Meteorologists refute media claims that Arctic storm caused by humans: ‘That’s utter bullsh*t’ – ‘Who is feeding the media this crap?’

The Washington Post is hyping an Arctic storm ‘Frank’ for causing a spike in North Pole temperatures. See: “Freak storm pushes North Pole 50 degrees above normal to melting point”

But meteorologist Dr. Ryan Maue is countering the media hype that the storm currently hitting the Arctic is caused by mankind.

‘That’s utter bullshit,” Maue declared on December 29, in a response to the Washington Post’s claim that the Arctic event “reeks of a human-forced warming of the Earth’s climate.”


Maue added: “Who is feeding the media this crap?”

Meteorologist Joe Bastardi also weighed in, calling media reports of a melting Arctic, the “lunatic fringe.” Bastardi noted that before this storm, “Arctic temperatures are way below freezing.”

Bastardi also noted that the “data buoy” measuring temperatures in the Arctic was “more than two degrees south of the North Pole and is not representative of true temperatures. He noted that the Danish Meteorological site’s data was “much better and it showed that the Arctic “has been much warmer” in the past.

“Long standing DMI records(back to 1958) indicate the Arctic has been warmer in 1984, 1985, 2000 and 2002 . The Washington Post owes it to readers to show BEST data source,” Bastardi added.

The blog noted today that Arctic sea ice extent was at a 10-year high, despite the media hyped storm.

“Earlier today, sea ice extent was at a 10 year high. But experts say it all melted during one hour at -1C this afternoon,” wrote Tony Heller at, with more than a hint of sarcasm.

Screenshot 2015-12-30 at 12.13.32 PM

Ocean and Ice Services | Danmarks Meteorologiske Institut

Heller also noted that “Arctic ice is screaming back towards 1990’s levels.”

Update Dec. 31, 2015: noted:

“Experts say that a terrifying storm melted the North Pole yesterday”


“This unprecedented melting event has caused Arctic ice to reach its highest December extent in over a decade.”


Ocean and Ice Services | Danmarks Meteorologiske Institut  Note: DMI issued this this notice on above graph. “The plot above replaces an earlier sea ice extent plot, that was based on data with the coastal zones masked out. This coastal mask implied that the previous sea ice extent estimates were underestimated. The new plot displays absolute sea ice extent estimates. The old plot can still be viewed here for a while.”

“One buoy 300 km from the pole reported temperatures just above freezing for an hour yesterday. Another buoy a mile away did not report any above freezing temperatures.”



The current warm spike is not unprecedented. Arctic temperature data shows three cases of North Pole temperatures exceeding freezing since 1948. also noted: “A 1964 Arctic Temperature Spike Was Larger Than 2015 – And occurred during era of concern over ‘Global Cooling’

2015’s temperature spike in the Arctic was “at -20C was smaller than the 1964 ‘global cooling’ spike.”


Ocean and Ice Services | Danmarks Meteorologiske Institut

Update: Journalistic Fraud: North Pole Region Saw Similar Warm Spikes Before…OVER 70 TIMES In Last 58 Years!

Despite the data, the media is continuing to hype the alleged “unprecedented” weather.

The Washington Post featured Weather Underground’s Jeff Masters explaining: “It’s really hard to scientifically say that’s what’s going on.” Masters added: “This isn’t the climate I grew up with,” he said. “We didn’t see this kind of weather in the 20th century.”

But the data clearly reveals that “extreme weather” has not increased, counter to Masters’ claim. See: PROF. ROGER PIELKE JR: TESTIMONY ON THE CURRENT STATE OF WEATHER EXTREMES: ‘It is misleading, and just plain incorrect, to claim that disasters associated with hurricanes, tornadoes, floods or droughts have increased on climate timescales either in the United States or globally’

Steve Milloy of, mocked Masters claim: “It wasn’t the weather Jeff Masters grew up with? Well, isn’t weather always different by definition? And then, since he’s so into ‘climate change,’ why would he expect weather to be the same in a climate that is constantly changing? Besides… the Arctic has been this warm before… and sea ice is at a 10-year high.”

Unusual warmth at during the holidays is not unusual. Even in 1940, Santa had to deal with Christmas warmth. See:

Flashback 1940: NY Times: ‘Santa Claus ran into some of the strangest weather of his career’ as he flies through ‘all-time record high’ temps – From NYTimes, Dec. 25, 1940: Santa finds ‘strangest weather of his career’


Meanwhile, the Washington Post also attempted to link the UK floods to some sort of unprecedented weather. The Washing Post noted: “The U.K. Met office said that December has been a record-breaking month for rainfall in parts of the United Kingdom. A Christmas weekend storm brought up to 8 inches of addition rainfall on saturated soil.”

But the media has failed to note that the current floods in the UK are nothing unusual in the historical record. See: Historic Weather Records Rubbish UK PM Cameron’s Attempts To Blame Floods On ‘Global Warming’

Related Links: 

PROF. ROGER PIELKE JR: TESTIMONY ON THE CURRENT STATE OF WEATHER EXTREMES: ‘It is misleading, and just plain incorrect, to claim that disasters associated with hurricanes, tornadoes, floods or droughts have increased on climate timescales either in the United States or globally’ – Link to full testimony of Roger Pielke Jr. to Congress: ‘It is further incorrect to associate the increasing costs of disasters with the emission of greenhouse gases’

Prof. Roger Pielke Jr. slams NOAA For Claims of Increasing Extreme Weather: ‘In the US on climate time scales there is no evidence for more hurricanes, floods, tornadoes, drought. Happy to debate this topic with data’ – Pielke Jr. : ‘How can a NOAA spokesdude get away with telling USA Today that droughts are increasing when USGCRP, IPCC and peer reviewed research sez no?’


353 Responses

  1. There is a sickness going around that blames almost all natural events on human activity. Witch doctors have done this since antiquity so it is depressing how low the collective IQ of the world has sunk – In many quarters “Idiocracy” has arrived, and it will only get worse.

  2. Liberal Journalists are just Trolling America…..

    3% of Americans care about Alarmist Fearmongering……

    Liberal Journalists are very arrogant, stubborn, insecure, and neurotic…..

    They know most Americans don’t suffer from their Climate OCD Neuroses……

    But, they just can’t let it go……

    It’s a Compulsion…..


    They are forced to Troll…..

    1. When most of your advertising $$$ comes from government you have to stick to the narrative or go out of business. Media Welfare = Propaganda.

    1. NSIDC already show 2015 at almost an all time low. The chart shown in this article masks out a lot of relevant information – ie. the coastal zones, and shows an incorrect value for 2015.

        1. These warmists are truly silly people since there have been times during the current inter-glacial period of little to no summer ice.

          Yet Polar Bears are with us today and the world didn’t end either.

          For much of the Inter-glacial period,the world was warmer than it is now.

  3. All large Atlantic depressions are capable of pushing warm air into the Arctic Circle via Spitzbergen in just such a way. All that has happened is that we now have pretty graphics to display it on big TVs. The strongest Atlantic depressions are during colder spells such as the Little Ice Age as 17th century ships logs make entirely clear. Just because it is unfamiliar to the author does not make it unprecedented or even unusual, silly boy 🙂

    1. ❝my neighbor’s stride mother is making 98$ HOURLY on the internet❞….

      A few days ago new McLaren F1 subsequent after earning 18,512$,,,this was my previous month’s paycheck ,and-a little over, 17k$ Last month ..3-5 h/r of work a day with extra open doors & weekly paychecks. it’s realy the easiest work I have ever Do. I Joined This 7 months ago and now making over 87$, p/h.Learn More right Here
      ➤➤➤ http://GlobalSuperEmploymentVacanciesReportsJobs/GetPaid/98$hourly❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦

        1. ❝my neighbor’s stride mother is making 98$ HOURLY on the internet❞….

          A few days ago new McLaren F1 subsequent after earning 18,512$,,,this was my previous month’s paycheck ,and-a little over, 17k$ Last month ..3-5 h/r of work a day ..with extra open doors & weekly paychecks.. it’s realy the easiest work I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months ago and now making over 87$, p/h.Learn More right Here
          ➤➤➤ http://GlobalSuperEmploymentVacanciesReportsHigh/GetPaid/98$hourly❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦

    2. ❝my neighbor’s stride mother is making 98$ HOURLY on the internet❞….

      A few days ago new McLaren F1 subsequent after earning 18,512$,,,this was my previous month’s paycheck ,and-a little over, 17k$ Last month ..3-5 h/r of work a day ..with extra open doors & weekly paychecks.. it’s realy the easiest work I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months ago and now making over 87$, p/h.Learn More right Here
      ➤➤➤ http://GlobalSuperEmploymentVacanciesReportsHot/GetPaid/98$hourly❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦

        1. It’s not an error; it’s just another valid calculated stat! It just shows a coastal masked sea-ice cover stat you might not want to acknowledge. In that stat, 2015 ice is materially higher than the previous 10 years. Calling it an “error” betrays your warming bias, and a gotcha prejudice.

          1. It was not presented as such here. There are a lot of ups and downs in any climate data set. But the overall trend for northern sea ice extent and volume is in decline. And notice the note under the newer plot:

            “The plot above replaces an earlier sea ice extent plot, that was based on data with the coastal zones masked out. This coastal mask implied that the previous sea ice extent estimates were underestimated. The new plot displays absolute sea ice extent estimates. The old plot can still be viewed here for a while.”

            1. Of course I saw the note (& saved the page); it was factored into my question. Even with “a lot of ups and downs of any climate data set,” (thank you for acknowledging that often unacknowledged fact), and even with “… headline grabbing catastrophic results? I for one am shocked that in DEC’15, the massive area of NH
              non-coastal sea ice extent isn’t at some sort of minimum — aren’t you?” After all, DEC’15 is materially higher than the last 10 years for that stat?

              1. And I suppose you are shocked that coastal ice is low, no? Lot’s of factors influence sea ice extent, for example wind and ocean currents. Ocean temps probably play a bigger role than air temps. But it is clear that NH sea and land ice, in extent and volume, have been declining for several decades.

                1. Repetitive and evasive of my question — of course after an arctic temp spike raising North Pole temps, very low coastal ice might be observed without me, or for that matter, most being “shocked!”

                  1. Stochastic fluctuations do not seem usual tome. NH sea and land ice, in extent and volume, have been declining for several decades. Does that fact concern you?

                    1. Should it be concerning for a globe in an interglacial period coming out of a little ice age? What should the globe be doing differently?

                    2. Of course I am! I have a ridiculous fantasy where everytime I ask someone a direct question, I get a direct answer.

                    3. Maybe if you bother to look at the ENTIRE Holocene, you will quickly realize your faux concern is absurd.

                      There have been various times in the inter-glacial that there was little to NO summer ice in the region.

                      The current ice cap is larger than average for the inter-glacial.

                    4. It is difficult to know ice cover extent in past centuries. However, proxy study evidence supports the conclusion that the Arctic Ocean has had continual ice cover for the last 5000 or 6000 years.


                      Before that, 6000 to 10000 years ago, there were some periods with ice free summers. These have been attributed to natural changes in Earths orbit.


                      The current warming can only be explained by the increase in greenhouse gases.

                    5. The Holocene period started 11,500+ years ago, and continues up to today.

                      Thus ALL of the things you just said are covered by the “ENTIRE Holocene”.

                      Thus your citations prove that you agree with Thomas Peterson’s comment that there been times in this current inter-glacial period (known as the Holocene) in which the Arctic has experienced “little to NO summer ice”.

                      How is what may or may not be causing the current warming relevant to what caused the past warming, other than there was warming?

                    6. You’re right. But Dano2 is the one who appeared to need “context”, not Thomas Pearson.

                    7. I’m sure I also made up your earlier request for citations (or context) from Thomas Pearson since it no longer exists.

                    8. request for citations…from Thomas Pearson since it no longer exists..

                      Nothing has been deleted. It is still there. You made that up too.



                    9. There have been various times in the inter-glacial that there was little to NO summer ice in the region.

                      [citation needed]



                    10. ROFL!!! Disqus allows you to completely remove a prior comment without a trace of any kind, by simply editing it into nothingness. And Climate Depot doesn’t indicate “comment removed” or “comment deleted” unless Climate Depot is responsible for the removal or deletion. SO…poof….you removed a prior comment, without a trace, from it’s former chronological position here on Climate Depot.

                      But alas, Disqus WILL NOT allow you to remove a post, without a trace, and then put it BACK in it’s former chronological order, later. Poor baby!
                      You tried to make me look like I “made something up” by removing the post I was referring to. Had I been forced to try to prove that, at most, all I could have used to support my conclusion that you did it because you are an evil liar, would have been my own personal assumptions and opinion. But when I pointed out that your comment had disappeared, instead of just being a an evil liar and saying “see…you made it up”….YOU did something that no only proves to everyone here that are ARE in fact, an evil liar, but it also PROVES that you are a STUPID, as well as evil, liar.

                      You claimed that “Nothing has been deleted. You made that up too.”

                      Bravo Dano2! You gave me the best belated Christmas Gift ever….EVIDENCE that proves you are a stupid, evil liar so I no longer have to rely on flimsy premises like my personal opinion and assumptions when I put forward that conclusion. Best!

                    11. Keep going liar. The little caption beside your name and who it’s to, indicates it that you just re-posted a comment that you CLAIM still exists on this thread. But the re-post is the ONLY time that comment actually appears here. You can never put that comment BACK into the chronology where it was. So claiming it’s still there can always be disproven by anyone who glances up at the time frame that matches the time stamp on it.

                      Or are you trying to insinuate that you CAN still see it up there….so it must still appear to be up there to everyone else? Because it’s not up there anymore….to anyone else. Literally, there is NO POST addressed to Thomas Pearson from you “two days ago” anywhere in this thread EXCEPT where you posted it UNDER a comment I made ONE day ago.

                  2. You might say “Do you consider it unusual that the area in which the concentration of Arctic sea ice is over 30% is higher than it has been in relation to the area in which sea ice concentration is less than 30% for the last ten years?”

                2. Of area around the coast, the ice concentration is between 15 and 30%. Areas off the coast, the ice concentration is roughly 30% and above. Does that mean that ocean temps are lower off shore and warmer on shore? Does that mean that air temps offshore are colder than onshore? What can we, and can’t we, logically assume about the differences between the shore ice and the offshore ice without comparing all of the variables involved?

            2. The first (Danish) chart-the one with the mask- shows 2015-2016 levels at 10.25 km2.

              The second (Danish) chart-the one without the mask shows 2015-2016 levels at 13.75 km2


              The one you posted from NSIDC shows the 2015-2016 total at -12.25 km2.

              None of the charts are “wrong”, and the first two charts are of different measurements of the same area-one with a mask applied, and one without that mask applied.

              The first Danish chart (with the mask) actually showed the past ten years on it-from 2005-2015, and the way that chart was presented here was under the joking caption of “This unprecedented melting event has caused Arctic ice to reach its highest December extent in over a decade.” Since neither the updated, unmasked chart, nor the one Mike435 posted, show all of the past ten years, Mike has yet to prove that how the first graph was presented here is “wrong”.

              1. The caption given here does not mention that coastal data was excluded. The caption says: “Sea ice extent in recent years (in million km2) for the northern hemisphere, as a function of date.” Marc Morano left out the next line that says: “Please notice, that the sea ice extent in this plot is calculated with the coastal zones masked out. To see the absolute extent, go to this page.” This may well be an honest error. Perhaps Morano will post a correction when he recovers from New Year’s Eve. 😉

                1. It’s not Marc’s caption. The caption is from the danish site. It is not Marc’s fault that the coastal data on that chart was excluded. Marc is also not responsible for the red lettering or arrow. He linked to a chart from Marc ALSO included a link to the actual chart on the danish site AND anyone who checks the chart will see the “new” chart. Note that the authors of both charts says- “This coastal mask implied that the previous sea ice extent estimates were underestimated.” That the coastal mask IMPLIED that the previous sea ice extent estimates were underestimated DOES NOT EQUATE with the previous ice extent estimates WERE WRONG.

                  All this means that the chart itself was CORRECT. BOTH TIMES. That the coastal zones were masked out has ZERO affect on the fact that the chart shows that the concentration of sea ice (higher than 30% in the Arctic) was higher at the end of 2015 than it has been in the past ten years.

                  Its not Marc’s chart, or his error, or his problem.

                  1. Morano is responsible for what he posts on his blog. Perhaps the Danish site added the correction after Morano posted this. Nonetheless, the chart with the caption given is incorrect. I merely pointed this out.

                    1. Maybe I should be more direct.
                      Before the charts in question, Marc introduces the fact that hes reporting on what Tony Heller posted on his blog at

                      Marc uses QUOTATION MARKS to indicate when he’s quoting what Tony said. (Meaning its not Marc’s caption) You must have MISSED the fact that the caption you are NOW complaining about has quotation marks around it. Those little marks indicated that TONY is the one responsible for the caption that claims-
                      “This unprecedented melting event has caused Arctic ice to reach its highest December extent in over a decade.”

                      The one beneath the graph was placed there by the Danish researchers and unless you want to attempt to prove that they mislabeled their own chart, I’m going with the assumption that they labeled it exactly as they wanted to, and as it is written, it doesn’t make “the chart with this caption” wrong or incorrect in any way. Again, the chart is correct., How they created the chart is correct. If you personally assumed that the chart in question DID measure and cover “absolute sea ice extent” or “15% and up sea ice extent” in the Arctic, then based on the details that have always existed on the Danish website AS WELL AS the “please see” note on the Danish website, YOU ARE WRONG.

                      PLEASE NOTE- neither Tony nor Marc added the word “absolute” to the chart, nor did they add anything about 15% and up, and the link THEY FREELY POSTED demonstrates that the makers of the chart never even meant to IMPLY that their chart represented “absolute sea ice extent” or “sea ice extent 15% and above”.

                      SO, based on the actual physical evidence (facts), your conclusions aren’t based on solid premises. The only question left is-did you INTEND to reach those mistaken conclusions when you started or did that happen by mistake?

                    2. He’s under no obligation to babysit readers to make sure they understand exactly what was posted, why it was posted, and what his motives were when he posted it.

                      YOU are responsible for what YOU posted here.

                    3. I do not require babysitting. I just pointed out a mistake. It is you who have gotten your panties in a knot. Do some breathing exercises and try to relax.

                    4. And? It proves the man isn’t a lying cherry picker right? He left the chart there, and it’s still a correct chart. The note doesn’t change that.

                2. Are you really that ignorant of trend analysis or are you just trolling? If the chart measures the same thing over 10 years, it doesn’t really matter what is blanked out since it will blank out the exact same thing on every single year. So as a measurement of the trend of coverage, how it is being used in the post, it would be perfectly valid even if it overestimates or underestimates the actual coverage. It is a Measure of Performance, it doesn’t actually directly measure anything, but is does show trends. To paraphrase a former US president, “It’s the trend, Stupid!”

                    1. “NH sea and land ice, in extent and volume, have been declining for several decades.”

                      And even if true, this is a problem why? … and secondly, what do you think you can do about it?

                    2. Albedo, stop emitting carbon.

                      Are these trick questions? My 7th-grader can answer.



                    3. And this year is the highest recorded in a decade, your point is? For that matter, the sea ice extent was both more and less is the fairly recent past and at times was increasing and decreasing during the same time frame, So? 1944 was the last time the Northwest Passage was open, was that caused by Global warming? This year the ice extent is clearly higher, using the methodology of the chart, than in any of the years recorded on the chart, which was the point of the post.

        1. The 1st chart showed JUST the areas in which the “ice concentration is higher than 30%”. The “new” chart shows all areas in which the ice concentration is higher than 15%.

          Are areas in which there is only 15% ice equal to areas in which there is 30%? Of course not. Drawing a bigger circle that measures “absolute ice extent” does not make the amount of ice in each area equal.

  4. If they followed the cold as much as they followed the heat, we wouldn’t be talking about climate change. That cold air that was displaced went somewhere – why don’t they go chase that for a change?

  5. The Paris Climate Agreement abolishes all forms of climate change, extreme weather events, and rising sea levels for now and for all time. It is a done deal and we here in the USA do not have to pay anything for it because we are a poor nation with a large national debt, trade deficit, and unfunded liabilities. Climate change no longer exists so it should be of no concern to us any more. Human caused climate change cannot possible be the cause of anything because human caused climate change has been abolished for now and for all time.

  6. The Atlantic changed the title of that story! It was “The Terrifying Storm That Will Melt the North Pole This Week” and now it says “The Terrifying Storm that will Unfreeze the North Pole”.

  7. The Washington Compost owned and operated by man-child Jeff Bezos, idiot savant, indoctrinated Marxist Harvard graduate. He’s destroying the very country that allowed him his fortune, and now his actions weaken and will eventually destroy the country and its native people.

    He got this virus from the long line of Jews and their sickness to destroy societies, take them over so they can own and control everything.

    Good job, Jeff. When it all collapses, you will not be spared.

      1. Dan0? Mike435, really? My respectometer just plummeted – little/no phy-sci background, NO THERMODYNAMICS study at all! A train-wreck of bad info epoxied together in dogma, w/ years of posts in evidence of same. I guess that begins to explain a lot…

        Forget what I said about, “let’s think of this another way.”

              1. Thanks smartie, the charts I posted are the latest from those sources. Following the links in the article moron will get you to January 2015. Ouch.



                    1. Your charts only show 5 years… The DMI one shows a lot more…. No ice loss… the Earth isn’t warming. You are a satellite data denier.

                    2. You’re the one that thinks 2015 is the hottest… and you are clearly wrong… You are the one who can’t read a chart.

                  1. Thanks, smartie-smart. You whined about wanting newer graphs, admonished me to follow the link in the article, and comically were unable to see the graphs in the article are a year old.

                    Aren’t you precious?



                    1. They aren’t a year old unless you consider December 2015 to be a year old…. You’re the king of morons.

          1. Try to look at the charts and see if you can understand there is a difference and following the links will get you an older chart than what I showed.

            Can you grasp it?



                1. Your charts only show 5 years of data… they are a from a different source… they are measuring different things.. But the DMI data is updated daily… Your data is just as new as the one posted in the article… And you are too stupid to understand that…

        1. It is… That’s what UAH and RSS temperature shows… 2010 was still hotter… FYI.. that means we’re cooling… Because this is an el Nino year. You fail…. and you’re the worst.

            1. No. Actually we are talking about science… which involves data… And temperature data plays a role… and your graphs only showed a few years worth of data… Where was the data from 2005? Loooser.

              1. Ice, smartie. Can you grasp that the chart refutes the assertion Meanwhile Arctic sea ice extent is currently at a 10 year high

                Can you understand it? Can you read a graph? Can you grasp simple graphs?



                    1. I grasped it just fine…. More sea ice than 10 years ago when coastal areas are included..

                    2. Smart people can tell my graph was sufficient to refute the assertion. What’s your excuse?



                    3. And your facebook link was awesome… More science in the comments section from “deniers” than on the page itself. You Climastrologists don’t know anything more than what you are told can’t think for yourselves.

  8. Oopsie!

    ‘That’s utter bullshit,” meteorologist Dr. Ryan Maue declared on December 29, in a response to the Washington Post’s claim that the Arctic event “reeks of a human-forced warming of the Earth’s climate.” Maue added: “Who is feeding the media this crap?”

    Morano made that up. WaPo didn’t state that.

    Caught fibbin!



    1. That is funny. The Wash Po article Maue links too actually criticizes that claim.

      “Scribbler [environmental blogger Robert Scribbler] says such an anomaly “reeks of a human-forced warming of the Earth’s climate”, although some climate scientists aren’t convinced global warming is meaningfully impacting these types of storms.”

  9. Liberal Alarmists in the Media……
    …are no different than 6 Day Creationists or Intelligent Designers……

    You could explain all the Science to them that is contrary to their Climate Religious Beliefs…..
    …and they won’t be swayed….

    Their Climate Beliefs aren’t really based in Science….

    If 95% of the Climate Scientists came out tomorrow and said: “There is no reason for Alarm…..Emissions aren’t Bad……They’re Good……
    ….Stop Worrying……No need for CO2 Regulations”….

    Would the WashPost, NYTimes, Eric Holthaus, and the rest of the Climate Cult admit they were wrong and stop pushing their Propaganda?

    NOPE…..of course not…..

    In fact…….close to 50% of Climate Scientists……ARE NOT…..Alarmists……

    You wouldn’t know that by reading or watching the Liberal Media…..

    The Liberal Media are Insecure, Childish, and Arrogant Narcissists……

    They’ll never admit they’re wrong……

    Especially not regarding their Highly Sacred Climate Religion…..

    They always need to hold something over the Heads of the ‘Illiterate’ Masses……so they can Teach us and Enlighten Us…..


    How did they get so Enlightened?

    Their Parents from the Suburbs paid for them to go to a Liberal University…….and Major in Journalism…..

    After 4 Years……they all automatically attain Buddhahood……upon Graduation……..enabling them…….

    ….to bring the Truth of Reality to us Lowly Illiterates…..


    No Thanks…..I have 3 Degrees in Science…….MUCH Superior to Journalism…..

    I didn’t learn the Art of Telling Stories…….I learned how to Decipher and Understand the Natural World and its Natural Processes……

    What’s Real and What’s not Real……… not up to a Poll……

          1. That’s right, Pielke, Lindzen, Christy, Edso, Spencer, Curry, Soon, Happer and a host of others have “no science background” whatsoever. Al Gore, on the other hand, is a walking, talking Colosus of scientific knowledge. Why do we know this? He made a movie. That “settles” it.

            Just a reminder to you and your AGW alarmists – Gore made a brash prediction 10 years ago and the “best if used by” date is rapidly approaching – later this month. Any wagers that his prediction of doom and gloom will (a) be realized, (b) be covered by the MSM, (c) be excused as merely a warning for “immediate action to be taken” – but hasn’t been and won’t be, despite COP21 posturing?

            The alarmists have Gore, Bill Nye “The Pseudo-Science Guy”, John Kerry and the political apparatus of the IPCC. I’ll stick with my team of skeptical scientists.

            1. Aside from the fact you can’t name any science on your side, share with us exactly what it was Algore (isfat!) done perdiktid.

              Exactly what it was.



              1. I’ve given you names of scientists who are recognized as knowledgeable in their respective fields of climate science. Go read their published and posted work for yourself and, unless you think UA-H hired Spencer as a throw-away position or that MIT felt sympathy for Lindzen and kept him on board for no good reason, feel free to critique their analysis with your own data.

                Gore predicted that by January, 2016 it would be too late to do anything about CAGW. He garnered significant press with his road show, a Nobel Prize for his activism, a big payday after selling his TV “station” to Al Jazeera and he travels in luxury between his mansions while scolding the rest of us to curb our carbon footprint. Notice that I have not made any comment about his physical appearance nor how he speaks (although he does have a penchant for being condescending in his pronunciation and speaking pattern) – those are things you brought up.

                1. Wow! you’ve given me names. Congratulations!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

                  Who cares? You’ve given no science. You have no science. No NewPhysics, no equations, testable hypotheses, body of work, journals, models, scribbles on a napkin.

                  Big whoop.



                  1. I figured you were intelligent enough and curious enough to go read what these prominent skeptics of CAGW have written, why they are skeptical of the doom-and-gloom predictions and present your own counter-argument as to why they are wrong. Was I wrong in giving you that much credit?

                    1. You really are lazier than the average gullible alarmist, aren’t you? The science you seek is written by the scientists I’ve already steered you to. Go do your own homework and refute what they present. I’m not going to do it for you. In the meantime, let’s pretend that mankind’s 5% contribution to atmospheric CO2 emissions is capable of tipping the global climate to catastrophe, as you alarmists propose. What are you personally doing about it to prevent this contagion from happening?

                    1. Let us know when you get to sixth grade so you can read a chart.

                      In ~9th grade you’ll learn about start point bias.



            2. Your list does include a couple of scientists, Curry and Lindzen, whose body work is respectable. I read Pielke’s book, Climate Fix, and found it interesting; he has made a fair case that the mass media hypes extreme weather (as it does with crime and terrorism). Christy and Spencer do some tricky satellite data processing, but have a history of miscalculations and greatly overstate their conclusions. The others are just crackpots. But let’s be honest. The vast majority of climate scientists and researchers in related fields have concluded the our ghg emissions pose a serious risk to the ecological systems that we and many other species depend on. So, irrespective of what you think of Gore, Kerry and Nye, I am going to go with the mainstream scientific view.

          2. Dear Dano.

            Please explain to me your church’s teaching about the




            refrigerated gas bath

            blocking 17% of the energy available to a light warmed rock,

            being a MIGHTY MIGHTY HEATER in the SKY,
            so that the VERY GASES blocking the 17%
            and doing ALL the PHASE CHANGE REFRIGERATING, are the ”CORE” of the Magical Heater.

            Be succinct.

            Make the thermodynamic thunder roll, with exquisitely phrased profundities that rattle the intellectual rafters so to speak,

            as if you’re speaking forth, in an expert production of Othello.

            Move on to your scintillating expose on how all through history – people have used frigid gas baths, to warm the light-warmed rocks, the baths blocked 17% available light to.

            Make that stuff ring like you really believe in it, and you don’t really think people are sitting around worldwide laughing into your thermodynamically,
            befuddled face.

              1. We’ll accept that as your confession you don’t really know what you’re talking about. Deflection is your culture’s way, like being fascinated with bombastic story telling is the way of other death cults whose membership hope something’s really wrong so they don’t feel so wacky,

                about being so doggone wacky

                    1. The science was already shown in the article… You are too stupid to see it and can’t read graphs.

                    2. Thanks smartie. Poor hapless Allen and you have shown no science to validate your beliefs.



                    3. Yes we do… that satellites say….

                      No warming in 18 years….
                      No Sea Ice changes in about 9 years….
                      And volume is about the same as 7 years ago…

                      All totally inconsistent with it being the “hottest year ever”

                      Keep up your climastrological masturbation.

          3. Except ALL the satellites. You know…. those things that can measure the radiation coming off from the whole earth and not just in a relatively few spots.

            1. What about the satellites? do you think you know something? What papers say something using satellites that says something about radiative physics working differently on earth than elsewhere in the universe?



              1. Satellites say the Earth hasn’t warmed for 18 years… A complete contradiction of the entire AGW hypothesis… what more do you need to know… the models are wrong… they aren’t even close.

                  1. You’re claiming falsely that 2015 is the hottest year… The charts clearly show you are wrong…
                    The graph starts in 1979 after about .3 or .4 C of cooling from 1940-1975… sooo…. probably no warming in 70 years.

                    1. Clownical. Every metro organization on the planet is saying 2015 was the warmest year on record. Aren’t you precious?



                    2. Yes… because they are using fudged surface data based on instruments that cover .003% of the planet… Satellites cover nearly the entire surface…. How many temperature stations do we have in Central AFrica?

                    3. nope… completely proven… Every day… The last pause buster change being the most egregious.

                    4. Has been 100 times… All of you assertions you’ve proved wrong with your own charts.

                    5. Typie-typing nonsense isn’t “backing” or “providing evidence”

                      When you get to 8th grade you’ll learn that.



                    6. Yes but I learned from you… You have nothing… You can go back and see how NASA changes historical data on a weekly basis recently… It’s really sad you’re so stupid.

                    7. People don’t live in dirigibles. They live on the surface of the earth.

                      /Captain Obvious



                    8. I can show you aren’t measuring African and Antarctica… I can show you 40% of the numbers in the USA are fudged.. It says so right in the database

                    9. You have zero evidence for that assertion. None. Nada. Nil. Null set. Zip. Zilch. Jack. Squat. Bupkis.



                    1. Thanks, LOLO, no one said it was science – it is making fun of your false statement!



                    2. If it isn’t saturated… why isn’t the temperature rising…. DOHHHH… You have no science on your side…

                    3. Clownical. Two years in a row warmest on record, but tempercher ain’t risin’.

                      Me loves me my Internet Performance Art!



                    4. Again… satellites all say 2010 was warmer… therefore we are cooling which is why ice is not going away…

                    5. And where they do live they create the UHI effect…
                      How many temperature stations in central Africa? Antarctica?

                    6. But they measure the rest of the earth… pretty much all of it.
                      so only your logic fails.

                    7. It is not higher than 10 years ago. And it is dishonest to start from record low point. Stop being dishonest.



                    8. So ice stays stable during the well documented global coolilng and immediately begins falling off… It isn’t that big of a drop… and the data pre 1979 is not nearly as good. You only have 60 years of data… it’s nothing. and the data isn’t that good.

                    9. No…. They refute you… I’ve posted the line 3 times now… You’re an idiot moron.

                    10. LOL… back to proving sea ice hasn’t GROWN for 10 years by showing 4 years worth of data… Hilarious. I hope no one is paying you to post this stupidity.

                    11. I’ve already explained the difference …. your the moron who tries to prove ice has declined over the last 10 years with a chart that has 4 years worth of data…. You’re the definition of a moron.

                    12. 10 of the hottest years on Earth… yet no change in sea ice extent…. You’re hilariously stupid.

                    13. Again, your graph ALWAYS starts at the end of the 40 year global cooling phase… why are you cherry picking… And Despite 7 of the hottest years on record… ice volume same as 7 years ago… an in an El Nino year…. You are stupid to believe the crap.

                      I told you volume was same as 7 years ago… Thanks for confirming my chart… you really didn’t need to posit it… it just proves you wrong.

                    14. Clowntastic! Smartie can’t grasp the concept of the start of satellite measurements!!!11

                      You are a ….erm…”special” little boy!



                    15. What is the rate of change since 2010? Aren’t these the “hottest years on Record”… LOL.

                    16. NOt since 2010… despite 5 of the hottest years on record AND an el nino…. YOu’re so stupid… I’m laughing out of my chair.

                    17. And you’re not smart enough to explain it to anybody… because there’s nothing to explain… Post one more time that 4 years of ice extent data to prove we are lower than 10 years ago… MORON.

                    18. But it’s the hottest year on record… why isn’t sea ice dropping through the floor? Your graph shows no statistically significant change in 10 years. Totally contradictory… and then of course baselined off the coldest years in recent history.

                    19. Liar: Your graph shows no statistically significant change in 10 years.

                      Grasping at weak straw.



                    20. Not lying… All of your years in the same band…. You can’t read a graph because you have a n IQ of 30. DMI graph shows most ice in 10 years.

                    21. No… you use a chart with only 4 years of data to claim that ice is less than it was 10 years ago… Even a 3rd grader is not that stupid.

                    22. Whatever you do… Don’t hit the Antarctic button and look at that one….
                      You’re so hilariously stupid it’s funny…
                      Again, the Danes disagree.

                    23. Why did you post a new chart if your first one wasnt just 4 years… youre so stupid. I hope your mom isnt reading this.

                    24. You were the toddler who whined, so i showed you what the chart you whined you wanted looked like, I’m enjoying your spectacle, you make me laff!



                    25. Yes and the chart showed all 10 years in the same band… proving that sea ice stopped declining 10 years ago…

                    26. He posted 2 charts and a couple of links in the Gavin Schmidt thread that completely destroyed his argument and proved mine was correct. He’s a freaking genius with data! I encourage him because he does more damage to his own side than I ever could. 🙂

                    27. and proved mine was correct.

                      Since ice right now at record low, you must mean and proved mine was [clownical].



                    28. Can you read? Or do you just choose not to?
                      This is not the Gavin Schmidt thread is it? LOL!!

                    29. Cuz Arctic ice with Arctic storm somethingsomething handflap wootwoot squirrel! is the best you can do.

                      That is: smart people and half-wits know the topic was Arctic ice. Then there is you.



                    30. 10 years no change in ice according to your size…. Mine shows a little improvement. Yet this is the warmest year on record and an El Nino year… and still ice levels are the same as 8 years ago.

                    31. You haven’t refuted anything except your own false statements with graphs you can’t read.

        1. Dano has a degree, in applied Magic Gais. He has got EXPERT testimony of all the heateristical

          into a

          mighty, MIGHTY Heetur in the sky. Ya’LL.

          He can TAYLe YeW abowt how ALL THROUGH history, MEN have used FRIGID REFRIGERATED BATHS,
          RAISE the TEMPERATURES of light-warmed ROCKS,

          so the rocks got WARMER than when there was MORE LIGHT REACHING the light warmed rock
          and there WAS no

          Now you must admit YOU MUST

          that is a Magical, MAGICAL Gais, to make a mighty mighty heetur like that.
          You can make the sky hot by using fire too.

          You should HEAR HIM RIVET the CROWD with HIS STORY about how makin that DEVIL FIRE
          makes the SKY get HOTTER and HOTTER til you can’t hardly find any shade, from those Backerdistical

          Boy, HOWDY that TaiR, is a MIGHTY magical heater. MIGHTY magical!


          1. at least our science is not science that we made up along the way and then changed then faked numbers and then we were still proven wrong with actual facts. the earth hasn’t warmer in over 15 years. global warming is a theory that HAS NOT been proven in any way. it has only been proven by democrat sponsored scientists in order to get more money from said democrats via grants.this was all proven when the emails came out the fake the number to increase tempts a few years ago.

            1. You can’t provide valid, testable evidence for a single word you typie-typed. Well, maybe “a”, “and”, and “the”, but that’s it. Nothing more.



  10. Since we are talking about how the Washington Post is covering climate change, here are two recent editorials to consider.

    2015: A year of progress and buffoonery on climate change

    Even ExxonMobil says climate change is real. So why won’t the GOP?

        1. The data sets are mostly based off the same information… No conspiracy needed…. but an I’m saving the world complex is helpful. Plus the normal corporate/government groupthink.

        2. Please explain the growing disparity between the surface temperature record and the satellite temperature record… Why are they diverging… Why do we see the historic data shifting…. at least once every month…. Do you think we are still getting earth-shattering news every month about the temperatures in 1880 and 1910? Seriously, are you really that stupid?

            1. Satellites show very minimal warming in the last 20 years… All of the warming occurred between 1979 and 1998…. Nearly 20 years of warming after a 30-year cooling period… So…. temperatures have barely risen in the last 70 years.

  11. Dear Magic Gasser. Please bear testimony of your church’s teachings about how the frigid, refrigerated, turbulent fluid bath blocking 17% available energy to the planet,

    became a MIGHTY, MIGHTY HEATER in the SKY!

    Go on to explain how,

    many times through history,
    refrigerated gas baths
    blocking light to the

    light warmed rocks immersed in them

    have been used to heat the rocks such that they were warmer
    AFTER the frigid refrigerated turbulent fluid bath
    when there was more light arriving on the light warmed rock,
    and there WAS no

    frigid refrigerated turbulent gas bath.

    Make the profoundly thundering thermodynamic truths ring like somebody put on a production of Othello.

    Pause at really important points, and add in little piquant anecdotes of a humorous nature, & whatnot.


    (Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a lawsuit on December 2, 2015, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia seeking records of communications from National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) officials regarding methodology for collecting and interpreting data used in climate models (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Commerce (No 1:15-cv-02088)).

  13. Climate Change is Unfaslifiable Woo-Woo Pseudoscience

    Karl Popper famously said, “A theory that explains everything explains nothing.” So what do you make of the theory that catastrophic manmade CO2-driven “climate change” can account for harsher winters and lighter winters, more snow and less snow, droughts and floods, more hurricanes and less hurricanes, more rain and less rain, more malaria and less malaria, saltier seas and less salty seas, Antarctica ice melting and Antarctic ice gaining and dozens of other contradictions? Popper gave a name to “theories” like this: pseudoscience.

    1. Flashing a bunch of newspaper headlines is not science. The warming continues. The melting continues. Sea level rise continues. Ocean pH is dropping. The impacts on weather are complex and not as well understood.

      1. Nah, you’re just thermodynamically incompetent.

        Phil Jones the world’s # 1 climatologist admitted in 2 0 0 5 ”The scientific community would come down on me in no uncertain terms if I said the world cooled since 1 9 9 8. OKAY IT HAS but it isn’t but seven years of data
        and it isn’t statistically significant.”

        Flash forward to 2010. JONES has been CAUGHT LYING and in exchange for NOT GOING TO JAIL he AGREES to REVEAL the REAL GLOBAL TEMP.

        feb 2010 BBC INTERVIEW with PHIL JONES:

        BBC: Isn’t it true there has been NO WARMING since 1 9 9 5 and that since 2 0 0 2 there has been slight WARMING?

        JONES: YES. I did the calculations and find that SINCE 1 9 9 5 there has been NO WARMING and that there has in fact, since 2 0 0 2, been some SLIGHT but not STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT,
        C O O L I N G.

        Look around AGAIN: WHAT data set showed in 2 0 0 5, NO MORE WARMING since about 95-98 and SLIGHT, but NOT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT

        C O O L I N G?

        The RAW DATA PLACED that way online by LAW to stop – ADJUSTMENTS SCAMS.

        PLOTTING to ISSUE PRESS RELEASES that IT HAS KEPT WARMING when they are ARGUING about how it HASN’T and THEY don’t KNOW what to DO,

        Then admits under pain of going to JAIL, that ”I”ve been FAKING ALL THIS WARMING since 1 9 9 5/98.

        then that DATA is FAKE.

        Your CLAIM is FAKE.

        Sea level still rises identically to the way it’s been for FIVE THOUSAND YEARS from about 2 to maybe 4 mm a YEAR.

        Ocean pH is NOT dropping, there isn’t even STANDARDIZED pH MANAGEMENT. Not ANYWHERE in the world.

        In other words your story’s wrong because you got it from M S M who weren’t really interesting in finding out Al Gore’s movie about ”using the fire will make the sky get hot” is a hoax.

          1. Look up the word ”thermometer”

            Then burst out in song about how the sun warmed rock was HEATED through BLOCKING LIGHT to it

            and scrubbing it with a FRIGID REFRIGERATED BATH.

            And it needs to be so clear we think you had Al Gore lay hands on your head and set you aside as a special messenger, of magic gais and frigid baths that heat up rocks to the point they’re WARMER than when they weren’t in a frigid bath.

                1. What you should have done was gone and gotten some books so you could talk about your low information voter religion with some CONFIDENCE.

                  Again: BEAR TESTIMONY of YOUR PERSONAL UNDERSTANDING, Magic Gasser,

                  of the MAGICAL and GREEN ancient CIVILIZATION who ALSO HEATED THEIR OWN rocks,

                  Explain that. GO FIND the GUY who WILL.

                  I’ll wait.

              1. LoooooooooL I did.

                As an atmospheric radiation instrumentation Electronic Engineer.

                And of course that means you’re in a bind so bad….LoLoL you can’t

                ban me for telling you start barking proper thermodynamic process or face… well you know.


                Cmon and tell us about your church. ”FIRST, the earth had no atmosphere to remove energy so it was warm. 100% of available energy made it to the surface.

                THEN, there was a LIGHT BLOCKING, FRIGID SELF REFRIGERATING COOLANT BATH suspended around it, and it got

                HOTTER than it WAS in VACUUM. Getting ALL the LIGHT


                  1. Obviously you’re over here begging for a chance to BARK some MAGIC GAIS CHURCH SOLIDARITY.

                    GET BARKING Magic Gasser ! Let’s HEAR it about how YOU THOUGHT the SUN WARMED EARTH

                    was made WARMER than when it DIDN’T have a FRIGID, REFRIGERATED, SUNLIGHT BLOCKING

                    BATH, we won’t all LAUGH in your NOT PAYING ATTENTION, face. LoL Yeah, we will.

                    You go ahead and start barking about the magic gais makes the sky a mighty, MIGHTY heetur.

                    We’ll try to see our way through to the end when you declare OTHER ancient green civilizations used to HEAT THEIR sun warmed objects in FRIGID, SUN BLOCKING BATHS of REFRIGERATED GAS, TOO.

                    Sing it like you mean it. Say it like you’re auditioning for a position in a Kenneth Branaugh movie.

          2. Look up the word ”And That’s How The Frigid, Light Blocking Bath Of Refrigerants, Made The Sun-Warmed Rock, HOTTER Than When It Wasn’t In The Frigid, Light Blocking Refrigerant Bath.”

            Let us all know in whatever fascinating hand wavings you put together, so it doesn’t sound like you’re high,

            when you say that sounds real.

      1. Yes, it is for the NH sea ice. 30% or more ice, coastal zones included. Their other charts is 15% or more ice with coastal zones excluded. Its all there on their website.

          1. I know… But they apparently don’t have data using the new method more than 5 years going back… So for comparison purposes… that’s all they have. And in comparison 2015 ended superstrong.

        1. The quote on is “Total sea ice extent on the northern hemisphere since 2005. The ice extent values are calculated from the ice type data from the Ocean and Sea Ice, Satellite Application Facility (OSISAF), where areas with ice concentration higher than 30% are classified as ice.” So it’s true, the 30% NH sea Ice area (not same as sea ice extent which includes 15%) is clearly at a 10 year high and materially so…

          But you and others continue to feed a TROLL! As I posted many days ago he has “little/no phy-sci background, NO THERMODYNAMICS study at all! A train-wreck of tired-old bad info epoxied together in dogma, w/ years of posts in evidence of same.”

          By his own post, “I was a weatherman in the USAF and studied bioclimatology before switching to the plant side,” Like I said, he is is little/no phy-sci (iow, life-sci dominant, phy-sci ignorant), NO THERMODYNAMICS “plant”… a vegetable… “best” description might be a mushroom, rooted in the dark of his own bs!

          This thread is a representative capsule of years of evidence of his mental um acuity? The thread itself is prima facie evidence of my earlier assertion! For more that a full decade, he has dogmatically posted such trails of evidence, the same as this thread.

          IRONIC ISN’T IT; his phy-sci & thermodynamic vacuous posts are in evidence about as long as the 10 year NH 30% or more ice areas, that were materially surpassed in DEC’15 and continues here in early JAN’16. The difference between these two of course is that the NH 30% ice will eventually drop back into the 10 year plots – the other will like never exhibit any evidence of acuity in phy-sci or thermodynamics.

          At this point, perhaps it’s “best” if I conclude with, “please don’t feed the troll!”

  14. All too often, the pro AGW argument is based on the notion that those of us that question their logic are “anti-science”. Anything in the world can be proven if one accepts an anecdote – or a singularity as proof. Modern science is based on statistical data, in which a single event; be that a tornado, a hurricane, or a temperature spike; must be analyzed in conjunction with the universe of other data in order to look for trends. If a signal is discovered, it requires an explanation. Noise never requires an explanation, as it is just noise. Drawing conclusions from noise is the purview of politicians – not scientists.

Leave a Reply