 satellite data. At the peak of the global cooling scare, Antarctic sea ice was nearly gone. The image below was from the Nimbus-5 satellite in January, 1976.  There was almost no sea ice left around Antarctica.

screen-shot-2016-11-19-at-1-37-27-amscreen-shot-2016-11-19-at-1-03-17-amNow compare vs. current levels. There is probably five times as much ice now. The ice will retreat over the next ten weeks, but its extent will not likely get lower than it was in January 1976.


From the same National Geographic article in 1976, all of our top government climate experts said Earth was rapidly cooling.


National Geographic : 1976 Nov, Page 578

This graph from the 1990 IPCC report showed the low extent in 1976. I have asked NOAA for the source of this data, but they say they have been unable to locate it.


FAR Chapter 7

The next graph overlays the 1990 IPCC data on the post-1979 data at the same scale on both axes, and shows that Antarctic sea ice bottomed out in late 1976, with an anomaly of -2.6 million km².


Pacific Ocean behind recent Antarctic sea ice growth, study says | Carbon Brief

NSIDC currently shows the Antarctic sea ice anomaly as -1.9 million km².


S_stddev_timeseries.png (1050×840)

When Antarctic sea ice extent was at a record high not many months ago, Walt also blamed that on global warming. Heads I win, tails you lose.


A warming climate changes weather patterns, said Walt Meier, a research scientist at Goddard. Sometimes those weather patterns will bring cooler air to some areas. And in the Antarctic, where sea ice circles the continent and covers such a large area, it doesn’t take that much additional ice extent to set a new record.

Antarctic Sea Ice Reaches New Record Maximum | NASA

I’m looking forward to President Trump putting an end to this scam. Enough is enough.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

55 Responses to Walt Meier Spreading Antarctic Ice BS Now

  1. Me says:

    As soon as I saw CNN I knew it’s BS!

  2. Me says:


    Peace and out to everyone unless you are a snowflake Hellary supporter that has to hate the trump love like ye are doing! LMAO!

  3. RAH says:

    The powers that be in GISS Climate and Cryosphere departments and CNN are going down the tubes and there isn’t a damn thing they can do about it.

  4. Robertv says:

    He must hate penguins.

  5. charles nelson says:

    Null school Earth.
    A great tool for devastating Warmists.
    No part of Antarctica has been above zero ˚C , so far this summer.
    I show it to people on my phone…I love their expressions!

  6. etudiant says:

    I don’t think that this is fair to Walt Meier or to the truth.
    Historically, Arctic and Antarctic ice levels have seesawed, when one is up, the other is down, so that global sea ice levels have been essentially flat (+/- 10%) since at least 1979.
    What is unusual this year is that both Arctic and Antarctic sea ice levels are running well below normal for the date, Arctic rising more slowly than usual and Antarctic declining from a very sub normal peak. Afaik, this is very much a novel situation, that we are getting ongoing record low ice extents for the day in both hemispheres.
    The data used is very nicely illustrated here: https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/#/extent

    • gator69 says:

      What is unusual this year is that both Arctic and Antarctic sea ice levels are running well below normal for the date…

      There is no such thing as “normal” in climate or weather, only averages over time. Cherry picking averages (or dates) is scientifically obscene, unless it is done in a mocking sense, as we frequently see on this site.

    • tonyheller says:

      I don’t have a lot of patience for people accusing me of dishonesty. Feel free not to comment here any more.

    • Ernest Bush says:

      How can you even use the word “historically” for such a short period of time. Since the last Ice Age, only 9,500 years ago, more or less, it is known that temperatures, glacial ice, and sea ice have varied wildly outside of anything recorded over the last 100 years. The whole AGW scam is built on such small changes of temperature and ice area over such a small period that when set against the Holocene period are really insignificant.

      You are losing the argument because as ordinary people look to the weather for proof of what you say , they don’t see it. Thus, they become increasingly skeptic because you Scamists resort to louder and more absurd claims thinking that eventually your view will prevail.

    • Andy Watson says:

      Good post.

      Both Antarctic and Arctic current ice extents are very unusual. We will have to wait to find out why both are so low. Antarctic had it’s first maxima in August this year.

      In recent times the Antarctic has seen the increase in ice from the minima be above average but the melt from the maxima about average. Not this year.


  7. BruceC says:

    What happened around 1980?

  8. etudiant says:

    Guys, it is in fact unusual (unprecedented in the record afaik) to have both hemispheres sea ice levels setting new lows for the time of year simultaneously.
    That does not say it is a seasonal peak or trough in either case, so I don’t think it helps to point out that other years have gone higher or lower. Adding them together though, the global sea ice extent for the period since 1979 appears to be setting new all time lows. That we need to thoughtfully evaluate.
    Dr Meier made a reasonable point, that we are seeing something we have not recorded before. It may be nothing or it may be meaningful, we just don’t know. But at least we should not just dump on the observer for the observation.

    • tonyheller says:

      Walt Meier blames increasing and decreasing Antarctic sea ice ice on global warming. That is not science, it is propaganda.

      Last year around this time he made huge areas of five year old Arctic sea ice suddenly disappear from NSIDC maps. I have also caught him altering Arctic sea ice graphs.

      • Andy Watson says:

        How can he have done that Tony when he moved to NASA from NSIDC in 2013?

        Or is he still working part time for NSIDC?


    • Robertv says:

      It seems to me that the Antarctic sea ice is under attack from several big storm systems.

    • Sunsettommy says:


      ou are quite the fella who thinks that a short data base is enough for you to use over the top words such as, unusual,unprecedented, all time lows, in your commentary.

      Tony make the point that YOU and Meier overlook,is leaving out evidence prior to 1979, indicating that there were far less ice around Antarctica than now. You completely ignored it,even when Tony showed you the chart for the Nimbus 5 satellite data,showing negligible sea ice around Antarctica,earlier in this thread.

      You are smashing your credibility when you do this.

  9. etudiant says:

    Well, Steve McIntyre correctly said that in climate science, you have to watch the pea.
    I have some sympathy for climate researchers. Maintaining scientific integrity while working for an administration which explicitly said it did not want any climate change deniers in it must be tough.
    So stuff happens, much of which is BS. Here however we do have something tangible and material. It deserves attention, not dismissal, especially from this corner of the community. Something seems to have shifted and we’d be dumb to ignore it.

    • Robert Austin says:

      In other words, under the political climate of intimidation of government scientists, “maintaining scientific integrity” will be a distant second priority to maintaining the sinecure. Hence the “pimping” of ice data only since 1979 whilst, as Tony reiterates, ice data prior to 1979 is conveniently forgotten.

    • gator69 says:

      … we do have something tangible and material…

      Not in the greater scheme of things. Only with a child-like knowledge of this Earth could anyone actually believe that what we are seeing is in any way unusual.

    • RAH says:

      “Here however we do have something tangible and material.”

      You mean as opposed to the record Maximum Antarctic Sea Ice Extent that occurred in 2012?

      Or was that “tangible and material”?

      • etudiant says:

        Nope, the record Antarctic ice of 2012 neatly offset the record low Arctic ice, so the global extent was maintained.
        What is different now is that global ice extent is falling lower than any time since steady satellite coverage started in 1979.
        We are in record low global sea ice territory, which is something the GW proponents could not claim before.
        Is this significant? I don’t know, but it is a deviation that deserves attention, not head in the sand dismissal.

        • gator69 says:

          … it is a deviation that deserves attention…

          A deviation from what exactly? A recod of less than four decades on a planet that is 4.5 billion yerars old? A planet that has been green at the poles and ice at the equator.

          Get a grip.

          • etudiant says:

            The salient point of our climate was well expressed by the late Lyndon Johnson’s science advisor. He said: The climate is an angry beast.
            We should not poke at it with sharp sticks.

            I think his was the voice of wisdom.
            We know from the ice cores that temperatures can rise or fall very abruptly. We don’t know why or how.

            I believe that justifies a very conservative approach to climate change, try to keep things ‘natural’, because we don’t really have any idea whether anything we are doing is screwing things up irreversibly. We are in an interglacial, we should try to keep it that way.

          • AndyG55 says:

            “We should not poke at it with sharp sticks.”

            And just how do you poke the climate ??

            What a stupid statement !!!

            “We are in an interglacial, we should try to keep it that way.”

            You say we don’t have any idea if anything we are doing will screw up the climate.. then how the heck are we meant to know how to keep the climate a certain way.

            You are talking absolute irrational nonsense.

          • gator69 says:

            AndyG55, we clearly see what we are dealing with now, an evancoligical. Science and logic be damned.

          • RAH says:

            Andy, he’s talking about the wisdom of a president that:
            Picked his Beagles up by their ears.

            Formulated “The Great Society” which established the welfare state, the “projects”, and destroyed the black family.

            Under which the Gulf of Tonkin incident occurred which led to the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which in turn led to the war in Vietnam which he and his “Wiz Kids” terribly mismanaged because LBJ wanted to play Field Marshal just like Hitler.

          • RAH says:

            It really is a statement of the sorry state of the climate change movement when they must gamble their agenda and credibility on something as transient and variable as sea ice and WEATHER at the poles. Sea ice that in the short term is more often than not effected more by wave and wind action than warming of the seas or air though this time it is warmer than usual it still just WEATHER!

        • Sunsettommy says:


          we had regular satellite coverage for years before 1979,why do you continue to lie, after you have been shown TWICE that the 1976 low in Antarctica, was much,much lower than now.

          Stop lying!

          • etudiant says:

            Guys, don’t get upset.
            Satellite coverage pre 1979 is not continuous afaik. It is possible that the military had comprehensive global coverage earlier, but I don’t think they had the same spectrum coverage which allows current satellites to differentiate ice from water. If anyone has such comprehensive earlier coverage, they have kept it well hidden.
            It would help if people actually read what I posted, that there is no question both Arctic as well as Antarctic ice levels have been much lower as well as much higher at times.
            What is new is that now both are well below their normal levels for this time of the year so that the global level, which had been stable through the post 1979 satellite surveillance period, is noticeable below that range now.

            Our climate is an artifact of our biosphere. I don’t think anyone believes that we would have an oxygen atmosphere without it. So imho screwing up the biosphere with pollution and land misuse is poking the climate with a sharp stick.
            It is obvious from the ice cores that climate can swing on a dime. The Younger Dryas cold snap happened so fast the ice cores can’t exclude it taking place within a year. The rebounds similarly seem to have happened very fast on occasion. So our climate is demonstrably unstable. That suggests we should try to disturb things as little as possible, because we might trigger something we really would not like.

          • BruceC says:

            etudiant (French for student – btw ;) , you keep on saying this is ‘new’ or ‘unprecedented in the record’, you do realise that the sat record (37 years) is just over half the length of an oceanic cycle don’t you (on average 60-70 years).

            Can you provide us with the evidence (peer reviewed of course) that BOTH poles HAVE and/or HAVE NOT been at a ‘low extent’ prior to sat recordings?

          • gator69 says:

            What is new is that now both are well below their normal levels for this time of the year so that the global level, which had been stable through the post 1979 satellite surveillance period, is noticeable below that range now.

            Once again, (yawn). There is no “normal” in climate or weather, and 1979 is not when the Earth was formed.

            So etudiant, don’t get upset.

          • AndyG55 says:

            “Guys, don’t get upset.”

            Not upset,

            just laughing at you childish naivety is all.

            Quite cute, in a floppy-eared puppy sort of way.

          • BruceC says:

            This planet is 4.6 BILLION years old (give or take a few MILLION) … and you reckon the past 37 years is normal?

          • BruceC says:

            Here’s another thing snowflake – even though the current interglacial has the highest CO2 levels for the past 4 interglacials (300,000 odd years) – it is also the coolest.

            Please explain!

          • Andy Watson says:

            But we are not at this years low Sunsettonny. It’s only November.

            I sometimes wonder if you actually read the original posts and understand them.


  10. Psalmon says:

    The Trump Admin needs to significantly reorganize, re-staff, and re-task the assets that contribute to this scam…NASA, NSF, NOAA…Gather data, deliver operating functions (NWS etc), but cut all the research out. May seem regressive, but look what we got the other way. Let the private sector flourish and fund R&D.

    • litesong says:

      Psalmon postured:
      Trump …needs to …reorganize, re-staff, and re-task ….NASA, NSF, NOAA… cut all the research out. May seem regressive…
      litesong wrote:
      Correction: t-rump will kill science to suit re-pubic-lick-uns who have no science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc in poorly (un-?) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaas. It ain’t regressive….. at least to kids who chose NOT to have science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc in poorly (un-?) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaas.

  11. Andy DC says:

    Walt can keep yapping like a mindless dog until 1/20/17. After that, he and others of his ilk will hopefully be drained from the swamp.

  12. sam says:

    The best way to put this fraud to and end is to replace gavin schmidt with tony heller! Why not, all gavin did prior to getting the top spot over there was run a stupid climate blog! Lets see TH publish the real climate change and go through the peer review process! With Trump i hope they finally gut both the noaa and nasa of this domineering group that insist on deceit and shutting out contrary views. They can keep some AGW believers but there needs to be normal scientists there too. michale mann was saying that the military will ‘warn’ trump about ‘climate change as a national security threat’ when they brief him. This is preposterous and it sounds like an obvious attempt to intimidate the president so that he allows these fraudsters to continue their scam like GW did. I will be watching closely when trump takes office but I fear that i will be disappointed.

  13. Andy Watson says:

    Walt is correct, Antarctic sea ice currently is at satellite low levels compared to previous years. something you fail to correct because you can only pull up a magazine cover from a different part of the year.

    That’s a pretty feeble counter-point to be honest.

    Let’s wait to see what this years Antarctic minima is. We still won’t be able to compare it to 1976 image unless there is some dataset that can be compared and adjusted to the current algorithms

    How’s the Arctic going on by the way? You were all over the Arctic in Sept when a large increase in ice, due to weather. Now it has completely stalled you have gone radio quiet.



    • RAH says:

      My thought is there is absolutely no evidence that man had caused the ice to dissipate. The ball is in the warmist cult to prove that it has been caused by man and is not just natural variation just like the maximum extent recorded in 2012 was.

  14. Big V says:

    Mr Heller, shouldn’t the two images you should have compared been the following!


  15. Free the TrumpRolled! says:

    “planet that is 4.5 billion yerars old”
    Why are you considering only to 4.5b years back?
    That you ignore 4.5b through 8b years back, strikes us as disingenuous.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.