Skip to content

Crooks Still Pursuing Arctic Ice Scam

September 23, 2017

By Paul Homewood



h/t stewgreen


The crooks don’t give up, do they?




As the Arctic continues to heat up, so does concern in the scientific community about climate change.

Researchers at the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research (AWI) have discovered the Arctic sea ice has once again experienced ‘considerable melting.’


This September, the extent of Arctic sea ice shrank to roughly 4.7 million square kilometres – but a few decades ago, it averaged around seven million square kilometres at the same time of year.

Researchers measure the Arctic sea ice each September, when it reaches its minimum and can provide insight into the most drastic melting and its causes.

While the melting is slightly less than last year and isn’t a new record low, it’s described as ‘massive’ and is just as serious. 

The minimum sea ice extent for 2017 is the third lowest in the satellite record.

The loss falls in line with the averages of the past ten years and falls far below the numbers from 1979 to 2006.

It’s due to an unusually warm winter that gave signs of extreme melting earlier this year – sea-ice coverage in March was lower than any March on record.

‘This year’s sea ice extent is again on a very low level,’ Marcel Nicolaus, sea-ice physicist from AWI at the University of Bremen and Universität Hamburg, said.

‘The observed September value of the past eleven years has consistently been lower than in any of the previous years.’

The researchers see the melting as an important indicator of climate change.

The loss falls in line with the averages of the past ten years and falls far below the numbers from 1979 to 2006. Pictured: sea ice minima from 1979 to 2017


Even their own graph shows that the sea ice minimum this year was eighth lowest, not third as they claim. It also shows that sea ice extent has been very stable since 2007, and shows no sign of disappearing as they keep on claiming.

As for their claim that the Arctic continues to heat up, this is quite fake. RSS satellite data show that temperatures in the Arctic have changed very little since 2014.

Recent time series plot



Their scaremongering about Arctic ice has long been shown to be unjustified, so all they can now do is shout that it used to be more in the 1980s.

If Arctic ice did suddenly recover to those levels, then I suggest the world really would have something to worry about.

  1. September 23, 2017 5:11 pm

    The data do not show that year to year changes in seasonal extreme sea ice extent are related to global warming.

  2. Tim Hammond permalink
    September 23, 2017 5:51 pm

    Whatever happened to that BBC idiot in the sailing boats? He turned around and then what happened? Did the BBC ever report anything more about why he couldn’t do what he said he would do?

  3. Gamecock permalink
    September 23, 2017 6:22 pm

    ‘it’s described as ‘massive’ and is just as serious.’

    I’ll give ’em that, that it ‘is just as serious.’

    As many people died from it this year as did last year.

  4. mwhite permalink
    September 23, 2017 6:36 pm

    Seems ther’s sea ice measurements going back to the 1920s

  5. AndyG55 permalink
    September 23, 2017 9:10 pm

    Arctic sea ice is in the top decile of extent of the last 10,000 years.

    The ONLY time it has been higher was during the LIA, and the late 1970s, which was a similar extreme extent to the latter part of the LIA.

    Either Wegener don’t know this, which makes the TOALLY INCOMPETENT.

    or they do know this, and are being DELIBERATELY DECEITFUL as they try to push some sort of slimy, lying agenda.

  6. September 23, 2017 9:21 pm

    Sorry to interrrupt…. do you know this US blog :
    If you do, what do you think of it ?….

  7. September 23, 2017 10:42 pm

    Tip: 4Radio The Jim al Khalili trailer where he tells us of big Climate Change effects in Antarctica scary scary
    Actual prog blurb is less scary
    Airs Tuesday morning & evening

  8. September 23, 2017 10:47 pm

    Green is more about PR than truth
    There is a strange thing
    That strange phrase “considerable melting” is used all over media headlines as if placed there.

    You can see by searching on Twitter.

  9. September 23, 2017 10:54 pm

    Paul I was about to complain about the Admiral ad spoiling your graphic
    but it draws my attention to the Mail article seemingly been stealth edited to change the original “Considerable Melting” headline

  10. September 23, 2017 10:57 pm

    This tweet shows an original headline

    Dozens of other articles also use that “Considerable Melting” headline

  11. September 23, 2017 11:17 pm

    A few weeks ago Dr Judith Curry posted an illuminating study of Arctic ice by Dr. Ronan Connolly & Dr. Michael Connolly. In everyday parlance their conclusion is:

    1. The amount of sea ice changes naturally.
    2. It has been changing for thousands of years.
    3. We didn’t tell the climate models this (because we didn’t know) but now we should.

    After describing the evidence, they summarise it:

    1. After re-calibrating the pre-satellite data, it now transpires that Arctic sea ice has alternated between periods of sea ice retreat and growth. The satellite record coincidentally began at the end of one of the sea ice growth periods. This has led to people mistakenly thinking the post-1978 sea ice retreat is unusual.

    2. The results from new sea ice proxies taken from ocean sediment cores suggest that Arctic sea ice extent has varied substantially over the last 10,000 years. They also suggest that Arctic sea ice extent was actually less before the Bronze Age than it is today.

    3. The current Global Climate Models are unable to reproduce the observed Arctic sea ice changes since 1901, and they seem to drastically underestimate the natural sea ice variability.

    There may be rebuttals, but in the meantime this gives a military-grade defence against the shrill alarmist cries that Arctic sea ice is in decline and it’s all our fault.

    • RAH permalink
      September 24, 2017 4:13 am

      So if satellite coverage had began in 2012, what would they be saying about Arctic sea ice now?

    • A C Osborn permalink
      September 24, 2017 9:22 am

      We did not actually need this study, there is enough anecdotal evidence in the history books to point to this anyway.
      Only those with an agenda to push for AGW being the cause is the problem.
      In fact most Ice loss had little or nothing to do with the ambient Temp and everything to do with Wind Direction, Current Direction and Storms.
      But don’t let a few facts get in the way of a good propaganda story.

      • richard verney permalink
        September 24, 2017 10:33 am

        As you say, Arctic Ice melt has little to do with ambient temperature. Here is the HADCRUT4 plot for the Arctic (70 to 90 deg North).

        You will note that in the 24 year period 1922 to 1946 some 12 years (ie., 50% of the time) the temperature anomaly was +4degC (or more) whereas during the 24 year period 1992 to 2016, only 6 years (ie., 25% of the time) had a temperature anomaly of +4 degC (or more).

        Further, in the earlier period, the positive anomalies were slightly higher and no modern year has come anywhere near the +7degC anomaly seen in 1937/8. In the modern period, the peak anomalies have only scraped to the +4degC level whereas in the earlier period there are several around the + 5, + 6, and even + 7degC level.

        The fact is that the Arctic region as a whole has not warmed when compared to the temperatures seen in the 1930s and 1940s. To the contrary, it is clear that the Arctic region was consistently warmer in the past.

  12. Broadlands permalink
    September 24, 2017 12:51 am

    “As the Arctic continues to heat up, so does concern in the scientific community about climate change.”

    So… what does the scientific community suggest we do about it? More scaremongering… “Act now”? To do what? Capture and rebury CO2….hundreds of billions of tons of CO2. For how long and at what cost? They should be concerned about that?

  13. Chris Lynch permalink
    September 24, 2017 2:03 am

    Just the usual pathetic dishonesty from the usual suspects trying to conceal their disappointment. They had such high hopes for a record low ice extent this summer.

  14. Dean redhead permalink
    September 24, 2017 4:26 am

    I would like to up where we would drill offshore on ice with land rigs with artificial man made ice just like making a skating rink. We would settle this climite change once and for all.also the the billions of dollars taken in by our goverment.

  15. roger permalink
    September 24, 2017 8:02 am

    And now la nina asserts herself more strongly every day to mock the feeble minded academics, politicians and media, spreading her chilly fingers from ocean to land and crawling ashore like a sea monster from a b rated movie.
    Except we cannot leave our seats to escape the reality of the approaching cold.
    We await their attempted explanations with some amausement.

  16. Coeur de Lion permalink
    September 24, 2017 8:41 am

    I note that the UK Met Office is saying that the ‘slowdown’ has stopped due to Pacific overturnings and that there have been three recent years over one degree above pre- industrial etc etc. But the language has got fuzzier and is not quite as mad for AGW as before. I’m sure we trust UAH most. Currently point four one above the 30 year mean.

  17. September 24, 2017 8:55 am

    ‘the melting is slightly less than last year and isn’t a new record low’


  18. Athelstan permalink
    September 24, 2017 10:06 am


    It’s time to play the other side and btw change the speakers they’ve blown out

  19. richard verney permalink
    September 24, 2017 12:29 pm

    According to MASIE, the Arctic minimum ice extent has been increasing for approximately the last 10 years. See:

    Of course, MSM does not want to report on that inconvenient fact.

    • Jack Broughton permalink
      September 25, 2017 10:56 am

      I gather from Ron Clutz’s site that there is an attack on funding Maisie, and this is probably why: another inconvenient truth as you say.

  20. richard verney permalink
    September 24, 2017 12:35 pm

    This is a must see video for anyone interested in current position with respect to snow and ice and around the Arctic region;

  21. September 24, 2017 4:15 pm

    Reblogged this on Climatism.

  22. September 24, 2017 5:41 pm

    At some point linear trends will be invalidated.

    Any review of any of the climate data shows cycles up to at least 60 years. If a principle of cyclicity were used, the “obvious” connection to forcing the rise of CO2 would disappear.

    The use of a linear trendline is an implicit endorsement of the IPCC CO2 forcing of atmospheric temperatures. I don’t know why the skeptical side has accepted it. If we were to constantly use a cycling principle, even as a basic reference point to the alarmist graph, we’d make our point of the non-unique solution potential to the warming trend.

    By the linear trendline, I would agree the Arctic ice cover is in continual decline. Using a cycling model, I would suggest the decline may have ended a few years ago and we are just wobbling around the bottom before the ice expands again.

    Temperatures: even alarmists understand the problem of picking endpoints. And acknowledge the cyclicity of the AMO and PDO. Keeping the cycles will suggest the linear trend may be only a crude bottom-to-top simplification of a cyclic phenomenon – an end-point problem. Yes, a CO2 rise might be there, but it will be in the full cycle, not the partials.

    Using linear trends to analyze a non-linear world doesn’t make sense. Ask the investment brokers to use it on managing your money if you think it does.

  23. September 24, 2017 8:34 pm

    What a melange of weasel wording and misleading facts. If they can fit this year into their scenario, then I guess we can expect more of the same over the next several years. Although, when we read that “This year the Arctic sea ice shrank to roughly 6 million square kilometres …” that will be the time to link back to this article. (Come to think of it, we may already be able to do something like that wrt 2012 [and less spectacularly 2007]. I will have to check my files.)

    • dave permalink
      September 24, 2017 9:09 pm

      I am sure that at least part of the problem with the public is that many of them do not realise that the Arctic HAS a summer. So these people are shocked and scared to hear of ANY shrinking. They think it is unnatural, i.e. man-made.

  24. September 24, 2017 8:37 pm

    I see by the title that Tony Heller’s style of commentary is catching on. Good ‘nuf.

  25. Ben Vorlich permalink
    September 25, 2017 8:54 am

    Over on the BBC Matt MacGrath did a similar piece on Hurricanes.

    Those who have been sceptical of the impact of carbon emissions from human sources on the climate have crowed about the fact that it has been 12 years since a hurricane rated category three or above has made landfall in the US.

    But those working in the field believe that measuring the connection between hurricanes and climate change based on the number that make land is hugely mistaken.

    • RAH permalink
      September 26, 2017 2:10 am

      HA! this is such a joke.

      After hurricane Katrina and the 2005 record Atlantic hurricane season Kerry Emanuel of MIT announced that more frequent and stronger hurricanes were the “new normal” due to global warming. After that we were inundated with claims from multiple sources that such would be become “the new normal” for the US. We heard the same after extra-tropical “super storm” Sandy came ashore. What has happened is the exact opposite of what was claimed and their claims were absolutely false as conclusively demonstrated by the record major hurricane hiatus in which not a single major hurricane struck the lower 48 for the next 11 years and 10 months. Such bombastic dooms day claims were falsified by the fact that incidence of major hurricanes have declined since the 1950s.
      The alarmists set the metric and sane people have been rubbing their noses in it for over a decade now.

      142 months without a CAT III strike on the lower 48 is luck. Two CAT IV strikes on the lower 48 in a season is due to climate change. This despite the fact that the ACE in all other regions of the world where tropical cyclones form is very low. Climate Change is, after all, supposed to be global isn’t it?

      It is the same old litany from the same old sources.

      Bad weather events are from climate change. Good weather is just weather.

      A run of hot temperatures is caused by climate change. A run of average or cooler than average temperatures is just weather.

      Cold weather is weather. Cold weather with a blizzard is a result of climate change caused by global warming. Milder than usual winters are caused by climate change.

      Droughts are from climate change and so are any drought busting rains that follow them. Declining Arctic sea ice is due to climate.

      Declining Greenland SMB is due to climate. Growing Greenland SMB is due to weather. Declining ice extent, area, or age of ice is always due to climate. Growing ice extent, area, or age of ice is not. And any time glaciers calve it’s a sign of a warming climate.

      And round and round the merry go round goes.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: