Current climate experts simply forgot to mention that WAIS thinning has been going on for centuries, and has nothing to do with CO2.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- ChatGPT Research Proposal
- Warming Twice As Fast
- Understanding Climate Science
- Recycling The Same News Every Century
- Arctic Sea Ice Declining Faster Than Expected
- Will Their Masks Protect Them From CO2?
- Global Warming Emergency In The UK
- Mainstream Media Analysis Of DOGE
- Angry And Protesting
- Bad Weather Caused By Racism
- “what the science shows”
- Causes Of Earthquakes
- Precision Taxation
- On the Cover Of The Rolling Stone
- Demise Of The Great Barrier Reef
- Net Zero In China
- Make America Healthy Again
- Nobel Prophecy Update
- Grok Defending Climategate
- It Is Big Oil’s Fault
- Creative Marketing
- No Emergency Or Injunction
- The Perfect Car
- “usually the case”
- Same Old Democrats
Recent Comments
- arn on ChatGPT Research Proposal
- conrad ziefle on Warming Twice As Fast
- conrad ziefle on ChatGPT Research Proposal
- dm on ChatGPT Research Proposal
- Ohio Cyclist on ChatGPT Research Proposal
- Robertvd on ChatGPT Research Proposal
- gordon vigurs on ChatGPT Research Proposal
- arn on ChatGPT Research Proposal
- Ed on ChatGPT Research Proposal
- conrad ziefle on ChatGPT Research Proposal
There is also this.
Copy of original report by Dodson. 1948.
See Page 8 for Deglaciation. Please note the term “geologically speaking”!
http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/IPY/ipy_12_pdf/QC851R66no6.pdf
“As the upper limit of glaciation was not found it is obvious that a short time ago geologically speaking the ice was more than 600 ft. thick ten miles off shore. When due allowance for the gradient of the glacier is made it seems certain that the ice was at that time a 1000 ft. thicker on the mainland than at present.”
Anyone who says that the Antarctic glaciers are getting thinner due to CO2 and CAGW has absolutely no idea what they are talking about. The irony is that NOAA say this and yet have the scientific evidence of the opposite in their library.
Excellent find!