Ice-Free Arctic Prophesy Update

The world’s leading climate scientist “echoing work by other scientists” prophesied ten years ago that the Arctic would be ice-free between 2013 and 2018.

The Argus-Press – Google News Archive Search

Faced with the failure of his forecasts, he officially switched to a life of crime (i.e. left-wing politics) in 2013.

All hope is not lost however for the prophet.  Current volume loss rates show that the Arctic will indeed be ice-free on October 21, at 10:58 am.

Ice volume is third highest since 2003, and volume loss is third lowest since 2003.

Spreadsheet    Data

Ice extent loss has also slowed to a crawl, with essentially no change over the past 24 hours.

August 8   August 9

August 1   August 9

With temperatures below freezing in the Beaufort Sea, prophet Hansen is going to have to leave his comfortable fossil fuel powered office in Pennsylvania, and join Reggie and Al in the Arctic with a blowtorch.


This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

78 Responses to Ice-Free Arctic Prophesy Update

  1. Jeff Jones says:

    Actually, careful investigation shows you are way off on your ice-free prognostication. It is actually December 7th.

  2. Gator says:

    I’m sure Phil will be along any minute to explain that Hansen did not actually mean ice free by 2018. He and Nick Stokes have the only Hansen screed cypher, it only works in hindsight, as Hansen’s prognostications are very much like the quatrains of Nostradamus.

  3. Gator says:

    Phil will be along any minute to explain that Hansen did not actually mean ice free by 2018. Dr Phil and Nick Stokes have the only Hansen screed cypher, and they are not sharing. It only works in hindsight, and much like the quatrains of Nostradamus, the prognostications of Hansen cannot be known until after the fact. They are the purveyors of pre-conceptual science.

  4. Griff says:

    more nonsense. Are you looking at anything except DMI charts?

    Here’s a concentration chart, also showing the limits of the ice…

    …which you can check on this satellite composite

    you can check the DMI extent chart against that and see it is showing ice where there is open water.

    Its currently 5th lowest extent for the date (2012,2007, 2016 and 2017 being lower) and still heading down -not improbable it will be lower than last year in September.

    The temps over Siberia are high and there’s a strong south wind over there… even looks possible that sea will be open right round Greenland. I notice you aren’t showing the arctic temp chart which has now gone above the mean…

    PIOMAS shows the DMI (modelled) volume chart is off…

    If we are approaching getting lower ice extent than last year, then surely the ice condition is getting worse, isn’t it?

    • Gator says:

      So you admit Hansen’s predictions are wrong. Great!

      Now if we could only get you to stop hating poor black people.

    • Gerald Machnee says:

      **If we are approaching getting lower ice extent than last year, then surely the ice condition is getting worse, isn’t it?**
      NO, only in YOUR mind. Above, you said 5th lowest, so not lowest.
      Are you related to Nick?

    • R Shearer says:

      More nonsense from the Grifftard. Please disappear like you said you would. Come back when you might have something intelligent to say.

    • Mr Grimnasty says:

      PIO’M’AS, so what does the ‘M’ stand for then Griff.

    • Gerald Machnee says:

      **If we are approaching getting lower ice extent than last year, then surely the ice condition is getting worse, isn’t it?**
      NO, only in YOUR mind. You just said 5th lowest, not lowest. having a problem with language?

    • Wilbert says:

      “you can check the DMI extent chart against that and see it is showing ice where there is open water.” Arctic Winds will push water over the ice and the satellite photos will show water instead of ice….does it not? Any wind data available?

    • tonyheller says:

      I post NSIDC maps , and Griff responds with : “Are you looking at anything except DMI charts?”

      • Josh says:

        Tony, its called liberal cognitive dissonance :).
        Anything that does not fit the agenda is not mentioned and denied.

        • Andy says:

          Keep stupid comments and politics out of a science debate.



          • tonyheller says:

            Global warming junk science is based on politics.

          • Gator says:

            When did Andy become a moderator here?

            Thankfully not Andy

          • Disillusioned says:

            “Keep stupid comments and politics out of a science debate.


            So, Andy wants to keep his stupid comments and politics out of these discussions. Oh good.

          • spike55 says:

            “Keep stupid comments .. out”

            Yes , please do, little-andy

            That way we will NEVER hear from you again.

            And who the *** do you think you are to tell others what to do or say

            Socialist totalitarian cretin. !!

      • mwhite says:

        There is always this site

        “MODIS Composites

        The product consists of 7 day MODIS satellite composite images compiled to create a mosaic image of the Arctic Basin. It is available when there is sufficient daylight to show the ice conditions.”

      • Anon says:

        And here is the end-result of Griff and his friends talking up an ice-free Arctic and the need to transition to Wind and Solar Power:

        As far as the Arctic being “open to shipping”, the ice extent and climate will only be of academic interest in 10 years time. These routes will be open year round thanks to the environmentalist’s demand for natural gas (LNG):

        The monster-icebreaker that might reshape Arctic shipping

        Yards fight for the right to build the nuclear-powered vessel that will be able to break through 4 meter ice and open wide shipping lanes across Arctic waters.

        The 209 meter long and 47 meter wide vessel, designed by company Iceberg, has a draft of 13 meter and will be able to break through four meter thick ice at 12 knots speed. It will be powered by two RITM-400 reactors with a total 120 MW capacity. It has unlimited range and can operated round-the-year…

        *And this: For Yamal LNG, Novatek ordered 15 icebreaking LNG carriers ice-class Arc7 from South Korea’s Daewoo Shipbuilding Marine Engineering.

        And how often this backfire phenomenon repeats itself. After they close all the Coal and Nuclear Plants, to implement Solar and Wind Projects, they need the flexibility of Natural Gas power plants to cope with the generation variability. Thus making all of our ground water aquifers vulnerable to Fracking, landscapes crisscrossed with Pipe Lines and the Arctic open to Year Round Shipping.

        The Green’s Idea of saving the environment. (lol)

      • gregole says:

        I read your comment; I closed both eyes, my head rolled back, and I started laughing. And laughing harder. And harder.

        This is the best blog on the internet today.

        Griff, hit the tip jar.

      • Jack Miller says:

        I don’t know why he bothers, his comments only prove that he cannot read graphs,charts, or calendars. He also suffers short and long term memory loss should get it checked out . . . .

    • Andy says:

      “If we are approaching getting lower ice extent than last year, then surely the ice condition is getting worse, isn’t it?”

      If it happens then yes, though year on year is not a good way of looking at things due to the short time scale. Overall trends matter.


    • spike55 says:

      PioMESS has always been a load of basic nonsense, griff.

      But its all you can manage.

      Looks like minimum will be just less than 5 Wadhams,

      NO trend over 10 + years

      5 x “ice free™”

      And as you should be well aware by now if you were not terminally DUMB,

      Current levels are still in the top 10% of the last 10,000 years.

      But you continue to play the wilfully BLIND MONKEY on that fact , don’t you griff.

    • Disillusioned says:

      GRIFF! Your religious masters’ predictions have FAILED! What part of that don’t you understand?!?!

      They were WRONG! CO2 isn’t doing what Arrhenius hypothesized! You’re worshiping a FAILED hyped-pothesis. Get over it!

  5. Johansen says:

    Hansen obviously has a high opinion of himself. Keep sticking it in and twisting.

  6. mwhite says:

    Still heading to the North West passage

    • Stewart Pid says:

      The sailors of saildog are sitting off Barrow Alaska now …. sailing speed = 0.0
      Some nasty ice up ahead for them but maybe by Sept they could make it through.
      They need the Grifftard to sprinkle his magic ice melting pixy dust and perhaps Reggie & his blowtorch too.

  7. John F. Hultquist says:

    When the “We’re toast” pronouncements were made, “free of ice” meant there would be only water. That was so last century.
    Now, at the urging of an icy-sciencey type dude, ice free means anything under 1 Million kms^2. This has been given the eponymous non-scientific name of “One Wadhams.” [I don’t think he was talking about volume.]

    Now in a new century, to know when to throw the Arctic Has Died Party (AHDP) the date has to be recalculated.
    When will the Arctic Ocean ice descend past One Wadhams?

    Will there be a sight-seeing flight so all the prophets of doom can be present at the time of Rapture?

    • Steven Fraser says:

      The ice threshold associated with the IPCC phrase ‘Nearly Ice-free’ is defined as summers with less than 1Million sq km (1 Wadhams) of extent for 5 years in a row.

  8. arn says:

    The quote at the bottom of the photo “exposes” what Hansen really is.

    “Should more scientists follow James Hansens example and unleash their inner ACTIVIST?”

    He is an activist and politician.
    It was always about politics and activism,
    his was never about science.
    And he then logically has chosen the safest way
    to rip of tax payers money:As politician.
    And that way he has much more influence to keep the taxpayer money flowing
    to climate science and opposing politicians won’t dare to challenge Mr. 100% Wrong prediction and still world best expert Hansen.

  9. Andy says:

    DMI ice thickness is still trailing Bremen sea ice extent graphs, which are more accurate.


    is more accurate than this

    on ice extent, hence their volume values are still dragging……

    Going back to extent the average summer means no record ice extents for another year after 2016 and 2017.

    Given that, considering average weather why has there been no rebound since 2007? I remember skeptics claiming there would be a massive rebound after 2007, which was an unusual year weather wise and made the value low. The extent did creep up again from that but has since continued the trend downwards.

    The freak of 2007 seems to be coming the norm 10 years later. And no rebound in site ……..


    • Gator says:

      We have already had a massive rebound from the lows of this interglacial. Cycles…

      • Andy says:

        Hey Gator

        Do you know what TWUNT means?

        It means you, that is.

        Stop talking bollocks about another subject completely. It’s not relevant.

        Just a hint from a scientist to a Walmart / Mcdonalds drop out



      • spike55 says:

        “It’s not relevant. ”

        You certainly lack any relevance, little andy.

        a rabid climate change denier like you speaking of accuracy, really is quite funny.

        No trend in MASIE or DMI data for at least a decade, little-andy.

        Get over it. and stop sulking.

    • spike55 says:

      yep, the AMO is still hovering around the top of its usually flattish top.

      This is all about the climate glitterati and their projections

      WAY OFF, just like all other projections based on the “global warming” scam

      You do know that Arctic sea ice is still in the top 10% of the last 10,000 years, don’t you little-andy?

      Or are you one of those CLIMATE CHANGE DENIERS we hear so much of.

      • Disillusioned says:

        Methinks there may be 10 years – or more – of bouncing around the top of the AMO to go.

        IOW, we’ll likely have to deal with ignorant natural “CLIMATE CHANGE DENIERS” for quite awhile longer before the climate actually does begin to change.

        Disillusionment is a good thang!

    • Anon says:


      I applaud your careful analysis of the data and the trends, they are well considered. This is commendable.

      But where I begin to take issue is with this statement: “I remember skeptics claiming there would be a massive rebound after 2007, which was an unusual year weather wise and made the value low. The extent did creep up again from that but…”

      Again commendable. You are asking skeptics to actually be accountable for what they say.

      The rub is that accountability ought to go both ways. Who has been held to account the plethora of statements like these?

      North Pole could be ice-free this summer, scientists say (2008)

      Climate change study predicts refugees fleeing into Antarctica

      Climate change will force refugees to move to Antarctica by 2030, researchers have predicted.

      Refugees are expected to move to Antarctica because of the rising temperatures that will see the population of the continent increase to 3.5 million people by 2040. (this is the current population of the state of Connecticut to put that number in perspective)

      I have no need to list the massive number of failed predictions and contradictions posited by the CAGW camp.

      So you “remember skeptics claiming” something that did not come true and are bothered by that… and now seem to want some kind of a dialog and explanation from them. Great!

      Now, lets put the shoe on the other foot. There are a lot of equally inquisitive folks on the anti-CAGW side that would like similar explanations from the CAGW side about the claims and predictions they have been publishing. But all they get is that the “Science is Settled” and they are akin to holocaust deniers for even raising questions.

      If you are looking for a reason why there are so many folks skeptical of CAGW you really just found it.

      Like you, anti-CAGW folks just want answers and accountability.

      *What is funny, is that just like you, I began genuinely and sincerely looking for answers for the many failed predictions and contradictions. And after years of being rebuffed, I had to conclude that there was not any “real there there” so now I have joined the Climate Skeptics side.

      • Anon says:

        Andy, I was trying to be polite above. You come on to this blog, with some fine point about one site having more accurate data than another. Fair enough.

        But, if I do the same on a pro- CAGW site, I get immediately shut down as a denier and then get blacklisted as a commentator. And that is just mentioning a similar fine point.

        Recent example: “Death Valley recorded its hottest ever month this year which broke past records from the 1930s. Has anyone accounted for the effect of the new parking lot and huge Solar Panel array 74 ft from the temperature station and why nearby stations record no such record? (see photo below)

        I got no discussion from this comment and was immediately BANNED. So I think it is kind of ironic that you (and other Griff types) come here and expect a conversation or debate and expect to be taken seriously. The pro – CAGW side offers no such accommodation.

        So I ask: In what world can you post outlandish scientific headlines then shutdown all debate as to their veracity?

        It sticks of dishonesty, unethicalness and outright fraud, all perpetrated by the same folks who rigged an election against Bernie Sanders.

        • RonnyLee says:

          Anon: Thanks for posting this. I Googled the visitor center at Furnace Creek and was able to find the same satellite imagery of the area around the temperature station. If you widen the view just a tad more than your pic, you will also see just to the South, a massive, industrial sized air conditioning unit that keeps those visitors nice and cool during the blazing heat. I wonder if the heat it pumps out warms the area around it any?

  10. gregole says:

    Thanks Tony for keeping us posted on Arctic Ice volume this year. I remember when volume was all the rage some years ago, and it’s good to see you are taking that particular metric seriously enough to focus in on it this year.

    The results have been fascinating: against the numerous predictions of an immanent Arctic melt-down we’ve read about over the years in the established well-researched media, it looks like the opposite is actually happening. Volume, as compared to recent years is actually up, not down. This is news.

    I can’t help but wonder why the volume is so anomalously high this year with CO2 at over 400 ppm; way past the alleged safe level of 350 ppm.

    And as I have noted many times before, I am no Arctic ice expert, just an interested, curious person; but, and I’m going out on a limb here, I have an Arctic ice minimum prediction: This year, 2018, the Arctic will not be ice-free. Arctic ice will cover an area measured in the millions of square kilometers. There’s just too much ice at this point in season for all of it to melt from the super-CO2 charged atmosphere, be blown south by storms, or melted from beneath by warm ocean currents.

    One can’t help but wonder when we will have a free-northwest passage, and an ice-free Arctic. How much CO2 will it take? This year, it looks very much like 400 ppm isn’t enough atmospheric CO2 to do the job, and the high ice extent even seems to suggest that the conjecture that increasing levels of CO2 will equate to lower ice volume is dubious at best. Perhaps, even outright intentional fraud.

    Gosh I hope not. Then what would we blog about in the dog-days of summer?

    • griff says:

      He’s using volume -and the DMI modelled volume at that – because it is the only stat which can give any impression that the ice is not actually entering a worse state year on year.

      The actualities of extent, thickness, age of ice, the record lows in some areas of Arctic seas have all apparently escaped him.

      This has – by his own admission – been a cold year in summer in the central arctic and a cloudy one, yet we already see it has 5th lowest extent. Given a season with ideal melt conditions, we will inevitably see a new 2012. And later a seasonally ice free arctic ocean.

      • spike55 says:

        “And later a seasonally ice free arctic ocean.”


        Get your doctor to change your anti-psychosis meds, griff,

        They are making you hallucinate and drift off into fairy-tale land.

      • Gator says:

        Who gives a sh!t if it is 5th lowest in 39 years? That’s like 4th place in the Indianapolis 500. Who remembers who came in 4th?

        There is currently more ice in the Arctic than the average of the past 9000 years. This puts this year in about 4000th place, or 4000th lowest.

        Why do you hate poor brown people Ms Griff?

        • spike55 says:

          Actually gator, basically ALL the period before the jump into the LIA was of less sea ice extent

          The current would probably be in the range of 9000-9500th lowest place out of 10,000

          • spike55 says:

            There are probably only about 500-600 years of the last 10,000 year with a greater extent than now.

      • Robert Austin says:

        “actually entering a worse state year on year”

        Warmists like griff always start with the unwarranted and scientifically baseless assumption that less Arctic ice is “worse”. Griff, pray-tell, what is the ideal Arctic summer ice extent and volume? Why is the 1979 Arctic ice extent taken as the ideal from which any deviation is taken as catastrophe?

        Tony displays the ludicrous predictions of some of the leading lights of climate science but you deliberately skip over their nonsense in attempts to score some minor points on Tony. You might get more respect if you were to acknowledge that Hansen and his ilk are damaging your cause and the image of science in general.

      • gregole says:

        Read for comprehension Griff. Your comment, directed to me, suffers from nit-picking and misdirection.

        I don’t care what metric is used to measure Arctic ice. Some may be modeled. Some may be observed from above by satellites. And for historic reference, I suppose some may be inferred from anecdotal evidence. And where long-term ice is over land, ice cores.

        And there’s possibly more ways of measuring ice I haven’t listed, because again, and I’ll repeat, I don’t care. All of them have built-in assumptions; all have error bars; all may have some merit in understanding Arctic Ice.

        All fascinating I’m sure to professional experts, and expert amateurs. I am neither. I just want to know why there is so much ice in the Arctic with CO2 at 400 ppm, 50 ppm above the safe limit. I want to know why, by any measure, that there is an enormous slab of ice floating on the Arctic ocean right now and it’s blocking the NW passage and at it’s minimum in a few weeks, it will be measured in millions of square km.

        There’s plenty of ice in the Arctic this year by any measure – in fact too much ice for an ice-free Arctic in September.

        Here’s an exercise to help you to visualize how much ice is in the Arctic at the minimum: Take an ice-extent of your choice at the minimum. It will be expressed in units of squared distance: something like km^2. Find yourself a map of the country you live in and note the scale – it will be in units of length per length something like x-centimeters = x kilometers; or x inches = x miles.

        Now here’s the trick – draw a circle representing the Arctic ice area at the same scale, and I know the actual Arctic Ice isn’t really a circle but this is just an exercise in visualization. To do this you will need to know the formula for the area of a circle which is the mathematical constant Pi (approximated to 3.14159) times the radius^2. You can search the internet to verify this.

        Cut out your circle.

        So you have a map of your country of residence, and a circle drawn at the same scale as your map. Place the cut-out paper circle on your map and see how much of your country would be covered in ice at the Arctic minimum.

        My country of residence is the U.S. and I did this in 2012 at the minimum. The Arctic ice minimum was an enormous patch of ice. You’ll see what I mean when I say “There’s plenty of ice in the Arctic.”

        And volume could be treated in a similar fashion. Simply choose a suitable thickness, and repeat the above exercise by first translating volume into area; then area into a suitably scaled circle to match your country.

        Let’s look forward a few weeks to the actual minimum, we’ll probably we’ll get it in September this year. Keep your eye on that Arctic ice – the remote far north will have started it’s march into night as the seasons change above the Arctic circle. And Arctic ice will grow, it will rapidly grow. It doesn’t hover around some minimum value – it bottoms out like in inverse peak and shoots practically straight up as September progresses to October and so forth.

        This is a key metric many of us ignore; this blog tracks the ice turnaround, but you won’t see many others. I find this lack of attention peculiar. Because it’s the formation of new ice that will determine if we have an ice-free Arctic. By my rough reckoning, and I certainly do not intend to spend time doing a proper math-model of this, it would be something (very roughly) in the range of 4 X 10^6 km less ice at the maximum before we’d get an ice-free Arctic.

        And while we’re having this nice discussion, don’t forget that you owe me numbers on how much additional CO2 we’ll need to melt all the ice in the Arctic, and when you think that will happen. I can wait until the discussion erupts in September. And when all that ice is gone, I’d like to know your forecasts for tipping points once all the Arctic ice is gone.

        And don’t you think this is the greatest blog on the internet? Please do hit the tip jar now and then to help keep this going!

        • spike55 says:

          Just for reference, 1 Wadham (1 million km²) is about 3 times the size of Germany, and 5 times the area of the total UK.

          Estimating the September minimum of just under 5 Wadhams, that will be about 14 times the area of Germany, and around 18-19 times the area of the total UK.

          There is still one HECK OF A LOT of Arctic sea ice up there.

    • spike55 says:

      “yet we already see it has 5th lowest extent”


      There are approx. 9000 out of the past 10,000 years that had lower extent

      Arctic sea ice is still in the top 10% of the last 10,000 years.

      The ONLY time it has been higher was during the ANOMALOUSLY COLD LIA, and the 1970’s when the extent was nearly as high as the LIA extent

      In the last decade, there has been no further RECOVERY to the much lower average Holocene extent.

      The world truly is at a COLD period in the current interglacial.

      You are a deceitful, lying, extremely ignorant CLIMATE CHANGE DENIER, griff.

  11. Mr. Sir says:

    Maybe I’m looking at this wrong, but looking at the sea ice extent graphs, it appears to be far below the 1981-2010 median, so the arctic isn’t really “recovering”.

    • Anon says:

      Mr. SirGood observation! I saw that too. Now imagine you compared it with the 1978-1982 median: the Arctic would appear to be in real trouble then. As a scientist, the next question I would ask is: What is the 1981-2000 period indicative of exactly?

      If you are doing coastal tide gauge research, because the oceans cycle through periods of warming and cooling over about 6 decades (multi-decadal oscillations) you have to be very cautious about making trend claims. Because of this most scientists agree that a tide gauge is not indicative of a long-term tide trends unless it has been recording data for a minimum of 60 years (so as to be sure it includes at least one such oscillation). Otherwise you may confuse any possible long term trend you see in the tide gauge with a normal oscillation.

      Even with one 60 year interval recorded, all you can do is track the newest oscillation with the previous one, which is why tide gauges with a 120 year recording history are the Gold Standard.

      With all the NASA / NOAA data shenanigans I have seen,

      Here is an example:

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

      *In the video above they deliberately hide the pre-1980 Hurricane Data.

      So, I would bet that the 1981 – 2000 average was chosen for a political vs scientific reason.

      I hope that helps to clarify things.

    • spike55 says:


      What you need to understand is that the late 1970s was the EXTREME, the anomaly, up there with the extents of the Little Ice Age

      The LIA is NOT where we want the global temperature to be. !!

    • spike55 says:

      You also need to understand that the extent around the 1930s,40s was similar to now.

    • spike55 says:

      You need to get things into perspective,

      The “recovery” has been the slow loss of sea ice down towards a more normal Holocene level from the extreme highs of the late 1970s. The Arctic sea ice is still in the top 10% of the last 10,000 years. That recovery has, unfortunately, stalled.

      The Medieval Warm Period had less sea ice, and the previous 9000 or so even less again

      It was the LIA and the mid/late 1970s that was anomalously high.

      Current is still quite HIGH in the real scheme of things.

  12. griff says:;topic=2223.0;attach=106177

    5th lowest extent, still falling, looking as if it is heading for 4th.

    • spike55 says:


      There are about 9000 years of the last 10000 that have a lesser extent

      Stop being a MORONIC IGNORANT LIAR, griff.

  13. Psalmon says:

    NASA formally celebrats a skeptic.

    For the launch of the Parker Solar Probe, they invited now 91 year old Eugene Parker who first postulated a “Solar Wind”. The AP reports:

    “Sixty years ago, a young astrophysicist at the University of Chicago, Eugene Parker, proposed the existence of solar wind. Many were skeptical and told him to read up on it first “so you don’t make these killer mistakes,” he recalls. Vindication came with NASA’s Mariner 2 spacecraft in 1962. Parker is now 91 years old and at Cape Canaveral with his family to witness his first launch — a Delta IV Heavy rocket with the spacecraft bearing his name. It’s the first time NASA has named a spacecraft after someone who’s still alive.

    The irony here is too large to calculate.

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.