Iceberg half the size of Greater London calves off Antarctic glacier | Environment | guardian.co.uk
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- NASA Sea Level
- “getting smaller”
- “Permanent Shift” In Antarctic Sea Ice
- Rapidly Accelerating Sea Level Rise
- Technology Advances
- “The Hour Of Decision”
- “fair & equitable”
- Michael Mann Continues His War
- Time Travelling Satellites
- Time Traveling Satellites
- Adult Content On X
- The Climate Of 1923
- Arctic Report Card
- Green Colorado
- Hottest Summer Ever
- “Sea ice could be gone by 2012, scientists warn”
- Record CO2 Growth
- Walz’s For Trump
- 6,000 Year Old Tree In The Austrian Alps
- Gemini Can See The Future
- Clinton To Defeat Trump By Double Digits
- Climate Intelligence Means “Making Things Up”
- Comedy From The BBC
- The Climate Afterlife
- Rewriting The Northern Hemisphere
Recent Comments
- Greg in NZ on NASA Sea Level
- arn on “getting smaller”
- Gordon Vigurs on “fair & equitable”
- Gordon Vigurs on Michael Mann Continues His War
- Gordon Vigurs on Michael Mann Continues His War
- Bob G on “getting smaller”
- arn on “getting smaller”
- Hank Phillips on “getting smaller”
- Francis Barnett on “Permanent Shift” In Antarctic Sea Ice
- Scott Allen on “getting smaller”
It’s still propaganda fluff.
It doesn’t matter if they say it isn’t global warming, they get the phrase itself inserted into the article’s sub-headline.
Then there’s the body of the article…
First there’s this: Prof Angelika Humbert, a glaciologist and ice modeller with the Alfred Wegener Institute – “I use the images from the satellite to model the flow of the glacier and how the grounding line is retreating which allows us to predict the behaviour of the ice sheet over the next hundreds to thousands of years.”
In other words, expect a study from Angelika Humbert within a year which will probably contain the following: “Based on our modeling we expect a collapse of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet within x years (probably a time period hinted at in her quote above – “hundreds to thousands of years”) but we need more funding to refine our models due to the severe nature of this threat and the broad spectrum of socioeconomic impacts upon low-lying regions, especially in poor countries which will be worst hit.”
Sound about right?
In fact, they already give it away just a little further down the article: “The flow of the ice stream from the Pine Island Glacier has accelerated in recent years. Smith said: “The Pine Island glacier is quite significant because it is losing more ice to the sea than any other glacier in the world. The glacier is changing a lot and quickly.”
Complete melting of the Pine Island glacier in the future would not only increase global sea-levels but it is also predicted that it could destabilise the entire West Antarctic ice sheet. Studying the glacier can help scientists to understand what factors contribute to the melting.”
And there it is. We’re not going to say this is global warming today but after we model all this (and announce our pre-arrived conclusion) it will be.
So this article, while saying this calving event isn’t global warming, implies it throughout the rest of the story.
And before she assigned her hypothesis for this particular glacier I bet she searched for a glacier that was losing ice than one that was gaining ice so to make her hypothesis worthy.
“Natural event unrelated to global warming…”
Isn’t global warming a natural event? It always has been before. Or did Al Gore invent it? 😉
Retreating glacier, bad
Advancing glacier, bad
Reblogged this on The Firewall.