More Desperate Criminal Behavior From Climate Scientists

Climate scientist criminals have gotten so desperate, they are trying to blame record Antarctic Sea ice on global warming.

ScreenHunter_246 Aug. 01 15.54

Does Global Warming Actually Increase Antarctic Sea Ice? : Discovery News

These crooks don’t even make any attempt to mask their fraud.

That interpretation tends to irk climate scientists, who point out that the Antarctic’s gain in sea ice is more than canceled out by the much larger melting of ice in the Arctic, so that the overall pattern is one of melting sea ice.

That claim is utter nonsense. For the past three years, global sea ice area has been averaging above normal. (2) (512×412)

Antarctic sea ice is expanding because Antarctica is getting colder. The waters around Antarctica have been persistently below normal temperature for several years.

sst_anom (1)

sst_anom.gif (800×600)

NASA has known for years that Antarctica is cooling.

ScreenHunter_07 Nov. 04 15.52

SVS Animation 3188 – Antarctic Heating and Cooling Trends

Shindell and Schmidt 2004
Shindell, D.T., and G.A. Schmidt 2004. Southern Hemisphere climate response to ozone changes and greenhouse gas increases. Geophys. Res. Lett. 31, L18209, doi:10.1029/2004GL020724.

While most of the Earth warmed rapidly during recent decades, surface temperatures decreased significantly over most of Antarctica.

Pubs.GISS: Abstract of Shindell and Schmidt 2004

When that became a political problem for them, they simply changed the data.


The level of fraud from these criminals is breathtaking. They don’t make any attempt to be honest or accurate anymore. It is all about protecting their scam.

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to More Desperate Criminal Behavior From Climate Scientists

  1. Michael 2 says:

    When I’m feeling a bit depressed all I need to do is come here and find a reason for it. The good news is not living in Antarctica. 2/10ths of a degree warmer isn’t really “warmer” anywhere in Antarctica.

    • omanuel says:

      Pompous popes, total tyrants and crooked climatologists still cannot hide the giant fountain of energy Copernicus discovered at the gravitational center of the solar system in 1543, in total control of the whole solar system:

      Click to access npgd-2-1275-2015.pdf

    • omanuel says:

      Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely!

      1. The Catholic Church was at the top of the power structure in 1543 when Copernicus reported a Higher Power at the gravitational center of the solar system.

      2. The Scientific Community was near the top of the power structure in 1945 after deciding the winner of WWII by releasing energy from the cores of heavy atoms.

      By 1946, the scientific community was also lying about the Higher Power that Copernicus had discovered at the gravitational core of the solar system in 1543!

      Such is the human nature.

  2. When the editors, the peer reviewers, the NSF, the NAS, NOAA, NASA, and the White House are in on the hoax, it’s easy to get away with data fabrication. Anyone who questions it is immediately blacklisted and called crazy. Then even the moderates don’t want to associate with them, for fear of their own jobs.

    When the scientific outcomes are based on money paid for specific services rendered, and on conclusions predetermined by the funding source, no actual science is being done, by definition.

    The solution: on politically charged questions (which is the vast majority of questions), poll the community to find out who is on which side. (Require respondents to defend their positions, not just to state them. This way, their statements about their own beliefs can be assessed for credibility.)

    Then, take equal amounts of funding and equal numbers of authors from both sides of the question. (No one is allowed to participate without revealing their bias. Anyone who claims not to have a bias one way or the other is not accepted.)

    Any paper which does not follow these rules is automatically assumed to be spurious and unscientific, and is ignored. Copies of the funding paperwork and of the checks (both sides) or direct deposits are submitted and published as a part of the paper, because they are part of the evidence for (or against) the scientific findings within the paper.

    Anything less than the above is not science but mere games with words and numbers.

    What I’ve outlined here is the only way, that I can see, out of the morass of fraud we’ve gotten ourselves into.


    • bit chilly says:

      i would vote for that richard. sadly, unlikely to happen .

    • omanuel says:

      None of us imagined it possible that Stalin emerged victorious during a worldwide NEWS BLACKOUT of events near Konan, Korea in August-September 1945, in total control of . . .

      2. Holding the CREW of an American B-29 bomber for negotiations . . .

      to unite nations (UN) and national academies of sciences (NAS) on October 24, 1945 into a giant, worldwide Orwellian Ministry of Consensus Science (UN)Truths!”

      None of us imagined that possible, although in 1946:

      3. David Snell reported many of these events in The Atlanta Constitution,

      4. The internal composition of the Sun was abruptly and unanimously changed from iron (Fe) to hydrogen (H), without any discussion or debate, and

      5. George Orwell moved from London to the Scottish Isle of Jura to start writing the futuristic novel that describes the current state of worldwide government by deceptive science – NINETEEN EIGHTY-FOUR!”

  3. Billy Liar says:

    It’s the same old model junk science from Hansen. From the abstract:

    atmospheric CO2 amount, which in turn is a tight control knob on global climate

    He’ll go to his grave thinking that CO2 is the control knob for climate. He appears unable to conceive of anything else that might affect climate. Poor man, his brain is stuck in a race condition.

    • “Appears” is right. He presided over a lot of the data fraud!

      I’d say he’s stuck in a hoax condition. If he ever admits to the blatantly obvious fact that there is no support for his CO2 position, he proves he was lying when he said it was all a fossil-fueled conspiracy to silence the truth. And thereby proves he participated in a hoax on the people’s dime. Then he would be responsible for triggering the demise of the climate hoax beloved by the Left. And he would give ammunition to any efforts to claw back the money from him.

      • What could possibly go wrong? says:

        He does as his bosses tell him to. Nothing more. nothing less. If you have a close look at “climate control” you will see that it is the same old colonial measures. Give the [insert underdeveloped society of choice] some glass pearls, do some mighty booga booga on climate conferences and continue taking their wealth unabated while they play with their useless solar panels and windmills instead of actually developing a feasible economy. If climate scamming isn’t enough, add some drones or some ,ilitarily drilled religious extremists of choice who interestingly enough only blow up people who resist EUSA control, to make your message clear.

        The whole climate scam is weaponized and toxic by now.

        • I hear you about extremists, but for me the climate hoax is more about making wealthy nations poor and subjugating them to traditionally poorer nations. The colonialism, if you will, has been globalized, or multiculturalized.

          It’s about hatred of Western values, and now for the first time in centuries, those folks have it in their reach to destroy the West as we/they have known it, and rebuild it in the image of the anti-West. And the Western power groups that previously supported the West and its values (for their own reasons) are now turning and joining forces with those they used to oppress.

          We, the dwindling supporters of sanity, are being caught in a pincer between these two powerful groups of Western and non-Western leaders, and to add insult to injury, they’re trying to make us take the rap for their own past crimes against other peoples. Because they were never really on our side to begin with. As I said, they were allied with us for their own reasons.

          In my view, the wielding of Muslim extremists is because it shakes up the Western middle class who then feel compelled to go into “crusade mode” for lack of a better term, which drives Western debt through the stratosphere, thereby advancing the above-stated goal of making us poor and subjugating us to nations who hate our values. We are not thinking clearly about the wisdom of reacting like this, because we’re still stuck on the old paradigm that we’re the top of the world, and our leaders are on our side and against the attackers, and so it seems natural to turn up the response to 11 and “let ’em have it”. Hey, it’s always worked before.

          Obama loves this reaction, because he can indulge it to the hilt, and the more he does, the more damage we do to ourselves. And he and his friends laugh hysterically, because to them it’s so easy for anyone half-conscious to see what’s going on, and they think it’s just hilarious that most of us can’t see it. (As for me, I just find it pathetic, and I’m amazed at how hard it is to get otherwise intelligent people to see the reality of what’s happening around us.)

          For those of us conservatives who are more aware, if we complain to the perpetrators about it, telling them how shameless and evil they are, they just laugh and tell us payback is the pits. Which is their way of saying two wrongs make a right, which fairly encapsulates their entire belief system in a nutshell.

  4. rah says:

    The nice thing is they can lie all they want but the majority of people still put the issue at the bottom of the barrel of their concerns. And so the propaganda is not having the desired effect.

    • gregole says:

      Global warming never amounted to much. Anyone and everyone sees that. It amazes me how long the warmunist scam-artists have kept the hoax alive.

  5. darrylb says:

    Yes, there is some warming in (under) the West Antarctic ice shelf.
    However, there is much evidence which points to the fact that it is from
    heat coming from the earths core. It appears that the region is increasingly
    becoming a more active volcanic area.

    Humans can be a sad lot. At one time we blamed everything on witches.
    Now, we (some of us) will blame everything on CO2 induced warming.

    BTW, a new paper has stated that four out of eight Scandinavian glaciers have
    been increasing in total mass.

    • The West Antarctic Ice Sheet is attached to bedrock which is below sea level, because of the rise in sea level 10,000 years ago. The ice formed when sea level was 400 feet lower. Now that the seas have risen, it has taken this long for the WAIS to loosen from the bedrock. These idiots think it was caused by humans. There are no words to describe the profound depths of their stupidity.

  6. Andy DC says:

    These people do not even show even the slightest pretense of doing science. There are simply trying to defend an obvious politcal agenda and countless failed predictions by coming up with any cock and bull story they can dream up. It is really quite pathetic seeing them make total jackasses of themselves.

  7. A logic so clear
    That only fools cannot seize,
    Global warming
    Causes the Antarctic to freeze;
    Called the ‘Invention Principle’,
    It’s an indisputable law,
    Don’t believe what I say
    Go check with Al Gore!

  8. au1corsair says:

    “Normal?” Who established “normal” and what means did they use? Was “climate normal” created by several drunkards with a dart board in a pub? Either the climate “record” is mostly guesswork or the last three centuries haven’t advanced the accuracy of scientific measurement procedures and instruments. I’m rooting for better gear and processes, so that renders the records prior to the modern era inaccurate guesswork.

    Earth spent more time with high temperatures (over 50 degrees Centigrade global average) than it did with “normal temperatures” in the 20 degree global average–unless “Climate Scientists” are Bible-thumpers and Earth is less than six thousand years old…

    • Beale says:

      Was “climate normal” created by several drunkards with a dart board in a pub?
      Something like that, probably.

  9. Andy says:

    It’s interesting that depending on your point of view the Arctic is losing sea ice because or winter winds and the Antarctic is gaining sea ice because it is getting colder, or, the Arctic is losing ice because of warmer summers and the Antarctic is gaining sea ice because of winds increasing the extent. Completely opposing views. 🙂


    • Yes but only one of them is built on the foundation of a fabricated surface temperature record and the assumption that all current satellite temperature series are massively off-kilter (cooling-biased).

      Moreover, I suspect that the effect of icebreakers on Arctic ice extent is about as great or greater than the effect of wind. Hard to prove because there could be military icebreakers out there whose activities could be classified in order to protect the climate conspiracy.

      • Andy says:

        I have to admit your second paragraph made me chuckle. Icebreakers have almost zero effect on ice extent value, do you know how big the Arctic is? Perhaps they should send this hundreds of secret ice breakers to the Antarctic also to reduce the increasing extent?

        Try and at least be reasonable with possibles….


        • Well, Andy, I always try to entertain, when possible.

          Breaking up the ice makes it more mobile so it can travel further with a given wind speed/duration. It also increases the surface area-to-mass ratio, which can affect melting rate. I don’t see what’s so unreasonable about that hypothesis. Around the summer minimum, I think it wouldn’t take many icebreakers at all to materially impact the ice extent. And temperature data suggest to me that we should be seeing more ice than we really are.

          When you talk of sending icebreakers to the Antarctic to reduce the increasing extent, I would consider that feasible.

          First of all because I very much doubt they have enough icebreakers to cover both poles sufficiently for the scheme to be worth the effort, at either pole.

          Second, because they’re already taking the position that increasing Antarctic extent corresponds to increasing temperature. Therefore by implication, a suddenly decreasing extent does not greatly help them, and may even harm their brainwashing efforts.

          Finally, you must admit it would be a lot harder to hide the transfer of U.S. icebreakers from Arctic to Antarctic than to just leave them in the Arctic, where they would be, anyway. They would need to come up with a plausible excuse for any Pentagon staffers who couldn’t be trusted with the truth. A difficult deception, and rather less likely to succeed than the one I posit. (Besides, getting sufficient fuel to them, and keeping that action hidden, would be a nightmare.)

        • Correction: “would consider that feasible” should be “would not consider that feasible”.

      • AndyG55 says:

        Yep, there is a definite tendency to accept LESS Arctic sea ice in summer as being very beneficial. Otherwise they wouldn’t have ice-breakers, would they. !

        Most beneficial would be if the Arctic was ice free for at least some part of the year..

        You know, like earlier in the Holocene, before the “neoglaciation” period down to the LIA. !

        Its a pity the level seems to have bottomed out and now looks to be increasing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s