Arctic Settled Science Update

MASIE shows Arctic sea ice extent 9% less than the same date in 2012.


But NSIDC maps show 9% more ice than 2012.

2012   2019

Apparently an 18% discrepancy is close enough for government work, which will be used to make multi-trillion dollar superstition based policy decisions.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

71 Responses to Arctic Settled Science Update

  1. John Kolb says:

    would be nice to see the graph contain the same dates on the legend, or put in a file link that can be reached.

    • tonyheller says:

      All of those things are present in the blog post. It would be nice if people actually read the post before commenting.

      • Phil. says:

        It would be nice if you read the information provided with the data you present here, perhaps you would avoid making such egregious mistakes. For example here you compare two different quantities as if they were the same.
        MASIE is only intended to give an accurate location of the ice edge and uses different sources at different times, it is not intended to give an accurate measure of the ice area. “in general, it would not be appropriate to compare a recent MASIE extent value to one more than a few weeks old because the data sources and analysts NIC uses may have changed.”
        The Ice extent measurements on the other hand use a consistent satellite source and provide data on the seaice extent of those pixels that contain more than 15% ice.

        • spike55 says:

          Poor phail, can’t take actual data.. finds a way to DENY the facts.

          NSIDC also shows Arctic sea ice extent has levelled out

          Still waiting the little PAHILURE to tell the truth about the Arctic sea ice

          Come on COIWARD,

          Admit the FACT that current levels are above what they have been form most of the last 10,000 years

          You are NOTHING but a cowardly, LYING, yellow chicken-little, phail.

  2. griff says:

    I think commenters have frequently pointed out to you the unreliability of MASIE for year on year comparisons.

    Also, comparing different metrics without fully stating and evaluating the different basis on which they are compiled is utterly misleading

    the FACTS remain: 2019 is second lowest in the 40 year satellite record after 2012 – without a storm event like the GAC of 2012.

    The ice is not recovering, but is still in decline

    • Gator says:

      Ms Griff, the satellite record goes back more than 40 years. Is it your hatred of poor brown people that makes you cherrypick the from the satellite record?

      Ice in the Arctic is the exception, and not the rule, for this interglacial. Only a moron would expect the ice not to melt.

    • xenomoly says:

      I will wait for the AMO to turn negative for a bit before assuming the arctic is doomed. The arctic sea ice has largely oscillated around the same extent for 14 years now and we are near where the AMO switches to negative. I think it’s likely to cause the sea ice extent to return to the levels it had in the late 70s. If it never changes over – and the arctic degrades – then I would be concerned. But we have only a part of one cycle of this major oscillation in satellite records – so it’s hard to conclude that our limited observation window is indicative of a general trend.

      • Gator says:

        Doomed Arctic? Again, ice in the Arctic is the exception, and not the rule for our current epoch. IMHO ice is what dooms the Arctic, and an ice free Arctic would be preferable.

      • spike55 says:

        “then I would be concerned.”


        For most of the Holocene there has been far less sea ice than there currently is. Still in the top 5% of the last 10,000 years

        • Andy says:

          The Holocene is irrelevant to this discussion because the discussion is Tony saying there is a discrepancy between two data sets over one year.

          I am sure when you are at home and your long suffering partner asks

          ” What time is the new Netflix Series Madman55 on?”

          and you come back with ” They didn’t have Netflix in the Holocene”

          It must be a real bundle of fun living with you in your cave …

          • Gator says:

            No Andy Andy, it is relevant. Waving your tiny hands does not change this.

            What Tony does is point out that there is zero reason to be concerned about Arctic ice. And that is exactly what the Holocene tells us. I’m starting to think that you hate poor brown people.

          • Gator says:

            No Andy Andy, the Holocene is extremely relevant. We have explained this to you before, why are you a climate change and science denier?

            Tony’s posts are pointing out that there is no reason to be concerned about Arctic ice. This is what studying the Holocene does, it proves that ice is the exception and not the rule.

            Why do you hate poor brown people?

          • Andy says:

            Sorry Gator but Tony is not talking about that at all , if you can’t read what he is saying in this post do one of the following

            1. Ask an adult to read and explain it for you, perhaps whilst you sit on their knee.

            2. Use your finger under the smaller words and speak it out aloud. Don’t worry about the bigger words longer than 5 letters.

            I’m sure we didn’t get dumb comments like this back in the Holocene ????????????

            Weakest reply ever.


          • Gator says:

            Poor little Andy Andy. He cannot see the forest for the trees.

            Let me mansplain it to you, Andy Andy.

            Tony’s entire blog is devoted to destroying leftist lies, the biggest of which are that climate change is a disaster and socialism will save humanity. Tony counters alarmism and leftist insanity with virtually every post.

            The post above is once again a counter to Arctic ice alarmism, which is not based in science. The alarmists use cherrypicked dates, just like yo do, to try and fool fools into believing there is a problem and mankind is to blame.

            Andy Andy, if you are unaware of this, you are one of the useful idiots. Congratulations.

            The Holocene is absolutely relevant to countering Arctic ice alarmism.

            Andy Andy has the weakest mind ever,he cannot understand what a child can.

          • Andy says:

            Gator, very surprised you are still trying to argue on this when even Sputum55 has given up.

            Take some guidance from him on how to win battles.

            To mention it again, for the hard of hearing, this is a worthwhile post by Tony on the differences between two data sources from the same people, OVER THE LAST YEAR, and needs no spam from dimwits who cannot see that about the Holocene, like some parrot forever saying ” the holocene, the holocene”



          • Gator says:

            Still too obtuse to see the forest for the trees Andy Andy?

            What is your purpose for obsessing over meaningless Arctic ice? I’m just assume it’s your hatred of poor brown people. But please, feel free to let me know if there is another reason.

          • spike55 says:

            Poor littleandy, has to DENY that the nHolocene is actually very much ain a COOL phase.

            Only way the little cretin can maintain his fantasy of CO2 warming

            Arctic sea ice extent is FAR HIGH than it has been for most of the last 10,000 year.

            Just live in DENIAL little andy-worm

            For most of the Holocene there has been far less sea ice than there currently is. Still in the top 5% of the last 10,000 years



            CLIMATE CHANGE DENIAL and wilful ignorance of basic facts is all that little-andy-worm is capable of.

      • Robert Austin says:


        “and the arctic degrades”.

        Is “degradation” any deviation from the 1979 Arctic ice extents? Is the 1979 Arctic ice minimum extent the ideal minimum extent?

      • Nicholas McGinley says:

        I think “the Arctic” will be fine.
        If we were to be so fortunate as to have a less frigidly cold and frozen northern wasteland preventing a wide portion of our planet from being inhabited by life or used for anything productive, we should make the day it warms up and the ice is gone a world Holiday and celebration…a global Thanksgiving Day!
        Imagine all the new lands to inhabit, the new sea routes, new fishing places, the new habitat.
        What could be bad about a less inhospitable planet?

    • Dunc. says:

      You do know there is actually a 50 year satellite record, but the first 10 years is always ignored ?
      1979 isnt the start of satellite measurements of arctic ice.

      • Nicholas McGinley says:

        Yup…I seem to recall we had men on the moon a full 10 years prior to 1979.
        And weather and spy satellites in large number well before that.

    • David Reich says:

      Starting any data set of arctic ice at 1979 when nearly all the previous evidence (DOE, research reports) show that 1979 was the peak ice arctic ice levels over the last 100+ years is nothing but cherry picking the start date. As Tony has pointed out dozens of times, there was satellite data (from the 1990 IPCC report showing actual NOAA chart) dating back to 1973 but today’s reporting by agencies refuse to report it because it was much lower than 1979. Further, the 2019 summer arctic temps have been following the 1958-2010 average and the daily mean is now below freezing right in line with the 60 year trend. Finally, there is nothing misleading about showing the actual enormous discrepancy in real data produced by so-called trusted agencies regardless of the root cause(s). Just a few days ago, it was reported that the arctic would be ice free this summer. Not even close.

    • GW Smith says:

      Ms. Griff – Your desperate obsession to see a trend every time you post is clearly evidence of a paranoid and psychotic personality. But I think I give you too much credit at that. The world does not like straight lines, nor is it black or white. It is cyclic and wiggly. Just look in the mirror.

    • KevinPaul says:

      Mention the arctic and the griff appears just like a blowfly to an outdoor dump.

    • spike55 says:

      As you well know, griffool, Arctic sea ice extent is still in the top 5% or so of the last 10,000 years

      It is still historically VERY HIGH., only marginally down from the extreme high of the LIA and late 1970s

      You ignore this fact because you like chicken-little bed-wetting and are a climate change denier.

    • Nicholas McGinley says:

      Griffy sez:
      “Also, comparing different metrics without fully stating and evaluating the different basis on which they are compiled is utterly misleading”

      Imagine that!
      A warmista whining about misleading information!
      Now I have seen everything!
      *note to self* Griff sez MASIE is known to be worthless.

  3. Jeff says:

    What I want to know is whether enough ice will melt to finally free Terror and Erebus to complete their mission and discover the Northwest Passage

    • spike55 says:

      Larson navigated the Prince of Wales Strait alongside Banks Island in 1944

      Not a chance of getting anywhere nearly this year, the whole of Melville Sound is chockers with thick sea ice.

    • Disillusioned says:

      Jeff said, What I want to know is whether enough ice will melt to finally free [HMS] Terror and [HMS] Erebus to complete their mission and discover the Northwest Passage (clearly sarc)

      The literal translations are: HMS Intense Fear and HMS Darkness! Those are the ships that were looking for the Northwest Passage… during the Little Ice Age? Huh?!? Yeah, sign me up!

      I’d rather be crab fishing the Bering Sea.

  4. mwhite says:

    A fake ice graph, not a problem

    A fake ice map, someone might get into trouble or even die. Questions may be asked, courtrooms may be involved.

    • Nicholas McGinley says:

      Ice extent is a bogus metric in any case.
      It is highly subjective as to what they count as ice and what is open ocean, being that this time of year there is always a relatively small aerial coverage of continuous ice.
      Plus there are well known problems with ice that has melted water on the surface.
      Ice volume is a better measure of the amount of ice.
      Recall they promised us a few years back that multiyear ice was what was important.
      On top of all the rest, large open areas of water are places where massive amounts of energy are escaping to space in the Arctic, cooling the waters to depths unknown…no ARGO floats up there.
      This is likely a big reason why examination of the ice extent and volume from past years often shows very high years right after very low years, and vice versa.
      One might expect a lot of ice would guarantee a lot the next year, or a small amount would have small amounts in adjacent years. We do not see that…we see spikes way above and way below the centerline in direct temporal proximity, time and time again.
      Note also trend reversal tend to occur around extreme years…iffen we are having one.
      Look at those 1970s sea ice graphs…highly variable.
      Right before a trend reversal.
      Long patterns like the AMO have broad bottoming and topping patterns.
      I see these same patterns in stock charts all the time.
      What is amazing is that a change of trend can very rapidly have a dramatic effect on the visual impression given by the graphs.
      For example, five years of modest cooling in the UAH TLT graph will but us well below the 1980 to 2010 centerline.
      Right now the atmosphere has near record high optical clarity, being that it has been many years since a major volcanic eruptive event has injected aerosols into the stratosphere.
      And TSI is showing the lowest level in the PMOD record, which goes back to 1975.
      If it keeps going down, and solar activity remains very low, we get a major reversal of one or more major ocean or atmospheric cycles, we have a large eruption, and/or a la nina spike…it could get very cold very quickly.
      If several of these occur, it could be dramatic, and not good.
      Whining about a less deadly Arctic is inane…I wonder how warmistas will react to a real problem with cooling and advancing ice around the globe?

      • Disillusioned says:

        Whining about a less deadly Arctic is inane…

        … and insane.

      • spike55 says:

        Russian sea ice charts are showing about 10% more compact ice than in 2012.

        Even in the rather odd MASIE data, the Central Arctic is still above “normal”

      • Andy says:

        “Ice extent is a bogus metric in any case.
        It is highly subjective as to what they count as ice and what is open ocean, being that this time of year there is always a relatively small aerial coverage of continuous ice.”

        How can you say the extent is bogus due to satellite measurements being “subjective” and then assert

        “Ice volume is a better measure of the amount of ice.”

        How is measuring 3d thickness from satellite data more accurate than measuring 2d extent from satellite data ?

        How do they measure ice thickness so accurately whilst extent / area is so subjective?


        • spike55 says:

          Admission of ignorance seems to be your thing, little-andy

          Try telling the TRUTH, for once in your miserable existence

          Arctic sea ice extent is currently far greater than it has been for most of the last 10,000 years

          Come on ADMIT THE FACTS, if you have the guts to.

          or remain an ignorant little climate change denier.

          • Andy says:

            My question was not addressed at you Sputum55, so please go away,

            You are like a fly around my desert whilst two grown ups try to converse over dinner.


          • spike55 says:

            Ducking and weaving as you avoid facing FACTS. So funny.

            You are a child-minded troll with a pre-pubescent comprehension of science. Go and find Greta, you will be be happy then.

  5. Andy says:

    Someone give me the AMO v the summer extent minimum in the Arctic in a combined graph so we can see if changes in the AMO are reflected in the sea ice extent….


  6. Andy says:

    Just for Gator and Sputum55 to read again for the 1970’s showing 1979 was not cherry picked

    Graph on page 9 .. observed values before 1979 …..

    Note observed rather than modelled


    • Gator says:

      Note that I gave you satellite data, and not models Andy Andy. That was a poor attempt at a strawman, if you want to starve millions of innocent people to death, you will need to try harder.

      The Holocene is the standard.

    • spike55 says:

      Seen that fabrication.

      Its a LIE.

      You have been conned yet again because4 you are an ignorant putz.

      In gullibly accepting that fraudulent graph, you are saying that Arctic sea ice is NOT related to temperature, thus destroying the whole AGW scam.. thanks

      The fool uses NOAA temperature data, so you know its a farce.

      When will you STOP DENYING that current levels of Arctic sea ice are far above what they have been for the last 10,000 years

      You are nothing but an ignorant gullible climate change DENIER, little-andy.

      • Andy says:

        “In gullibly accepting that fraudulent graph

        But Tony has quoted his work more than once Sputum55

        You said

        “The fool uses NOAA temperature data, so you know its a farce.”

        Are you calling Tony an idiot then?

        Goodbye ….

        Actually, perhaps not, he seems to put up with the two internet village idiots amongst the words of wisdom on here.

        He’s too kind. He’s good to me having a different viewpoint, or perhaps because I do post some science once in a while, and he is good to you keeping you off the streets.



        • spike55 says:

          LOL, TH quotes NOAA to show just how bad the rest of the AGW science is.

          And you are too dumb to see the point.

          “I do post some science once in a while”

          Lying to yourself yet again.. so funny, so deluded

          Or are you just trolling for attention now?

          You have FAILED to post any actual science for decades, just baseless anti-science propaganda, because you are too clueless to know the difference.

          You poor wilfully ignorant climate change denier troll.

          Let’s see if you can ADMIT the truth.

          Repeat after me.

          1. Current levels of Arctic sea ice are far higher than for most of the last 10,000 years.

          2. Using 1979 as a starting point is using an extreme high, up there with the LIA, and is therefore totally meaningless and anti science, especially when data prior to that exists.

          3. Around 1940, there was similar Arctic ice extent to now. This matches the Arctic temperatures.

          If you are DUMB and gullible enough to accept the fabrication in your pdf, then you are saying that Arctic Sea ice is not affected by temperature, which destroys you pathetic yapping and deep-seated brain-washing in the AGW scam.

          Again, too dumb to realise it

          You live in a fact free, zero-science fantasy, little-andy.

          Time to wake up little trollette.

  7. Andy says:

    “You are nothing but an ignorant gullible climate change DENIER”


    You might want to re-write that Sputum55, I think you mean advocate, rather than denier ???


    Actually I am climate neutral and waiting for the science to catch up with what is actually happening. I tend to put a pro science viewpoint on here against the people with more keyboard buttons than scientific brain cells as you might have noticed.

    Have a rethink.

    In regards to the Arctic, I refer back to Tony’s original point in his first post, rather than getting off topic.


    • spike55 says:

      Poor little trollette.

      Fact is not part of your existence

      LYING even to yourself.

      You have NO science viewpoint, because your refuse to accept any real science

      A WILFULLY IGNORANT little-andy

      A most pathetic little worm.

    • spike55 says:

      ““You are nothing but an ignorant gullible climate change DENIER”

      The facts hurt you don’t they

      You are a climate change DENIER,

      You ignore all evidence that we currently live in one of the cooler period of the last 10,000 years.

      You DENY all evidence that shows Arctic sea ice extent is still in the top 5% of the last 10,000 years

      You DENY all evidence that shows starting at 1979 is starting at an extreme anomalous high, up there with extents of the LIA.

      You DENY that the climate has changed NATURALLY , thankfully warming a bit since that coldest of periods.

      You DENY that Arctic sea ice is affected by Arctic temperature, gullibly putting forward fabrications that show zero correlation between Arctic temperature and Arctic sea ice.

      You are a climate change DENIER.

      There is no other way to state it.

      You are science EMPTY, not science neutral, just too dumb to see the difference

      Tony’s original post shows that, in comparison to the Holocene normal, there is still one heck of a lot of sea ice up in the Arctic, and that changes over the last dozen of so years are totally insignificant.

      Glad you final admit that point.

  8. ChD says:

    Hello Mr. Heller,
    I greatly enjoy reading your blog since years.
    Thank you for providing all these informative graphs and news pieces.

    However since this post the feed does not contain the whole content anymore. Was this done on purpose? Is it possible to turn that back on?


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.