backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 58 comment(s) - last by Brian H.. on Jul 18 at 6:54 PM


Surface melt from Greenland glaciers. Previous studies have suggested this melt could destabilize the Greenland ice sheet.
Longest-term study yet of the continent says nothing to fear.

For global warming activists, Greenland is the most potent weapon of fear in their arsenal. With Antarctica cooling, and the floating ice at the North Pole incapable of affecting sea levels, Greenland alone can contribute the vast amounts of melted ice capable of flooding cities. Greenland -- which began gradually melting at the end of the last ice age some 20,000 years ago -- continues to slowly shed ice today.

The only problem? It's melting far too slowly. At its current rate, Greenland will take thousands of years to significantly affect sea level.

Fears have still arisen, however, over claims that melting rate is being accelerated by man-made global warming. Some past studies have indicated this may be happening, by measuring the rate at which glaciers have slid towards the sea, sped by melt water beneath lubricating the process.

However, a new study has concluded that Greenland's rate of melting is not accelerating, and in fact may actually be decreasing when viewed over a longer timescale. The study, which used 17 years of satellite measurements to reach its conclusions, determined the overall yearly movement of ice to the sea is not increasing, and is actually decreasing in some places.

The researchers noted the speedup observed by past studies was strictly a short-term transient phenomena, occurring primarily in the summer months.

The study, which is appearing in the Friday edition of the journal Science, was led by Dutch Researcher Roderik S.W. van de Wal, of the Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Research of the University of Utrecht.

Claiming losses in coastal property values, a group of Spanish homeowners and investors last month threatened Greenpeace with legal action over exaggerated claims of sea level rise.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

good!
By omnicronx on 7/4/2008 11:23:49 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
and the floating ice at the North Pole incapable of affecting sea levels
I always love pulling this out when my global warning activist friends try spreading their lies! I have even had people tell me that this is untrue, so I gladly took a cup and an icecube with water already in it and told them to wait for it to melt.

As for the article, finally some proof to shut up the non believers. I am not saying increased c02 emissions are not raising the worlds temperatures, but I have always had the position that a run away green house effect of any kind is pretty much impossible at the rate we put toxins into the atmosphere.




RE: good!
By 4play on 7/4/2008 12:07:35 PM , Rating: 2
How is this proof? It's just one study out of thousands. There are studies to suggest the opposite too.


RE: good!
By omnicronx on 7/4/2008 12:17:19 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
How is this proof? It's just one study out of thousands. There are studies to suggest the opposite too.
You are absolutely right, proof is the wrong word here, but as the article states, all the studies suggesting the opposite were short term, and were probably only taking the summer months into account, whereas this report was based on 17 years of satellite imagery. In other words, this is report seems as though it is more scientifically backed than any other report out there.


RE: good!
By jbartabas on 7/4/08, Rating: 0
RE: good!
By porkpie on 7/4/2008 2:16:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It certainly does not oppose the IPCC projections
The IPCC prediction is for less than a 1/3 meter rise per century. Nothing scary about that. The author is right, the claims of cities flooding aren't based on IPCC predictions, they're based on silly unproven feedback effects that this study disproves.


RE: good!
By jbartabas on 7/4/2008 2:33:48 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
The author is right, the claims of cities flooding aren't based on IPCC predictions, they're based on silly unproven feedback effects that this study disproves.


Well, you obviously have missed half of the title:
quote:
Greenland Ice Melt Not Increasing


So the author is far from being right.


RE: good!
By masher2 (blog) on 7/4/2008 3:23:05 PM , Rating: 2
> "So the author is far from being right"

As my prior post indicates, ice loss is defined by much more than simple surface melt effects. This new research refutes the idea that dynamical ice loss is accelerating, and indicates it may actually be on the decline.

I have, however, updated the article headline to better reflect the actual situation.


RE: good!
By jbartabas on 7/4/2008 4:14:35 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I have, however, updated the article headline to better reflect the actual situation.


Well, as I answered in the other thread, if you look at their Fig. 2 that reports the surface mass balance other 17 years (increasing negative values), I am not sure that you can state "Greenland Ice Loss Not Increasing" (i.e. new title) either.

Also, it may be just a wording issue, but you may want to check this paragraph:
quote:
Fears have still arisen, however, over claims that melting rate is being accelerated by man-made global warming . Some past studies have indicated this may be happening, by measuring the rate at which glaciers have slid towards the sea, sped by melt water beneath lubricating the process.


suggests to me that if one shows (like this study does) that glaciers are not sliding faster towards the sea, then one shows that the claim that man-made global warming accelerates the melting rate is wrong.

GW increases melting rate whatever the dynamical response is. What the other studies have supposedly showed by measuring increased ice velocities is that there is an additional ice loss by indirect effect (i.e. feedback). What this study shows is that there is no additional increase in melting and ice loss due to the feedback from ice dynamic. But they clearly talked about increased ablation likely due to climate warming.


RE: good!
By grenableu on 7/5/2008 12:47:36 PM , Rating: 5
Watch Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" or any documentary or news story on global warming and what do you see? A little melting on top? No, you see huge chunks of ice breaking off into the ocean.

That's exactly why this research is a big slap in the face for those people. When you prove that ice movement is slowing down, it cuts the legs out from the whole argument.



RE: good!
By Flunk on 7/4/2008 12:32:09 PM , Rating: 4
Please present your "thousands" of conflicting reports. I love it when you guys make sweeping claims in your rebuttals to other sweeping claims.


RE: good!
By 4play on 7/4/2008 12:46:31 PM , Rating: 2
I never claimed that the thousands of studies were conflicting with this. Is it unreasonable to suggest that there have been thousands of studies done? Studies are done all the time, especially on things that are linked to climate change. Just look at the past week of J.Mick Vs M.Asher.

PS. wheres the link to this study?


RE: good!
By 4play on 7/4/2008 12:46:31 PM , Rating: 2
I never claimed that the thousands of studies were conflicting with this. Is it unreasonable to suggest that there have been thousands of studies done? Studies are done all the time, especially on things that are linked to climate change. Just look at the past week of J.Mick Vs M.Asher.

PS. wheres the link to this study?


RE: good!
By Andy35W on 7/5/2008 2:50:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
PS. wheres the link to this study?


Yes, that would be good.

Can we have the link please.

Meanwhile, at the "northpole" webcam

http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/latest/noaa1.jpg

anyone fancy a dip?


RE: good!
By phxfreddy on 7/5/2008 3:44:23 AM , Rating: 1
What this is proof of is that all the MMGW alarmists are lying willfully making up stories out of whole cloth.

...you appear to think WE need to prove MMGW is untrue....WE DO NOT....its up to you to prove MMGW is true before we divert entire course of our industrialized society because of the lunatic idea that the sky is falling or the globe is warming!

By the way evidence rolls in from all quarters that MMGW is a willful hoax aimed at grabbing power and money. Its funny to see the true believers squirm. They had and have no idea how utterly uncool they are ! ..what squares.....these scientific no nothings were so desperate for some sort of community in our highly mechanized society that they bit on this one !!! and bit hard...hook / line / sinker !


RE: good!
By Polynikes on 7/8/2008 12:15:28 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly, so how the hell can anyone in their right mind believe there is concrete evidence on either side? Who can you trust?

It's either GW is made up, and the people against it have to work extra hard to make people believe the opposite, or it's real and everyone saying it's not is lying. How do you know?


RE: good!
By Akazar on 7/5/08, Rating: 0
RE: good!
By Smilin on 7/8/2008 3:58:21 PM , Rating: 2
What about the South pole? Does it miraculously stay frozen while the North pole melts?

Good thinking there genius.


RE: good!
By porkpie on 7/8/2008 4:29:47 PM , Rating: 2
The South Pole has been getting colder lately genius. There's more ice there now than there was 50 years ago.


How many things Masher can get wrong?
By jbartabas on