Fake climate scientists, sensing doom, are continuing their non-stop barrage of fake news – claiming the poles are melting down, at a record low, and we need to pay them to refreeze it 
Arctic sea ice extent is nearly identical to 2006, 2007, 2011, 2014, 2015 and 2016.
Charctic Interactive Sea Ice Graph | Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis
Antarctic sea ice extent has been trending upwards for almost 40 years, and that was blamed on global warming.
Why is southern sea ice increasing?
Antarctica has one low year, and that also gets blamed on global warming.
Scientists continue to claim Greenland is melting down.
Even as Greenland blows away all records for ice gain.
Greenland Ice Sheet Surface Mass Budget: DMI
Many climate scientists have no clue about the past, present or future. They ignore the scientific method, and lie to the press and policy makers. And they are funded by confiscating your income. Congress needs to put this to an end. I was very impressed by President Trump’s attack on fake news before a massive crowd at CPAC.
Tony. Have you thought of the remedy? Have you developed an opinion of how to end this crap without at the same time damaging legitimate government funded scientific research?
One key in my view is transparency. If the government funds your research then it is the property of the people and BY LAW all work, data, and communications carried out in developing a claim must be open to public inspection. All of this in total must be supplied at the time of publication. Failure to comply ends all funding. The only exception being research that has obvious and direct national security implications.
I know that more needs to be done to end the waste of Taxpayer dollars and to prevent Academia and government agencies from being used to drive social/political/economic agendas.
As far as I am concerned RAH, I want to see an end to ALL grants and to ALL federal funding to universities/colleges.
Let them go beg funding from private citizens and corporations like they used to. Federal funding is actually relatively new and has proven to be toxic in my opinion because the owner of the money (US) loses control of where his money goes. Instead it is used by the Commies to push THEIR agenda without them having to reach into THEIR pockets resulting in the leeches being in control.
I should add that we have NOT had Congress Critters, with the exception of maybe a dozen, who actually represented the interests of the American people for over ONE HUNDRED YEARS.
How do I know this?
Because we are still saddled with the Federal Reserve Bank the biggest leech of them all AND the group behind the Bolshevik Revolution.
Inflation is a hidden tax on your wages. In 1976 A typical American CEO earned 36 times as much as the average worker. By 2008 the average CEO pay increased to 369 times that of the average worker. link
RAH, all we would have to do is make scientists live by the same standards as banks. I can’t pass gas without three auditors and the CFPB. And if someone even thinks I looked sideways at an ethnic, we are fined millions, if not billions.
Hell, I’d be satisfied if scientists were forced to live up to the “Truth in Advertising” standards that we demand from dog food manufacturers.
gator69
Who would be the auditors?
Why not ask Tony?
My point being that the solution to an overbearing huge government is not more government. I am seeking a way that will make it very difficult to skew the system to be a tool for political/social/economic change in the future. I would love it if someone could make it a system that is impossible to corrupt but I doubt that can be achieved. So that is why I propose transparency first. Understanding that is not the only thing that needs to be done to turn this ship around and keep it from heading off course again. In short I’m asking for ideas of how to keep the system honest in the long haul, no matter who controls DC at a particular time.
We already have too much government involvement in science, and it is currently working in the wrong direction. We would have to reverse the flow of scrutiny. Why not force all peer review through a spanking machine, instead of the rubber stamping machine that we now use? And then simply hold scientists and journalists to account for their false statements? It works in every other private sector endeavor.
Or should we just leave it be?
Leaving it be would be a fatal error IMO. Permanent changes to the system have to be made or our grandchildren and their children are going to suffer the consequences. Academic has demonstrated they cannot police themselves but there has to be a way of effectively doing so without adding another layer of government but at the same time not punishing those doing legitimate science. The two key nodes to arriving at a system to control them are, IMO, control of the funding and transparency. Perhaps there are others but this truck driver is not knowledgeable enough about the ins and outs of the system to know what they are.
But perhaps the way to approach this is the problem solving process. This is the process taught by the US military:
PROBLEM SOLVING PROCESS
1. Recognize And Define The Problem
2. Gather Facts And Make Assumptions
3. Define End States And Establish Criteria
4. Develop Possible Solutions
5. Analyze And Compare Possible Solutions
6. Select And Implement Solution
7. Analyze Solution For Effectiveness
But PIOMAS Arctic sea ice volume is at a record low level for the time of year Tony!
Even if that’s true, who cares?
Well,he obviously cares and he has a point(as long as this is reliable)
The question is wether we behave like him and don’t care about informations we don’t like
or we become people of integrity instead of people like him.
As long as we ignore things we don’t like we are not better than him,
and that’s in my opinion not a good way to go.
Because of guys like him and their mob mentality execellent scientists and experts
like Alfred Wegener got ruined and i won’t even mention what they had done to Ignaz Semmelweis.
The problem is:His big big Tiger to kill us all called global warming exists,but it is just a small kitten.
As time has proven time and time again.
Anybody who prefers the truth to “fake news”?
Anybody who prefers human life to meaningless ice?
Let’s ask these folks…
Kathleen Hartnett White former head of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the second largest environmental regulatory organization in the world after the EPA, Said (at ~ 46 minutes) that 54 million Europeans now have to decide between eating and heat. That Germany is going backwards civilization wise as electricity has become a ‘luxury’
“Anybody who prefers the truth to “fake news”?”….great question, which is why everyone is here (including you) instead of at your phony website. You’re clearly a desperate man.
Jimmy Boy must get paid by the visit and probably gets a bonus for the number of known skeptics he can entice over to his site. Therefore he haunts sleptic sites trying to drum up visits =$$$
How did you measure it?
Gerald – I didn’t measure it. The University of Washington modelled it, rather like the DMI did for the Greenland SMB graph Tony displays above.
Here’s a “measurement” of Greenland ice mass for you:
Poor Genocide Jim doesn’t know that GRACE measures gravity anomalies, and not ice.
Poor brown people die by the tens of thousands daily because of Genocide Jim’s sponsorship of the CAGWBS holocaust.
Gator – Surely you’re not so dumb that you don’t understand the implication of my quotation marks?
Or are you?
Genocide Jim – Surely you’re not so dumb that you don’t understand the implication of of your activism?
Or are you?
Greenland Total ice mass Jimbo
+1
Greenland melts only if you tune your satellite to see some melt.
Not sure how multiple year ice increases but mass decreases.
Because the SMB takes no account of the calving that takes place around the edges of the Greenland ice sheet.
Calving is s sign of growth not loss. Models are fake news by the way.
And GRACE is not a reliable measure of ice mass because it’s data can be substantively skewed by the underlying geology. You want reliable data on ice then measure the ice using a metric which cannot be skewed by other factors.
In my view, when a person has to go to GRACE to back their claims on ice mass they have already lost the argument.
RAH – So what’s your view on Tony’s use of graphs based on the outputs of DMI’s climate models?
Greenland ice mass since 1900, Jimbo
Get some real perspective into you feeble little world, fool.
Then answer these questions that you have been RUNNING AWAY from like a cowardly yellow-backed snivelling troll.
Question 1 for Jimbo, coward of the year
Even if the Arctic sea ice were to drop back a lot further than now, towards the pre-LIA norm, why is this a problem ?
Question 2 for Jimbo, the troll with the massive yellow streak.
Do you think it would be beneficial if Arctic sea lanes were actually open, instead of trapping ships in sea ice?
…. Or would it be more beneficial if they were closed all year like back in the extremes of 1979. ?
“everything is calculated using the new models so that all values and curves are comparable.”
You are talking with your foot in your mouth yet again, bozo. !
Jim Hunt
They are all modeled but I prefer DMI because it is far less corrupted by politics than any other IMO.
It’s a judgment of credibility. The same kind of judgment I make when I decide who’s blogs I visit. I think I clicked on one of your links to your blog once a couple years ago and haven’t been back.
You don’t know what you’re missing RAH!
Snow White’s NOAAGate predictions for example.
Astonishing stuff!
But calving glaciers are advancing glaciers, not an indication of glacier retreat. There is so much BS concerning the mass balance of the Greenland ice sheet. But we do know that aircraft forced to land and be abandoned on the top of the ice sheet during WW2 were located buried hundreds of feet below the surface of the ice cap.
You have NOTHING , Jimbo,
certainly not the GUTS to answer questions
Question 1 for Jimbo, gutless worm
Even if the Arctic sea ice were to drop back a lot further than now, towards the pre-LIA norm, why is this a problem ?
Question 2 for Jimbo, the ignorant troll with the massive yellow streak.
Do you think it would be beneficial if Arctic sea lanes were actually open, instead of trapping ships in sea ice?
…. Or would it be more beneficial if they were closed all year like back in the extremes of 1979. ?
Multiple year sea ice has ZERO relationship to Greenland glacier calving.
Multiple year sea ice has ZERO relationship to Greenland glacier calving..
Referring to the Piomass chart.
PIOMAS is not a reliable set of measurements of volume. It is simply the product of modelling.
And who knows what biases exist in that !!
Even they admit that the margins of error are MUCH greater than the supposed anomalies.
Question 1 for Jimbo, the most ignorant and cowardly slime on the net.
Even if the Arctic sea ice were to drop back a lot further than now, towards the pre-LIA norm, why is this a problem ?
Question 2 for Jimbo, the moronic troll with the massive yellow streak.
Do you think it would be beneficial if Arctic sea lanes were actually open, instead of trapping ships in sea ice?
…. Or would it be more beneficial if they were closed all year like back in the extremes of 1979. ?
Upper Colorado snowpack looks good (maybe a little on the high side).
http://graphs.water-data.com/ucsnowpack/
Well,if exaggerated Alarmism could cause heat
earth would be hotter than the sun.
I wonder wether a single year on planet earth ever existed when many temperature
anomalies in random regions did not occure
to create such news.
I won’t even imagine what kind of alarmism would happen nowadays if a fertile greenbelt which existed 8K years ago would turn fast into a desert as it happened with the region we call today Sahara.((those africans must have produced many many manmade co2 at that time )).
But in a world where dry climate even in States which have huge deserts((California))is considered abnormal and cause of climate change
instead of standard climate which is necassary to “create” sanddeserts
everything seems possible.
are
What I would like to see are the Nimbus satellite data. That’s seems to have been slow boated. Maybe they don’t like the data so much. As I recall the Antarctic data showed the S pole going from a record high (compared to today) and a record low in the span of only 2yrs! What gives Jim Hunt? How could that possibly happen in only 2yrs time?
El Nino.
Also change in solar UV ===>change in ozone ===> change in jet stream/wind and the Antarctic Circumpolar current is wind driven.
>>>>>>>>>>
Judith Curry said: “I coauthored two papers that looked at both the arctic and antarctc sea ice versus enso”
The second paper is:
Interpretation of recent Antarctic sea ice variability Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, Art. No. L02205.
Liu, J.P., J.A. Curry, and D.G. Martinson,
RACookPE1978
August 14, 2014 at 10:20 am
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/08/14/smoke-from-russian-fires-over-arctic-sea/#comment-1709041
Judith Curry has measured a substantial DECREASE in Arctic snow and ice albedo (lowering from a “fresh ice + new snow” albedo in January-March of 0.86, then steadily going down over the summer to a mid-July low of 0.44 average albedo, and a measured low of 0.38!
Then, as melt water re-freezes and new snow falls, the albedo recovers back to a November – December 0.85.
Interactions among aerosols, clouds, and climate of … – Judith Curry
http://www.curry.eas.gatech.edu/currydoc/Curry_TSOTTE160-161.pdf
Notice how our friends at SkS ALWAYS have an answer for everything? It’s quite uncanny how they can explain stuff their models didn’t predict! I think the score is something like 193-0 at the moment, and all points fall in their favour. Of course they do, Dana. Why on earth wouldn’t they?/ ~notpropagandaatallohno!
Trump should forget the crooked news media and go after the crooked UNAS(United National Academies of Sciences) that Stalin created when nations and national academies of sciences were united on 25 OCT 1945.
Dr. P. K. Kuroda realized on 13 JUN 1936, and later reported in his autography, that a NUCLEAR PHYSICIST IN JAPAN DID NOT UNDERSTAND NUCLEAR ENERGY.
Kuroda reported the physicist appeared to be in his 30s. Long before I recognized Kuroda’s “secret message”, H. YUKAWA (born 1907) received a 1949 Nobel Prize in Physics for the SNM (Standard Nuclear Model) that ignores NEUTRON REPULSION, the source of energy that powers the Sun and the Universe.
Several other Nobel Prizes in Physics will be discredited if Trump shuts down the gravey train for pseudo-science and demands that theoretical nuclear physics theories comply with Einstein’s 1905 and Aston’s 1922 discoveries that atomic rest mass (m) is stored energy (E), or clearly explain why not:
E = mc^2