Alarmists Face Record Meltdown

After telling us all year that the Arctic is record hot and will be ice-free or at a record low this summer – climate alarmists face a record meltdown of their scam.

Arctic sea ice extent is actually right at the ten year mean, and has been in the normal range all year.

ims_data.jpg (1092×793)

The short, cold polar summer has crashed and burned early.

Ocean and Ice Services | Danmarks Meteorologiske Institut

And nothing but cold in the forecast over the ice.

10-Day Temperature Outlook

These crooks will continue their scam for as long as government continues to fund their scam.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

60 Responses to Alarmists Face Record Meltdown

  1. Andy DC says:

    There is no trend in the 10 year record and little if any trend in the 80 year record. If you use the cherry picked 1979 starting date, an outlier year when sea ice was at Little Ice Age levels, yes there is a downtrend. But no honest scientist would start a chart from an outlier year. That is one thing alarmists are absolutely not, honest scientists.

  2. Chaamjamal says:

    Also no evidence that year to year changes in seasonal extreme sea ice extent are related to agw.

  3. just a thought says:

    A Dilbert oldie but goodie.
    http://dilbert.com/strip/2017-05-14

  4. Brian D says:

    Weather pattern for the upcoming week
    Today’s map

    • Brian D says:

      Low pressure will strengthen again across basin, but will migrate and weaken towards western basin as high pressure strengthens in the eastern areas. Another powerful low will move in and restrengthen low pressure in the western basin mid week.

      • Brian D says:

        Low pressure will then migrate to the Canadian side as high pressure builds along Russian side by weeks end. Weather across the NWP stills looks like colder, with mostly N winds again this week. unless there is a drastic change, don’t see the N route being open by a long shot this year. We’ll see.

        • Andy DC says:

          You would think those storms would cause a lot of clouds and drop a lot of snow over the sea ice. Logic would dictate that both the clouds and the snow cover from Arctic storms should slow the melt considerably. But in 2012, the alarmists claimed that an August storm completely chopped up the ice and caused it to rapidly melt. So what is true and what is propaganda is hard to tell, as alarmists are anything but trustworthy.

          • Stewart Pid says:

            Andy – Caleb and I were just talking about all the cloud up in the Canuck Arctic Archipelago this summer.
            http://obuoy.datatransport.org/monitor#buoy14/camera

            Look at Obuoy14 for a view of the arctic in the M’Clintock Channel east of Victoria Island.

          • Brian D says:

            AndyDC, that storm was over the Chukchi sea, and was a tight, deep low for days with strong upwelling. The ice was already in a very vulnerable state in that area. These storms are moving in quickly and weakening over an area of the basin with thick ice.

            The ice is still vulnerable at the fringes, and will take a hit as the storms move in, but not like the 2012 scenario. The upwelling under these storms can still cause some breakup and spreading of the thicker ice, which is quite normal.

  5. Jim Hunt says:

    I’m sure you’ll love my latest Arctic surf forecast Tony!

    http://GreatWhiteCon.info/2017/08/facts-about-the-arctic-in-august-2017/

    Here’s the MASIE FAQ yet again:

    https://nsidc.org/data/masie/masie_faq

    MASIE relies on data from the Interactive Multisensor Snow and Ice Mapping System (IMS) that runs at the National Ice Center (NIC).

    Use the Sea Ice Index when comparing trends in sea ice over time or when consistency is important. Even then, the monthly, not the daily, Sea Ice Index views should be used to look at trends in sea ice.

    • Andy DC says:

      My impression that these storms are nowhere nearly as intense as the 2012 storm. But if alarmists want to insist that a rare severe August blizzard proves global warming, the logic seems backwards to me.

      • Jim Hunt says:

        The current storm is indeed not as intense as the “Great Arctic Cyclone” of 2012:

        http://GreatWhiteCon.info/2015/03/sea-ice-and-swells-in-the-beaufort-sea-in-the-summer-of-2014/

        However:

        With a height in excess of 20 feet, the period was too short to qualify as a full blown swell and it was in fact directed away from the ice edge rather than towards it.

        What’s more the Arctic surfing season is not over yet. In actual fact it’s only just begun.

        • AndyG55 says:

          Still WAY, WAY above the norms of before the LIA , isn’t it, Jimbo.

          You KNOW that its been LOWER than current for some 90-95% of the last 10,000 years

          Or is your DENIAL all you have to back up your amoral agenda?

          You are NOTHING but a LIAR and low-level CON/SCAM troll.

        • AndyG55 says:

          CON is the only possible description of your FETID little LI+YING web site Ji8mbo

          Still desperate for attention, I see,

          DENYING that Arctic sea ice is above what it has been for some 90-95% of the Holocene.

          Is it GROSS ignorance, or GROSS DECEIT?

          Its good to see that you at least admit that the slight drop is due to WEATHER, and nothing else.

          Still Its not going to drop anywhere near far enough to be of any benefit to the people living up there, is it , Jimbo.

          Imagine if they could have just a few more weeks of commerce, travel and fishing., wouldn’t it be wonderful for them,. !

      • RAH says:

        It says much that Alarmists happily anticipate Arctic storms because they break up and scatter or concentrate the ice out of the sea lanes so they can hype climate change.

        • Jim Hunt says:

          It says much that Deplorables like AndyG refuse to discuss the facts about Amundsen’s NWP voyage and keep on hyping proxy data instead!

          It also says much that Tony’s “two or three blog posts everyday” continue to use other Arctic data in ways that the data provider explicitly deprecates!!

          • AndyG55 says:

            And history DENIERS like Jimbo, the attention seeking, bed-wetting clown/troll, refuse to ADMIT that the current level of sea ice is above what it has been for 90-95% of the Holocene

            You are a FRAUD, Jimbo,

            ..your web site is LYING CON.

            Fact is Amundsen was MAPPING, in a small wooden boat, and it was only just a small time after the EXTREMES of the LIA.. Or are you WILFULLY IGNORANT of that as well, like you are of every other aspect of Arctic history.

          • gator69 says:

            It also says much that Tony’s “two or three blog posts everyday” continue to use other Arctic data in ways that the data provider explicitly deprecates!!

            That’s rich, coming from an anti-human, anti-science, genocidal troll. Jim cares more about opinion than fact, and cares more about his CAGW agenda than human life.

          • RAH says:

            Date providers produce their data for others to use and interpret. Anyway one looks at it this year in the Arctic and especially in Greenland should have been a dose of reality for people like you which claim we’re heading for a “virtually ice free” Arctic in the next few years.

            You people can’t seem to get it through your heads that warmer than average temperatures in the Arctic during the winter months have still been well below freezing and that for the Arctic to become “virtually ice free” for any reasonable period it will require sustained above average temperatures during the Arctic summer. Just the opposite happened this summer contrary to predictions. So, grasping as straws you talk about storms.

            Like I said Jim, you and those like you would be better to keep their mouths shut because it is clear that there is absolutely no indication there is anything out of the realm of natural variability occurring.

          • Jim Hunt says:

            RAH – Where have I claimed that “we’re heading for a “virtually ice free” Arctic in the next few years.”?

          • Jim Hunt says:

            AndyG – At the risk of repeating myself repeating myself, here’s the ancient facts yet again:

            1b) Gjoa eventually departed Gjoa Haven on August 13th 1905.

            1c) Gjoa reached King Point near Herschel Island on September 2nd 1905, but could get no further. She was forced to spend the winter of 1905/06 there.

          • gator69 says:

            And another 21,000 innocent humans were snuffed out yesterday by Genocide Jim and the International Socialist Party.

            What if your family was part of that equation Genocide Jim? Would you still be coming here and blathering on about ice?

            Too much of a coward to answer the question?

          • RAH says:

            oh please!!!!!!
            Your blog has a picture of a polar bear supposedly praying!!!!!! Your blog is a constant stream of negative claims when it comes to Arctic ice hyping every decline. It talks of “solving the predicament we’re in” in reference to “climate change”. One post after another on “melting momentum”, “Arctic Amplification”, “Cryosphere Crisis”, etc, etc, etc, ad nauseum. And then there is this:
            http://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2011/04/trends-in-arctic-sea-ice-extent.html

          • sunsettommy says:

            You are a dishonest joke since you ignored what Arctic researcher Dr. Meier had to say about MASIE,that I posted the other day.

            You were shown TWO others sources that show similar results.

          • Jim Hunt says:

            What are you on about RAH.

            That is not my blog!

          • Jim Hunt says:

            Tommy – Not so very long ago I called Dr. Meier and asked him his professional opinion about MASIE. This is what he told me:

            http://GreatWhiteCon.info/2016/02/dmi-masie-and-the-sea-ice-index-an-interview-with-walt-meier/

          • AndyG55 says:

            Sea ice is STILL above 90-95% of what it been for the last 10,000 years

            Was MUCH lower in the MWP too.

            There really is one HECK OF A LOT of sea ice up there, That’s because its trying to recover from the EXTREMES of the late 1970’s, which were equivalent to those of the LIA.

            Only those TOTALLY in DENIAL of science would try to make any other inference.

    • AndyG55 says:

      Nobody is in the least bit interested in your CON website , Jimbo

      Stop the desperate whimpering for attention, ITS PATHETIC, even from you.

    • Stewart Pid says:

      Guys, I have said it before and I will repeat it again. Jim often shows up here and plays nice and posts some stuff of merit – worth considering & educational. Sure he plays for the other team but we can still talk nice if we try.
      I see a huge difference between Jim and Griff who is an obvious troll / gorebot with little technical education or common sense.
      Just my thoughts … we are all good people and just because we are on a blog doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be courteous and we have a free pass to say stuff we wouldn’t say to Jim’s face …. although I admit that I have a checkered past regarding my treatment of the grifftard ;-( …. I will try harder!!

      • gator69 says:

        I would absolutely say to Jim, or any other face, what I have said here. To do otherwise would be cowardly, and inhuman.

        • Jim Hunt says:

          See what I mean Stewart?

          • gator69 says:

            These were the bad projects. As you might see the bottom of the list was climate change. This offends a lot of people, and that’s probably one of the things where people will say I shouldn’t come back, either. And I’d like to talk about that, because that’s really curious. Why is it it came up? And I’ll actually also try to get back to this because it’s probably one of the things that we’ll disagree with on the list that you wrote down.

            The reason why they came up with saying that Kyoto — or doing something more than Kyoto — is a bad deal is simply because it’s very inefficient. It’s not saying that global warming is not happening. It’s not saying that it’s not a big problem. But it’s saying that what we can do about it is very little, at a very high cost. What they basically show us, the average of all macroeconomic models, is that Kyoto, if everyone agreed, would cost about 150 billion dollars a year. That’s a substantial amount of money. That’s two to three times the global development aid that we give the Third World every year. Yet it would do very little good. All models show it will postpone warming for about six years in 2100. So the guy in Bangladesh who gets a flood in 2100 can wait until 2106. Which is a little good, but not very much good. So the idea here really is to say, well, we’ve spent a lot of money doing a little good.

            And just to give you a sense of reference, the U.N. actually estimate that for half that amount, for about 75 billion dollars a year, we could solve all major basic problems in the world. We could give clean drinking water, sanitation, basic healthcare and education to every single human being on the planet. So we have to ask ourselves, do we want to spend twice the amount on doing very little good? Or half the amount on doing an amazing amount of good? And that is really why it becomes a bad project. It’s not to say that if we had all the money in the world, we wouldn’t want to do it. But it’s to say, when we don’t, it’s just simply not our first priority.

            http://www.ted.com/talks/bjorn_lomborg_sets_global_priorities/transcript?language=en

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dtbn9zBfJSs

            See what I mean Genocide Jim?

          • Jim Hunt says:

            No.

            What’s that got to do with Amundsen’s travails in 1905, or the NSIDC’s MASIE FAQ, or the August 2017 Arctic surf forecast, or……

          • gator69 says:

            Genocide Jim thinks it is cute to switch subjects in the middle of a thread, while he advocates for the starvation of millions.

            Genocide Jim more than deserves any and all insults he receives.

          • Jim Hunt says:

            You’re the one switching subjects Gator, and not for the first time I might add!

            Scroll up to the top. Can you see the word “Arctic” in the first paragraph?

            How about the word “genocide”?

          • AndyG55 says:

            Jimbo doesn’t give a rat’s arse about all the money that could have been spent helping less unfortunate countries, but has been WASTED on the moronic AGW AGENDA instead.

            He really is the most putrid of amoral human excrement.

          • gator69 says:

            Genocide Jim, we had switched over to discussing the merits of identifying the sick bastards who haunt this site and constantly raise alarm over meaningless ice. Even you had switched over to this topic, when it was convenient to do so.

            You are a world class POS Jim. You are helping to starve 21,000 people to death each and every day with your sick anti-human alarmism. I have repeatedly pointed this out to you, and yet you continue your genocidal campaign against the poorest of this world.

            I use your flippant attitude to show others just how sick in the head you CAGW cultists are, and it works like a charm every time. Most humans understand that human life trumps ice, and your team comes off looking like the ghoulish goons that you are.

      • Jim Hunt says:

        Thank you for your kind words Stewart.

        Bitter experience suggests they will fall on deaf ears in here!

      • Griff says:

        I see – so I post charts of actual ice conditions, which makes me a troll…

        and the peculiar stream of insults accusing me of mass murder and bedwetting, they are somehow ‘nice’ and more scientific?

      • Colorado Wellington says:

        “Jim often shows up here and plays nice …

        Sure he plays for the other team but we can still talk nice if we try.”

        Of course we could talk nice, Stewart, but im afraid that you haven’t considered who are the members of “the other team“, what are their goals, what are the methods to achieve them and what carnage they already caused.

        I’ve dealt with “nice” members of similar teams all my life and I found very early that playing nice doesn’t work. Your decency will not be honored. It will be used against you.

  6. RAH says:

    According to the science through out most of earths history it has been as warm or warmer than it is today and often for very long stretches much hotter.

    There have been no ice caps for the majority of earths existence.

    Through most of earths history CO2 levels have been higher than they are today including during the known time when life has existed here.

    There is no normal for earths climate and the paleo record reveals many radical changes in the climate in the past. The changes since the end of the last glaciation don’t even show up as a blip in the longer term record.

    And yet Tony had plenty of material from both the past and present to produce two or three blog posts everyday like the one above. Obviously our science teachers are not doing their jobs.

  7. RAH says:

    I await the “scholarly” papers using the excuse that this period of declining solar is the reason for their predictions of climate disaster to have failed to materialize. You know there have to be some coming. And no doubt some will come from the same “scholars” that ignored the fact that we were in a sustained peak of solar activity when they made those predictions.

    Old Sol is very drowsy and looks to be heading for rem sleep. Cycle 23 was considerably less active than Cycle 22 and cycle 24 so far has been the least active since cycle 14. How long he’ll sleep is a matter of conjecture but it seems that things are pointing towards as good long nap.

  8. Geoff Sherrington says:

    For Southern Hemisphere, look at temperatures cat lonesome Macquarie Island. Scarcely a change from 5 Dec C mean for the past 50 years.
    Global warming advocates are yet to explain why it is excepted.
    No need for adjustments for TOBS or site moves or UHI. Could that be the reason for constancy? Geoff

    • AndyG55 says:

      Its still WAY higher than all but the EXTREME extents of the LIA and late 1970s.

      Unfortunately, the RECOVERY from those extremes seems to have stalled for the last 10 years.

      and with the AMO turning and sleepy sun, it looks like the people up there are not going to get the massive benefits of lesser Arctic sea ice.

      Imagine the MASSIVE BENEFITS if the travel, commerce, fishing etc were possible for more than just a couple of weeks a year.

      Those would seem to want the place to remain ice-bound like it was during the LIA, (coldest period in 10,000 years) really are a sick, anti-human, amoral bunch of evil low-lifes.

    • AndyG55 says:

      “concentration low…”

      NO , concentration HIGH..

      Far higher than all but a tiny freezing cold portion of the last 10,000 years.

      as usual griff is only concerned about comparing with the EXTREME HIGH of the late 1970’s

      Its PETTY and it CHILDISH.. and its a mark of TOTAL IGNORANCE.

    • gator69 says:

      People still starving…
      http://www.poverty.com/

      climate change spending dead last…
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dtbn9zBfJSs

      Starvation trumps meaningless ice…
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human

      Why do you hate poor brown people Ms Griff?

  9. sunsettommy says:

    I see that Jimbo, doesn’t want to address the science paper Dr. Meier published which make specific statements that MASIE is a good source for Sea Ice cover data,here is the ABSTRACT Jim, ignored:

    “ABSTRACT.
    Passive microwave sensor have produced a 35 year record of sea-ice concentration
    variability and change.Operational analyses combine a variety of remote-sensing inputs and other sources via manual integration to create high-resolution,accurate charts of ice conditions in support of navigation
    and operational forecast models.One such product is the daily Multisensor Analyzed Sea Ice Extent (MASIE).The higher spatial resolution along with multiple input data and manual analysis potentially provide more precise
    mapping of the ice edge than passive microwave estimates.However,since MASIE is based on an operational product,estimates may be inconsistent over time due to variations in input data quality and availability. Comparisons indicate that MASIE shows higher Arctic-wide extent values throughout most of the year,largely because of the limitations of passive microwave sensors in some conditions (e.g. surface melt).
    However,during some parts of the year,MASIE tends to indicate less ice than estimated by passive microwave sensors.These comparisons yield a better understanding of operational and research sea-ice data products; this in turn has important implications for their use in climate and weather models.”

    How
    do sea-ice
    concentrations
    from
    operational
    data compare
    with
    passive
    microwave
    estimates?
    Implications
    for improved
    model
    evaluations
    and forecasting

    How
    do sea-ice
    concentrations
    from
    operational
    data compare
    with
    passive
    microwave
    estimates?
    Implications
    for improved
    model
    evaluations
    and forecasting

    • sunsettommy says:

      Here is the link:

      https://www.igsoc.org/annals/56/69/a69a694.pdf

      The Paper was published in 2015.

      Meanwhile Jimmy posted this below as his usual misleading reply to the paper I posted the other day, he ignored it,to make this reply instead:

      “Tommy – Not so very long ago I called Dr. Meier and asked him his professional opinion about MASIE. This is what he told me:”

      So what is considered more credible, an unsourced interview, or the actual science paper Mr. Meier himself published in the publication, Annuals In Glaciology.

      What he allegedly told Jim doesn’t match up what he said in his refereed paper,which is data and sourced.

      DR. Meier in the paper basically said the SII and MASIE have their place,with strengths and weaknesses of each discussed.

      Jim as usual,didn’t answer the published paper at all. The one that was published for the benefit of the science community, for interested researchers outside of the community.

Leave a Reply to Brian D Cancel 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.