Facebook Censoring The Inconvenient Truth About Antarctic Temperatures


MAY 6, 2023

tags: Antarctic

By Paul Homewood

This post came up on my Facebook today:


When you click on SEE WHY, this comes up:

And this is the story the Facebook censors don’t want you to see:

Quite why Facebook would want to rely on the USA Today for its source of science is a mystery. Perhaps they should have actually checked what real scientists are saying:


The Antarctic continent has not warmed in the last seven decades, despite a monotonic increase in the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases.

In this paper, we investigate whether the high orography of the Antarctic ice sheet (AIS) has helped delay warming over the continent. To that end, we contrast the Antarctic climate response to CO2-doubling with present-day orography to the response with a flattened AIS. To corroborate our findings, we perform this exercise with two different climate models. We find that, with a flattened AIS, CO2-doubling induces more latent heat transport toward the Antarctic continent, greater moisture convergence over the continent and, as a result, more surface-amplified condensational heating. Greater moisture convergence over the continent is made possible by flattening of moist isentropic surfaces, which decreases humidity gradients along the trajectories on which extratropical poleward moisture transport predominantly occurs, thereby enabling more moisture to reach the pole. Furthermore, the polar meridional cell disappears when the AIS is flattened, permitting greater CO2-forced warm temperature advection toward the Antarctic continent. Our results suggest that the high elevation of the present AIS plays a significant role in decreasing the susceptibility of the Antarctic continent to CO2-forced warming.


I’ll post this on Facebook and see how long it takes for the censors to strike!

5 50 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bryan A
May 8, 2023 2:11 pm

I avoid Farcebook so please post an update if when the censors attack

Reply to  Bryan A
May 8, 2023 7:52 pm

I call it Facistbook

Bryan A
Reply to  MikeSexton
May 8, 2023 8:58 pm

The worlds leading ANTI Social website

Nick Stokes
May 8, 2023 2:21 pm

I’m curious about the claimed new cold record -135F. The cited link doesn’t work for me.

Matthew Bergin
Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 8, 2023 2:37 pm

Just checked the link and it is working fine

Nick Stokes
Reply to  Matthew Bergin
May 8, 2023 3:49 pm

The NorwayToday link? OK, so where and when was the -135F reading?

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 8, 2023 4:52 pm

Yup, the web reference quoted in the Norway Today story comes up as a ‘404 Not found’ page for me. Can’t find any news references to a new record low temperature in Antarctica. Searched the Norway Today site with the words “new cold record” back as far as 2010 with no joy.

I entered the text “Antarctica just set a new record 135F below zero” into Google and the closest reference is to a 2013 NBC news piece about a satellite (not surface) temperature recorded there that year and in 2010.

Can any fact-checkers shed any light?

Bryan A
Reply to  TheFinalNail
May 8, 2023 6:40 pm
Last edited 1 month ago by Bryan A
Bryan A
Reply to  Bryan A
May 8, 2023 7:28 pm
Reply to  Bryan A
May 8, 2023 10:18 pm

yes . Its NASA data
NASA Earth satellites found that the place with the lowest temperature in the world is indeed on the East Antarctic Plateau, high up on a mountain ridge, NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center said in a Facebook post on December 16. A satellite picture shows that on the plateau a temperature of minus 135.8 F was measured.”

So NASA put it up on Facebook ! LOL

Nick Stokes
Reply to  Duker
May 8, 2023 10:24 pm

Yes. And apart from accuracy issues, it is measuring skin temperature on the surface, not air temperature.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 9, 2023 12:55 am

No. It’s the *air temperature*
“As well as the surface record, satellites circle the Earth over the poles looking at part of the atmosphere up to 10km above our heads known as the troposphere. They carry microwave instruments that measure how much heat is given off by oxygen molecules, from which scientists can work out the air temperature.”

Accuracy issues? That’s so hilarious. Don’t see a calibration as being an issue unlike the BoM

Last edited 30 days ago by Duker
Nick Stokes
Reply to  Duker
May 9, 2023 3:11 am

No, it’s skin temperature. You are describing MSU methods. But they cannot get down to surface, which is why the closest we can get is TLT. They use MODIS and AVHRR, which measure emitted IR, hence skin temperature. Here is a WashPost report saying that, with the quote”
“Satellite earth skin temperature measurements will never be accepted as ‘official’ weather observations no matter how accurate their data might be,” writes Christopher Burt, Wunderground’s weather historian.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 9, 2023 5:04 am

““Satellite earth skin temperature measurements will never be accepted as ‘official’ weather observations no matter how accurate their data might be,” writes Christopher Burt, Wunderground’s weather historian.“

“No matter how accurate their data might be.” That made me laugh.

The Powers-that-Be accept the RSS satellite data because it conforms closely with the bastardized surface temperature record. This happens because they all use faulty data in their calculations, whereas the UAH satellite data eliminates this faulty data.

Besides, the differences in all the different temperature measurements are only tenths of a degree from each other.

The climate change data mannipulators made these tiny differences into the “hotter and hotter and hotter” meme of the Twenty First Century.

Nick, trying to act like satellite measurements are not fit for purpose is funny. And ridiculous.

Nick Stokes
Reply to  Tom Abbott
May 9, 2023 6:11 am

Totally confused again. As I said, this has nothing to do with MSU methods, including RSS and UAH. It is a method based on measuring surface radiation, using either MODIS or AVHRR sensors.

But one thing it has in common is that it is not measuring surface air temperature at a height of 1.5m.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 10, 2023 2:03 am

Pray tell how the ocean temperatures are measured ?
‘Skin or air’
Oceans being such a large part of the globe

Nick Stokes
Reply to  Duker
May 10, 2023 2:17 am

Ocean measures are Sea Surface Temperatures, being the temperatures in the top few metres (that turbulent layer is well mixed). Skin temperatures are also measured (by AVHRR and Modis), and are related but not the same. The NOAA posts high resolution AVHRR data which I monitor here, with interactive maps.

Bryan A
Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 9, 2023 3:36 pm

Isn’t IR also emitted by CO2 at altitude?

Rich Davis
Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 9, 2023 4:19 am

Apart from the usual Nickpicking sophistry intended to distract from the relevant point, why pray tell, do you quibble about surface vs air temperature old man?

By analogy, “He didn’t strangle 135 people, he suffocated them. So, nothing to see here. Your report was WRONG!”

Jim Gorman
Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 9, 2023 4:23 am

Thank you for the argument you are making. I believe you are trying to say that the surface temperature is warmer than the air temperature, which is what the satellites measure. That argument assures everyone that “back radiation”, i.e., cold to hot, can not warm the surface!

You have just joined the sceptic club in doubting the GHG theory of global warming from CO2!

Nick Stokes
Reply to  Jim Gorman
May 9, 2023 6:06 am

No, the skin surface temperature is usually colder than the air temperature in high Antarctica.

Jim Gorman
Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 9, 2023 6:52 am

Really? You might want to explain the process of how that occurs. Funny how CO2 can warm the surface by a lot everywhere else but Antarctica.

Reply to  Jim Gorman
May 9, 2023 12:59 pm

Well it has an average altitude of 3,000m for a start.

Reply to  Matthew Bergin
May 9, 2023 10:46 am

As of now it appears there is a server problem of some sort.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 8, 2023 2:41 pm

The Norway Today link or FB?

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 8, 2023 3:02 pm

Nick pressed a bunch of keys above the Enter key and then a similar amount of keys below the Enter key and figured it would be Ok because the average was the Enter key.

Nick Stokes
Reply to  harryfromsyd
May 8, 2023 3:50 pm

So, wise guy, do you know where and when this -135F reading was found?

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 8, 2023 4:26 pm

Sure, a high ridge in east Antarctica a few hundred km from Vostok.
Apparently around 100 similar temps across the years 2004 to 2016.
The lowest temp was actually measured by them at -145F.

Finding things on the internet gets hard when climate zealots seek to censor any data that interferes with their campaign. Hope this helps, you can resume the book burning …

Reply to  harryfromsyd
May 8, 2023 5:04 pm

You appear to be referring to satellite-derived measurements from 2010. The official thermometer record still stands at -128.6F from 1983.

But let’s say we take the 2010 measurement as the coldest; do you think it’s honest for a Facebook page published in late April 2023 to claim that a new coldest record has “just” been set when it happened ~13 years previously?

Reply to  TheFinalNail
May 8, 2023 5:14 pm

The Facebook page links an old image without a date on it. Whenever I see these things I always check the details. You’ve made a poor inference that the image on the Facebook page must be dated similarly to its republishing on someone’s Facebook account.

Reply to  harryfromsyd
May 8, 2023 10:22 pm
Reply to  TheFinalNail
May 8, 2023 5:20 pm

Satellite measurements are not reliable?
Or ground measurements are not reliable?

Doesn’t really matter, ’cause everywhere in Antarctica is below freezing.

Bryan A
Reply to  Mr.
May 8, 2023 7:33 pm

You are correct Satellite and Ground measurements carry little weight, its the Modeled Temperature that matters most 😉

Rich Davis
Reply to  Bryan A
May 9, 2023 4:25 am

You laugh, but Nick and Rusty believe.

Reply to  Mr.
May 9, 2023 12:07 pm

Anything that counters Nick’s agenda is by definition not reliable.
Thus, satellites can be both reliable and not reliable, depending on what we are getting from them today.

Reply to  TheFinalNail
May 8, 2023 9:25 pm

The official thermometer record still stands at -128.6F from 1983.

FFS, you are going to post a link to WonkyPedo as your source?
The ref for that was published in 2009. No link is provided to Vostok station data.

Last edited 1 month ago by climategrog
Bryan A
Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 8, 2023 7:29 pm
Nick Stokes
Reply to  Bryan A
May 8, 2023 9:40 pm

From the link:
These temperatures were recorded using remote sensing from satellite, rather than by ground-based thermometers, meaning that they are not considered to be contenders for an official world record.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 8, 2023 9:00 pm

Apparently, approximately mid-way between “Dome A” and “Dome F,” with it being slightly closer to Dome A. See the link provided by Bryan A.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 8, 2023 9:43 pm

Hi Nick. Good to see you still here asking pertinent questions and getting down voted for doing so. I’ve found that -135 figure mentioned here.


scientists announced in 2013 that they found surface temperatures of -93 degrees Celsius (-135 degrees Fahrenheit) in several spots on the East Antarctic Plateau

Those data seem to have revised downwards since: -98 degrees Celsius (-144 degrees Fahrenheit).

Last edited 1 month ago by climategrog
Reply to  harryfromsyd
May 8, 2023 8:05 pm

AAAAAAAha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 8, 2023 10:28 pm

I’m not sure if “just” is correct but from a recent paper

Comparisons with nearby automated weather stations suggest that air temperatures during these events are near −94 ± 4 °C or about −138 F. 

So, Nick, would you agree Farcebook is wrong to censor the original post?

Nick Stokes
Reply to  Redge
May 9, 2023 3:13 am

I think the post was misleading, but Facebook should not have intervened.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 9, 2023 3:20 am

The cited link doesn’t work for me.”

I think that is what is referred to as a Freudian and on topic to boot!

May 8, 2023 2:23 pm

There has been no warming at the South Pole since continuous record keeping began in 1958. Antarctica recorded its coldest six months in 2021.

Last edited 1 month ago by Milo
Reply to  Milo
May 8, 2023 3:31 pm

continuous record keeping began in 1958
2023-1958 = 65
I could round 65 up to 70 I guess.

Reply to  KevinM
May 8, 2023 5:21 pm

Continuous records on the periphery of Antarctica go further back.

McMurdo Station dates from 1955; Palmer from 1968, but US expeditions started in the 19th century. ADM Byrd’s flights in the 1930s mean we’ve been taking advanced scientific measurements for almost 90 years, not just 70.

Flights were followed by seasonally occupied bases. The west base was established in January 1940 in the Bay of Whales. Two months later, the east base was established on the north side of Neny Bay.

Last edited 1 month ago by Milo
Reply to  KevinM
May 9, 2023 12:32 pm

“Last seven decades” was the claim:

1) 1950s
2) 1960s
3) 1970s
4) 1980s
5) 1990s
6) 2000s
7) 2010s, and one to grow on:
8) 2020s.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Milo
May 9, 2023 4:36 am

2021 is like over 500 days ago

(Just stepping in to assist Nick and Rusty)

And besides it wasn’t measured with a mercury thermometer (Hg freezes at -39F, but whatevs).

May 8, 2023 2:26 pm

A factcheck using “USA today”. Straining credulity…

general custer
Reply to  DMacKenzie
May 8, 2023 5:33 pm

Is anybody fact checking USA Today?

May 8, 2023 2:38 pm

If it ain’t warming, Fakebook doesn’t see it. The Antarctic peninsula has had some warming but it is a small part of Antarctica.

Reply to  antigtiff
May 8, 2023 5:22 pm

The West Antarctic Peninsula has been warmed by subglacial volcanic eruptions.

Reply to  Milo
May 9, 2023 2:19 am

The western extremity of the peninsula is not even in the Antarctic Circle.

Reply to  antigtiff
May 8, 2023 9:33 pm

The climate of the peninsula is determined by the surrounding seas and wind speeds ( Foehn effect, warming meteo stations on the lee side ). Nothing to do with the rest of the continent.

It is as relevent as the climate of Land’s End to the climate of the UK.

Ben Vorlich
Reply to  antigtiff
May 9, 2023 12:55 am

The patient has hypothermia, but his left thumb is warming up nicely

Don Perry
May 8, 2023 2:41 pm

Do as I did and delete your Facebook account, encourage everyone you contact to do the same and don’t look back for a second as that utterly worthless piece of crap.

Reply to  Don Perry
May 8, 2023 3:27 pm

Isn’t this a case where a little discrimination is sensible? Sure, much of FB is nonsensical, but it does permit the exchange of thoughts between diverse people. The reader has to decide what to accept and what to reject, but isn’t that the normal mental process for most of us? I read all sorts of things on FB, which just interest me without any bias coming into it!

Reply to  mikelowe2013
May 8, 2023 5:50 pm

I read all sorts of things on FB, which just interest me without any bias coming into it!

And you know that how?

Facebook could be biasing the results of what you see without you knowing it. The same way Google searches push “approved” web sites ahead of others, regardless of the clicks received.

Reply to  mikelowe2013
May 9, 2023 10:09 am

Forums are much better as it is easier to debate with a far better post box and allows better attachments to be used along with much better moderation tools for the problem members.

Ben Vorlich
Reply to  Don Perry
May 9, 2023 12:52 am

Never considered joining from day one. Back then I didn’t want a spotty American youth playing fast and loose with information about me. Nor most of the social media apps that have appeared since. I’ve seen nothing to make me change my mind.
Google is bad enough,

Reply to  Don Perry
May 9, 2023 2:22 am

I did better than that. I never got on FB in the first place. Didn’t open a Twitter account until after Musk bought it. Never been signed on at any other “social media” platform ever!

Reply to  rah
May 9, 2023 3:18 am

“I did even better than that” – not on either and therefore I am officially today’s “Smartypants”…..

May 8, 2023 2:52 pm

West Antarctica has significant geothermal activity that would explain at least some of the warming in that area. And WV is by far more significant than CO2, especially in polar areas. so I just dont get the blind faith they have in CO2 being primary cause.

Larry Hamlin
May 8, 2023 2:54 pm

The people running Facebook are just a typical group of climate alarmist idiots. They represent the future of AI.

Reply to  Larry Hamlin
May 8, 2023 3:36 pm

I loved the concept of Lt Cdr Data on Star Trek when I first saw it, but later in life I see too much opportunity for ultra-efficient errors. I don’t think the concepts of AI bias and groupthink were dug into. That tv show came from a different USA cultural era.

Last edited 1 month ago by KevinM
May 8, 2023 3:02 pm

I guess we’ll have to ask the Russians about Antarctic conditions since Facebook is busy banning science truth. What’s next–Chinese AI to bypass American AI bias?

Protesters Say Russian Ship Bound for Antarctica Unwelcome at South African Port (voanews.com)

Russia Makes Move On Antarctica’s 513 Billion Barrels Of Oil | OilPrice.com

Peta of Newark
May 8, 2023 3:04 pm

The only part that’s warming is where most of the ‘research stations’ are.

Nobody needs to know anything more

May 8, 2023 3:20 pm

Antarctica is always below 0.

Wtf does it matter how many degrees below 0 the temp varies, if it’s still always below 0?

Reply to  Mr.
May 8, 2023 5:47 pm

Wtf does it matter how many degrees below 0 the temp varies

If no one was measuring the temperature below zero, there would be much less “global warming”. Most warming is occurring on land in winter when it is below zero.

Greenland plateau has risen almost 10C in January over the past 70 years. That is spectacular increase. Why do you think temperature anomalies are used. 10C warming supports the idea of CO2 induced warming better than pointing out it has gone from MINUS 30C to almost MINUS 20C.

Reply to  RickWill
May 8, 2023 6:17 pm

Thanks Rick.

The whole ooga-booga Climate Crisis Cult mantra is that humans won’t be able to live on an Earth where we all now live that experiences ~ 1.5C warmer in a few decades time.

But nobody could ever live in sub-zero Antarctica, so what’s the big deal if the conditions there go from – 30C to -20C.

I’m sure the penguins won’t g.a.f.

Reply to  RickWill
May 9, 2023 2:39 am

But apparently CO2 doesn’t hang out in the Antarctic. Instead they actually cite the established science to explain that the cold spots occur because of very dry air, or IOW air lacking water vapor, hanging over high up depressions for a period of days.

But when it comes to the Arctic, the increased water vapor causing some warming during the coldest months, is ignored and the culprit is CO2.

Reply to  rah
May 9, 2023 9:22 am

Here is the link for an article that was post by Richard Greene saying that CO2 actually cools parts of Antarctica. This was couple of months ago.


i wonder what has happened to Mr. Greene. He hasn’t posted in a moth or so.

Reply to  mkelly
May 9, 2023 4:20 pm

Ricky chucked a tanty and flounced off in high dudgeon.

Reply to  mkelly
May 9, 2023 11:58 pm

He probably failed to get the desired hits on his site that he was constantly promoting here.

May 8, 2023 3:41 pm

 high elevation of the present AIS plays a significant role in decreasing the susceptibility of the Antarctic continent to CO2-forced warming.

But it works the opposite way on the Greenland plateau, which shows the highest temperature rise on the globe – up almost 10C in January over the past 70 years.

CO2 induced warming is such a ridiculous concept and yet it has gained so much currency. There is no long wave radiation in the lower troposphere of any significance over tropical land and oceans and a bit more over cloudless dry land.

Attached shows satellite measured OLR spectrum on the L/H spectra compared with black body spectrum for corresponding temperature. Best fit for the tropical land at 7S is 235K; much cooler than the 303K ground temperature. The lower L/H spectrum for the Sahara compares with black body at 270K, still substantially colder than the overnight surface temperature of 297K.

So there is no OLR from the surface to space. What is released from space is transported from the surface by convection.

Screen Shot 2023-05-09 at 8.36.04 am.png
Reply to  RickWill
May 9, 2023 10:08 am

Even if temperatures over the Greenland plateau in January rose by 10 C, they would still be well below 0 C, so this would not cause the ice sheet to melt, particularly because there’s practically no sunlight in Greenland in January.

It would be more important if temperatures over the Greenland plateau were above freezing for a longer period of time during the late spring and early summer, when there may be enough solar radiation to melt ice.

However, it’s unlikely that the Greenland ice sheet will melt anytime soon. In the summer of 1945, a squadron of planes returning from World War II had a scheduled refueling stop in Iceland, but were blown off-course by a storm, and had to ditch in southern Greenland. The pilots were rescued a few days later by another squadron, but the planes were damaged beyond repair. In the early 1990’s, these pilots used remote sensing by satellite to locate their old planes, which turned out to be buried in ice over 100 meters deep. This would tend to indicate that the ice cap is actually thickening, at least in that location in Greenland, by about 2 meters per year.

May 8, 2023 3:48 pm

Not surprising. 97% scam 3% science.

April was cooler in USCRN. All data prior to 2021 however has just disappeared.

Last edited 1 month ago by Walter
Reply to  Walter
May 9, 2023 1:46 pm

Just saw that. The USCRN data has been flat for a decade or so now, must be time for an “adjustment” to better fit the narrative.

Right-Handed Shark
May 8, 2023 4:37 pm

They’re getting lazy. Surely they could spin this into “CO2 induced warming causes dangerous Antarctic temperature stability”.

May 8, 2023 7:20 pm

Have them fact check this:

Arctic sea ice extent May 7th, 2023: 13.336 Million square Km

Arctic sea ice extent May 7th, 2004: 13.030 Million square Km

Yes I know, sh!t science aka climate science. The lowest form of “science” where you can still convince your mom’s knitting circle that you’re a scientist. Fact check that with Michael Mann’s mom’s knitting circle.

May 8, 2023 7:48 pm

Doesn’t anybody have any friends down there to ask?

May 8, 2023 11:08 pm

I’ve just spend a HOUR trying to find actual, up to date data for either Admunsen-Scott or Vostok and get nothing apart for WP links and outdated papers.

Does anyone know where any of this is archived.

The official Admunsen-Scott station website is full of crap about “open science access” and “equity” but ZERO DATA.

Mark BLR
Reply to  climategrog
May 9, 2023 4:52 am

… actual, up to date data …

Assumptions on my part :
1) You’re talking about temperature data (97% sure about this one …)
2) You’ll be satisfied with “monthly averages up to 2 months old” (3% sure …)

It took me ~10 minutes to find data using the GISS “Station Data” website, most of that trying to remember where exactly in the “Data sites” sub-folder of my Bookmarks file I had moved the following URL to.


“Rotating and zooming in” on Antarctica on the globe, and then clicking on the Amundsen-Scott and Vostok red dots, followed by the “Generate Plot” option, led me to the following individual pages.

Amundsen-Scott (the left dot in the “middle” of Antarctica) :

Vostok (Latitude -78.45, Longitude 106.867) :

In both cases the “Download month data as text or CSV” links gave me monthly averages up to March 2023.


Now that’s sorted, what was the actual “data” you had in mind when you were typing your OP into your computer (/ phone / device) ?

Nick Stokes
Reply to  climategrog
May 9, 2023 2:36 pm

I made a gadget here to try to speed that up. It has a variety of portals; I have just added one on BoM ACORN. But if you click on “GHCN V4 NEW!” (it’s about 5 years old), you can enter station names in a search box, select the one you want, and then select months of unadjusted or adjusted data. It draws plots, but the DATA button will give the numbers plotted.

May 9, 2023 12:52 am

I’ve just posted the Nature.com article on FB 🙂 I’d suggest all of you do the same 🙂

May 9, 2023 5:41 am

I once pasted a link to the story of the Mendenhall Glacier melting and uncovering a 1,000+ year old forest. Facebook censored it. So this doesn’t surprise me at all.

Andy Pattullo
May 9, 2023 8:21 am

Facebook is about modern social trends and belief systems, not science. It is a huge marketing mechanism for uncritical consumers of social pablum, a temple of Narcissus.

May 10, 2023 8:24 pm

The hot spots correspond pretty well with the volcano or geothermal belts. See map:

Antartic volcanoes_eece13842bafeedbe61771c1728b209b.jpg
%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights