1956 Iceberg Was The Size Of Massachusetts and Connecticut Combined

Climate fraudsters are busy today touting an Antarctic iceberg the size of Delaware. In 1956, an iceberg five times as large broke off, and it was the second one that year.

24 Dec 1956, Page 29 – Lebanon Daily News

Massachusetts + Connecticut is much larger than Delaware.

With climate alarmists, it is all misinformation, all the time.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

39 Responses to 1956 Iceberg Was The Size Of Massachusetts and Connecticut Combined

  1. Steve Case says:

    I remember that, I was twelve at the time.

  2. Kris J says:

    Thanks for posting this! I have family members who are very very concerned (frightened) about this issue. I take it there was no tidal wave, and they either re-attached themselves or busted up into smaller pieces?

    • tonyheller says:

      It was floating ice shelf, so no impact on the seas.

    • RAH says:

      Your family would not be alarmed if the people reporting this were honest. They aren’t honest because it is their intention to alarm those not familiar with the subject in order to form their opinions.

      The ice shelf was floating on the water like an ice cube. Put as much ice as you want in a glass then fill it to the brim with water and set it on the counter. After the ice has melted check it out and you will find the glass has not overflown. If there is any moisture on the counter it will be from condensation formed on the outside of the glass. The melting of ice in or on water does not increase volume.

  3. Andy DC says:

    Glaciers calve, sometimes massively. Create large icebergs, like the one that sunk the Titanic over 100 years ago. The alarmists need to get over their childish and stupid progaganda, that somehow calving of glaciers is related to AGW or anything remotely related to it.

  4. Charles Johnson says:

    Not to be nit-picky :) but the article is wrong. The combined width of both Massachusetts and Connecticut is actually 120 miles not 60 (50 for Mass and 70 for Conn.)

    • tonyheller says:

      Your not being nit-picky. You are just misreading the article, and making a ridiculous comment.

      • Charles Johnson says:

        How so?

        • Colorado Wellington says:

          Area (roughly).

          All Hail to Yankee Doodle.

        • tonyheller says:

          The article was referring to total area, not length or width.

          • Charles Johnson says:

            For my own curiosity, I went through the math and the iceberg that calved was 12,480 sq. miles. The land area of Mass and Conn is 16,108 sq miles. Apparently, when the writer states it was ‘roughly’ the same size he was simply embellishing the article.

          • sunsettommy says:

            Charlie, you left out some math to account for something else.

            In any case you are full of crap because you are here to fog up the main point of the post.

        • TimA says:

          You’re anal…

          • Charles Johnson says:

            Yes, I’ve been told that before… :)

          • Colorado Wellington says:

            My mother always checks journalists’ math but she doesn’t think they are embellishing their articles by using bigger numbers. She believes most of them are math and science illiterates, unable to recognize even errors of several orders of magnitude.

  5. Robertv says:

    In winter ?

    So at the moment it’s not going anywhere.

  6. Brian S says:

    The drama on twitter today about this is hilarious, yet sad

  7. Nutation_discombobulation says:

    Thank you Tony for all your hard work, especially your videos, they are superb.
    They can soil the data, but they can’t touch the newspaper archives, great move.

  8. AndyG55 says:

    “Glacier” means RIVER OF ICE. !

    ie IT FLOWS !!!!!!!!!!

    What if it didn’t break off occasionally ?

    • Stewart Pid says:

      It would encircle the planet and flow up it’s own arse … if glacier’s have arse’s ;-)

    • -B- says:

      If the ice never returned to the sea and kept building up? The earth would eventually become off balance and the axis of rotation would shift to a new stable position after a period of wobbling that would kill us all.

      It’s so very simple the ice gets pushed too far out to sea and breaks from its own weight and sea action. But making ignorant people fear these processes is how rulers have maintained control for at least six thousand years. No reason to stop now.

      • arn says:

        And the more ice there is ,the more likely
        a huge chunk will break away,
        just as a huge branch will more likely break away from a huge tree with a lot of huge branches than from a small one with few.

        Anyway we’re just talking about phantoms.
        As,according to experts like al gore, the arctic is icefree since many years icebergs can not exist.
        Just as those people in flooded manhattan((according to hansen))can not exist as they can not breath under water.

    • gator69 says:

      What if it didn’t break off occasionally ?

      Alarmists would simply claim that that too was a result of man made CO2.

      CAGW: The “theory” that explains everything, making CO2 the God Molecule.

  9. pwl says:

    Darn, the headline missed an impressive pun, “Icebergs from Antarctic Calving Impressive Year”…

  10. Steve Case says:

    The ice that breaks off as an iceberg large or small is a function of snow that fell in the interior decades or more ago. It has nothing to do with CO2 global warming or what the kardashians are doing.

    • AndyG55 says:

      “or what the kardashians are doing.”

      I dunno,

      If one of the Kardasians sat on the glacier, it would probably break !

      • arn says:

        no-sea level rise would increase and manhatten would be flooded within seconds when a fatarsian would enter an iceberg.

  11. Eric says:

    Whenever I hear of calving I immediately think of a growing ice sheet / glacier. Look at the amount of ice that is away from land and on the other side of this icesheet. According to nullschool the temperature of the sea ice is -30.

    Looks like the S. Hemisphere is cooling drastically.

    • gator69 says:

      Whenever I hear of calving, I am reminded of the origins of the term…

      calve /kav/ verb
      gerund or present participle: calving
      1. (of cows and certain other large animals) give birth to a calf.
      2. (of an iceberg or glacier) split and shed (a smaller mass of ice).

      The term comes from giving birth to a smaller version of the parent, and is associated with growth, and not death.

    • RAH says:

      Should be since it’s the depths of winter down there. Nothing remarkable about that. But the exceptionally cold temps at the other pole and Greenland during the height of the summer are notable IMO.

    • RAH says:

      It’s not so much the amount of snow or new ice formation that is the harbinger of colder times. It’s the lack of melt during the warmer months give reason to be concerned.

  12. Derek Colman says:

    Howv many Wales was it? In the UK we use Wales as a measure. This new iceberg is 0.26 the size of Wales, or 260 milliWales. We need to know how many Wales is one Massachusetts/Connecticut in order to understand this.

  13. Neal Asher says:

    Also, buried in the hype and hysteria, you’ll find that this ice berg was getting thicker before it broke off, but that doesn’t fit the narrative.

  14. JoNova says:

    Tony, wow. That pans out (if it is correct) to 334km x 96km or an unreal 32,000 km2.

    The current one is 5,800km2.

    I’ve written about some other old big icebergs.

    • tonyheller says:

      They say it was one of the largest ever, but being in the bottom 20% size wise, it would be more accurately described as being one of the smallest ever.

  15. JoNova says:

    Someone, check my maths!

Leave a Reply

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