Even journalists get tripped up into thinking this is photo from the North Pole. At the real North Pole, history shows this to be a relatively common occurrence.
It isn’t very hard to catch Al Gore and his Climate Reality project followers in ridiculous claims that don’t hold up. For example there was his statement on national television where he claimed the temperature of the interior of the Earth was “millions of degrees” and then there is his “Climate 101” video that failed so they had to fake the results in post production. None of his followers call him out on such things, so it isn’t a surprise to find that they think this photo proves the North Pole is melting, far worse than before.
Only one problem: that picture wasn’t taken at the North Pole, it was taken over 300 miles away.
You see while they were busy lecturing the faithful, they forgot the one teensy-eeensy little detail about the source of this photo. It is from camera on top of the sea ice, and sea ice isn’t static, it moves. In fact according to the University of Washington who manages and tracks these floating cameras and weather stations, while they started out near the North Pole, they aren’t anywhere close to it now. See the map:
My annotations added, original source: http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/
The North Pole Environmental Observatory web page describes their weather stations and webcams as “an automated scientific observatory in the central Arctic ocean” and describes the “Barneo 2013 buoy farm — including webcams.”
This “North Pole melted” image (and variants) got a lot of media play last week, showing the “lake at the North Pole” such as this AtlanticWire story saying “The North Pole has Metled Again” and this Daily Mail story, titled “The North Pole turns into a lake: Webcam captures melting ice following a spell of warm weather“.
That was enough to spur the sans-factually emotive Huffington Post into action with a before and after comparator:
Of course, like the Gore Reality Bots, all of these “journalists” also missed the simple fact that the photo was taken hundreds of miles away where the buoy had drifted to. They could easily check this themselves with about 30 seconds of work, visiting the source for the photo here:
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/
Some of the blame for this nonsense goes to the University of Washington’s Dr. James Morison, who manages the page titled: “North Pole Environmental Laboratory”. When that page was put together, the Arctic hadn’t become the poster child for global warming yet, so the the naming was probably innocuous. However, that naming leaves the “webcam at the North Pole” assumption wide open for those that are factually challenged or just too lazy to check.
Using the contact info linked above, I’m sending a letter to Dr. Morison, asking him to fix this issue, naming the page something else, so fools won’t make the same mistake again next year. The webcam/weather station buoys spend most of their lifetime away from the North Pole, so the name of the web page is misleading, as has been aptly demonstrated by the fools in journalism and activism that didn’t look beyond the title this past week.
And, as of today, the “North Pole melt crisis” seems to be over.
And, of course, photos actually taken at the North Pole by the US Navy show that such open water is a regular occurrence in the past:



(U.S. Navy Photo)
UPDATE: NYT’s Andrew Revkin pointed out the same issue is his essay:
A Closer Look at That ‘North Pole Lake’
Revkin has a unique perspective, in that he’s one of the few reporters on the planet that has actually visited the North Pole with a science team.
He notes:
A Web search for “North Pole lake” turns up a lot of hype. I posted a YouTube video trying to clarify what is and isn’t going on:
Ponds of meltwater form routinely on Arctic Ocean sea ice in the summer. The sea ice is floating on the Arctic Ocean and in constant motion. The autonomous camera that took these images was placed on the ice a few dozen miles from the North Pole in early spring, but has since drifted hundreds of miles.
UPDATE2:
I’ve heard back from Dr. Morison at UW. He’s aware of the problem saying:
The lesson I’ve taken from this is that we need to do a much better job of explaining these images. What looks normal to those of us familiar with this particular environment can look alarming if we don’t provide the context.
I expect that we’ll see some improvements to the web page to discourage such future misunderstandings. I thank Dr. Morison for the willingness to engage the issue with me and to consider improvements.





This was linked on the Drudge Report on Friday: http://www.climatecentral.org/news/melting-at-north-pole-how-bad-is-it-16294
It took five minutes to debunk this. Camera #1 which is very near by camera #2 showed a very different view, but as you observed, a visit to the site showed neither camera were at the north pole, both being on a fast track to the North Atlantic via the annual ice conveyor stream east of Greenland. This is posted at the webcam page for those who are still capable of critical thinking and a few moments of research: http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/WebCams.html
I posted a note at the Freedman story (that has not gotten past moderation) showing the reality including the refreeze. What a ridiculous climate site that is and what an idiot Andrew Freedman is.
The lack of honesty in climate alarmist hysteria is appalling.
There you guys go again letting facts get in the way of a good story. It seems every day that they are taking more historical license than Oliver Stone making a movie. Maybe he advises them.
Isn’t the North Pole where Santa Claus has his shop where he makes Obamaphones??
As Solar Cycle 25 takes hold amid a 70-year “dead sun” Grand Solar Minimum, even Gorista/HuffPo types will come to the startling realization: “No, my reverberating friend, you are not the Beginning and the End” (Alan J. Lerner). Too late… by then, their suppurating mendacities will be one with Nineveh and Tyre, and good riddance to ’em.
Typical alarmist lies and disinformation.
Didn’t Nansen encounter a lot of open water near the pole? Nothing new here.
Jesse Ferrell of AccuWeather broke this story four days ago and deserves some credit:
“Did the Media Just Prove North Pole Is NOT Melting?”
http://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-blogs/weathermatrix/did-the-media-just-prove-north-pole-is-not-melting/15739869
Marvellous work, superbly executed. Thank you.
AGU Arctic summary, which isn’t good news for snow balls!
Maybe Morrison needs more funding.
The grade-B movie “Ice Station Zeba” was on over the weekend. I swear that film is where most people get their impression of the arctic ice cap. In the film, the ice cap is a featureless, snow covered plain. Just a solid sheet of unmoving ice.
I’m surprised they didn’t add a few photo-shopped drowning polar bears to the pic.
The Arctic Sea ice melt rate has really slowed down over the past 2 weeks.
There are only a few years in the record going back to 1972 that have been this small over the last 2 weeks and over the past 5 days, it is the slowest melt for this time of the year on record.
Things change of course but the melt pond arrived right at the time the sea ice melt rate slowed to one of its lowest ever. Still 45 days to go until the typical minimum on September 12th.
@Reg Nelson
Please don’t give them any ideas. LOL!
You are forgetting the most basic conventions of Post-Modern Science. The “Truth” of any conjecture is determined solely by how badly you wish it were true, and the Falsity of any information is measured by the depth of your passion that such a thing must be false. And Anyone who says different is a Denier or a Raaacist or something.
Why, there is sea ice even 10 thousand miles south of that spot, 300 miles is nothing compared to that.
Bloke down the pub says:
July 29, 2013 at 9:51 am
The photo taken on the 29th seems to show fresh snow on top of the ice.
Exactly. I have also read that such was the case. So, the snow melts, then when temps drop sufficiently, bingo, more ice. Much ado about nothing, and par for the course for the lamebrained MSM.
WillR says:
July 29, 2013 at 10:09 am
One of the absolutely silliest stories is here:
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2013/07/26/startling_images_show_melting_north_pole_turning_into_a_lake.html
Sharp-eyed readers already on the case.
[http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2013/07/26/startling_images_show_melting_north_pole_turning_into_a_lake.html#comment-aHR0cCUzQS8vdGhlc3Rhci5jb20vRUNITy9pdGVtLzEzNzQ5NzMwOTUtMjU2LTkwMQ==]
I’m not sure why the photos of the subs is here. If it is to imply that the ice was less than today then that is misleading. We know it wasn’t and that the crew had to search for some time to find a gap in the 8 foot thick ice so they could surface. These gaps are called polynyas and are caused by wind and tide. They are temporary and soon freeze over.
We have a slightly rude word in the UK to describe someone determined to air their ignorance. The word is f**kwit and it describes Gore and his acolytes perfectly. Apologies if you find the word offensive.
Something else that now frozen pond has in common with ponds we’re all familiar with – it is the lowest lying spot there, so any melt water will flow to it, exaggerating the sense of scale of the melt. Given the already exaggerated effect of the camera lens, this was a cherry for picking for the science challenged MSM to run with, and for the science drop-outs in the alarmist blogosphere to amplify. All it lacked was some photoshopped penguins and dolphins grounded on the frozen beach, burning in the 24/7 arctic sun. And maybe some of those ambulatory asters that are migrating north to escape the heat from the mid-latitudes
There needs to be a serious financial cost for printing such rubbish.
Simon:
Actually you’re being misleading. You don’t know that the multiyear sea-ice in 1958 is more than now, because there isn’t data that gives you a reliable number.
The idea that you can use the relative difficulty of surfacing a sub through an ice sheet during a period without satellite guidance as a proxy for total arctic sea ice coverage is of course ridiculously silly
Karl Blair says:
July 29, 2013 at 1:16 pm
“Apologies if you find the word offensive.”
Which word – ‘G *re’?
Karl Blair says:
July 29, 2013 at 1:16 pm
“We have a slightly rude word in the UK to describe someone determined to air their ignorance. The word is f**kwit and it describes Gore and his acolytes perfectly. Apologies if you find the word offensive.”
Offensive? Hell it’s f**kin terrific.
Reg Nelson says:
July 29, 2013 at 11:44 am
I’m surprised they didn’t add a few photo-shopped drowning polar bears to the pic.
=====
Or a red-nosed reindeer.