New Video : Arctic Refuses To Melt As Ordered

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

58 Responses to New Video : Arctic Refuses To Melt As Ordered

  1. Anon says:

    Hi Tony,

    Thanks for this, I find this kind of linear timeline presentation really valuable, and intend to use it when I talk to people about this.

    I know you are super busy and are doing so much already, so thanks for all of that, but something I think would be very useful would be a timeline of all of the “adjustments and corrections” that have happened over the past decade, laid out the way you did in this video.

    I do something similar now on paper, starting with a statement from Judith Curry in 2015:

    Hiatus controversy: show me the data
    Posted on November 6, 2015
    The bottom line with regards to the hiatus is all of the data sets except for the new NOAA/NCDC data set show a hiatus (with NASA LOTI being the other data set coming closest to not showing a hiatus).

    And then I list all of the adjustments up to the present date… for example:

    1] 2015: Global warming ‘pause’ caused by glitch in data (NOAA/NCDC)
    2] 2017: Major correction to satellite data shows 140% faster warming since 1998 (RSS Troposphere)
    3] 2019: Ocean temperature data shows warming is accelerating faster than we thought (ARGO)
    4] 2019: Heat on Bureau of Meteorology over data records rewrite (Australia Surface Temps)
    5] 2019: Correcting historic sea surface temperature measurements (NOAA/NCAR)

    And I usually include your prediction from 2015 about the need for Mears to adjust the RSS data. And then I conclude the talk with Judith Curry’s statement from 2015 (above) and allow people to draw their own conclusions.

    I have found that people tend to not notice as individual data sets get adjusted, but when it is all laid out in a timeline, that tells a completely different story. And given the supposed dire importance of this science, people are often shocked to learn that every data set has been “adjusted” for various and sundry reasons. Okay, I could see one or two data sets having problems, but all of them? And all result in increasing the amount of warming? This is massively implausible and/or it demonstrates the rank incompetence of the scientists undertaking these studies.)

    Maybe you have done something like this already? And I missed it? But I have been following your work pretty closely and I don’t recall something like this. If so, could you please post the link below this comment, as I definitely could use it.

    And again, thanks for all of your effort and work!

    • RWBenson says:

      I agree with the comment from “Anon”. I, also, would like to have a factual timeline of the adjustments.

      It is also perplexing to me that the adjustments are not accompanied with the logic for the adjustment. I understand that if an adjustment is made to match the hypothesis, you would not expect an explanation. However, good science or good engineering practice always requires details about the logic for adjustments when they are made to the underlying data set.

      • paul courtney says:

        Mr. Benson: The process is thus: 1) Adjustments are made but not announced or explained. 2) Mr Heller and other “science deniers” inquire. 3) The inquiry is ignored. 4) “Science deniers” press for an answer until a response is compelled. 5) They deny the adjustments were ever made and say how “science deniers” are the problem. 6) Repeat 4. 7) They admit the adjustments but don’t issue an explanation. 8) Repeat 4. 9) An explanation finally issued, saying the adjustments were necessary because science. 10) Repeat 4. 11) They announce that some of the adjustments actually lowered the average. Now they open up a bit to show that the “urban heat island” is cause to lower some readings by .5 C. They call Mr. Heller Daffy for suggesting that temps were adjusted up to serve the cause. 12) Mr. Heller shows figures that urban heat effect is much, much larger than .5 C. 13) They deny any adjustments were made, and repeat 3-13.
        As a bonus, NASA and NOAA will substantially cool the 1930s, then use charts starting in 1960 to explain the adjustments were tiny and not substantial at all. This is a Nick Stokes specialty.

    • arn says:

      Good idea.

      It is time for some methodology to illustrate things clearer
      with the most important (failed) predictions.

      The rise and sudden fall of the coming ice age.

      1001 failed predictions from global warming and 2000 moved goalposts.

      Incompetent BS and how to get a noble prize with it(ask Al Gore)

  2. spike55 says:

    GREAT VIDEO, Tony :-)

    That’ll drag the AGW cultist trolls out of their sewer ;-)

  3. KevinPaul says:

    Long after all the inconvenient rubbish has been dumped, what Al Gore will be remembered for most, besides the profiteering, is “The Gore Effect” climate that refuses to obey the hypotheses.

  4. John of Cloverdale, WA, Australia says:

    Excellent video, Tony. Thanks!

  5. John of Cloverdale, WA, Australia says:

    Tony, I am just wondering when renewables will save us from the coming age of continuous heat?
    A recent snapshot below from NYSIO and MISO showing sources of power generation in the eastern US. When the wind don’t blow and the Sun don’t shine ………………………

  6. CheshireRed says:

    Your comment about the scam is unravelling in real time is spot-on and gets to the nub of what’s driving the current ‘climate emergency’ hysteria.

    The real emergency is climate alarmists have seen their claims repeatedly falsified and know time is against them so, they’re ramping up the rhetoric while they can.

    Once the current La Nina returns temps to where they were pre-El Nino the dreaded Pause will return…and this time it’ll be over 20 years old. They know that will well and truly piss on their alarmist chips. They’ll be livid. LOL.

  7. Pam Dennis says:

    From the London Telegraph today- more nonsense.

    ‘Britain is set for the hottest night on record, as the NHS advised it might be better to keep windows closed to fight the sweltering heat.
    Temperatures could remain as high as 24C (75.2F) on Tuesday night for parts of South East England, according to the Met Office.
    The hottest ever UK night time temperature was 23.9C (75C), which was recorded in Brighton on August 3 1990. The hottest July night recorded was 23.3C (73.9F) on July 29 1948, at St James’ Palace, London.
    Under the current heatwave, which is expected to last until the weekend, the mercury could hit 37C (98.6F) on Thursday.’

  8. etudiant says:

    Still seems to be another above prior year melting trend for Arctic ice:
    As long as that continues, there will not be any reappraisal.

  9. Psalmon says:

    Siberian crisis for 2020 in Britain called off…now it is Iberian…

  10. tom0mason says:

    Excellent video again Tony! :-)
    Don’t you just love the way Al Gore can BS with a serious face, the mark of a true sociopath.

  11. rwbenson says:


    Excellent Video. Very factual with a graph that is very difficult to view and not conclude that there are not substantial changes. I especially like the time line of predictions juxtaposed next to the graph.

  12. Mark DeGiorgio says:

    Have you seen this recent report on the bbc, just because we’re having a few days of hot weather!
    Climate change: Current heating ‘unparalleled’ in 2,000 years

  13. SHARK says:

    Al Gore made several speeches about Arctic ice and quoted a range of projections given by various scientists. He didn’t give just one projection, but if you listen to Heller, you’d never know that because he cherry-picked the most damning to make his point. In Inconvenient Truth, Gore mentions one projection of 2050. He quotes other scientists who give different projections, but Tony Heller conveniently doesn’t mention these. He also fails to let his viewers know that at the COP 15 meeting in 2009, Gore said, verbatim: “Some of the models suggest there is a 75% chance that the entire polar ice cap during some of the summer months will be completely ice-free within the next 5-7 years.” But Gore actually mis-quoted the model, which actually predicted that 80% of the ice might be gone in that time and that some would remain beyond 2020.

    In fact, 95% of the Arctic’s oldest, thickest ice is ALREADY gone, by all reports. Heller uses ice extent to fool his viewers, failing to mention that the extent is losing massive VOLUME, while it maintains its thinner breadth. So his graph showing unchanging extent is accurate. But how thick is that ice? He doesn’t show this, nor does he show viewers NASA’s time lapse video of how rapidly that thick ice has vanished. Because that would be damning indeed.

    In fact, in 2017 ships cruised through the Northern route along Russia without icebreakers for the first time in history. Nothing is happening in the Arctic?

    And how about this most recent headline from Barent’s Observer: ‘ ARCTIC SUMMER 2019: RECORD-BEATING HEAT, DRAMATIC ICE LOSS AND RAGING WILDFIRES’

    June 2019 was the warmest June on record for the globe, and that included in the Arctic, smashing the 2016 record. June 2019 had the second smallest sea ice extent in the 41-year record maintained by the National Snow and Ice Data Ctr.

    414 consecutive months with temperatures above the 20th century average. But there’s nothing to see here, right Tony?

      • SHARK says:

        Ice THICKNESS and VOLUME, not extent. Extent is meaningless.

        • spike55 says:

          YAWN, Volume is the same as previous years


          Far more than for over 90% of the last 10,000 years.

          Stop you childish caterwauling.

        • spike55 says:

          “Extent is meaningless”

          SO are your comment.

          They are built on a deep-seated IGNORANCE and a TOTAL DENIAL of climate history.

          Volume.. Ain’t going anywhere either

      • SHARK says:

        Posting that graphic demonstrates once again how poorly informed you are about arctic sea ice. Do you ever investigate beyond the visual gratification of a graphic? Do you ever actually read explanatory data?

        • Gator says:

          Snark cannot read graphs, and must rely on others to tell him what they say is happening. Sad. Snark cannot discern facts, and will remain ignorant for the rest of his ill informed life.

        • spike55 says:

          Real data is an ENEMA to you isn’t it, dog-snark.

          Just makes you produce even more regurgitated garbage from both ends..


          Far more than for all but about 500 years of the last 10,000

  14. spike55 says:

    What an incredibly IGNORANT little rant from the gummy.

    FULL of errors and LIES.

    So Al Gore quoted several “claimate scientists” and they were ALL WRONG.

    Yes, we know that.

    Arctic sea ice is still in the TOP 5-10% of the last 10,000 years.

    (late 1970s was an EXTREME ANOMALOUS HIGH, equal to extents during the LIA)

    There has been NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGE in year Arctic sea ice for well over decade. Volume is about the same as it has been for the last decade or so.

    Little wooden ship, St Roch passed the channel next to Banks Island in 1944, been IMPASSABLE since then, ice-hardened cruise ships have to sneak around through Cambridge Bay.

    Very little chance ANY will get through this years, the Canadian Archipelago is CHOCK FULL of sea ice.

    June 2019 WAS NOT the warmest June on record.

    That is a LIE based on fabricated data.

    Nor was it extra warm in the Arctic, as shown in the chart below.

    Your continued DENIAL of basic historical facts, and total incapability of actually LEARNING anything makes you sound like a cross between a headless chock and a Norwegian Blue .

    Are you vying to be the most wilfully ignorant, uneducated, gullible smuck on the planet?

    Your comments put you well in the running.

    You are the very epitome of CLIMATE CHANGE DENIER.

  15. KevinPaul says:

    We’re not children sitting at the feet of Tony’s mat. We can think for ourselves. Many of us were believers, long before we realised climate variability was being used as a tool for political and social engineering.
    I admire Tony because he endures the disrespect and malice of people like you, in order to honour the memory of a man who was a true scientist, one who held his integrity to science above his belly or prestige, and a man whom your most honoured Gore walked all over.

  16. spike55 says:

    WOW, there is one heck of a lot of Arctic sea ice up there

    Canadian Archipelago is chock full of sea ice as well

  17. SHARK says:

    HAHA! LOL! HAVE YOU TOLD THE MILITARIES OF THE WORLD WHO ARE RUSHING TO THE ARCTIC TO PREPARE FOR ITS OPENING? What a pack of nitwits. And you all reinforce each other’s idiocy.

    • gregole says:

      Military forces rushing to the Arctic? Really. How about some evidence.
      What Arctic opening? There’s plenty of ice in the Arctic.
      Submarines maybe.

    • spike55 says:

      You mean the the Russians building HUGE nuclear powered Ice-Breakers

      You are a mindless, ignorant DOLT !

  18. SHARK says:

    Rising to Heller’s red herrings like trained seals. Pitiful.

    • Gator says:

      That article is pure BS. It states that ice is melting due to industrialization, yet not once has anyone ever shown this to be true. There is zero empirical evidence that man made CO2 is effecting our climate, and natural variability has never been disproven.

      Your link is to an article written by a very ignorant person. Why would I accept the opinion of a know nothing?

      Military activity is also on the rise in the South China Sea. Is this because the ice melted there? I cannot recall an ice cap on the South China Sea, maybe Snark can illuminate us with another piece of leftist propaganda from the Grauniad.

    • spike55 says:

      One way to continue your ABJECT IGNORANCE is to read articles from the Gruniad. !

      The epitome of FAKE NEWS. !

  19. SHARK says:

    See NASA Time Lapse Video of Arctic Ice and try to swallow your Dunning-Kruger pride.
    Then check these headlines out:














    • Gator says:

      Snark, there is currently more ice in the Arctic than the average of the past 9,000 years.

      Your caps lock only shows you have nothing to say, and that you are an ignorant bore.

      Dunning-Kruger is “a cognitive bias in which people mistakenly assess their cognitive ability as greater than it is. It is related to the cognitive bias of illusory superiority and comes from the inability of people to recognize their lack of ability. Without the self-awareness of metacognition, people cannot objectively evaluate their competence or incompetence”.

      Snark, you are psychologically projecting once again. You are clearly unaware that there is nothing unusual or unprecedented about our climate, or the ice in the Arctic. Your ignorance bonafides have been duly noted, you can stop now.

    • spike55 says:


      and you believe all this yelling and ranting PROPAGANDA without even CHECKING FACTS. !!

      So FUNNY.

      No wonder your mind is in such a state of DEEP-SEATED SIMPLE-MINDED IDIOCY. !!

      1. Pompeo. New opportunities.. Yes, there is WAY TOO MUCH sea ice up there to do anything at the moment.

      2. Russia has always out-numbered USA by a large number of high-powered Icebreakers, they OWN a large proportion of the Arctic coastline, they are building several HUGE nuclear powered ice breakers in an attempt to overcome the large amounts of sea ice up.

      They want LESS SEA ICE.

      3.Arctic sea ice is STILL in the top 5-10% of the last 10,000 years. It has NOT declined in the last decade at all. The late 1970s was a short period of ANOMALOUS and EXTREME HIGH extent only seen before during the Little Ice Age.

      4. Not much melting in the Arctic basin this year, little gummy, more now than there was 2 weeks ago. Siberian sea is about normal for the last 10 years

      5. Russians show there is STILL a lot of old ice up there

      6. June was NOT the hottest June even in the tiny 40 years of untampered data.
      Was warmer for probably 90-95% of the last 10,000 years
      Was almost certainly warmer during the 1930s,40s.

      7. CR is showing a drop in temperature for July so far.

      8. Media Bias/Fact check by a bunch of far left-wing ignorant dolts, who would LIE to their grandmother.. They wouldn’t have a CLUE what a fact is or what science is. Very much like you. CLUELESS..

      I really hope this deep-seated PANIC and MINDLESS ANTI-SCIENCE, ANTI-FACT RANTING yours continues.

      Its HILARIOUS to see someone so DUMB and IGNORANT and GULLIBLE.

  20. SHARK says:

    When you’re done performing your mental gymnastics to try to explain NASA’s Time Lapse Video of Arctic Ice, check out BIOMASS MONTHLY THICKNESS ANIMATION, 1979-2017

    AVERAGE ARCTIC SEA ICE VOLUME JUNE 2019 “Monthly volume was 32% below the maximum in 1979 and 29% below the mean for 1979-2018.”

    • Gator says:

      And yet still above the average of the past 9000 years.

      Which is greater Snark? 40 years or 9000 years? Why would you choose to eliminate 9960 years of ice? Science denier much? LOL

      • SHARK says:

        9000 years? Of course, Gator. The Early Holocene Insolation Maximum was due to Earth’s precession, its axis tilted so the northern hemisphere was closer to the sun in summer, resulting in warming and Arctic ice melt, but none of the Milankovitch Cycles are in play today to cause the melting we’re seeing. So once again, you’re blinded by graphs that don’t tell the whole story, the problem of everyone on this site who refuse to conduct actual research and rely instead on misleading graphs, pseudoscientific Wattsupwiththat and cherry-picking master Tony Heller.

        • spike55 says:


          Mr ZERO EVIDENCE rants again

          You are such an EMPTY P.O.S.

          Dog-shark droppings at best.

          You have not presented ONE TINY BIT OF REAL SCIENCE in all your crazed , demented rantings.

          I doubt you have even the vaguest clue what real science is.

          Just REGURGITATE that AGW mantra offal

      • Gator says:

        Snark, why would it matter how it got warmer? You guys claim there is a tipping point, and clearly we are nowhere near it. Your claim to know why it was warmer is BS. Unless you can…

        1- List all climate forcings, order them from most to least effectual, and then quantify them all.

        2- Please provide even one peer reviewed paper that refutes natural variability as the cause of recent, or any, global climate changes.

        There is nothing unusual or unprecedented about our climate, or how we got here. For 4,500,000,000 years climates have always changed, naturally. This means there has been a set precedent, and the burden of proof falls on natural climate change deniers like yourself.

        You claim to have all the answers, so let’s go skippy!

        • spike55 says:

          I wonder if the poor gummy snark has any idea just how much damage his ignorance does to the AGW cult cause.

          People see his sort of blind unthinking regurgitation of basic anti-science fallacies / mantra, and must surely laugh at the idiocy !

          People can see his ilk ranting and raving , but TOTALLY INCAPABLE of answering simple scientific questions about even the most basic facets of climate.

          His posts really are the stupidest, most ignorant posts I’ve seen in a long time, even considering that griffool twerp.

    • spike55 says:

      Again with the abject IGNORANCE that the late 1970s was a period where the Arctic sea ice was at an EXTREME ANOMALOUS HIGH, not seen since the Little Ice Age.

      That high period was the out-rider, and the current level is STILL in the top 5% or so of the last 10,000 years

      STOP being a wilfully ignorant stooge. !!

      Try to learn at least something REAL in your pathetic existence.

      There has been no change in the last 10 or more years as the AMO levelled off, but that that AMO is starting to cycle back down.. is that what is causing your panic. ?

      You can see your mindless socialist agenda and idiotic anti-science propaganda will shortly come to an end against a wall of reality.

      And you will skulk back into your sewer infested troll hole to wallow in your ignorance.

      • SHARK says:

        Arctic Sea ice was remarkably stable over most of the 20th century but after that “anomalous high of the 70s,” the volume dipped precipitously, as it continues to do today. We don’t measure climate change or Arctic ice by normal variables over a three or four year period, Spike. We measure globally over decades. The relevant long-term, multi-decadal trend is down. And the northern hemisphere is no longer tilted toward the sun in summer, as it was during the Holocene, the explanation for Arctic ice melt during that period. Who exactly is the ignorant stooge here?

        • spike55 says:

          WRONG as always.

          Why keep doubling down on your manic deranged ignorance little toady?

          Looks like IGNORANCE is your only support mechanism .

          Ove the longer period, Arctic sea ice has expanded massively up to a peak in the LIA, followed by another peak extreme in the late 1970.

          You really have to go and get at least a base level primary school education before your next post, because you showing yourself to be WOEFULLY IGNORANT of basically everything.

        • spike55 says:

          Great to see you FINALLY admitting that Arctic sea ice was MUCH LESS during most of the first 9000 or so years of the last 10,000

          Took you long enough o learn such a basic fact.

          Now to your next lesson. Do try harder this time.

          Let’s see you produce some empirical evidence of warming by increased atmospheric CO2.

          Take your time… go and look up what empirical means .

          Then get back to us with another of your mindless anti-science rant. ;-)

        • neal s says:

          shark wrote “And the northern hemisphere is no longer tilted toward the sun in summer, ”

          It wouldn’t be summer in a given hemisphere, if it is NOT tilted toward the sun.

          How many times must CAGW climate scientists make failed predictions before the willingly ignorant and gullible shark will finally realize it is being lied to by them?

          How many times must the current lies from various ‘respected’ organizations, not match the previous lies from those same organizations, until shark realizes that those ARE lies?

        • SHARK says:

          To clarify, the northern hemisphere’s summer in the Holocene occurred when the earth was closer to the sun, the reverse of today, and I know my previous post will be twisted because of the use of the word “tilt,” which should have read “positioned closer,” for obvious reasons.

          • Gator says:

            And you are still wrong.

            1- List all climate forcings, order them from most to least effectual, and then quantify them all.

            2- Please provide even one peer reviewed paper that refutes natural variability as the cause of recent, or any, global climate changes.

            There is nothing unusual or unprecedented about our climate, or how we got here. For 4,500,000,000 years climates have always changed, naturally. This means there has been a set precedent, and the burden of proof falls on natural climate change deniers like yourself.

        • Gator says:

          No Snark, sea ice was not remarkably stable during the 20th century. It melted, grew, and melted again. This is exactly what one would expect during an interglacial. And yet it is still higher than the average of the past 9000 years. Why are you guys so grossly ignorant of our planet’s history?

  21. KevinPaul says:

    Yell all you like shark, nobody’s listening, we were all once where you are now, and I doubt anyone wants to be hoodwinked again.

    • SHARK says:

      I know, Kevin, that’s everyone’s problem here: Nobody’s listening, which is why you all remain so ill-informed.

      • spike55 says:

        You have NOTHING to back up any of your mindless regurgitations.


        Just mind-numbed brain-hosing, leaving nothing but putrid green sludge.

        You are nothing more than a yapping chihuahua behind a 6ft fence.. totally irrelevant to any rational scientific discussion.

      • Gator says:

        Are global warming skeptics simply ignorant about climate science?

        Not so, says a forthcoming paper in the journal Advances in Political Psychology by Yale Professor Dan Kahan. He finds that skeptics score about the same (in fact slightly better) on climate science questions.

        The study asked 2,000 respondents nine questions about where they thought scientists stand on climate science.

        On average, skeptics got about 4.5 questions correct, whereas manmade warming believers got about 4 questions right.

        One question, for instance, asked if scientists believe that warming would “increase the risk of skin cancer.” Skeptics were more likely than believers to know that is false.


        A study published Sunday in the journal Nature Climate Change finds that people who are not that worried about the effects of global warming tend to have a slightly higher level of scientific knowledge than those who are worried, as determined by their answers to questions like:

        “Electrons are smaller than atoms — true or false?”

        “How long does it take the Earth to go around the Sun? One day, one month, or one year?”

        “Lasers work by focusing sound waves — true or false?”

        The quiz, containing 22 questions about both science and statistics, was given to 1,540 representative Americans. Respondents who were relatively less worried about global warming got 57 percent of them right, on average, just barely outscoring those whose who saw global warming as a bigger threat.

        Once again we see a leftist, Snark, psychologically projecting his ignorance.

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.