Arctic Lies Continue Unabated

Climate experts continue to insist that Arctic sea ice is at a record low and declining.

In fact, Arctic sea ice extent is normal and much higher than last year.

Charctic Interactive Sea Ice Graph | Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis


Ongoing cold weather is forecast over the Arctic, as the sun reaches its highest point in the sky.

10-Day Temperature Outlook

Our top scientists say the Arctic will be ice free in a few weeks.

‘Next year or the year after, the Arctic will be free of ice’ | Environment | The Guardian

They only have 90 days to melt the Arctic – those experts better get cracking.

Ocean and Ice Services | Danmarks Meteorologiske Institut

Climate science has nothing to do with science. It is all fake news, all the time.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

74 Responses to Arctic Lies Continue Unabated

  1. sunsettommy says:

    What is amazing is that they are so transparent with their lies,as if they don’t care at all.

  2. John F. Hultquist says:

    Note that Wadhams has moved the goal posts:
    There will still be about a million square kilometres of ice in the Arctic in summer but it will be packed into various nooks and crannies along the Northwest Passage …

    A million square kilometres is the expert’s definition of Zero.
    Wadhams joins a long list of folks going back into prehistory that have had trouble with this concept and number. Now in his dis-honor, 1 M. sq. km. is to be called a Wadhams, forevermore.

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      To be fair, the zero is a relatively new concept in mathematics and mere 22 centuries is not long enough for slower thinkers to digest such novelties.

      • Gator69 says:

        One million has six zeros, so it is a little confusing for the math illiterate.

        So why is it that they do not consider the atmosphere to be CO2 free?

        • Robert Bruce says:

          Probably because they can understand (sort of) the concept of “400,” which seems like a “big” number to them The problem is (that you pointed out) that they can’t computer the 400 parts per million ( i.e. 400/1,000,000), and place it in its proper context.

    • Lasse says:

      “So if you replace ice with water, which is darker, much more solar heat will be absorbed by the ocean and the planet will heat up even more rapidly than it is doing at present.”
      Proven wrong this season.
      Sun is at its peak around 25 June with ice cover 10 M km2.
      Ice is at its lowest point in September ca 4 M km2 leaving more water to cool of when sun is leaving the polar area.
      10 M km2 at 24 June and 24 of November-it seams as if ice is growing fast.

      • Charles Higley says:

        Actually, taking into the account the low angle of the Sun’s rays , even at summer’s zenith, and taking into account the long path this radiation must pass through to get to the surface at such a low angle, the solar input energy is about 3% per sq meter of direct overhead sunlight.

        Solar input does not significantly melt Arctic ice. It is warm water and warm air masses from the south that melt the ice and these things can be quite fickle in their actions. In 2007, when the Arctic ice was at a record low that summer, it had nothing to do with Arctic temperatures. A large bolus of warm water was pumped into the Arctic Sea basin by the Atlantic Oscillation, which then melted the ice from below, and then prevailing winds blew huge amounts of sea ice OUT OF THE ARCTIC, where it melted in warmer waters.

        And open water does absorb this 3% energy input but its input is almost immediately matched by evaporative cooling from surface evaporation. The Arctic will never be ice free and balmy unless Earth’s axial tilt disappears and the Sun kicks it’s energy output up a few notches.

    • rw says:

      That’s always been his definition. And if the extent ever gets that low, I’ll consider he’s made his case. However, he’s on record as forecasting it for the present year. I’d certainly be willing to bet against that. (Actually, the only question of any interest is what he will say after we reach a minimum that is 4X what he forecast; and even that isn’t of any great concern to me.)

    • AndyG55 says:

      “Now in his dis-honor, 1 M. sq. km. is to be called a Wadhams, forevermore.”

      And please remember who gave him that dis. :-)

    • phil jones says:

      Nimbus Satellite images show 1964 Antarctic same as today!!


    • Douglas Hoyt says:

      In a few years, the definition of zero Arctic ice will evolve to be 7 million square kilometers or less.

    • Latitude says:

      A million square kilometres is the expert’s definition of Zero.

      ..and the same size as Egypt

  3. Andy DC says:

    That tiny sliver of missing ice in the eastern Arctic is all we have to show for decades of hysteria and all the billions wasted?

      • Andy DC says:

        1980 is a very cherry picked start date, as 1979 had a record amount of ice. If the charts started in in 1960 or 1940, the ice drop would not seem nearly as dramatic. Typical grossly overstated alarmist propaganda.

        • Andy DC says:

          According to the National Ice Center, sea ice is normal (see bottom of page I have attached above). So your alarmist propaganda is obviously false.

          If you are going to troll someone else’s site, you should not be spreading such obvious lies. It is very rude and very disrespectful to someone like Tony, a true hero that has spent thousands of hours of his own time documenting the truth!

      • gator69 says:

        And here is a graphic for you Genocide Griff…

      • sunsettommy says:

        Here is what you left out Griff,

        “Credit: Amanda Montañez; Source: Piomas Monthly Ice Volume Data, 1979–Present, Polar Science Center, University of Washington”

        They started from the probable 20th century peak. At least the high point in the entire Satellite record. Thus using a short time frame for propaganda purposes, it is DISHONEST!

        This is typically misleading dishonest crap warmists do every day now. as they try hard to push a great big lie.

        YOU Griff, have been shown many times that early in the Holocene for a few thousand years,had little to no Summer ice in the Arctic region. CO2 levels during all that time was never above 280 ppm,according to the ice core data. Polar Bears and the Arctic ecosystem stayed intact the whole time. Humans sailed through the time when large civilizations sprang up in Egypt and Mesopotamia and more.

        You are seriously a dishonest person,who goes out of the way to ignore a lot of PUBLISHED science research, in order to maintain your warmist delusion of a dying ice pack. You were recently shown that at the CURRENT level of ice in the Arctic,is actually among the highest level of the entire Holocene.

        You have NOTHING here to sell, as you are a proven liar and dishonest person.

  4. GW Smith says:

    I still can’t understand if these “scientists” are that diabolical or if their visceral leftism has not completely blinded them to reality. I’m beginning to believe in parallel universes.

  5. frederik wisse says:

    The Anglo-Saxon gang is putting out more climate-crazyness than you and I are capable of imagining and which pales American climate-catastrophism . You-tube is showing videos of Dr Michael Berton of Bristol University showing that an enormous catastrophy
    will be inevitable in a few years and of Guy McPherson talking about exponential changes prophesying the end of the world before 2030 with a steel-hard face . This is way worse than changing a few statistics based on a misplaced sense of own importancy. If ever there need to be people punished for misleading , then these ones should be the first .

  6. gregole says:

    Any rowboat, kayak, or jet-ski expeditions planned to explore the ice-free Arctic and highlight the dangerous lack of Arctic ice this year? I haven’t heard; but to be honest, I haven’t been looking either.

    • Griff says:


      and since the NW passage is already showing signs of the ice breaking up…

      • gator69 says:

        Ms Griff, another 21,000 people needlessly suffered and died yesterday because alarmists such as yourself are diverting precious resources away from them. Why do you hate poor brown people Ms Griff?

      • sunsettommy says:

        Yawn…. the Griff the ice hating Grinch,caterwauling over a small region.

      • Latitude says:

        Climate change researchers cancel expedition because of climate change

      • AndyG55 says:

        You are LYING as always , griff.

        Seems to be ALL YOU ARE CAPABLE OF.

        LIES, and MORE LIES.

        MASIE show the Greenland Archipelago region has actually INCREASED in sea ice extent in the last 20 days.

      • AndyG55 says:

        You can see from this May ice level graph that the ONLY regions having any melt are the Barents, Bering, Okhotsk regions. ie at the very edges.

        • Griff says:

          Which is what you would expect at this stage…

          But note the NSIDC have documented “However, ice has retreated at a record rate in the Chukchi Sea, and open water extended to Barrow, Alaska. “

          • sunsettommy says:

            You are really too dumb to notice that it ALWAYS melt out in those areas,every Summer.

            You have never shown why a decreasing summer ice pack is bad for us,while you just recently indicate that you think it was not bad for us long ago,because it was a NATURAL event:

            “And you continue to ignore the fact that the early holocene had a unique, orbital influence causing low ice which is not present today.”

            Good then,bad now or good now,bad then.

            Which is it?

            Meanwhile the world went on,Polar Bears lived on,so did their prey. Egypt and Mesopotamia develop civilization and cities, as well in Africa.

            You keep saying it is low Summer ice now,suggesting it is really bad to the planet,yet you have been shown repeatedly that for THOUSANDS of years there were little to no Summer Ice in the early part of the Holocene.

            No evidence of a collapsed or devastating effect on the planet, in all that time. CO2 levels in the air around the 260 ppm level.

            You have nothing here.

      • sunsettommy says:

        Meanwhile science research was cancelled due to too much ice in the Hudson Bay area:

        “The Canadian Research Icebreaker CCGS Amundsen has cancelled the first leg of the 2017 Expedition due to complications associated with the southward motion of hazardous Arctic sea ice, caused by climate change,” a release from the U of M said. “The need to deal with extreme ice conditions in the south meant the ship would arrive too late on site to meet research objectives.”

        The article blame it on “climate change”, ha ha ha, so dumb since according to the warmist loons,basing it on the AGW conjecture, was supposed to be less and less due to climate change………

  7. Griff says:

    No, it is not normal or OK…

    Comparing it with last year and it is ‘much higher’?

    Well last year at this time was the lowest ever extent for this time of year, thanks to an early drop in extent…

    …and this year has a lot of thin ice spread out over a wider area, thanks to a warm and stormy winter in the arctic which has seen the ice exported/spread out over a wide area.

    The thickness and volume of that spread out ice is low and it is broken up… the ‘concentration’ figure shows that. (record low volume)

    Keep on putting out this completely inaccurate information and come the September minimum you are going to look very foolish…

    • gator69 says:

      Ms Griff, the only thing that is abnormal is your affection for meaningless ice. Why do you hate poor brown people Ms Griff?

      • Griff says:

        Again, I point out to you your peculiar obsession has no rational or logical basis.

        The ice does not care what colour you are. The scientific data remains the same.

        • Latitude says:

          “The thickness and volume of that spread out ice is low and it is broken up…”

          Thick, dense ice had travelled to the area down from the High Arctic
          Strong northeastern winds started packing in ice in late April and never stopped
          “We never had any issues in the past of this nature,”
          They determined it was multi-year ice, not typical of the northeast coast of North America and most likely from the High Arctic. Chunks measured between five and eight metres thick.
          “This is the first time we’ve actually seen ice from the High Arctic,”
          “Typically there would be very little or no ice left in either of these areas at this time of year, let alone the thick ice pack we are currently seeing
          etc etc

        • Gator69 says:

          Again Ms Griff, as I have pointed out with the assistance of Nobel Laureates, your alarmism is stealing resources from millions who will starve to death as a result.

          Why do you hate poor brown people Ms Griff?

    • sunsettommy says:

      You are full of shit,Griff.

      Your claim that it is not normal is a great big LIE!

      You have been shown a number published science papers showing long periods of time in the early Holocene of little to no Summer ice. Here is what DR. Meier stated a few years ago,citing a published science paper:

      “Can the Arctic really become sea ice-free during summer?

      It has been suggested that the Arctic really can’t lose all its sea ice during summer because there isn’t enough energy to melt all of the ice in the short summer. There are a couple of reasons why this thinking is faulty.

      First, we know the Arctic can potentially lose all its sea ice during summer because it has done so in the past. Examination of several proxy records (e.g., sediment cores) of sea ice indicate ice-free or near ice-free summer conditions for at least some time during the period of 15,000 to 5,000 years ago (Polyak et al., 2010) when Arctic temperatures were not much warmer than today.”

      There are more like this out there,so stop your lying.

      • Griff says:

        The periods of the holocene where ice was low had a quite different environment to today, as the orbital set up during that part of the Milankovitch cycle was quite different.

        We have low ice when there isn’t a marked orbital influence.

        And we know from collected record we have much lower ice than at any point since the 1850s (the point to which detialed records have been collated) and to the lowest point in the 1940s, the prev low since the 1850s

        • Latitude says:

          And we know from collected record we have much lower ice than at any point since….the little ice age

        • sunsettommy says:

          You have been shown that those records from the 1800’s have very LOW RESOLUTION in them. You were schooled on this a few months ago, on Watts Up With That?

          Stop with your lies!

          You keep saying that today’s ice levels are low,when according to recent science research it is actually well above average for the entire Holocene. You need to stop making these misleading,lying claims you make.

          Here is the link to the chart:


        • sunsettommy says:


          try explaining this away since this is during the MWP time frame,long after the high summer insolation level of the early Holocene is gone:

          “Between 1000 and 1300 average summer temperatures were about 1°C higher than today, with the mean annual temperature higher by perhaps 4°C in a largely ice-free Arctic. Eric the Red, a renowned world citizen of that time, has been much maligned as the first progressive publicity man for giving Greenland a false image in order to attract settlers; but in truth, the southwest of that vast country was warmer and greener by far than at any time until the Fieldfares Turdus pilaris arrived there in the mid-1930s. The sea-temperature of the Atlantic was higher than it has been since, and there appears to have been none or very little ice to hinder the Vikings’ communications between Iceland, Greenland, Newfoundland and Labrador (Mowat 1965). Indeed Brooks (1926) considers that the polar ice-cap may have disappeared entirely during the summer months, to build anew each winter.”

  8. Lasse says:

    Less ice cover will heat the globe?
    Less ice cover will cool the globe?
    The question is not hard to answer!

    • Rah says:

      It wouldn’t matter if solid Arctic sea ice extended down to Iceland in the middle of the summer. As far as the scammers are concerned it would be man’s fault. And there would be people like Griff that would believe them and promote their lies as the Gospel.

      • Jason Calley says:

        We’ve seen them do exactly that with the Antarctic ice cap. “It’s going to melt! It’s our fault!” was the big cry, right up till the time when it got larger instead. The response? “It’s gotten bigger from more fresh water freezing! It our fault anyway!”

        Funny too, how unchangeable science changes. Back when the cap was going to melt, the “science was settled”. Then when the ice increased, the science was still settled!

        Gack! Blasted CAGW liars…

  9. David A says:

    Griff drools…
    No, it is not normal or OK…
    Well last year at this time was the lowest ever extent for this time of year”

    Poor soul, please give me a list of all the harms caused by the last decade of cyclical low Arctic sea ice being lower then the previous 20 years.

    Please define your use of the word, “ever”

    You sound very emtional.

  10. Kris Johanson says:

    If anyone has time, this is an honest question:

    I’ve read on this forum that Arctic ice blows/shifts all over the place.
    What does less Arctic sea ice actually MEAN? Does it mean less is breaking off, and so it’s a sign of COOLING?…. or does it mean less is sticking around, which could be a sign of WARMING?

    This is a somewhat confusing issue for some of us.

    Also, do we have a way to estimate the MASS of Arctic sea ice, and not just the EXTENT to which it spreads out?

    • gator69 says:

      This is a somewhat confusing issue for some of us.

      Don’t be too concerned Kris, you are nowhere near as confused as the “experts”.

    • Jason Calley says:

      Hey Kris! “What does less Arctic sea ice actually MEAN? Does it mean less is breaking off, and so it’s a sign of COOLING?…. or does it mean less is sticking around, which could be a sign of WARMING? ”

      You raise an important question, and one that is at the heart of much debate. The sad answer is that much of the time whoever is making the claim of either more or less is not explicit enough to be certain. Often, one measurement will have an increased value while another will have decreased. Maybe the area is up and the volume is down. Maybe the 15% extent is down but the area is up. When that glacier just calved off 10 km^2 was it because the glacier is growing fast or because melt water is lubricating the bedrock?Even if you see a trend, how is the trend defined? Has the ice decreased over the last 10 years, but increased compared to what it was 100 years ago? 1,000 years? Even if you claim that it has decreased, what sort of error bars do we have? It makes no sense to claim a 20 gigaton decrease when the error bars of your figure are 100 gigatons. And so on, and so on, and so on…

      I don’t say these things to muddy the water (metaphorically speaking) but only to point out that we are speaking about a subject that is extraordinarily complex, and unless we use an unusual degree of linguistic precision, a subject that literally cannot be scientifically discussed. One of the few conclusions that we can state emphatically is that (pardon the emphasis) BASED ON THE LIMITED AND IMPERFECT DATA AND HISTORICAL RECORDS we don’t see anything particularly extreme or unusual. There seems to be a number of interacting cycles involved. We have had more ice. We have had less ice. Nothing catastrophic happened either way.

      • Griff says:

        We have excellent collections of record going back to the 1850s as well as 38 years of the satellite record.

        We know very well what the ice extent was back to the 1850s – and it is lower now than it has ever been.

        • Jason Calley says:

          “We know very well what the ice extent was back to the 1850s”

          No. We know kinda sorta, not “very well.”

          “it is lower now than it has ever been”?

          No. Based on sediment cores the Arctic was ice free during the Holocene Climatic Optimum. Geologically speaking that was recently. Nothing bad happened then, why should it now? From a human civilization standpoint the HCO was “good times” for people all over the globe.

          Griff, from a geologic or climatologic point of view, your lifetime, my lifetime, even back to the 1850s is small change. It may be the best data we have, but no cause for thinking that the sky is falling. This must be the first mega-catastrophe in history that is so subtle it has no major impact on us.

          • sunsettommy says:

            Griff, keeps up with her dishonest 1800’s claims because she was shown the deep weaknesses of the LOW RESOLUTION data, which are few and incomplete.

            The warmist chosen Satellite record starts at a 20th century high point, 1979 which is deliberately dishonest,when there were records going back to 1973 showing a much lower ice level. The IPCC in their 1990 report showed this as being from 1973 onward too.

            Warmists do this over and over.they lie or mislead with their deliberate omissions of data to maintain their delusions of a coming apocalypse.

      • Kris Johanson says:

        Jason… yes, your 2nd paragraph, above, accurately captures my question. Thanks for the vindication, now I feel a little better

        • Colorado Wellington says:


          The above exchange embodies the fundamental difference between CAGW skeptics and believers. In search of truth, you and Jason ask questions to which we have only imperfect answers. On the other side, everything is perfectly clear to Ms Griff.

          I’m not sure if you have ever experienced an argument with trained Marxists. I have. Everything is perfectly clear to them and they have answers to everything. All they have to do is applying the underlying doctrine to any question asked about the past, present or future, and the truth will be revealed.

          Here is what Lenin wrote about Marxism in 1913:

          The genius of Marx consists precisely in the fact that he furnished answers to questions which had already engrossed the foremost minds of humanity.

          The Marxian doctrine is omnipotent because it is true. It is complete and harmonious, and provides men with an integral world conception which is irreconcilable with any form of superstition, reaction, or defense of bourgeois oppression.

          I don’t know of a better analogy to the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis. To the believers it is equally omnipotent, complete and all-explaining as Marxism is to its adherents.

    • Griff says:

      Yes Kris, there are measures of volume as well as extent…

      Extent is (generally) the area covered by at least 15% ice… so a high extent may reflect a wide area covered by patchy ice, or a low extent may be a small area, but covered 100% with dense thick ice.

      At present extent is higher than last as winter storms have spread the ice further and thinner – and ‘exported’ it from the central arctic. (Which is why there’s a lot more ice than usual off Newfoundland)

      Generally the maximum winter extent and the minimum summer (September) extent are the 2 comparable points in the year, from year to year.

      See here for some charts:

      Concentration maps show what is 100% ice covered and what only 15% covered. See here for current status:

      Thickness is important too – here you can see current thickness and compare to prev years:

      So finally we come to volume…
      That’s area actually covered times thickness…

      This page charts the volume based on the PIOMAS project figures…
      You’ll note there has been a continual decrease in volume

      When you look at all the data, this year has low volume, thin, broken up ice, ice spread out and exported into waters where it will melt.

      • Gator69 says:

        And yet nobody died.

        Why do you hate poor brown people Ms Griff?

      • Kris Johanson says:

        Griff – Now that it’s Saturday I’ve had a chance to peruse the links you posted above. Thank you for taking the time. Very helpful.

        If I understand correctly, Arctic Sea Ice VOLUME is fluctuating between roughly 20,000 cu km (April) and 5,000 cu km (Sept.), and the overall trend is downwards. That means around 15,000 cu km freezes and melts each year.

        Bear with me, I’m NOT a geologist or climate scientist – I’m just trying to understand the basic arguments. Here are my back-of-napkin calculations, please poke holes in this if necessary.

        That volume/mass of ice – freezing and melting, freezing and melting – represents a swing of about 5 x 10^18 KJ just in enthalpy of fusion.

        By comparison, the oceans represent about 6 x 10^21 KJ/C of just latent heat alone.

        This means that even if ALL of the Arctic Sea Ice melted and refroze each year, the impact to the World’s oceans would be about 1/1000th of one degree C (?!)

        I realize this assumes perfect mixing, and other things, but this is VERY SMALL effect.

  11. Rah says:

    The metrics commonly available for sea ice are:
    Area (extent minus the holes)
    Age (multi-year ice is denser than newly formed ice)

  12. Gator69 says:

    Ms Griff is back, spreading more lies so she can keep her genocide going. She really hates poor brown people!

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.