Basic Physics All at Sea in Sky News Climate Scare Nonsense Story

From THE DAILY SCEPTIC

by Chris Morrison

Possibly one of the dumbest and most scientifically illiterate climate scare stories ever written has been published by the fast-fading UK Sky News. Climate reporter Victoria Seabrook notes that the sea ice on the Arctic “continent” is melting at 12% every decade but she backs it up by publishing a graph clearly showing it has been stable since 2007. She goes on to claim that the Arctic melt will push up sea levels around Britain and fuel worse coastal flooding, seemingly unaware that melting ice in liquid does not raise its level (suggested educational tip, check out ice in a gin and tonic glass). Just for good measure, her silly story throws in the wobbling jet stream and a “shocking” prediction that global temperature could rise by nearly 1°C in just five years.

This story is a classic of its kind – late climate psychosis folderol to back up the collapsing Net Zero fantasy. After decades of relentless mainstream gaslighting, mass audiences are still vaguely concerned that the climate is in some kind of ‘emergency’. Net Zero is retreating around the world, partly because it is increasingly understood that human civilisation cannot abolish the use of hydrocarbons without returning to the dark ages, and partly because nobody is prepared to pay for it when given a choice. But the great climate science con that is the foundation of the collectivist Net Zero lunacy continues, and, if Seabrook’s latest work is an example, it is getting more desperate by the day.

So she publishes the graph below with the misleading 12% decline every decade heading.

Screenshot

There is no attribution but the graph is broadly similar to others showing the September minimum sea ice extent plotted back to 1979 and the start of continuous satellite data. It clearly shows that a short-term decline from the middle of the 1990s was stopped in its tracks from around 2007. Seabrook is not alone in running a linear line down from 1979 and ignoring the individual trends over nearly 40 years of the five decade time period. Countless scare stories feature the declining sea ice and countless accounts fail to note that 1979 was also a cyclical ice high point. There is plenty of evidence to show the combined extent across the seas of the Arctic region was much lower back to the 1950s.

These cherry-picking stories are ubiquitous despite recent work from Dr Mark England of the University of Exeter which noted that the ice had been stable over every month in the year since 2007. In addition, the illustration below from Arctic scientist Allan Astrup Jensen displays the progression of the September sea ice since 1979.

Screenshot

The actual data clearly show a different story to that relayed to the general public by a mainstream media struggling to retain credibility in an information world they no longer control. As Jensen observes, the summer ice plateaued from 1979-97 and then fell for 10 years. Either side of the drop there have been minimal losses, while the last near decade has seen some possible gains.

As well as all this melting sea ice pushing up imaginary sea levels, Seabrook also states it will “shift the jet stream” and disrupt the UK weather system “in ways not fully understood”. Alas, no ‘scientists say’ evidence is provided for this claim, which may not even be relevant given the ice has been on pause for nearly 20 years. A working knowledge of the jet stream high in the northern hemisphere atmosphere is not yet available due to limited observations over relevant time periods. Not yet “fully understood” sums it all up, even though Seabrook claims the UK weather will be disrupted. Of course it will.

Temperature data are always good for a laugh in climate alarmist circles, particularly when they arise from the UK Met Office. When it is not making up temperatures from 103 non-existent sites, the Met Office is promoting figures taken from its largely unnatural heat-ravaged nationwide weather network. Other state-funded meteorological operations, packed full of climate activists, produce similarly corrupted figures and when they are combined to give a global temperature, extreme scepticism is the order of the day. Further homogenisation and convenient retrospective adjustments mean that these datasets have more fiddles in them than the music cupboard at the Royal Philharmonic.

Seabrook picks up on a recent report from the World Meteorological Organisation that is said to forecast a rise in warming from around 1.2°C to 2°C within the next five years. Or, as Seabrook noted in a later X post, “finds” a rise in the warming.

Screenshot

The chance of this rise is said to be “exceptionally unlikely” says Professor Adam Scaife of the Met Office Hadley Centre who worked on the report. But that’s the way you do it – invent a ridiculous clickbait figure to attract attention but then go on to note the “forecast” would have been “effectively impossible” just a few years ago. This is then said in Seabrook’s report to be a sign of how quickly the climate is changing. In the bizarre world of ‘settled’ climate science, an opinion, however improbable, is promoted as a sign of physical change. Professor Scaife is reported to add: “It is shocking in that sense that two degrees is possible. However, it’s not shocking [because] … we thought it might be plausible at this stage, and indeed it is”.

Confected word salad, indicative perhaps of how most climate science has long departed from the traditional scientific process.

Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor

5 23 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

48 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Michael Flynn
May 31, 2025 11:16 pm

She goes on to claim that the Arctic melt will push up sea levels around Britain and fuel worse coastal flooding, seemingly unaware that melting ice in liquid does not raise its level (suggested educational tip, check out ice in a gin and tonic glass).

It’s surprising how many “climate change” fantasists believe this sort of bizarre nonsense.

The world is obviously well supplied with ignorant and gullible people.

Reply to  Michael Flynn
June 1, 2025 1:05 am

Always check the CV. Masters in “Investigative” Journalism, then a downward career spiral, going from the foreign affairs beat, to arts & entertainment, and finally landing in the climate change beat. No hint of any science or numeracy is given.

John Hultquist
Reply to  quelgeek
June 1, 2025 9:16 am
Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  John Hultquist
June 2, 2025 11:21 am

Eminently qualified, no?

/s

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Michael Flynn
June 1, 2025 7:36 am

Arctic ice includes land ice.

Alan
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
June 1, 2025 8:41 am

Not that much as compared to Antarctica.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Alan
June 1, 2025 4:51 pm

But it’s still there. Downvoted for saying a true thing. SMH.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
June 2, 2025 11:30 am

True but not relevant to the discussion.

John Hultquist
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
June 1, 2025 9:19 am

True, but the image — yellow line on blue background — says sea ice.

MarkW
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
June 1, 2025 9:23 am

The article clearly and specifically states that it is sea ice that is melting.

Also, glaciers in the Arctic region are both few in number and small in size.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
June 2, 2025 11:30 am

While true:

“Climate reporter Victoria Seabrook notes that the sea ice on the Arctic “continent” is melting at 12% every decade”

See? Sea ice is the topic.

https://news.sky.com/story/arctic-warming-3-5-times-faster-than-rest-of-world-as-security-threats-to-uk-fundamentally-changing-13375508

The chart showing ice melt is directly from the Sky News hit piece.
Sea ice is mentioned multiple times in that Sky News article.

Paul Seward
Reply to  Michael Flynn
June 1, 2025 4:31 pm

Ice has the quirky phenomenon of expanding in size when it freezes, which is why it floats. If it were to all melt, then it would displace less ocean water. Wouldn’t that in return result in the ocean levels going down and not up?

Michael Flynn
Reply to  Paul Seward
June 1, 2025 4:44 pm

No. The ice shrinks back to the volume of water from whence it came.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Paul Seward
June 1, 2025 5:09 pm

You’re missing the fact that about 10% of the ice is floating above sea level. The ice below the surface does shrink as it melts. The ice above the water surface flows down to fill that space.

atticman
Reply to  Rich Davis
June 2, 2025 2:56 am

I shall have an extra G&T this evening for experimental reasons…

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Paul Seward
June 2, 2025 11:33 am

The displacement is the water mass versus the ice mass. Ice when freezing is less dense so it floats but retains the exact amount of mass as the displaced water.

Reference
Archimedes

taxed
May 31, 2025 11:40 pm

When the Met Office releases its temperature data for May, it can be expect to be well above the averages but not record breaking. As this is the temperature data for Scunthorpe, North Lincolnshire for May.
Mean max temp 17.6C
Mean min temp 8.6C
Mean temp 13.1C

Compared to the Met Office’s average temps data for England in the month of May (1990-2020).
Mean max temp 16.2C
Mean min temp 6.95C
Mean temp. 11.6C

So we can expect to see more headlines trying to link this year’s dry, sunny and warm spring to man-made climate change.

Reply to  taxed
June 1, 2025 2:21 am

Nothing the Met Office releases has any basis in reality.

It is derives from surface stations that are largely totally unfit-for-purpose, corrupted by urban bias and horrendous site placement.. not to mention totally fake non-data.

At Tallblokes blog you can follow as Ray totally destroys any semblance of accuracy, meaning or relevance in the MetOffice’s temperature fabrication.

The Met Office, and anyone who has ever worked for them, should be totally ashamed and embarrassed at the farcical nature of a large proportion of their surface sites.

Reply to  taxed
June 1, 2025 3:49 am

Are people complaining about the dry, sunny and warm weather? I didn’t think so. 🙂

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
June 1, 2025 7:58 am

Science clearly shows that wherever sleet falls, people flock to the site because they love sleet so much. The most sleet-prone locales are experiencing a rapid influx of people.

Palm trees? Water warm enough to swim in? Abundant, low-hanging fruit? Pfft. Everyone hates those things, and soon turn into climate refugees.

Rich Davis
Reply to  tom_gelsthorpe
June 1, 2025 5:18 pm

Yes, indeed, sleet is the ideal precipitation. Still wet enough to rapidly induce hypothermia, whereas snow may just fall off the body without nearly as much discomfort. And for the most part, no meaningful amount of edible plant life will be found in an environment experiencing persistent sleet. It’s a veritable paradise!

Reply to  tom_gelsthorpe
June 3, 2025 9:39 pm

“Water warm enough to swim in?”

I went scuba diving in Oahu. Unlike our poor visibility Northwest waters, it was like floating in a clear space region. Even the turtles enjoyed the experience as we did them.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  taxed
June 2, 2025 11:35 am

I still contend the better metric is the MEDIAM temperature, the threshold where half the measurements are greater and the other half are lesser.

(Thigh-Tlow)/2 does not accurately depict a rotating earth.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Sparta Nova 4
June 2, 2025 12:45 pm

typo: MEDIAN

June 1, 2025 12:37 am

Northern hemisphere sea ice extent as depicted by the six IPCC assessment reports:

Sea-Ice-AR6-fig-9.13
Bryan A
Reply to  Steve Case
June 1, 2025 6:09 am

Interesting the apparent games played between 1995-SAR and 2000-TAR.
The “zero point anomaly” line was shifted to drop the apex points below the 0 line anomaly average and the Lower Ice Level data prior to 1975 was eliminated.

strativarius
June 1, 2025 1:29 am

They’ve been banging that catastrophic climate prediction drum for decades and they’ve always been wrong.

That isn’t going to change. Now they are in Desperationville and any old yarn goes – as long as it has a fright element.

June 1, 2025 2:13 am

Jet Stream 1977..

jet-stream-1977
June 1, 2025 2:26 am

These articles are aimed at the general public who is generally not well informed on matters of science. It is the accumulation of and sheer amount of these types of articles that maintain the narrative. What’s that got to do w real journalism one might ask? Very little. This is not a mistake..

June 1, 2025 4:07 am

I’m pretty sure that if we are losing arctic ice, it is because the water is warmer and not the atmosphere. If that is the case it is proof that CO2 isn’t the cause because 15 micron backradiation won’t penetrate or warm the oceans. What warms the oceans? More warming visible radiation. The science is climate science is truly a joke.
https://app.screencast.com/hQSOZQaptm6XY
https://app.screencast.com/ZMpNTvkLD7DDJ

david jones
Reply to  CO2isLife
June 1, 2025 4:30 am

I am neither an academic nor a scientist so perhaps you can help me out here.

The sea ice has declined in the Arctic since the 80’s but has plateaued since about 2007.
Could one of the reasons for this be the reduced ice cover allowing heat to escape more easily
(like leaving the lid off a pan of water on the cooker) and thus some kind of equilibrium is attained? The heat will therefore be lost at a far greater rate than if the sea was covered with ice.

sherro01
June 1, 2025 7:21 am

There are now several articles that provide written quotes about countries warming faster than the average, or regions like the north polar quoted here.
The funny thing is that every country/region can provide an official quote that it is warming faster than the average. They come from the United Nations, the World Meteorological Organisation, the IPCC and various national government weather bodies. But they are junk, by definition.
It is a pretty, lively demonstration that you are a mug if you believe all that you are told about climate change. Geoff S

Jeff Alberts
June 1, 2025 7:35 am

She goes on to claim that the Arctic melt will push up sea levels around Britain and fuel worse coastal flooding, seemingly unaware that melting ice in liquid does not raise its level”

Not that I agree with any of the nonsense in the Sky News story, but “Arctic Ice” includes land ice. So the claim by the article writer here is a bit of a strawman.

rhs
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
June 1, 2025 9:12 am

How much arctic ice is over land?
Seems to me less than 10% as the arctic is an ocean with random islands.
Not sure off hand how much extends to Canada, Russia or Alaska. Especially year round.

MarkW
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
June 1, 2025 9:28 am

Read the article, she specifically states that it is sea ice that is melting.

rhs
Reply to  MarkW
June 1, 2025 10:10 am

Since the only arctic ice which can raise sea levels would be ice which is not floating on water.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  MarkW
June 1, 2025 4:50 pm

I read that it just says Arctic ice. Doesn’t that include part of Greenland and North America? Again, I don’t believe the nonsense, but land ice is also involved.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
June 2, 2025 11:49 am

Arctic sea ice.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
June 2, 2025 11:49 am

Not a bit of a strawman.

“Climate reporter Victoria Seabrook notes that the sea ice on the Arctic “continent” is melting at 12% every decade”

https://news.sky.com/story/arctic-warming-3-5-times-faster-than-rest-of-world-as-security-threats-to-uk-fundamentally-changing-13375508

The chart showing ice melt is directly from the Sky News hit piece.
Sea ice is mentioned multiple times in that Sky News article.

rhs
June 1, 2025 9:00 am

That’s alright, these folks have a solution.
After all, when it is -26c rather than -32c, it just feels so much warmer.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/can-we-refreeze-the-arctics-ice-scientists-test-new-geoengineering-solutions/

John Hultquist
June 1, 2025 9:42 am

Ms. Seabrook seems incapable of research and reading.
Several folks with failed sea ice predictions are reported here:
https://www.climatedepot.com/2021/05/10/egg-on-their-faces-years-of-failed-arctic-sea-ice-predictions-by-scientists-al-gore-others/
Peter Wadhams emeritus of Univ. of Cambridge. Wiki says “He is best known for his work on sea ice.”
John’s take: He is best known for being consistently wrong. He has predicted the Arctic Ocean will be ice-free (maybe first time in print in 2014). That was for summer of 2020. He later claimed that “ice free” meant a reduction to 1 M sq. km. This metric has become known as One Wadhams.

Bob
June 1, 2025 4:33 pm

Yeah, we don’t care what Victoria has to say either. The CAGW clowns are losing and they know it. And what happened to the deadly 1.5C increase she didn’t even mention it. How embarrassing they are.

June 1, 2025 11:30 pm

I’m surprised you even bother to quote items from mind controlled news entities transmitting from the embers of Great Britain, perhaps just to mock. Established agencies that once spoke the truth are now but shambling geriatric organisations confined by woke sentiments and little enquiry. There outpourings now have to be ratified or discounted by a quick perusal of YouTube, where we see them behind events or ignorant of them, A tragic case of being mere pets whose foibles you accept while reminiscing. How, once, they used to be authoritative, now reduced. We buy them from habit or for their crosswords their original purpose long having faltered. Much like that little grey place that Shakespeare once one intoned was a precious jewel in a silver sea, now dull pewter.

Greg Goodman
June 2, 2025 3:45 am

I’ve been pointing out for a couple of years that the “canary in the coal mine” is still a fine yellow color and chirping merrily. Glad to see this nitwit actually published the data showing she is wrong.

https://judithcurry.com/2023/10/21/arctic-sea-ice-the-canary-in-the-coal-mine/
https://judithcurry.com/2016/09/18/is-the-arctic-sea-ice-spiral-of-death-dead/

THE DEATH SPIRAL IS DEAD

it has been stable since 2007

Not really there was an all time low in in 2012 and massive (unreported) rebound the very next year.
It would be more accurate to say “no net change since 2007”.
In case anyone says that’s a cherrypick, it is the year of the Nobel (not science ) Peace Prize was give to the alarmists at IPCC and Big Al for outstanding propaganda and alarmism on , amongst other things, the “run away melting” and the inevitable “ice free summers”.

It seems the Al Gore effect also affects ice. As soon as he predicts imminent ice free conditions it enters a new plateau.

Greg Goodman
Reply to  Greg Goodman
June 2, 2025 3:47 am

Sea ice volume tells us the same story.
https://climategrog.wordpress.com/cpom_arctic_ice_vol_mths_2022/
comment image

There, the lower, purple line is October, the nearest that CPOM data gets to the Sept minimum. There we see the massive increase in Oct 2013 relative to Oct 2012.

The press was all over the “catastrophic” all time low of 2012 but forgot to tell us the next year when it bounced back up by 65% in ONE year.

Westfieldmike
June 2, 2025 10:20 am

It’s a contest between the BBC and Sky News to see who is the most stupid.

Crispin in Val Quentin
June 2, 2025 12:33 pm

“…showing the September minimum sea ice extent plotted back to 1979 and the start of continuous satellite data.”

There is plenty of data from 1974-1979. Why not show that? What it shows is that there was a rapid growth between ’74 to ’79 and a drop thereafter.

The claim that the data was only recorded “continuously” from 1979 is also not true. The point of using 1979 was that shows the recent peak extent to make the subsequent decline look more ominous.

There is quite a lot of evidence that the ice extent was lower than now from at least 1920-1922. Boy, is that inconvenient.