Skip to content

NASA’s Fake Video

November 3, 2016

By Paul Homewood






From the Telegraph:

One significant change in the Arctic region in recent years has been the rapid decline in perennial sea ice. Perennial sea ice, also known as multi-year ice, is the portion of the sea ice that survives the summer melt season. Perennial ice may have a life-span of nine years or more and represents the thickest component of the sea ice; perennial ice can grow up to 4 meters thick. 


NASA have been up to their tricks again. (Click on the Telegraph to watch the video)


The first con is that, although the video runs monthly progressions since 1984, it finishes in September 2016. Subliminally, you will have seen much larger extents of ice rolling through earlier years, simply because you are looking at winter and other months when extent is much greater anyway. Then, when the video stops at the end, you see the minimum extent for the year, and it is this which sticks in the memory.

This really is a cheap trick, not worthy of a supposedly scientific organisation.


But what has actually happened to multi year ice?


It is no secret that much of it was lost in 2007 and 2008. As NSIDC themselves admitted in April 2009:


This year, ice older than two years accounted for less than 10% of the ice cover at the end of February. From 1981 through 2000, such older ice made up an average of 30% of the total sea ice cover at this time of the year.





And in large part this was because wind and currents swept this thick ice out of the Arctic Basin, where unsurprisingly it all melted. This was what NSIDC said in August 2007:


Another aspect of the story for 2007 is the “memory” of the sea ice to changes over the past few decades. Specifically, there seems to have been a transition to younger, thinner ice beginning in the late 1970s. This reflects not only trends towards more summer melt and less winter ice growth, but changing winds that have transported fairly thick ice out of the Arctic Ocean into the North Atlantic, and decreased the length of time that ice is “sequestered” in the Arctic Ocean where it might have a chance to grow thicker.


It is no secret that thin, new ice tends to easily melt come the following summer. Consequently, it takes time to rebuild the thicker ice. 

However, by March 2015 multi year ice had staged a recovery from 2008, and >2 year old ice had doubled to about 20%.





Mysteriously, this graph was not published in April this year. Instead the version below appeared, totally contradicting the original data and showing much less older ice.




The real data did not support NSIDC’s agenda, so it had to be altered.


The myth that sea ice is getting thinner is exposed by DMI.

If we compare the DMI maps for 2016 and 2008, we can see much more thicker ice along the Canadian Archipelago. There was also a vast expanse around the pole of very thin ice in 2008. In contrast, the same area is full of two and three meter thick ice.

Although there a few areas with thicker ice in 2008, in overall terms ice appears to be much thicker now. (The clue lies in the ice volume, similar in both years; however, ice extent is much less this year, meaning thickness must also be greater).






In reality, Arctic extent has remained pretty much stable since 2007, and multi year ice is gradually recovering. But this not the story that NASA want you to hear.

  1. November 3, 2016 6:57 pm

    Time for NASA’s climate spin doctors to spin off. The world doesn’t need such distortion artists.

    • Broadlands permalink
      November 3, 2016 9:28 pm

      NASA climate is GISS. Their chief “spin-doctors” are Jim Hansen and his replacement, Herr Gavin. They are good at what they do in creating a bleak future for us all. They are not good at telling us what should be done about it that could meaningfully help… even in 100 years. That’s the irony?

      • November 3, 2016 10:30 pm

        Not a bleak future – a fake future. Climate models and reality are fatally out of step and reality can’t be wrong.

  2. Athelstan permalink
    November 3, 2016 7:57 pm

    Well for a start, Boreal polar sea ice extent is indicative of just erm, what? …………the Arctic Oscillation and they…… [western scientists, climactivists] know < FA about that.

    Sea ice declines and surges of this – we have pictorial and historical evidence albeit some is anecdotal admittedly, and yet again so what? Because, overall sea ice cover is average to stable – thus there is “nothing to see here” Ergo and all-in-all there is little need of panic.

    Accordingly, with respect to Arctic sea ice and it’s mythic properties, It is a monstrous misdirection to attempt to extrapolate and then prognosticate on anything supposedly is ‘out of synch’, let alone putting it down to, mankind’s atmospheric input of a harmless gas and yet the spinmeisters climactivists at NASA do, precisely that, make up stuff.

    Poley bears dying off – er no, Arctic sea ice all gone by next Wednesday – nope, Greenland ice sheet – vanishing ha! ha! ha!…….. and mankind’s CO2 is wot did it – what a fat fekkin joke it all is – it’s not funny though – at all.

    This is nothing, nothing to do with science and everything to do with politics, the banksters of Goldman Sackfuls and pseudo scientific advocacy.

    • AndyG55 permalink
      November 3, 2016 9:19 pm

      Less sea ice means that the polly beers don’t have to trek as far to find their favourite food.

  3. Roderick Green permalink
    November 3, 2016 8:30 pm

    OK I’m naive but why are people lying about all this? Who prospers?

    • Athelstan permalink
      November 4, 2016 12:13 am

      Money primarily and investment bankers have done, will do, make a financial killing, as do some political manipulators not least Obarmy whose friends with those nice fellows who stand to gain most out of a worldwide emissions limitation treaty and its consequent: carbon trading scheme – can you guess their corporate name – pretty much I’m damn sure you can!

      Alinsky nailed it; political power is very dependent upon and about keeping the sheeple worried, and on the edge – ad nauseum.

      The global warbling scam is the perfect vehicle, while the politicians can promise to “save the earth” by ‘doing sweet FA’ and in the meantime frightening the bejabbers and taxing you to death – wringing gelt out of everybody and by using “soon very soon!”,,,,,, near future – doom laden scenarios…….. “Arctic Ice melting”,

      “Himalayan glaciers gone early next week”
      “Amazonia drying up”
      “UNIPCC knows best”

      “we’re all gonna burn up – and you, yes you sonny are part of the problem, so throw away the keys of the 4×4 and walk, stop consuming bin the smart phone and get green/ live in a cave…………!”

      Scroll up on this page, Paul has some very useful links, and here are some more, mainly though not exclusively from a German/EU pov:

      Get reading, if you really want to know.

    • November 4, 2016 7:55 am

      Pumping up fear is super important and has been for millennia because fearful people pay BIG BUCKS to stop the scary thing from happening…

  4. Broadlands permalink
    November 3, 2016 9:11 pm

    Movie-maker technology should be able to fake satellite data from the 1920s and 30s to complete the video…but what data will they use? What empirical information will they have to ignore or add to the “dust-bin”?

  5. dennisambler permalink
    November 4, 2016 12:37 am

    Notice of yet another fake science prediction in the “prestigious” journal “Science”

    “Dirk Notz [Potsdam] and Julienne Stroeve [NCAR and UCL] analyzed Hadley Centre Sea Ice and Sea Surface Temperature data over time, deriving a linear relationship between the average monthly abundance of sea ice in the Arctic in September and cumulative carbon dioxide emissions, for a roughly 30-year period. The data reveal that for every metric ton of carbon dioxide that’s emitted, 3 meters squared of sea ice is lost.”

    The data revealed nothing of the kind, this was a modelling exercise.

    “The authors used this robust relationship in a collection of climate models that are part of the Climate Model Intercomparison Project 5 (CMIP5), to project Arctic summer sea ice loss.”

    In 2010, scientists derived a linear relationship between watching TV and heart attacks.

    I didn’t read the paper but I believe BBC programmes featuring the disappearance of Arctic ice were heavily implicated:

    “Scientists who predicted a few years ago that Arctic summers could be ice-free by 2013 now say summer sea ice will probably be gone in this decade.

    The original prediction, made in 2007, gained Wieslaw Maslowski’s team a deal of criticism from some of their peers.

    Now they are working with a new computer model – compiled partly in response to those criticisms – that produces a “best guess” date of 2016.”

    Ah well, back to the drawing board……..

    Should have been gone 4 years ago:
    Arctic Sea Ice Gone in Summer Within Five Years? Seth Borenstein in Washington
    Associated Press December 12, 2007

  6. Bartemis permalink
    November 4, 2016 1:03 am

    It misses the point anyway. Temperatures have risen since the end of the Little Ice Age (that’s why it was called “the end of the Little Ice Age”). So, some melt would not be surprising (though, not necessarily a whole lot given the small temperature change – Antarctica, after all, is not melting).

    But, it is beside the point. The point is that a warming world does not establish that humans are warming it. Particularly not with CO2 emissions. Particularly when CO2 is rising monotonically, but temperatures are not, which clearly shows that even were CO2 an influence, it is not a dominant one.

    • John Palmer permalink
      November 4, 2016 8:06 am


      • AndyG55 permalink
        November 4, 2016 10:47 am


  7. November 4, 2016 1:32 am

    Reblogged this on Climatism and commented:
    Climate activist Gavin Schmidt’s NASA deceiving the public to push the “global warming” agenda – shock news.

  8. NeilC permalink
    November 4, 2016 3:32 am

    Climate science is an oxymoron. Observation and facts do not apply. It is political nonsense. The masses are all ready catching on to their lies with the excellent work of people like Paul Homewood, Anthony Watts, Jo Nova and others.

    The distortion of facts will always lose in the long run. The sooner the better.

    • November 4, 2016 11:10 am

      Unfortunately, the damage to science, economies and Europe will be done before this happens!

  9. November 4, 2016 10:15 am

    Reblogged this on Patti Kellar and commented:
    What NASA wants is for John Q. Public to bury their heads in the sand.

  10. November 4, 2016 11:47 am

    The greatest cost will be to science as the general public no longer, and with good reason, believes anything they say. The real victims will be those scientists who tell the truth, but get tarred with the same brush.

  11. November 4, 2016 12:02 pm


  12. November 6, 2016 10:33 pm

    Reblogged this on Climate Collections.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: