End Of The Arctic Ice Scam

North Pole May Be Ice-Free for First Time This Summer

Ten years ago, I wrote my first article exposing the melting Arctic scam. The scam is on its last legs.

Ocean and Ice Services | Danmarks Meteorologiske Institut

Very cold, northerly winds east of Greenland are driving sea ice extent graphs nearly vertical.

Ventusky – Wind, Rain and Temperature Maps

This will become particularly problematic for climate fraudsters like Jennifer Francis and Michael Mann, who have been blaming the Polar Vortex on missing sea ice.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

69 Responses to End Of The Arctic Ice Scam

  1. RAH says:

    And so the Arctic will leave the headlines for awhile and global warming will move elsewhere. Alaska will be on the slate since next month a ridge brining unseasonably warm temperatures there is likely to form next month. It will be one of those times when temperatures here in Indiana and to the NE will be colder than they are in Alaska.

    the scam never ends. It just changes the place it focuses on.

  2. Disillusioned says:

    Although their publicly funded, pal-reviewed pseudoscience is imploding, the MSM have been silent for over a decade, and instead, they keep propping it up – still pumping out the Party Line of AGW (Climate Change ™) hysteria.

    But, they have a lot in their disfavor. First, the Sun is spotless; it is not cooperating with their CO2-is-to-blame hyped-pothesis. On top of that, the very natural cycle that allowed the scam to flourish in the first place will reverse course sometime over the next decade, or so. So, this “tipping point” fraud is at a tipping point itself.

    When the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation naturally changes course, this Titanic [CO2-caused-it-and-warming-is-unstoppable-without-carbon-taxes-and-windmills] fascist scam will go down to the bottom very fast. Naturally.

    The Jim Joneses at the top of this fraud know that their gravy train is barrelling toward a granite wall – and they know that there is nothing they can do now but keep up the Big Lie and keep pushing for their larger, global government panacea until impact.

    Their deceived sheep [I used to be one] are completely unaware.

    • Anon says:

      This is how they are attempting to do just that:

      OLD – PAST CENTERED:

      The definition of ‘climate’ adopted by the World Meteorological Organisation is the average of a particular weather parameter over 30 years. It was introduced at the 1934 Wiesbaden conference of the International Meteorological Organisation (WMO’s precursor) because data sets were only held to be reliable after 1900, so 1901 – 1930 was used as an initial basis for assessing climate. It has a certain arbitrariness, it could have been 25 years.

      ADJUSTMENT:

      For its recent 1.5°C report the IPCC has changed the definition of climate to what has been loosely called “the climate we are in.” It still uses 30 years for its estimate of global warming and hence climate – but now it is the 30 years centred on the present.

      NEW – PAST & FUTURE CENTERED

      Global warming is now defined by the IPCC as a speculative 30-year global average temperature that is based, on one hand, on the observed global temperature data from the past 15 years and, on the other hand, on assumed global temperatures for the next 15 years. This proposition was put before the recent IPCC meeting at Incheon, in the Republic of Korea and agreed as a reasonable thing to do to better communicate climate trends. Astonishingly, this new IPCC definition mixes real and empirical data with non-exiting and speculative data and simply assumes that a short-term 15-year trend won’t change for another 15 years in the future.

      https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/10/29/moving-the-goalposts-ipcc-secretly-redefines-what-climate-means/

      • arn says:

        That’s a fantastic idea:
        By using 15 years of already tampered data of the past and mixing them with 15 years of inexistent data they can make up as they like ,
        they will always get the results they want.

        They should also be paid that way.
        One half of the money they get should depend on how good their models predicted the past 15 years,(a 98% cut
        should be fair and scientific)
        the other half of the money they will receive in 15 years,depending on how good their models worked from 2018-2033.

      • Disillusioned says:

        Anon, Thanks for that article. Gotta give ’em props for how desperately they want to keep the Titanic on course. But it is still barrelling toward that proverbial wall out in the middle of the Atlantic. At some point within the next 15 years, the AMO will drop below the median and begin in its ~35-year colder-than-average half of the cycle.

        • Robert Austin says:

          Astonishingly, this new IPCC definition mixes real and empirical data with non-exiting and speculative data

          After following this subject since McIntyre/ McKitrick showed the flagrant abuse of science and statistics by the dendro community, the egregious manipulations of activist “scientists” no longer astonishes. For me, now it is good unbiased science that astonishes.

      • RW says:

        30 is also about the minimum size a sample, drawn from any shaped distribution of a random variable, can be used to compute an average that itself will be distributed pretty close to Normal. So there could well be some method in that madness…

    • The_Oracle says:

      Yep. It’s not surprising so many young people buy into it – they’re still thinking they can “change the world”, a world they’ve been told will vanish without their help. But the pathetic part is that so many otherwise reasonably intelligent grown-ups accept the myth of “global warming”. That’s scary.

  3. Steven Fraser says:

    And, for sea ice volume on November 22: DMI reports 14,414 cu km, 99.1% of the 16-year reporting period average for the day.

    • David A says:

      Yet since it is predicted to almost vanish in 15 years, thn currently we have 1000% more sea ice then average. ( based on the last 15 years and our predictions 15 years out)

      Thanks Anon, now I know how to get my answers.

  4. Mark Felkins says:

    Hahahaha I wish I have a headache over it now. The new Scam is the Sun Spots are appearing and the sun is going dormant for awhile this year. We’re starting a mini ice age yep a mini ice age! Mean while the reactors a Fukushima are spewing radiation everywhere and into our oceans, selling contaminated food to Americans. I bet most of them will get cancer who eat that food. And Most of California is contaminated with nuclear fallout ! And nobody cares! All the beaches are covered with nuclear fallout, most fish are contaminated, what to the libs to rasied the legal amount you can safely eat! Truth is none of it is good for you!

    • Mark Frost says:

      You got something wrong there… The Sun is not getting more Sun spots… it’s getting fewer. Do some research.. many scientific institutes and College research groups have published articles about this.

      • The_Oracle says:

        You’re correct. As an amateur radio operator, I’m acutely aware of the current abysmal RF propagation now, based on the low sun spot rate.

    • spike55 says:

      Your tin foil hat is leaking, Melkin !!

      Most of California is contaminated by socialism and leftism.

    • Gator says:

      Alien Structures On The Moon!
      November 8, 2018 Mark A. Felkins

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVSRm80WzZk

    • sunsettommy says:

      What are you drinking Mark?

      The Nuclear fallout hasn’t done much beyond a few dozen miles from the shore, you are showing how little you think, because that small fallout into a massive water basin will be well diluted in a short time.

      No the state of California is not endangered by what happened in Japan, stop being pulled by the nose over stupid ecoloonie claims!

      • RAH says:

        Any way one cuts it, building a nuclear facility on the ring of fire or any area with elevated seismic activity is not a good idea.

        The ring of fire seems to be getting more active. There were 65 significant volcanic eruptions along the ring of fire during the entire 20th century. In the first 18 years of this century there have already been 25.

  5. Josef says:

    Coldest Thanksgiving In 150 Years As Northeast Hit By “Siberian” Temperatures
    ‎11‎/‎23‎/‎2018‎ ‎12‎:‎34‎:‎11‎ ‎AM · 26 of 31

    Unfortunately there will be more to come and whatever is triggering these crazy weather patterns pretty much world wide, has also been triggering an increase in earthquake activities as well as volcanic eruptions. After checking various historic accounts, my hunch is that once again we may be looking at a repetition or anniversary of the 3600 signature cycle which last time triggered the Ten Plagues (1500 B.C.)(1500 + 2018=3518 approx.) and drove the then Pharaoh nuts and resulted in the release of the Jews from captivity and became known as the Exodus.
    The catch is that these plagues in some form or another were not just limited to ancient Egypt but from some not easily obtainable records we find that ancient China had suffered from them as well. If this is the case and will materialize all we can hope for is that this cycle will be less destructive. Aside from that I believe that Global Warming will be the least of our problem.

  6. Mike Hilbert says:

    Weather Manipulation! Global warming is a great cover story.

  7. Florida Jim says:

    Everything Democrats, Socialists and Marxists touch is collapsing around them and they have no where to turn their billionaires don’t like them and will not associate with them any more than they do the San Francisco “feces” dwellers.Democrats are unlikable even among themselves.Here’s how global warming began under FDR:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmqqRF9lkfw Mark Levin and Patrick J.
    Michael’s a Professor and debunker of the global warm scam . This man
    has no ax to grind and fully debunks the lies of global warming which
    has been proven o be lies from the United Nations dolts, professor.s
    receiving grants to say what the global warming lovers want to sustain
    the lies. Massive phony models used to rape taxpayers and enrich the
    United Nations, Democrats, and the entire government employee system, at
    every level, depending upon an endless source of taxes to keep their
    jobs and pensions in tact.This should end the debate. Ho ho Jim
    Started by FDR to provide endless jobs for Democrats

    The federalization of science adds 50% to every job https://nsf.gov/od/lpa/nsf50/vbush1945.htm
    Another massive Democratic scam raping taxpayers since 1940

    • James says:

      The vote for leftist is NOT collapsing. Which is the greatest global scare that allows all other scares.

      • Richard Broberg says:

        You can thank public education for the liberal brainwashing of students.

      • arn says:

        1)stuff ballots

        2)controle the media and tell people what to vote and think

        3)let illegals vote

        4)create as much poverty as possible and then pretend to help those poor

        5)infiltrate and subvert the school system

        Considering how much effort they put into all of this and the scale
        their voting results are a joke.
        They would lose every election by 20:80 if the system was unrigged.

  8. Tony Swindell says:

    The arctic ice scenario –and global warming — is a political vehicle to advance one-world government.

  9. Dr_Albert_Gortenbull says:

    Meanwhile, Al Gore is enjoying himself at one of his many retreats. Albert

  10. Tim says:

    That’s OK. James Hansen has himself covered and will just revert back to claiming an ice age is coming like he claimed in the 70s. The chumps will continue to believe him and he will say, “See, I was right all along.” Then he will go on to claim how all the BS and costs we are incurring because of the global warming/climate change scam needs to continue because that will also prevent the coming ice age from happening.

  11. jack says:

    al gore got rich off it ! and THAT !!! is a fact !!!

    • Brian J McNamara says:

      Rich-er… his family was already rich. How did they get rich? Bituminous coal mining. Once they made their stack off of the exploitation of natural resources, they decided that nobody else should have the same chance. He’s a perfect poster boy for the scam.

      • Jason Calley says:

        Don’t forget all the money the Gore family made from growing and selling tobacco. Even while Al was preaching against smoking, he and his family were still bringing in all that sweet Tennessee tobacco profit.

        Of course not just anyone can legally grow tobacco. You have to be in possession of a special governmentally granted license — which his politically well connected family just happened to have.

        Calling him a thieving hypocrite is a slur against thieving hypocrites everywhere.

  12. Fritz-Von-Dago (@PunchaLoon) says:

    A Common Truth: Just like with people when you torture numbers long enough, you get the answers you want!

  13. Jess says:

    The sad thing is that there are millions of gullible sycophants unwilling to temper their beliefs with facts. I can understand their initial perception, since there is a strong effort to subvert science; like many times in the past. Unfortunately, false beliefs lead to societal extremism, and some become violent. Their efforts become as backwards as those wanting to rid the world of dangerous witches.

  14. Prof Stev says:

    Come on. Seriously? The graph is only showing data from the last 37 years. And it’s still showing a ~30% reduction in sea ice this year. Calling someone a fraudster in an article about science is a pretty good indication that you’re full of s.

    8 paragraph articles from websites that look like their next publication will be about how evolution isn’t real. Cherry picking data about sea ice extent during a cold front isn’t a convincing way to go about an argument.

    What about all the glaciers receding around the world?

    What about plants surviving in habitats they didn’t 50 years ago?

    What about plagues killing wildlife in Siberia because 1000s years old permafrost is melting and exposing diseases?

    What about coral reefs bleaching because the oceans are warming?

    I need some convincing…

    • tonyheller says:

      Your mindless hysteria is noted.

    • Gator says:

      You need deprogramming. You have mindlessly bought into alarmist hype, and don’t even realize you are presenting cherry picked scenarios, right after you accused Tony of cherry picking.

      When you can present a coherent comment, please do.

    • RAH says:

      What about plagues killing wildlife in Siberia because 1000s years old permafrost is melting and exposing diseases?

      How did the pathogens causing the diseases you claim get buried in the permafrost in the first place? Could it have been because it was warmer at some previous time long due to natural variation before the industrial revolution or even the use of fossil fuels. Na! That couldn’t be the reason now could it? LOL!

      I could go through and poke big holes in the rest of hysterical rantings but why bother since you aren’t even smart enough to have figured out what I just pointed out for you on your own.

    • Jason Calley says:

      Hey Prof Stev! Just a polite question for you… Are you really a professor? If so, what field are you a professor in?

      Thanks!

    • oldbrew says:

      How’s that overdue ice-free Arctic looking, Prof?

    • Anon says:

      ProfStev,

      I was a university CAGW educator, with a terminal degree in the fundamental sciences. After Wikileaks broke, I was very upset at what happened to Bernie Sanders and began reading through the emails in earnest. Then this caught my eye:

      WikiLeaks Exposes Podesta-Steyer Climate McCarthyism
      h**ps://www.nationalreview.com/2016/10/wikileaks-john-podesta-silenced-climate-change-dissent/

      I was at the point of giving up on our political system and thought for a long time about that Pielke Jr. article. Why would Podesta be interested in Pielke? If the Democrats had no problem corrupting an election, what regard would they have for the climate record? It all seemed too unbelievable. But finally, after enough doubts accumulated, I decided to take a “weekend” and debunk all of the Climate Skeptic arguments. I thought it would be easy as dealing with the Creationists and Flat Earthers and I owed it to my students, to rebuild the CAGW hypothesis from the bottom up. Then I ran into scores of articles like these, that were unbeknown to me (not reported in the MSM I was consuming):

      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.

      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.

      h**p://blog.friendsofscience.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Lindzen12-March-ClimateScienceNOTansweringQ.pdf

      Censorship and Intimidation in Climate Science.
      Willie Soon, PhD Harvard & Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

      https://youtu.be/aYAy871w9t8

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

      https://www.wsj.com/video/opinion-journal-how-government-twists-climate-statistics/80027CBC-2C36-4930-AB0B-9C3344B6E199.html

      As a fundamental research scientist, with a lot of faith in the peer review system, I found all of this very troubling to say the least. And the more I pulled on each thread, the more and more the CAGW hypothesis began to unravel.

      I am at the point now where I have withdrawn from educating students about CAGW. Until all of the above can be explained and accounted for, I feel it is simply immoral to educate future generations about a topic I myself cannot understand. I can teach spectroscopy and quantum mechanics with little problem, however CAGW is beyond my capability.

      I wish you the best of luck on whatever journey you are on… but after an exhaustive review of the CAGW literature and IPCC reports, I am out.

      • Anon says:

        Furthermore, how do you account for presenting the graph below as meaningful? I was using it in my classes:

        NOAA : Hiding Critical Arctic Sea Ice Data

        https://youtu.be/nIEGo8E9s_8

        Or the fact that you can’t find sea level rise acceleration on any longterm high quality tide gauges:

        Fake News About Sea Level Rise

        https://youtu.be/K4Wx_FnCW6I

        And this fact, as elucidated by Heller above, is reported in the IPCC, if you bother to read the 100s of pages of reviewer comments, never reported by the MSM who insist on a 97% consensus: (pg #3)

        Good quality graphs of full-length tide gauge records from high-quality tide stations are absolutely essential for “grounding” the reader’s understanding of sea level, in particular the (lack of) response (thus far) in rate of SLR to GHG forcings… The omission of such graphs appears calculated to hide the fact that, thus far, sea level rise has not increased in response to GHG forcings, and will surely be powerful ammunition for critics of the IPCC and its reports.

        And then you move on to the East Anglia Climate Unit email hacks:

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

        h**ps://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2013/02/05/in-their-own-words-climate-alarmists-debunk-their-science/#70f6c7f768a3

        I used to think it was a moral obligation to teach CAGW, but now I believe it is unethical.

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      Professor, there are things even worse than plague in Siberia. Global warming will kill 4.5 billion people and the rest of us will spend our days in violent fights over beer shortage.

    • spike55 says:

      You want longer period of Arctic sea ice.

      How about this one showing that the current level is actually within the top 10% of the last 10,000 years, and only just a small amount down from the extremes of the little ice age.

      If you pretend to be a Prof. then you should allow yourself to be SO IGNORANT. !!

      • spike55 says:

        NSIDC Arctic extent just jumped above that of 2000.

        It has had the fastest growing “same 4 weeks” of any year back to at least 1988

    • spike55 says:

      “What about all the glaciers receding around the world?”
      Revealing tree stumps. You do know many of those glaciers didn’t exist before the LIA cold anomaly, don’t you?

      What about plants surviving in habitats they didn’t 50 years ago?
      And this is a bad thing.. HOW?
      What have you got against plant life?

      What about plagues killing wildlife in Siberia because 1000s years old permafrost is melting and exposing diseases?
      How did those bugs get there? Must have been when it was MUCH warmer, hey.

      What about coral reefs bleaching because the oceans are warming?
      Coral reefs have been around for millions of years , they survived the Holocene Optimum. Bleaching is a natural occurrence, and in the case of the recent GBR bleaching, was due to the El Nino causing a drop in water levels exposing the upper surface of the reef to more sun than it was used to, and still currents not providing food.. It is now rapidly recovering.

      For a so-called Prof.. you seem to be particularly IGNORANT.

      • Disillusioned says:

        Prof Stev said: “What about all the glaciers receding around the world?”

        spike55 says: “Revealing tree stumps. You do know many of those glaciers didn’t exist before the LIA cold anomaly, don’t you?”

        Nope. He doesn’t know about stumps under the ice, and doesn’t care to know that glaciers aren’t permanent, nor that they have grown and receded throughout the millenia.

        Prof Stev said: “What about plants surviving in habitats they didn’t 50 years ago?”

        spike55 says: “And this is a bad thing.. HOW?”

        Because the climate was perfect in 1968, and so any deviation from that must be bad.

        spike55 says: “What have you got against plant life?”

        If CO2 produces stronger, hardier plants, that is bad news. They produce oxygen, which humans breathe. We must wipe out at least half the human species on earth, in order to protect life on earth.

        Prof Stev said: “What about plagues killing wildlife in Siberia because 1000s years old permafrost is melting and exposing diseases?”

        spike55 says: “How did those bugs get there? Must have been when it was MUCH warmer, hey.”

        Not to that ignorant troll. He clearly believes permafrost is permanent… and that man caused the warmth in this natural cycle. His mind is made up, and despite his disingenuous claim at the end of his rant, he has no interest in being convinced otherwise.

        Prof Stev said: “What about coral reefs bleaching because the oceans are warming?”

        spike55 says: “Coral reefs have been around for millions of years , they survived the Holocene Optimum. Bleaching is a natural occurrence, and in the case of the recent GBR bleaching, was due to the El Nino causing a drop in water levels exposing the upper surface of the reef to more sun than it was used to, and still currents not providing food.. It is now rapidly recovering.

        For a so-called Prof.. you seem to be particularly IGNORANT.”

        It is by choice. He doesn’t care to hear about recovering reefs, or about natural cycles. He’s been told CO2’s magical powers are stronger than and will override natural cycles – although EVERY CAGW projection has failed. The drive-by idiot believes his religious leaders who have lied to him time and again. They have convinced him that a dubious, unproven hypothesis is settled science.

        It is warmer than it was in the 1970s; they claim CO2 caused it and that we’re at a dangerous tipping point. So that settles it. No amount of empirical data will change that closed mind.

        • Jason Calley says:

          Hey Disillusioned! You say, speaking of the Prof’s ignorance, “It is by choice.”

          Yes, exactly. Very few people, scientists included, care enough about the truth to examine ideas with which they currently disagree. For most of us, it is psychologically painful to do so. I have to give a sincere tip of the hat to Anon who has commented above. He is a rare bird who has done something incredibly difficult and unusual; he has re-examined his beliefs.

          • Disillusioned says:

            Jason said, “I have to give a sincere tip of the hat to Anon who has commented above. He is a rare bird who has done something incredibly difficult and unusual; he has re-examined his beliefs.”

            I tip my hat to Anon, also. He and I are kindred spirits.

            I am guilty of giving Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” DVDs to family and friends, and thusly being influential in helping to solidify their beliefs today. Like Anon, I ignorantly, sincerely led ignorant sheep astray.

            Later on, I became disillusioned. Thus, my moniker. After my disillusionment (that was powerful), I tried tirelessly for years – as Anon is doing now – to try and help associates understand why found out I was wrong. That is when I realized, you can’t just show a believer dissenting data. A religious believer must WANT to know the truth beyond all preconceived notions and beyond any/all political and social popularity concerns. OR, they will not become disillusioned.

            IOW, it IS all about CHOICE.

            Thanks for recognizing and honoring our friend Anon. I have found out (disappointingly) that people like Anon – and myself – are indeed the rare exceptions.

          • Gator says:

            What we may lack in conversions, we more than make up for in retention. I have never heard of a skeptic who turned believer. There have been false claims of this, like Muller, but not one example that I can find. Once the truth takes hold, it doesn’t let go.

          • Colorado Wellington says:

            It is by choice. Prof Stev likes to wake up in his bed and believe what he wants to believe. It is more comfortable that way.

          • spike55 says:

            Did I tell y’all I once worked for “Climate Action Newcastle ”

            Heck, even was in one of those anti-CO2 human signs on the beach, once.

            Then I did some research, and I laugh at my past non-thinking gullibility.

    • richard says:

      Prov Stev, difficult to know where to start with your nonsense so let’s just do coral-

      Where man does not go , use pesticides or where coral is protected ( 5% of the world’s coral) it is growing like a forest in pristine condition- see Bikini Atoll Coral or Coral around Cuba.

      Well that is unless you think climate change has the ability to miss out where man does not go, where coral is protected or where pesticides are not used.

    • AndyDC says:

      If you go back and read Tony’s past posts and the irrefutable evidence from unaltered data that he has documented, you would get lots of convincing. But you seem like someone that has already made up your mind, so I seriously doubt that you would have the intellectual curiosity to make that effort.

    • AndyDC says:

      It is a very obvious cherry pick to go back 37 years to start your chart. If you went back 10 years you get a totally different picture and if you went back 80 years you would get a totally different impression. Those impressions would not show significant warming.

    • TimA says:

      From the guy that can’t spell professor…or Steve…

    • steve keohane says:

      Where do you think 6 feet of sea level went in the past 6k years. Hint, Arctic sea ice was much lower to non-existent back then when it was actually warmer. We’ve been cooling for at least 8-10kya.

  15. Steven Fraser says:

    DMI Sea Ice Volume update for Nov 23: Volume now 14,531 cu km, up 117 cu km from the prior day. Growth was 106.40% of the 16-year average growth. Current volume is 99.06% of the 16-year average, ranked #8, and 98.52% of the DMI-charted 10-year reference period 2004-2013.

  16. Jim Hovater says:

    I teach Earth and Space Science. My classes debate the whole glad bal warming issue from all sides. This site has been invaluable as a resource.

  17. Jim Hovater says:

    I teach Earth and Space Science. My classes debate the whole global warming issue from all sides. This site has been invaluable as a resource.

Leave a Reply to David A 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.