Why The New NASA Antarctica Study Is Devastating To Climate Alarmists

NASA now says that Antarctica is gaining ice.

2015-10-31-10-37-09NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses | NASA

I have been pointing out for years that the academic interpretations of ice loss via GRACE gravity data, are complete garbage.

GRACE – Clueless AGW Science | Real Science

Another Nail In The Mindless GRACE Interpretation Coffin | Real Science

The implications of this study devastate climate alarmism:

  1. Antarctica is not contributing to sea level rise
  2. The Greenland ice loss interpretations almost certainly are wrong too
  3. Forecasts of rapid sea level rise are untenable

The climate scam is dead scientifically. There is nothing left but fraud, lies, corruption, censorship and extortion.

About Tony Heller

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

40 Responses to Why The New NASA Antarctica Study Is Devastating To Climate Alarmists

  1. beowulftoo says:

    But, but, butt Obama says it ain’t snowing no mo’. So how could that be?

  2. As far as I am aware – now that NOAAgate & your own NASAgate proves surface fabrications to be totally incredible, the Climate Extremists now have nothing to support their garbage religion.

    The Scam is no longer supported by any hard evidence whatsoever. It is a cliff, which has now been totally undermined to such an extent there is a gap between the base and ALL rock that used to support it.

    This is obviously physically impossible. So my conclusions are:
    1. There’s no scientific basis whatsoever for this scam and it only exists because of some “magic” (aka political will)
    2. That somehow – it is already falling – it’s just that its happening so slowly that we cannot (yet) see it falling – but presumably as it accelerates we will see it collapsing faster and faster.

    But aren’t the two connected? Because as soon as people believe its falling, the “magic” holding it up will disappear and it will fall because people believe it is falling.

    • The statements posted here appear to be a psychological projection of the religious global warming denialist movement. Projection happens when one accuses ones opponents of doing the very things that one is doing. That is, being a religion, being unreal, drinking “Koolaid” etc…

      The problem: NONE of your “evidence” contradicts AGW. If there is any, and it has been peer reviewed, it is so miniscule but it does not contradict the overwhelming pile of growing evidence that humans are mostly responsible for global warming.

      The religion is that of the deniers who refuse, incredulously, to accept scientific reality and fear the worst,… Believing in debunked and recycled myths over established science.

      It’s astonishing to me that people still believe there some sort of climate gate scandal which has been disproved in four or five government investigations! That tells me right there that denial of AGW Is a religion.

      Bet some of you believe in BenghaziGate too, the fake investigation which is actually a witch hunt by the RNC against Hillary to drive her poll numbers down.

  3. gator69 says:

    I wonder where cfgj is now? Grace Boy?

  4. Scarface says:

    “The climate scam is dead scientifically.”

    Spread the word!

  5. rah says:

    An F-15C Eagle from the 144th Fighter Wing flies above the High Arctic Oct. 22, 2015. From Oct. 15-26, 2015, approximately 700 members from the Canadian Armed Forces and the U.S. Air Force, Navy, and Air National Guard deployed to Iqaluit, Nunavut, and 5 Wing Goose Bay, Newfoundland and Labrador, for Exercise Vigilant Shield 16. (U.S. Air National Guard photo/Master Sgt. David J. Loeffler)

    Stopped over at Goose Bay while in transit several times. Interesting place. Don’t know how it is now but back then Field Ops was entered through corrugated galvanized steel arches which take you down to the facility which was more or less underground. Outside in the parking lot there were telephone poles strung with the wires and plugs for engine block heaters hanging down at each parking spot. The whole place had an ambiance of isolation in a wilderness with nothing but trees and mountains to be seen far as the I could see. Real Indian country it seemed. A squadron of Luftwaffe F4s was there sometimes. Asked one of their pilots why they were there and he explained that it was the best place for training for operations over the Russian steppes.

  6. Henry P says:

    told you so
    we are cooling from the top latitudes downward….
     A natural consequence of global cooling is a small (?) shift of cloud formation and precipitation, more towards the equator, on average. Whilst maximum temperatures will still be dropping, average temperature around the equator remains more or less unchanged, largely due to more condensation energy coming free.
     At the higher latitudes >[40] it will become progressively drier, from now onward, ultimately culminating in a big drought period similar to the dust bowl drought 1932-1939. My various calculations all bring me to believe that this main drought period on the Great Plains will be from 2021-2028. It looks like we have only 5 “fat” years left…..

  7. As noted at

    Why leave out the fine print and contradicting details??
    You cherrypicked what YOU’D LIKE reality to be. There is still a net increase in the ocean sea level rise of .27 inches, AS NOTED in the article. It’s not coming from Greenland like they thought it was. It is UNSCIENTIFIC to leave that out.

    The same NOAA trends reveal that in a few decades, compared to accumulation of 10,000 years, the net losses will be greater than the net gains. In only 20~30 YEARS! Vs. 10,000 YEARS of accumulation:
    “But it might only take a few decades for Antarctica’s growth to reverse, according to Zwally. “If the losses of the Antarctic Peninsula and parts of West Antarctica continue to increase at the same rate they’ve been increasing for the last two decades, the losses will catch up with the long-term gain in East Antarctica in 20 or 30 years — I don’t think there will be enough snowfall increase to offset these losses.”

    OVERALL picture is BAD:
    ”The good news is that Antarctica is not currently contributing to sea level rise, but is taking 0.23 millimeters per year away,” Zwally said. “But this is also bad news. If the 0.27 millimeters per year of sea level rise attributed to Antarctica in the IPCC report is not really coming from Antarctica, there must be some other contribution to sea level rise that is not accounted for.”

    This demonstrates is that there IS a sea level rise rise, but NOAA mistakenly attributed it to Antarctica. It’s possible for scientists to err. This article proves how science is self-correcting: the theory that best fits REALITY wins, not the anti-scientific pronouncements of Pharisees or political leaders.

    How was it possible for the author to ignore the contradicting evidence to his narrative?

    Picking out ONLY the evidence that proves your point, but ignoring the overall REALITY that contradicts your wishes and hopes is religious in nature, not scientific.

    In a religion one may believe in something that science contradicts. Sky fairies, Santa, Jesus or the flying Spaghetti Monster. But ignoring pertinent facts is climate change denialism–because the science of climate change reflects reality, not wishes or myths.

    I’ve got a feeling you won’t post this, because it runs counter to your dogma. Your loss.

  8. tomwys1 says:

    Re: NASA finally reporting about Antarctic mass gain: There actually is mention that sea level is affected negatively. With respect to the actual Sea-Level disconnect with Topex/Poseidon/Jason, most scientists worthy of that nomenclature, have known for quite some time that the U. of Colorado’s “adjustments” merely serve to double the actual sea level rise reported by Tide Gauges placed in tectonically inert locations (regions of the world that are neither uplifting nor subsiding). Its been 22 years of T/P/J reporting by the U. of C, and they must realize that the world knows the difference between 30mm and 70mm, and perhaps the mainstream media can figure it out too, but do NOT count on this happening before the Paris Xmas shopping spree.

    With a 38% CO2 rise since 1880 and NO equivalent acceleration of sea-level rise during the same period, you have to be mathematically inept not to see the disconnect. For more, see:

    • DD More says:

      NASA agrees,
      “We’re essentially in agreement with other studies that show an increase in ice discharge in the Antarctic Peninsula and the Thwaites and Pine Island region of West Antarctica,” said Jay Zwally, a glaciologist with NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, and lead author of the study, which was published on Oct. 30 in the Journal of Glaciology.

      but not with all the measurements. Except where is isn’t.

      From 2004 Climate Variability in West Antarctica Derived from Annual Accumulation-Rate Records from ITASE Firn/Ice Cores

      The ice cores from this study were analyzed to look for recent changes in accumulation rates. The period 1970–present was chosen due to numerous previous studies reporting changes in accumulation during this same time period. Mean accumulation since 1970 for each site was compared to the long-term mean and, due to the different time period covered by each record, the mean from 1922 to 1991 (the period of overlap between records) (Table 2). Results for cores 01-5 and 99-1 are disregarded because of the possible need for topographic corrections (see previous section). The results indicate a slight decrease (1–4%) in accumulation at sites 00-4, RIDS C and Siple Dome, and a larger decrease (9%) at site 00-5. Accumulation increased (5–10%) at sites 01-3, 01-2 and 00-1. The geographical clustering of these sites suggests that there has been an increase in accumulation since 1970 in the western sector of the Pine Island–Thwaites drainage system (00-1, 01-2, 01-3) (Fig. 2; Table 2).


      So they compare average accumulation 1922 to 1991 against accumulation 1970 to present. Since there was growth 1922 to 1991, it would take a 100% decrease between the two before any ‘Alarming loss’ is seen. So far only one core is 9% less than average and the whole group shows growth not melting.

      • Gail Combs says:

        Given that the Pine Island–Thwaites area is geothermialy active, I would be surprised if there wasn’t an increase in ice discharge.

        20 January, 2008 British Antarctic Survey

        The first evidence of a volcanic eruption from beneath Antarctica’s most rapidly changing ice sheet is reported this week in the journal Nature Geosciences. The volcano on the West Antarctic Ice Sheet erupted 2000 years ago (325BC) and remains active.

        Using airborne ice-sounding radar, scientists from British Antarctic Survey (BAS) discovered a layer of ash produced by a ‘subglacial’ volcano. It extends across an area larger than Wales.

        Lead author, Hugh Corr of the BAS says,
        “The discovery of a ‘subglacial’ volcanic eruption from beneath the Antarctic ice sheet is unique in itself. But our techniques also allow us to put a date on the eruption…

        June 10, 2014 The University of Texas at Austin Researchers Find Major West Antarctic Glacier Melting from Geothermal Sources

        Thwaites Glacier, the large, rapidly changing outlet of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, is not only being eroded by the ocean, it’s being melted from below by geothermal heat, researchers at the Institute for Geophysics at The University of Texas at Austin (UTIG) report in the current edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

        The findings significantly change the understanding of conditions beneath the West Antarctic Ice Sheet where accurate information has previously been unobtainable….

        Using radar techniques to map how water flows under ice sheets, UTIG researchers were able to estimate ice melting rates and thus identify significant sources of geothermal heat under Thwaites Glacier. They found these sources are distributed over a wider area and are much hotter than previously assumed.

        The geothermal heat contributed significantly to melting of the underside of the glacier, and it might be a key factor in allowing the ice sheet to slide, affecting the ice sheet’s stability….


    • Gail Combs says:

      Yes, Interesting approach. Use there adjusted mangled data against them.
      The actual historic CO2 data complete with error bars.


      CO2 is linked to sea temperature. Not surprising since cold water absorbs Co2 and hot water out gases CO2.

      In a paper recently published in the international peer-reviewed journal Energy & Fuels, Dr. Robert H. Essenhigh (2009), Professor of Energy Conversion at The Ohio State University, addresses the residence time (RT) of anthropogenic CO2 in the air. He finds that the RT for bulk atmospheric CO2, the molecule 12CO2, is ~5 years, in good agreement with other cited sources (Segalstad, 1998), while the RT for the trace molecule 14CO2 is ~16 years. Both of these residence times are much shorter than what is claimed by the IPCC. The rising concentration of atmospheric CO2 in the last century is not consistent with supply from anthropogenic sources. Such anthropogenic sources account for less than 5% of the present atmosphere, compared to the major input/output from natural sources (~95%). Hence, anthropogenic CO2 is too small to be a significant or relevant factor in the global warming process, particularly when comparing with the far more potent greenhouse gas water vapor. The rising atmospheric CO2 is the outcome of rising temperature rather than vice versa. Correspondingly, Dr. Essenhigh concludes that the politically driven target of capture and sequestration of carbon from combustion sources would be a major and pointless waste of physical and financial resources.

  9. Henry P says:

    interesting approach
    myself, I discovered the Gleissberg cycle
    [in addition to the Schwabe and Hale Nicholson cycle]
    and then I had to consider that there must be even longer term cycles than the Gleissberg cycle

  10. “The climate scam is dead scientifically. There is nothing left but fraud, lies, corruption, censorship and extortion.”

    You left out stupidity. Self-righteous, smug and vindictive leftist stupidity that makes people do vile things. That is the fertile soil out of which this scam grows. Without the backing of large parts of the electorate this thing would have been buried long ago. Never mind that the fraud is hurting the very people supporting it.

    But you were also right to leave it out because this stupidity is alive and well. It will survive the global warming swindle and stay with us till the end of times.

    • “Plot idea: 97% of the world’s scientists contrive an environmental crisis, but are exposed by a plucky band of billionaires & oil companies.”
      ~Scott Westerfield
      HAHAHAHA some people believe in Sky Fairies and anything else corporations and billionaires say.

      • rah says:

        97%? REALLY! Your still falling for that lie? Steven was right!

      • “… stupidity is alive and well.”

        QED. Thank you, agwisreal3000.

      • 97% of the world’s scientists? No, it was 97% of the alarmists.

        Note, I did not say alarmist scientists, since most of them are not scientists at all, but rather, they are just “Occupy Wall Street” morons who smoke pot all day. Scientists? And Dwight Gooden is a doctor.

      • Gail Combs says:

        “….some people believe in Sky Fairies and anything else corporations and billionaires say.”


        You should know ‘agwisreal3000’ you have fallen for the propaganda hook. line and sinker!

        Who the heck do you think CONTROLS THE MSM? Santa Claus?
        READ the peer-reviewed paper The Network of Global Corporate Control

        This lists the top fifty controllers: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21228354.500-revealed–the-capitalist-network-that-runs-the-world/

        Now do something smart, look at WHO the directors are of the MSM you read. He who controls the press controls the content. This is a quicky for Huff & Puff

        Huffington Post is owned by AOL-Time Warner

        Here are a few of the Directors:
        Thomas H. Castro is President & Chief Executive Officer of El Dorado Capital, LLC. a private equity investment firm, since December 2008. He is also the founder of IMB Development Corporation, a private equity investment firm, and has served as its Managing Director since January 2012. Prior to that, Mr. Castro, an entrepreneur, owned and operated other radio stations and founded a company that exported oil field equipment to Mexico. Mr. Castro has served as a Director since July 31, 2006.

        James E. Copeland, Jr. , Former Chief Executive Officer Deloitte & Touche USA. Mr. Copeland has served as a director since July 31, 2006 and is also a director of ConocoPhillips and Equifax, Inc.

        Donna A. James Consultant, Business Advisor & Managing Director
        Lardon & Associates LLC Ms. James served as President of Nationwide Strategic Investments, a division of Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company (“Nationwide Mutual”), a financial services and insurance company, from 2003, and as Executive Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer of Nationwide Mutual from 2000. Ms. James has also served as chair of the National Women’s Business Council since her appointment by President Obama in October 2010. Ms. James has served as a director since March 2009 and is also a director of L Brands, Inc. (formerly known as Limited Brands, Inc.) and Marathon Petroleum Corporation.

        Here is an older longer look LINK

        J.P. Morgan has controlled the MSM in the USA since 1915 and still does.

        • I will look up the information you posted. By and large, the mainstream media is owned by conservatives. If your Theory is correct, all mainstream media would be posting conservative memes without regard to truth or evidence like Fox News does regularly.

          . You have posted information without saying what your thesis or assumptions are. Since you use the term MSM, I must assume that you are generally conservative in your opinions and views. That term is mostly only used by conservatives.
          Generally tend to trust facts because they are smart enough to look them up and verify them. Conservatives usually don’t verify factual information on news sites or television. That’s the reason Fox News is so popular. People don’t check and Fox News simply regurgitates what they want to hear, not what is real.

          May I read between the lines and conclude that your thesis is that the MSM based on your evidence, is liberal inherently?

          If the MSM is Liberal in nature why are the owners almost universally conservative??

          Also, facts have no bias.
          When verifiable facts appear mostly on mainstream media yet are contradicted by Fox News, that tells you something about the ownership and their influence. Rupert Murdoch appears to have much more influence over his media then the Conservatives who own NBC, CBS, ABC.

          Why don’t you clarify what your point is and then I will respond further. Until then, your information is meaningless without context.

        • Gail Combs says:

          You are looking at it sideways.

          There IS no ‘Conservative vs Liberal’ that is just a dog and pony show to confuse the masses. Fox News is nothing more than the Controlled Opposition. It is there to keep up the illusion and nothing more.

          From 1913 on there has been consolidation of power in the federal government and a transfer of wealth from the ‘unfavored’ (middle class upstarts) to the favored (Old World Moneyed elite). That consolidation of power and wealth into the hands of a small unelected group has been accelerating in the last three to four decades.

          From the New York Times:

          January 29, 1989
          …Of mergers and acquisitions each costing $1 million or more, there were just 10 in 1970; in 1980, there were 94; in 1986, there were 346. A third of such deals in the 1980’s were hostile. The 1980’s also saw a wave of giant leveraged buyouts. Mergers, acquisitions and L.B.O.’s, which had accounted for less than 5 percent of the profits of Wall Street brokerage houses in 1978, ballooned into an estimated 50 percent of profits by 1988…

          THROUGH ALL THIS, THE HISTORIC RELATIONSHIP between product and paper has been turned upside down. Investment bankers no longer think of themselves as working for the corporations with which they do business. These days, corporations seem to exist for the investment bankers….

          In fact, investment banks are replacing the publicly held industrial corporations as the largest and most powerful economic institutions in America….

          THERE ARE SIGNS THAT A VICIOUS spiral has begun, as each corporate player seeks to improve its standard of living at the expense of another’s.
          Corporate raiders transfer to themselves, and other shareholders, part of the income of employees by forcing the latter to agree to lower wages. http://www.nytimes.com/1989/01/29/magazine/leveraged-buyouts-american-pays-the-price.html?sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all New York Times

          From the IMF (Yeah, THEM) three decades later:

          …In many countries the distribution of income has become more unequal, and the top earners’ share of income in particular has risen dramatically. In the United States the share of the top 1 percent has close to tripled over the past three decades, now accounting for about 20 percent of total U.S. income (Alvaredo and others, 2012)…

          Thanks to the MSM, the word Capitalist is now applied to those thieves that stole our wealth to enrich themselves instead of the hard worker who invested his money resources and labor into making salable goods. Ever loan from a bank to a corporation SHOULD be accompanied by stock certificates given to every single American they stole that wealth from via inflation/wage devaluation.

          Think how wealthy we would all be if we, instead of the thieves, actually got the benefit from the investment of our wealth.

          So WHO got the wealth that was vacuumed up by the leveraged buyouts and how did they accomplish it?

          Here is the WHO:
          The Network of Global Corporate Control

          The method is via mutual funds or the like where YOUR money is invested but THEY vote the stock. So even if the people whose money was invested in the target corporation did not want a hostile takeover they had no say.

          I get into a longer explanation starting HERE, with a bit of a fight with Gator to liven things up.

  11. Hifast says:

    Reblogged this on Climate Collections.

  12. Martin Smith says:

    The study isn’t devastating, Steven. It is good news. It means we have more time to complete the conversion from fossil fuels to renewables. What I’m not clear on is where the new ice is coming from. The press release implies it is not from increasing snowfall.

    • gator69 says:

      How dumb are you? It is explained in the first sentence of the press release…

      A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.

      You are hopeless.

  13. Glacierman says:

    A random act of science that got passed the gatekeppers……Someone is going to loose their grant money.

  14. things freeze…things thaw…welcome to earth…shit happens

  15. Henry P says:


    there is no agw
    if there were it must show up in the minima data

    but there is no chaos?

    • Henry P says:

      that is
      54 stations balanced on latitude (longitude does not matter as long as you look at K/annum)
      data from 1973
      42yr x 365 x 54 = 827820 measurements

      Now where is your data,

Leave a Reply