Temperatures Plummeting In Greenland Since 2003

Temperatures in southern Greenland have dropped several degrees since 2003.

ScreenHunter_9536 Jun. 16 01.36

This correlates with a sharp drop in North Atlantic sea surface temperatures since 2003.

ScreenHunter_9537 Jun. 16 01.50

The capital of Greenland is still buried in snow on June 16, with only about 70 days left in the so far non-existent growing season.

arcticomm_webcam (2)

About Tony Heller

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

51 Responses to Temperatures Plummeting In Greenland Since 2003

  1. Marsh says:

    Crop farming in Greenland, has gone from difficult to near impossible, in just a few short years!

    • omanuel says:

      Even more impressive, the internal composition of the Sun – the massive, giant fountain of energy that Copernicus reported at the gravitational center of the Solar System in 1543, supplying heat and light to the Earth and all other planets orbiting it – abruptly and magically changed from

      1. Mostly iron (Fe) in 1945 to
      2. Mostly hydrogen (H) in 1946

      The current Pope Francis has joined, and given a religious blessing to the AGW bandwagon to make certain this humanitarian effort – by Al Gore, the UN, the United National Academies of Consensus Science worldwide – is not disrupted by bloggers like Tony Heller reporting actual temperatures.

      • cfgj says:

        Xtians surely convert to AGW now that Francis has revealed what Jesus thinks and would do.

        • AndyG55 says:

          “Covert” from one religion to another.. you just admitted both are religions. DOH !!

          And if you really think the pope talks for Jesus, you are even more GULLIBLE than even I thought you were.

      • omanuel says:

        I am pleased that the current Pope has rejoined the anti-science establishment of those who arrested Galileo for teaching that the Sun – not CO2 – is the source of heat and light for the Earth and all of the other planets that orbit the Sun.

        Congratulations, Pope Francis, you managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory for the Catholic Church!

  2. Robertv says:

    Truther !

  3. Elaine Supkis says:

    A repeat of 1400 when the last Vikings fled!

  4. Andy DC says:

    As we all know, Alaska weather is climate, but Greenland weather is weather.

  5. Winnipeg Boy says:


    That link is good for a giggle. They have Greenland melt right on average. The Danes show a different picture as posted on this sight. A ‘cold and snowy’ melt season according to the cold weather experts in Georgia.

    • There is a 12 year delay between the driver peak and the temperature peak

      • Gail Combs says:

        Dr Page, you are comming up with the same time delay that Dr Evans has come up with.


        • cfgj says:

          What are his publication plans for the model? Peer-review is sorely needed…

        • AndyG55 says:

          The web gives a far more thorough peer-review of papers than ever a couple of “pals” could do.

          That is why so many so-called “climate science” papers are pay-walled. Avoiding real peer review.

          You really don’t understand the purpose of peer review, do you. !!!

          Peer review is when a couple of your peers (or in the case of climate science, the religious order), say that a paper is fit for putting into journals or where-ever, for discussion.

          That is all peer-review is..

          It DOES NOT imply any sort of scientific correctness, especially in an area like climate science where pal-review is rife within the cabal.

        • Arthur Ainslie says:

          AndyG55 +1

          Yes that’s right, a correct and concise analysis of “pal review”.
          I well remember the case of Charles Monet, the so called,
          “peer reviewed” Polar Bear “expert”.(Monett & Gleeson).
          In reality Monnett was on a research flight tracking bowhead
          whales in 2004 when he and a colleague, Jeff Gleason, spotted
          four dead polar bears floating in the water. This then was turned
          into a story claiming that Polar Bears were starving because of
          a so called “ice shortage”. Monett was grilled by the US Inspector
          General’s office, and admitted that.

          1. He only got the job by “hanging around” the laboratory,

          2. He had no idea how to take pictures for “evidence”.

          3. His job was to count Bowhead Whales, and he knew
          nothing about Polar Bears, or their lifestyles at all.

          4. His oft quoted “paper” was “peer-reviewed” by his own
          wife and a colleague who was actually an ornithologist.

          see the text of that incredible interview here :

          Just listen whilst an actor reads the above script – astonishing hubris !
          [archiveorg CMinterview width=500 height=140 frameborder=0 webkitallowfullscreen=false mozallowfullscreen=false]

    • omanuel says:

      Thanks for this intriguing information and your communications with Professor Freeman Dyson. I have known Professor Dyson for almost four decades, since we first met at the 1976 Gregynog Workshop on Isotopic Anomalies in Gregynog, Wales.

      The current AGW scam is partly a reflection of my failed efforts in 1976 to convince Freeman Dyson that the massive fountain of energy Copernicus first reported at the gravitational center of the Solar System in 1543:

      1. Made the chemical elements
      2. Birthed the solar system five billion years (5 Ga) ago
      3. Sustained the origin and evolution of life after 3.8 Ga ago
      4. Still controls every atom, life and planet in the solar system today, and
      5. Cannot be hidden from the public by combined forces of the Catholic Church, the United Nations and the national academies of science (NAS) united into a worldwide Orwellian Ministry of Consensus Scientific (UN)Truths.

      The fountain of energy in the core of the Sun exists on a miniature scale in the cores of atoms heavier than ~150 amu (atomic mass units) and destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki on 6 & 9 AUG 1945.

      The late Dr. Paul Kazuo Kuroda, risked his life by taking personal possession of Japan’s atomic bomb design for fifty-seven years to block sinister use of nuclear energy to RULE the world after WWII.

      The UN’s IPCC, the US National Academy of Science, the Pontifical Academy of Sciences in Rome, the Royal National Academy of Sciences in Sweden, etc., all confirm their continuing dishonesty by refusing to openly address or debate precise experimental evidence that show

      “The Sun’s pulsar core made our elements, birthed the solar system, and sustains every atom, life and world in the solar system today!

      • Here is a link to the Dyson exchange
        “See when Freeman Dyson predicts that the establishment herd will accept that they are wrong at.
        Here is a quote

        E-Mail 4/9/15

        Dear Norman Page,

        Thank you for your message and for the blog. That all makes sense.
        I wish I knew how to get important people to listen to you. But there is
        not much that I can do. I have zero credibility as an expert on climate.
        I am just a theoretical physicist, 91 years old and obviously out of touch
        with the real world. I do what I can, writing reviews and giving talks,
        but important people are not listening to me. They will listen when the
        glaciers start growing in Kentucky, but I will not be around then. With
        all good wishes, yours ever, Freeman Dyson.

        • omanuel says:

          Thanks, Norman. Freeman Dyson is pictured as the second left-most member in this group photo from the 1976 Workshop on Isotopic Anomalies in Gregynog Wales.


          Willie Fowler is in the middle of the front row in this group photo.

          Fred Hoyle is shown as the second right-most member, standing next to his co-author, Wickramasinghe. I am squatting at the right end of the front row, next to my research mentor, Professor Paul Kazuo Kuroda.

          Here is an updated version of a slide presented at the 1976 Gregynog Workshop on Isotopic Anomalies to show that the r-process produced excess Xe-136 in the outer, He-rich layer of the supernova that birthed the solar system.


  6. darrylb says:

    I am of the belief that we are continually and very gradually learning that there are many, many major and minor cycles, and that we will be learning and understanding more.

    A major problem with the AGW crowd is they simply try to narrow changes to a single cause, when there are many.
    Periods of decades or as history shows, sometimes centuries occur in the AMO.

    Those periods can be brought about by the convergence of many various oscillations, like watching the waves on a pond.

    The science of climate change is in its infancy.

    How often do you have a science in which observations completely contradict hypothesis and yet the hypothesis remains!

    • cfgj says:

      The planet is warming up, without a pause, so that prediction of AGW-theory panned out quite well.

      • Nonsense. See the first link at my 2:59 comment above.

      • ren says:

        What will the next winter in the north-east America (when the trend AMO is in decline) compared to the previous two winters?

        • gator69 says:

          CNN Money attributed the recent spike in prices to this winter’s unusually cold weather in the Northeast. The North Atlantic remains colder than it usually is at this time of year, so lobsters have, by and large, stayed out of reach of fishermen.


          It’s 1979 all over again! 😉

        • Andy DC says:

          I wonder what kind of winter we are going to have here in the mid-Atlantic If we combine El Nino with the cold machine of the last 2 years, you would think it would be exceptionally snowy, as nearly all the big snows for Washington, DC over the last 60 years have come during El Nino.

      • AndyG55 says:


        The planet has reached the top of a small molehill out of the coldest period in the last 10,000 years.

        I wish it would warm another degree or two, to go along with the enhance CO2 atmosphere, to the benefit of all life on Earth,…

        BUT IT ISN’T WARMING, and doesn’t look like its going to.

        The tiny amount of NATURAL warming we have had since the LIA is all there is…

        Rather sad, really ! 🙁

        • cfgj says:

          Seas are warming according to independent measurements (temperature & sea-level). No hiatus.

        • AndyG55 says:

          No they are NOT !!!

          You haven’t read or understood any of the SCIENCE and real data that anyone has put forward, have you.

          If you really think that a rate of maybe 0.03C over the period of measurements is actually significant in any way shape or form be it statistically, or sensible, you really have got severe brain-washed issued.

          And the data you have posted IS NOT independent. Don’t pretend that it is.

        • AndyG55 says:

          Gees, even NASA, the alarmista god, says that below 2000m is not warming


          And the data is so sparse, particularly from even a short period ago, that no-one can know what the ocean temperatures are doing.

          Its all a façade, for dumb, brain-washed fools like you.

      • Gail Combs says:

        Oh, Bovine Feces. The planet is COOLING!
        Any warming is the pimple on the flea on an elephant’s rump. More over there was a thermal pulse (Warm Period) just before the plunge into the Wisconsin Ice Age at the end of the Eemain.





        As the second graph shows the present earth climate is chaotic (as the IPCC has already acknowledged) with a warm and a cool phase. The cold phase is DOMINANT and we are in a brief, rather lukewarm phase, within an ice age.



        Not only that but it took close to maximum solar radiation at the critical June 60°N to kick the earth out of the Wisconsin Ice Age. (Changes near the north polar area, about 60 degrees North, are considered important due to the great amount of land. Land masses respond to temperature change more quickly than oceans.)
        The Holocene interglacial is now 11,717 years old. You can look up the calculated value at NOAA:

        ***…. 90NJune.. 60NJune
        0….. 523.30…. 475.95
        -10 … 579.16…. 521.80
        -11.. 580.52…. 523.16
        -12.. 579.49…. 522.50
        -13.. 576.09…. 519.85

        *** is thousand years before present, Chart has been truncated for clarity.

        The current solar radiation at June 60°N/June 65°N is within the range of several glacial inceptions.

        Current value – insolation = 479W m−2 (from the paper Can we predict the duration of an interglacial? (wwwDOT).clim-past.net/8/1473/2012/cp-8-1473-2012.pdf)

        MIS 7e – insolation = 463 W m−2,
        MIS 11c – insolation = 466 W m−2,
        MIS 13a – insolation = 500 W m−2,
        MIS 15a – insolation = 480 W m−2,
        MIS 17 – insolation = 477 W m−2

        If I were you I would be praying that CO2 is the magic gas the ClimAstroligists say it is, because even if the Holocene goes long as Tony Heller and some other think it will, the climate is going to be close to the threshold and a nasty rollercoaster as it was in the low imsolation valley between peaks in MIS11.

      • Gail Combs says:

        MIS11 BTW as an analog for the Holocene was tossed out by this paper:

        A Pliocene-Pleistocene stack of 57 globally distributed benthic D18O records
        Lisiecki & Raymo (2005)
        We present a 5.3-Myr stack (the ‘‘LR04’’ stack) of benthic d18O records from 57 globally distributed sites aligned by an automated graphic correlation algorithm. This is the first benthic d18O stack composed of more than three records to extend beyond 850 ka,…

        Recent research has focused on MIS 11 as a possible analog for the present interglacial [e.g., Loutre and Berger, 2003; EPICA Community Members, 2004] because both occur during times of low eccentricity. The LR04 age model establishes that MIS 11 spans two precession cycles, with d18O values below 3.6% for 20 kyr, from 398 – 418 ka. In comparison, stages 9 and 5 remained below 3.6% for 13 and 12 kyr, respectively, and the Holocene interglacial has lasted 11 kyr so far. In the LR04 age model, the average LSR of 29 sites is the same from 398– 418 ka as from 250–650 ka; consequently, stage 11 is unlikely to be artificially stretched. However, the 21 June insolation minimum at 65°N during MIS 11 is only 489 W/m2, much less pronounced than the present minimum of 474 W/m2. In addition, current insolation values are not predicted to return to the high values of late MIS 11 for another 65 kyr. We propose that this effectively precludes a ‘‘double precession cycle’’ interglacial [e.g., Raymo, 1997] in the Holocene without human influence….

        So the earth is certainly not going to warm catastrophically for another 65,000 years. Warmists forget all energy (minus geothermal) comes from the sun..

        • darrylb says:

          and to add to what Gail just stated

          My natural first line of thinking, as a result of physics being my most significant area of study is to quantify.
          Yes, all energy referred to as renewable minus geothermal, including wind, hydroelectric,
          CO2 producing fuels such as ethanol, and more all simply are current uses of solar energy.
          Fossil fuels contain stored solar energy. That energy has been stored over eons of time.

          So to quantify, energy stored or millions of years, or current energy? Which is greater.?
          Which will be enough?

          Energy is very quantifiable and one can do all the cute bit of manipulation one wants to do. But, even with a high degree of efficiency, it will not be enough—-unless as some people want—only they, the chosen few shall inherent the earth and they can eliminate the human pestilence on mother earth. You know, eugenics or whatever.

          Someday all the reserves on the earth will be chosen for consumption

          The answer will be within the nucleus of the atom, and methods will be sought to harvest the nuclear energy to produce and store it in the equivalent of fossil fuels.
          It is not as improbable as it may seem

        • Elaine Supkis says:

          Welcome home, Gail.

      • darrylb says:

        When I saw the name Tom Karl as the lead author of a study, I knew it was rubbish. I have seen his work too often
        ,That study ignores every major
        set of data and uses heat contaminated water on marine vessels to vouch for warming.
        The marine vessels are only capable of measuring in the shipping lanes, everywhere else had to be manufactured.

        The only possibility of finding some kind of temperature change was in sea surface temperatures It was not found below the surface as measured by the Argo float system.

        He used that data to raise the temperature record on buoys that were put in place for the specific purpose of measuring temperature.

        Also, he lowered the temperature record in a two year period in the beginning of the 21st century so that a raise in temperature could be observed, a process which left most every capable scientist scratching their head.

        Finally, he in filled in a very arbitrary manner sea surface temperatures in the Arctic.

        It is that kind of desperate manipulation of temperature records that first made me skeptical and in fact disillusioned with a significant part of the scientific community.

    • AndyG55 says:

      A great comment by Merovign on that thread…

      “Because SCIENCE is all about never questioning your own hypothesis.
      Everybody knows that.”

    • omanuel says:

      Andy, the UK Royal Society has been up to its ears in deceptive science after publishing two papers in 1946 [1] that changed mainstream opinions of astronomers and astrophysicists about the internal chemical composition of the Sun from:

      Mostly iron (Fe) in 1945, to
      Mostly hydrogen (H) in 1946, . . .

      without any public discussion or debate.

      Fred Hoyle, “The chemical composition of the stars,” Monthly Notices Royal Astronomical Society 106, 255-259 (1946); “The synthesis of elements from hydrogen,” Monthly Notices Royal Astronomical Society 106, 343-383 (1946).

  7. gallopingcamel says:

    Many thanks for sharing the Gregynog photos. I was born in Pembroke (Wales) and later studied physics and electrical engineering at Pembroke College, Cambridge.

    Back then (late fifties) I was a fan of Fred Hoyle and “Continuous Creation”. I stuck with Fred long after Penzias and Wilson found the cosmic background radiation attributed to the “Big Bang”.

    • omanuel says:

      What! You must be almost as old as me.

      I desperately wanted to speak privately with Fred Hoyle at the Gregynog workshop, but the BBC kept him busy filming for a TV series.

      In hindsight, I suspect BBC is about as trustworthy as the KGB. Too bad, I loved many old BBC programs and basically believed anything BBC reported.

    • The cosmic background radiation signal is extracted from a foreground noise orders of magnitude larger so that the former depends entirely on the assumptions made in the extracting algorithms. These assumptions are made using the assumptions needed to verify the hypothesis that it exists, so naturally that is what is found. The climate models were built on the same tautologous methodology. This is a popular method in many areas of science these days because it ensures that what the scientist promised to find in his grant application actually appears in the results so that the money keeps rolling in.

  8. gallopingcamel says:

    Gail Combs,
    Thanks for all that. Great research!

    • Gail Combs says:

      Nice to hear from you. As you know I am like ChiefIO and like to follow a thought to see where it leads. E.M. just does a much more indepth job than I.

      • bit chilly says:

        you do your good self a disservice there gail. i love reading your posts. always sensible,well thought out and most importantly , easy to understand for the hard of thinking like me 🙂

  9. gallopingcamel says:

    The Royal Society is in big trouble. It should have remained above politics.

    • omanuel says:

      It appears frightened world leaders united nations (UN) and national academies of science (NAS, RS, etc) into a giant, worldwide Orwellian Ministry of Consensus Science (UN)Truths on 24 Oct 1945.

      Fred Hoyle remains my hero today for exposing in his 1994 autobiography the fraudulent basis for the 1946 alterations to the internal composition of the Sun:

      Mostly iron (Fe) in 1945 to
      Mostly hydrogen (H) in 1946, . . .

      with no public debate or discussion !

  10. Gail Combs says:


    I agree with you. To put it in different words, civilization has two paths from this point forward.

    1. ‘Access to Energy’ for everyone which translates to freedom, technological growth and a high standard of living. Nuclear Energy would be a major part of the energy mix going forward.

    2. Slavery/Serfdom for most with an elite few living well off the labor of the serfs. As Ted Turner, Founder of CNN and the the UN Foundation said: ”A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.” He forgot to add that that is the number the elite feel are need to serve their needs.

    To praphrase Aristotle, “when looms weave by themselves man’s slavery will end. “ So it was actually James Watt, the inventor of the modern steam engine and the other inventors of the Industrial Revolution who freed the slaves. The fact that slavery is still alive and well in the third world just shows that Aristotle was right and idiots like cfgj and Jim Hunt want all of us, the 10% who don’t end up dead, to wear serf collars, not realizing they are included in the ‘us’.

    Speaking of a 10% survial rate…..

    Even with the examples of the failure of renewables in the EU in front of us, American politicians remain eager to commit to an unknown and unproven radical change to the fabric of the American economy and society. That change will mean — if Dr. Peter Vincent Pry, the executive director of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security, is correct — riots and famine. (Al Sharpton and Obama are certainly working hard on the riots) If it’s done abruptly the transition “..could kill 9 of 10 Americans through starvation, disease, and societal collapse…. “

    President Obama has made it clear he is willing to commit the people of the USA to removal of 30% of their reliable energy in the next ten years and 80 to 83% in the twenty years thereafter without any proof that replacement of proven energy generation methods by renewables can sustain the US population.

    On November 25, 2009 The White House, Office of the Press Secretary issued the statement:

    President to Attend Copenhagen Climate Talks

    Administration Announces U.S. Emission Target for Copenhagen

    The White House announced today that President Obama will travel to Copenhagen on Dec. 9 to participate in the United Nations Climate Change Conference, where he is eager to work with the international community to drive progress toward a comprehensive and operational Copenhagen accord…..

    The White House also announced that, in the context of an overall deal in Copenhagen that includes robust mitigation contributions from China and the other emerging economies, the President is prepared to put on the table a U.S. emissions reduction target in the range of 17% below 2005 levels in 2020 and ultimately in line with final U.S. energy and climate legislation. In light of the President’s goal to reduce emissions 83% by 2050, the expected pathway set forth in this pending legislation would entail a 30% reduction below 2005 levels in 2025 and a 42% reduction below 2005 in 2030.

    On November 11, 2014 The White House reaffirmed the desire to commit the USA to the same goals while allowing China to peak CO2 emissions around 2030.

    Building on strong progress during the first six years of the Administration, today President Obama announced a new target to cut net greenhouse gas emissions 26-28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025….

    The new U.S. goal will double the pace of carbon pollution reduction from 1.2 percent per year on average during the 2005-2020 period to 2.3-2.8 percent per year on average between 2020 and 2025….

    This ambitious target is grounded in intensive analysis of cost-effective carbon pollution reductions achievable under existing law and will keep the United States on the right trajectory to achieve deep economy-wide reductions on the order of 80 percent by 2050.

    No wonder the Obama admin wants all the illegals it can con into living in the USA. They are the only ones in this country with the survival skills needed to live in a USA without electric or mechanical power!

    The average energy use for the USA is 335.9 million BTUs per person. (Total population: 246,081,000)
    (wwwDOT)nuicc.info/?page_id=1467 or (wwwDOT)fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40187.pdf

    The U.S. in 1800 had a per-capita energy consumption of about 90 million Btu. (Total population: 5,308,483) (wwwDOT)bu.edu/pardee/files/2010/11/12-PP-Nov2010.pdf

    If the USA reduces its energy consumption by 80% it equals 67.18 million Btu. per person, two thirds of the energy used per person in the 1700s!

    Oh BTW Duke Energy just blew up the coal plant on the Cape Fear River near Moncure NC that they shut down so there is no going back …..


    Mean while power surges? from wind? solar? caused the transformer near us to explode and take out the computer surge protector which also caught on fire. Luckily the house didn’t burn down.

    • Elaine Supkis says:

      I figured something happened to your computer!

      We had surge problems and the electric company had to put in a much better transformer to stop surges after we had our computers blow out and the electrical input in the basement caught on fire.

    • omanuel says:


      I agree. Nuclear energy is probably the way to go.

      Our first order of business is to VERIFY or DISPROVE the validity of Galen Winson’s charge: The Nuclear Scare Scam


      • Gail Combs says:

        Oh it is a scam Oliver, When they were building the Seabrook Nuclear plant in the 1980s there was an ad in the Boston Globe

        Nuclear Power Plant Protesters
        pay – $10.00/hour

        The minimum wage at the time was $3.35 so that was good pay. More than We paid lab techs ten years later.

        So who was footing the bill? – Can you say the ROCKEFELLERS aka Standard Oil? The best way to get rid of the competition is to trick people into getting them regulated out of business.

        Speaking of E.M. Smith he covered the topic of regulating the competition very nicely in this comment.

Leave a Reply