Comments on: A new study has found that the glaciers of Greenland are not behaving as predicted.

By: Jim

Jim — Fri, 04 May 2012 00:36:44 +0000

In reply to jwing.

Just quoting the study cited. Go read it for yourself.
If you are going to post the study as a valid point of view, don’t be selective in what the study says.
Again, nearly 30% reduction in ice over 10 years.
It may cast doubt on the worst case scenarios (but even the authors think 10 years may not be enough to do that definitively), but it has not cast doubt on other bad scenarios.
Quite honestly, if the point is to prove that either GW does not exist, or that the glaciers are not melting, you’ve got the wrong study. It proves the opposite.
But don’t take my word for it…to look it up.

By: wodun

wodun — Thu, 03 May 2012 23:45:58 +0000

The predictions have all been wrong and so have the computer models but not to worry people have faith that the science will support their political world view eventually. But we can’t wait for science to catch up to consciousness, we must act now even if our actions wont change anything.

By: jwing

jwing — Thu, 03 May 2012 23:33:08 +0000

In reply to Jim. You don't have to explain to us whether you think AGW is truly happening. As you stated, it "sounds like warming" to you. Seriously though, a true believer already knows that the science is settled due to the concensus of academics and pronouncements from AlGore and Hollywood celebrities. It is tough to give up a belief system or ideology. Your belief that man-made global warming is caused by CO2 forces you to parse out from this latest data on glacier melting what you want to see. News flash: the emperor has no clothes on. What you attest to as science, is not so as it does not follow the scientific method.

By: Jim

Jim — Thu, 03 May 2012 21:45:40 +0000

This was an important study that shows the following:
1. The ice loss during the last 10 years was nearly 30%. The study showed that there was variation between the individual glaciers…some more than 30%, some less. Still a loss of 30%.
The lead author, Twila Moon (graduate student), has said:
“The old term “glacial pace” may require some rethinking. It turns out that the ice in many glaciers on the Greenland ice sheet moves more than 1km per year and, in some glaciers, more than 10 km per year. Most of these fast glaciers connect the interior of the ice sheet to the ocean and act like big conveyor belts of ice.”
They are all shrinking, some faster than others
Sounds like warming to me.
2. The conclusion of the report was that this amount of loss does not equate to the “worst case scenario” predicted from some climate models. Climate models predicted worst case, as well as less worse cases. The worst case had predicted that it could be as much as 6 feet. She believes that is unlikely, but it still could be as much as 4 to 8 inches.
The researchers said:
“That may not sound like much, but when other causes of sea rise around the globe are added, the total could still be about 3 feet by the end of the century.” Greenland glaciers are only a part of the driving force to sea level rise.
“’Glacial pace’ is not slow anymore,” said study author Twila Moon.
3. The authors cautioned that more study was needed.
Ian Howat, one of the authors, said:
“There’s the caveat that this 10-year time series is too short to really understand long-term behavior,” Howat said. “So there still may be future events — tipping points — that could cause large increases in glacier speed to continue. Or perhaps some of the big glaciers in the north of Greenland that haven’t yet exhibited any changes may begin to speed up, which would greatly increase the rate of sea level rise.”
Uncertainty of science indeed. But still worrisome.