Doom Arrives For Arctic Alarmists

Don’t say I didn’t warn you …

10-Day Temperature Outlook

Spreadsheet    Data

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

80 Responses to Doom Arrives For Arctic Alarmists

  1. Alfie Noakes says:

    You are a dangerous lunatic. Not long now till the likes of you are in prison where you belong.

    • Timo Soren says:

      We should put a warming on the link above. Lunatic unscientific claims will be found at this link.

    • Gator says:

      Ms Alfie is just another unhinged alarmist. She cannot debunk Tony’s post, so she caterwauls, and points to frauds like Mann and the Grauniad. Mann is a liar who got caught trying to alter the Earth’s climate history, even the IPCC disavowed Mann’s fraudulent hockeystick graph, as they removed it from their report. Every student of Earth’s climate history knows we had both a MWP and LIA.

      Exactly what crime has Tony committed Ms Alfie?

    • Anon says:

      Alfie, that was my reaction a few years ago. However, once you actually spend time with the science and not the headlines (an I am a scientist) there is another side to the story:

      Climate Science: Is it currently designed to answer questions?
      Richard S. Lindzen: Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and lead author of Chapter 7, “Physical Climate Processes and Feedbacks,” of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Third Assessment Report on climate change.
      Program in Atmospheres, Oceans and Climate MIT, Cambridge MA 02139, USA
      The above factors are all amplified by the need for government funding. When an issue becomes a vital part of a political agenda, as is the case with climate, then the politically desired position becomes a goal rather than a consequence of scientific research. This paper will deal with the origin of the cultural changes and with specific examples of the operation and interaction of these factors. In particular, we will show how political bodies act to control scientific institutions, how scientists adjust both data and even theory to accommodate politically correct positions, and how opposition to these positions is disposed of.”

      The Big Bad Forces of Censorship and Intimidation in Climate Science.
      Willie Soon, PhD: Harvard and Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

      How Government Twists Climate Statistics
      Former (OBAMA) Energy Department Undersecretary Steven Koonin on how bureaucrats spin scientific data.

      *Koonin received his Bachelor of Science from Caltech and his Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In 1975, Koonin joined the faculty of the California Institute of Technology as a Professor of Theoretical Physics.

      I suppose you came to this site to see what is going on with the climate deniers. The three articles above will begin to help you understand that. They are what is behind Trump’s anti-climate agenda. To sway the public, it is not enough to claim they are deniers and move on, what has to happen is a scientific discussion. (And that is impossible these days, as evidenced by your comment to Tony).

      To wit, I thought I would spend a day or two debunking the skeptic’s arguments (I am a scientist) and could not do it. What I discovered was deeply troubling.

      All I can say is good luck in your own efforts… whatever they might be.

      • Anon says:

        I would also add, in addition to being a scientist, I was a former climate change educator. After doing the background research (something I neglected to do in the past, instead just reading headlines and teaching out of the textbook) I can no longer ethically teach climate science and have actually found myself apologizing to former students.

        If you want to continue on the trail, I suggest these links:

        In Their Own Words: Climate Alarmists Debunk Their ‘Science’

        The IPCC, reviewer comments on the last Climate Report:

        *filled with skeptical scientific responses that never make it into the report or MSM headlines.

        The Russian position on CAGW (a country with the longest Arctic coast):

        *Follow the links to the 2004 powerpoint presentation

        Tony’s site here is pretty much a site devoted to “data” that runs contrary to the current media narrative, as such, you might find it jarring as it does not include a lot of introductory material. To understand Tony you really need to do the background reading on your own. Then come back here and you will be able to put in context what Tony is publishing.

        Sorry to contradict you, but I was exactly where you were three years ago. But I can no longer support the CAGW thesis as presented in the MSM… I would not call myself a hardcore denier either, just very disturbed about the data and ethics of it all… enough to abandon teaching anything to do with CAGW.

      • GCsquared says:

        Your painful story is a familiar one, and mirrors my own and my colleagues’ experience. If you’re troubled now, wait until you try to discuss it, although it seems you’ve already found how impossible it is.

        The greatest feedback amplification isn’t in the models, but in the climate research feedback loop (CRFL). This is the effect of government agencies funding research that lead to political conclusions that elites who allocate funds to those agencies wish to support. Why worry about fossil fuel industry funding, when the funds in the CRFL are probably in the billions. Has anyone else seen numbers on this?

        • Anon says:

          GCSquared… Yes, you are correct there, discussing it is a problem. But I never go out of my way to discuss it. The times it does come up are when I get asked directly, or in some group conversation that I am participating in where CAGW is stated as a fact. Then I will say that “I am not convinced of CAGW and can’t make a decision because I don’t understand the science”. (Now, that usually results in some disbelief because I hold a degree which should make understanding climate science very easy.)

          And the next question usually is, “what is it exactly that you don’t understand”. So, depending on who I am talking to, I might say something like, “I understand that the IPCC reports that the rate of sea level rise is accelerating (3mm/year), however when I look at all of the East Coast tide gauges, or any high quality long term tide gauge for that matter, I can find no evidence of it and I don’t understand why. So they respond, “why would you be looking at tide gauges?” And I respond, that “if I am going teach something scientific, I ought to be able to reconstruct any statement we make from first principles”. And then, quite often we will end up in my office with me explaining a lot of other problems that I don’t understand either.

          So, instead of convincing them that CAGW is wrong (which I really can’t) they leave with the I understanding that I told the truth, that I really don’t understand the science, and there are many others out there like me (leg. Lindzen, Soon, Koonz) that don’t understand either. Depending on how curious they are, I will sometimes play some of Tony’s videos as well.

          I have found that it is a lot easier for me to convince other people that I am ignorant (it is actually easy) than it is to argue the validity of CAGW theory. And oddly enough, I have had people who I have explained my self to, actually stick up for me in subsequent group discussions: “before you trash Anon, you should spend an hour with him in his office, he has a lot of interesting stuff to share.”

          I have opted out of teaching CAGW, because I really don’t believe (in truth) that we can ethically teach a subject to others that we don’t truly understand ourselves. (It is deceitful.)

          I don’t know if the above will work anyone else, but it is my approach.

      • Squidly says:

        Anon, interesting story. I admit that in the very beginning for me (25 years go), I too was a “believer” in the AGW doomsday. But since I have educated myself in the actual physics behind what would be required to create the so-called “greenhouse effect” from CO2 (or any other gas for that matter). I have found, undeniably, irrefutably and inarguably, it is physically impossible in this universe. Physical law prohibits the very mechanisms which are required to produce the so-called “greenhouse effect”. Let alone any kind of absolutely absurd “runaway greenhouse effect”.

        We could be burning up .. but the fact remains .. it isn’t from an excess of CO2!! .. for that is simply impossible.

        • Anon says:

          Squidly, I agree with what you are saying. I approach it a little differently because of what I have learned over the past 3 years, having been complicit in propagating CAGW over the last 20. See above.
          Thanks for your reply…

      • Michael Spencer says:

        What a brilliantly assembled presentation by Willie Soon – a REAL scientist, as distinct from various taxpayer-funded charlatans who, naturally, feel threatened by someone like Willie for fear of being exposed.

        Let’s hope that “The Donald” continues his “swamp draining” to expose the said charlatans, and that like Michael E. Mann they end up in State Pen!

        • Griff says:

          A ‘scientist’ who it is alleged wrote his scientific conclusions based on what the people paying him wanted to hear ?

          • spike55 says:

            You have NO FACTS.

            You don’t even see your MANIC bias that never allows you to see the truth.

            You KNOW that the farce of “climate science” is a PAID farce.

          • Gator says:

            The Smithsonian paid Dr Soon. What did the Smithsonian want to hear?

            And why do you hate poor brown people?

          • Colorado Wellington says:

            Ms Griff, you would not say this to Dr. Moon’s face.

            You are internet pond scum.

          • Anon says:

            Mann is alleged to be a fraud. You don’t need anymore than that. It is 110% true, expert minds have weighed in. Now that Mann is dismissed, lets go on to the next CAGW expert. What do ya got?

          • Jason Calley says:

            Hey Griff, you say, “A ‘scientist’ who it is alleged wrote his scientific conclusions based on what the people paying him wanted to hear ?”

            Alleged? That’s it, “alleged”?

            I allege that you eat kittens, raw and alive, for breakfast. Why should I listen to you when you are an alleged kitten killer?

        • Anon says:

          Michael Spencer, When I first saw that Soon video, I was a bit aghast that he was attacking Rachel Carsen (Silent Spring) who was one of my environmental heroes.

          For a few days, it gave me pause, I almost thought it was discrediting his message.

          Then I went to the scientific literature and looked up the Global Effects of the DDT ban, in countries trying to eradicate malaria. And sure enough, Willie Soon was right, the ban caused untold numbers of deaths in those third world countries. (anyone can go and research that for themselves). Back then people living in third world countries were not worth considering, or placing above our raptor populations in importance.

          Currently they are trying to bring back DDT for interior spraying of homes. Which is precisely the measured response that should have occurred after Silent Spring was published.

          So, in the end, I learned a lot from Willie Soon, he is a truth teller.

      • Griff says:

        all those sources have a known political bias in the opposite direction to the one you allege Alfie has.

        • spike55 says:

          Your comprehension is SADLY LACKING little trollette.

        • Anon says:

          Got it, find “political bias” and dismiss. That shortens my reading list dramatically. This could be your contribution to CAGW, lets call it “Griff’s Razor of Parsimony” (after Occam). Accept all “allegations “and dismiss, then evaluate for “political bias” and dismiss. That leaves us with the conclusion that we don’t know anything about the Climate. (I am comfortable with that.)

    • sunsettommy says:

      Damian the writer uses the worst possible temperature data set in PISS, that alone discredits the article.

      The Guardian is a joke news site that deliberately distorts the news and science on “climate change”, a rag better served in bird cages than table top.

      Meanwhile you offer no counterpoint to Tony’s post, because you have none, hence the desperate deflection to the guardian mess.


    • tonyheller says:

      Communists have always wanted to jail dissidents. Posting data from NOAA and DMI is now a crime?

      • Disillusioned says:

        Yes. Criticizing the deep state is a crime. If you contrast their own data against their claims, you should “[be] in prison where you belong.

        Don’t question. Ignorance is safe. It is bliss. Simply believe.

      • GCsquared says:

        You not only don’t even know what crimes you’re not committing, but also someone wants to jail you for being a dissident. You MUST be a communist.

        APGW logic.

      • In Soviet Union data posts you!
        Every lying ex-scientist who claimed nuclear reactors are unsafe (while ducking comparisons and urging surrender to communism) also spread the lie that freon (not the Antarctic volcano) would someday fry the penguins. Such of these flimflam artists as survive now pronounce Global Warming the settled Apocalypse they’ve been yearning for for all these years. I have yet to find a single exception.

    • arn says:

      So-one can believe in Santa,Martians ,
      that noble peace mass murderer & country destroyer Obama is a good man
      or that islam is the religion of peace,or that killing millions and millions of unborn babies is a good thing and even practice it-and nothing happens.
      But denying something abstract and irrellevant like official climate-science(even by using climate scien=real data or the ice age scare these parasites promoted until the beginning of the 80ies)
      is lunatic and dangerous?!
      Dude-there is no help for people like you.

    • RickS says:

      The “Guardian” stands front and center guarding the Gates-of-Bell where [ YOU ] will spend eternity (That’s “FOREVER” for those with a Preschool education !!!) and I can’t wait to see (WATCH) “You” suffer, and suffer, and suffer, etc, etc, etc…

      I-CAN’T-WAIT !

      GLOBAL-WARMING-(x 10 to the Billionth Power), for [ YOU ], FOREVER, AND EVER, AND EVER…….

      But then again, hopefully “You” and your “Family” die sooner than later, [ “things” like YOU pervert and filthify Planet Earth, not to say stench the whole place up… !

      Now wither away Devil and take YOUR seed with YOU !


      • Kenneth Schauer says:

        RickS, By your own words “and I can’t wait to see (WATCH) “You” suffer, and suffer, and suffer, etc, etc, etc…” implies you know you are going to be in Hell right along with the person you are condemning.
        Thank you for showing your ignorance, It gave me a really good laugh!

    • Mac says:

      Shut up, you mentally ill ignorant obsessive-compulsive psycho. People like you should be in straight jackets.

      I love it. “Prison”. Imbecile.

    • spike55 says:

      Poor little Alfie .

      so brain hosed that he can’t cope with the FACTS

      You are here as a slap-stick comedy act, right ???

    • spike55 says:

      Oh and little-Alfie.

      Nice self-portrait

    • JCalvertN(UK) says:

      When The Guardian tells me “X” I can be pretty sure that the truth is not “X”.
      When The BBC tells me “Y” I can be pretty sure that the truth is not “Y”.
      When The Washitgon Post tells me “Z” I can be pretty sure that the truth is not “Z”.
      I have found these sources are pretty reliable if interpreted correctly. The truth is reliably the exact opposite of what they assert.

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      Enough! Stop interrupting Ms Alfie’s emotional outbursts with appeals to facts and reason.

      • R. Shearer says:

        The left will continue to spread their message of love and peace even if it means they have to physically assault or even kill you.

    • STEVE SCOFIELD says:


    • mwhite says:

      “The shape of British summers to come? ”

      How does a climate scientist predict the future????

      He looks out of the window and says what he sees.

    • Eric Barnes says:

      Interesting that you would use an image from Chicken Little. Climate change is the “Sky is Falling” program for the UN. Why don’t you head to the cave? You and all your friends will surely be safe there.

  2. Timo Soren says:

    Don’t worry, Ben Santer now says “this is expected.” Because climate science clear states that the oscillations between warm and cold will increase in a warming world. So more cold and more hot is global warming.

    In 20 years, it would be nice if we had a class action lawsuit against all climate scientists like this to recover all public monies spent on them.

    I support your claim of fraud.

    • Josh says:

      Winters are warmer than back in the global cooling era of the 1950s to 1970s.
      Proof alarmists say whatever based on past few years rather than long term trend. Trigger angry idiots.

  3. R. Shearer says:

    Telling the truth is apparently a revolutionary act, something that Michael Mann could not do.

    • arn says:

      Michael Mann can not tell the truth as Mann-made AGW would then collapse .
      And not just that-he would turn from a earth&live saviour and superhero into a lying scumback.
      He then would be attacked by the deniers& by his friends(comrads,as those guys do not have friends and will abandon you instantly when you oppose whatever PC opinion).
      He then would be sued and forced to repay more money than Lance Armstrong.

      • Anon says:

        Arn, funny you should mention L.A.. In 1999 I knew what I was watching was impossible… and spent the first decade of the 2000s taking all kinds of flack for it. (never would watch him race) Then Landis, WADA, USADA and Oprah happened… I feel the same about CAGW now… too many inexplicable loose ends and too much contorted reasoning involved. (sigh)

    • Josh says:

      Mann will not even release his workings, hence he lost to Dr. Tim Ball – a true patriot and protector of the economies for all people not just the corrupt greenies.

  4. gregole says:

    No ice-free Arctic this year. Sigh. I feel like a motherless child.

    We were promised an ice-free Arctic. And tipping points. Where’s the tipping points? It’s 2018. There’s plenty of CO2 – right now the sun never sets in the Arctic and CO2 should be trapping heat. Lots of heat and, and, melting the ice. It’s consistent with a warming world. And then we get tipping points and stuff like that.

    All M@nn-Made too. It’s our fault. Fossil fuel addiction; consumption; it’s unsustainable; earth’s carrying capacity; we should be ashamed.

    What happened? I thought there was a consensus…what happened to the consensus?

    • Disillusioned says:

      Dude, that is blasphemy. Wash your mouth out with soap. Peer-reviewed consensus is always right. Consensus is science! Consensus is the last word.

    • Steven Fraser says:

      As a slight comment about the sun not setting in the arctic…

      The only day this is true at the edges of the arctic circle is the solstice. Using the ‘arctic’ definition using the average temp isotherm line for 10C, a part of southern Greenland is ‘arctic’ but enjoys sunrises and sunsets all year long.

      • Griff says:

        Here are the insolation levels as you go North for the summer months.;topic=2278.0;attach=105285;image

        Still plenty of solar energy pouring in thru August (plus a warmed sea)

        • spike55 says:

          WRONG AGAIN griff

          North Atlantic has been cooling rapidly

          Obviously not enough of the sleepy sun to melt much sea ice though, is there chicken-little.

          Sea ice is still in the top10% of the Holocene

          The world is just a fraction of a degree above the COLDEST period in 10,000 years, and looks like heading back down into the freezing bitter period.

          Get that fossil fuel pumping next winter , griff.

          Don’t rely on those solar panels someone else with an actual job paid for.

        • Anon says:

          Griff, you said about 2 months ago that Tony would stop posting this stuff once the Summer Warming Period of the Arctic kicked in. You should stand by the statements you make, it is the honorable thing to do. Go back and read what you have posted in the past and stand-by your word. Otherwise you are turning off a large segment of the population that independently “thinks for themselves”. You will get a lot more respect from me if you admit you are WRONG, instead of worming your way out by flaking another argument. A lot more people see what you are doing than you realize and it disgusts them, thus hurting your cause. FYI

    • Squidly says:

      We were promised an ice-free Arctic. And tipping points.

      Gregole, “tipping points”?? .. hell, we were promised not just “tipping points” but a full blown runaway by now. We should be seeing summertime temperatures in the thousands by now. No joke either. I am sure Tony could drum up some past articles of declarations of “runaway greenhouse effect” and how at this point, 2018, we would be smack-dab in the middle of this “runaway” and temperatures would be skyrocketing exponentially.

      I practically pee my pants in laughter every time I think about someone declaring a “runaway greenhouse effect” .. did they really think anyone would believe them? .. If Tesla really wanted to be successful at automobile manufacturing, he wouldn’t be making an electric car, he would be making a “runaway greenhouse effect” car .. which would power itself.

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      ”Where’s the tipping points?”

      Gregole, they are all around us. Sydney-based researchers demonstrated the tipping point principle in a practical, easy-to-understand experiment.

  5. Griff says:


    I think somebody needs to look at the Pacific side satellite photos for the 28th and the concentration and thickness maps in that area.

    Extent moved up one notch to 7th lowest for the date today.

    • spike55 says:

      FAR higher than basically 90% of the last 10,000 years, griff.

      Why do you continue to DENY CLIMATE CHANGE

      Is it just blatant and wilful IGNORANCE?????

      MASIE has current extent more than +1sd above the 2006-2017 mean

      DMI has ice volume at more than +1sd above the 2003-2017 mean

      The RECOVERY from the ANOMALOUS HIGHS of the 1970s looks like it has come to an end, mores the pity.

      And its STILL in the top 10% of the last 10,000 years.

      We definitely are still on the cusp of a mini ice age

      Less than 1ºC above the COLDEST period in 10,000 years

      And with the Sun having a snooze, looks like we might be heading back down .

      I reckon griff will move south, you know, to somewhere warmer.

    • paul courtney says:

      Griff: Sorry, no time. Too busy watching ice cubes melt in my glass. I’m worried it’ll overflow the glass and flood the east coast (USA). It’s like an experiment on sea level rise. Bet it can be reproduced in UK, if you try. Spoiler alert- all melted, seems I was alarmed over nothing. I’m robustly confident that you will, someday, know just how I feel.

    • Squidly says:

      Oooooh, so skeert .. “we’re melting … aaaahhhh”

      Pffttt… I have been watching this bullshit for almost 30 years. Same shit, different day. And we will be watching the very same bullshit for the next 30 years .. and having to listen to imbeciles like you Griff .. all along the way.

      You can’t even pay for such good entertainment. I just love watching morons be morons.

  6. Griff says:

    Maisie is useless for year on year comparisons…

    and DMI volume is way out of line with other indicators.

    • spike55 says:


      MASIE is perfectly good .. the NSIDC just don’t like what it produces.

      and yes, DMI is not as politically influenced as the others.

  7. Psalmon says:

    Greenland gained mass on July 27, middle of Summer, a record level.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.