What Drives Greenland Temperatures?

NASA Fraudsters claim that melting of eastern Greenland’s glaciers is caused by increases in carbon dioxide, but there is zero evidence to back up their claim. Glacier melt there peaked 80 years ago when CO2 was very low.




There is no correlation between atmospheric CO2 and Greenland temperatures.


What does drive Greenland temperatures is the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, which correlates nicely.


Amazing that these NASA crooks are willing to take a completely fraudulent story to the press.

About Tony Heller

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

22 Responses to What Drives Greenland Temperatures?

  1. I was wondering why the woods are so quiet and how the trees affect wifi transmissions. It seems that there is a war on with trees and chem trail spraying and that wifi towers stand high above any tree line. Perhaps you know of an article that covers chem trail spraying and if it is industry driven to eliminate trees … and how tree loss affects weather patterns http://www.pearsonitcertification.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1329709&seqNum=3

  2. I must be on the wrong website, sorry!

  3. oppti says:

    AMO has a big impact on climate up north.
    It can explain why we have reports on Ice free Artic from the period before 1978 when satellites have controlled the situation.

  4. Canadian Climate Guy says:

    Reblogged this on Canadian Climate Guy.

  5. smamarver says:

    This topic is so actual, as there are not so many studies on the oceans and their part in the global warming is often ignored. I have read a study regarding the arctic warming (www.arctic-warming.com) that may interest you, as it debates the theme and tries to find some answers for the questions regarding climate change periods. It is very important to focus on the oceans, as every definition we will try to find for the climate, we will get to the point where we will say that “the climate is the continuation of oceans by other means”.

    • Gail Combs says:

      Of interest is Frank Lansner’s The Original Temperatures Project presented at WUWT

      “….The number of adjustments of temperature data appears overwhelming and often undocumented. Are we facing homogenization of temperature data? Or is it “pasteurization” (= warm treatment) of temperature data?
      As a sceptic it is my opinion that we need to know for sure. I therefore started out 18 months ago collecting original temperature data and now I have started presenting the results on http://www.hidethedecline.eu

      I experienced a lack of will from the national meteorological institutes to freely share the tax paid data I asked for. I even had assistance from a large Danish Newspaper to ask the questions for me, send mails etc. I asked for raw data from datasets beginning before 1950, especially the non-coastal stations:….”

      Frank looked at ocean affected vs interior temperatures.


      But Non-coastal stations can be divided further into Ocean Air Affected stations (“OAA”, marked yellow) and then Ocean Air Shelter stations (“OAS”, marked blue).
      OAS areas thus have some similarities with valleys in general, but as illustrated above, the OAS areas cover a slightly different area than the valleys.

      I would think if you wanted the actual ‘temperature of the earth’ you would look at what is happening to Ocean Air Shelter stations since they are not as affected by ocean oscillations.


      Fig 19
      European Coastal trends versus Land trend from Ocean Shelter Areas.</blockquote

      It is interesting that the areas Frank suggest for measuring 'Ocean Air Shelter' temperatures to get the 'purest signal' are the places that thermometer data is no longer taken.

      And speaking of data 'adjustments and FRAUD' the EU does the same as the USA:


      Fig 7
      ECA&D temperature versions versus Tutiempo versions averaged for each nation.
      For most countries analysed, ECA&D temperature data versions have warmer values for temperatures than Tutiempo in recent years. Especially for the years 2010-2012 ECA&D seems to add a lot of heat to data when they adjust.

      Frank also looks at BEST and has nothing good to say.

  6. Chaam Jamal says:

    very interesting analysis. thank you.

Leave a Reply