Climate Genius Of The Day

Michael Kanuch says that Greenland is melting at a record rate.

screen-shot-2016-11-18-at-1-12-59-am

November 18, 2016 at 2:58 am

Greenland is actually gaining ice at a record rate.

screen-shot-2016-11-18-at-1-06-51-am

Greenland Ice Sheet Surface Mass Budget: DMI

Greenland wasn’t always gaining a lot of ice like it is now. In 1939, the glaciers of Greenland and Norway were nearing “catastrophic collapse

cp0fpw1vyaecaku-3

17 Dec 1939, Page 15 – Harrisburg Sunday Courier at Newspapers.com

The trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.

  • Ronald Reagan
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

49 Responses to Climate Genius Of The Day

  1. Latitude says:

    They are an odd bunch….they are internet savvy enough to post…..but not enough to check out what they are saying…before they say it

    • PMJD says:

      Just proclaiming their own Confabulatory Confirmation Bias

    • Gail Combs says:

      “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” ― Upton Sinclair

      In many cases these people are PAID.

      In what “seems to have been inspired by some of the Internet’s worst instincts,” according to the LA Times, the “Correct The Record” super PAC functions as the Clinton campaign’s dedicated online attack dogs. Their mission? Funnel a million dollars just into employing people to disagree with anyone who says anything negative about their chosen candidate on the Internet… breit
      bart.com/tech/2016/09/15/clinton-online-attack-dog-correct-the-record-offering-paid-bounty-for-dirt-on-trump/

      I doubt these were the first. They just got caught.

  2. Ken Meyercord says:

    Your Reagan quote is actually an adaptation of a Will Rogers line (https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/w/willrogers385286.html).

  3. RAH says:

    Nature and Leif and his Noresmen showed just what happens when the Greenland Ice sheet recedes. Trees grow where there were none or just scraggly scrub before. Humans colonize the places where the permafrost thaws and build things and grow crops for food and fodder and raise herd animals. They even built their own Cathedrals. They stay until the natural cycles result in it getting to cold and then once again the place is left to the native inuit.

  4. AndrewS says:

    Michael Kanuch lives in Bizarro world. {Alt-Left} There’s something very wrong with the cosmos if the alternate universe is bleeding over into our universe!

  5. DD More says:

    Would be more accurate if differentiate between the Tub and the Outside Walls.
    The Tub, massive center section is gaining ice and has for its recorded history.
    please see ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/icecore/greenland/summit/gisp2/isotopes/gisp2_temp_accum_alley2000.txt

    About half way down the data is : 2. Accumulation rate in central Greenland
    Column 1: Age (thousand years before present)
    Column 2: Accumulation rate (m. ice/year)

    Age Accumulation
    1st 0.144043 0.244106
    last 2 48.9746 0.091739
    49.0034 0.091599
    So 49,000 years and there are no negative numbers for Accumulation. Or every time period has increased volume. On the summit, Greenland over the last 49,000 years has only gained ice.

    The Rim Ice has been dated at the bottom at several locations to be 4,600 years old.

    So Mikies “Melting Faster than anytime” is could only be true if the Minoan Heat Wave took longer, but with the downward trend in ice temperature history, doubt it will all melt again. Till the next Interglacial in about 110,000 years.

    • AndrewS says:

      It won’t melt until the Ice Age itself comes to a complete end. That means Antarctica melts too. I doubt that is likely within the timeframe you suggest.

  6. CheshireRed says:

    We’re saved! On the basis that catastrophic climate change / global warming is A Bad Thing this must be seen as great news for the planet and humanity, and will thus be on the BBC website in no time. Can’t wait to see their in-depth coverage of this fantastic development.

  7. Brad says:

    It is not his fault, he probably gets his global warming info from yahoo news were he sees things like this: http://www.theverge.com/2016/11/17/13667630/global-sea-ice-concentration-graph-science-twitter.

  8. Andy DC says:

    These alarmists are pathological liars! Hurricane Mathew-caused by global warming, Fires in Georgia-caused by global warming. Thus every garden variety weather event is caused by global warming.

    Then what caused far worse weather events 80+ years ago?

    I hope that Trump and Company will drain this incredibly scummy part of the swamp to the absolute bottom!

  9. AndyG55 says:

    ATTENTION TONY HELLER.

    At the bottom of the Pattern Matching thread, someone has posted a graph using my moniker !! (the normalised graph)

    THIS IS IDENTITY FRAUD !!

  10. Svend Ferdinandsen says:

    The strange thing is that it at the same time is very much warmer north of 80.
    http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.php
    And at the same time the sea ice is not worse than 2012 that had a much colder weather.

    • Neal S says:

      Because much warmer than something far below freezing is still below freezing. Why would you expect temps that are still below freezing to somehow cause ice to melt?

  11. Jim Steele says:

    from the essay “Melting Ice is All Natural” with references

    http://landscapesandcycles.net/-vanishing-ice-all-natural.html

    Simultaneously the best studied Greenland glacier, the Jakobshavn, began retreating from its Little Ice Age maximum with it fastest observed retreat of 500 meters per year between 1929 and 1942. The rapid retreat was amplified when the glacier’s terminal front became ungrounded from the ridge. That earlier grounding point had previously prevented warm subsurface waters from entering its fjord. With more warm water entering the fjord, the grounding point rapidly retreated.

    When warm water intrusions subsided, the glacier stabilized, and even began advancing between 1985–2002. Although the recent retreat of Greenland’s glaciers is reported as an acceleration relative to the 70s, the rate of retreat is now much slower than the 30s and 40s. And again the 20th century pattern of retreat does not correlate with rising CO2 concentrations.

    The 20th century pattern of Greenland’s melting glaciers correlates best with the timing and distribution of intruding warm Atlantic water. …

  12. RAH says:

    It is silly that we spend so much time paying attention to Arctic sea ice as if it is some valid indicator of global warming. I know that the alarmists claim that is one place where warming will first show up prominently and that is why we do it but it is still silly and just playing their silly game.
    The factors that often effect that ice the most in every measurement be it extent, area, volume, or age, have little or nothing to do with global warming. Wind and waves will dissipate that ice far faster than a warming atmosphere or ocean.

  13. Kyle_Fouro says:

    what about long-term trends?

  14. Randall says:

    I think you missed this from DMI:

    “Note that the accumulated curve does not end at 0 at the end of the year. Over the year, it snows more than it melts, but calving of icebergs also adds to the total mass budget of the ice sheet. Satellite observations over the last decade show that the ice sheet is not in balance. The calving loss is greater than the gain from surface mass balance, and Greenland is losing mass at about 200 Gt/yr.”

    • AndyG55 says:

      roflmao.. this a “climate change” suck-up

      Please show the data that supports this statement, (other than the GRACE gravity data which has been shown to be monumentally wrong over Antarctica)

      Then read up on the AMO, LIA, MWP, RWP, Holocene Optimum..

      … and please TRY to get things into a perspective that cover more than just a tiny pinprick of time that alarmista use to fool the uneducated unaware public like you..

  15. ToSeek says:

    The surface mass balance is not the whole story. It only includes what’s happening at the surface: snowfall and rainfall vs. sublimation, runoff, etc. It doesn’t include iceberg calving or submarine melting. Surface mass balance has to be a very positive number over the course of a year in order to balance out these other effects.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.