One of the keys to the manmade global warming myth being espoused by soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore and the good folks at the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is that glaciers in Greenland have been melting in the last fifty years at an alarming rate.
In fact, both House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California) and Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-California) claimed to witness such evidence of global warming during recent trips there.
Yet, a paper written by the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide & Global Change, and published Monday by the Science and Public Policy Institute stated that not only have temperatures been declining in Greenland in recent years, but also glaciers have actually expanded a bit (emphasis added):
The Greenland ice sheet would appear to have experienced no net loss of mass over the last decade for which data are available. Quite to the contrary, in fact, it was likely host to a net accumulation of ice, which Zwally et al. found to be producing a 0.03 ± 0.01 mm/year decline in sea-level.
[...]
Hanna and Cappelen (2003) determined the air temperature history of coastal southern Greenland from 1958-2001, based on data from eight Danish Meteorological Institute stations in coastal and near-coastal southern Greenland, as well as the concomitant sea surface temperature (SST) history of the Labrador Sea off southwest Greenland, based on three previously published and subsequently extended SST data sets (Parker et al., 1995; Rayner et al., 1996; Kalnay et al., 1996). Their analyses revealed that the coastal temperature data showed a cooling of 1.29°C over the period of study, while two of the three SST databases also depicted cooling: by 0.44°C in one case and by 0.80°C in the other. In addition, it was determined that the cooling was "significantly inversely correlated with an increased phase of the North Atlantic Oscillation over the past few decades."
In an even broader study based on mean monthly temperatures of 37 Arctic and 7 sub-Arctic stations, as well as temperature anomalies of 30 grid-boxes from the updated data set of Jones, Przybylak (2000) found that (1) "in the Arctic, the highest temperatures since the beginning of instrumental observation occurred clearly in the 1930s," (2) "even in the 1950s the temperature was higher than in the last 10 years," (3) "since the mid-1970s, the annual temperature shows no clear trend," and (4) "the level of temperature in Greenland in the last 10-20 years is similar to that observed in the 19th century." These findings led him to conclude that the meteorological record "shows that the observed variations in air temperature in the real Arctic are in many aspects not consistent with the projected climatic changes computed by climatic models for the enhanced greenhouse effect," because, in his words, "the temperature predictions produced by numerical climate models significantly differ from those actually observed."
Hmmm. So, glaciers are actually expanding, and temperatures in this region are currently cooler than in the '30s and '50s.
Not what the alarmists on the left and in the media want you to think, is it?
For those interested, the entire paper is available in PDF form here. Those that want to receive e-mail notification when new studies and papers are published by SPPI should send an e-mail message to bferguson@sppinstitute.org.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Facts
August 10, 2007 - 10:32 ET by CaringwhiteguyWhy do the people who do these studies keep coming up with sound scientific facts? It's so much easier just to consider issues on emotion and by political agenda.
Facts? What are those?
August 10, 2007 - 10:59 ET by Dave in TexasFacts are boring. Here's what you do.
1. Shoot some footage of a baby [seal, polar bear, penguin, walrus, snow fox].
2. Shoot it with a BB gun.
3. Shoot some more footage of it crying after you shot it with a BB gun.
4. Shoot some footage of a piece of ice falling into the ocean.
5. Edit the footage with scenes 1, 4, and 3 spliced together in that order.
Congratulations! You have an oscar winning documentary.
Oops, nevermind.
August 10, 2007 - 10:47 ET by vrwc13GW is real, the debate is over. The glaciers in GREENland are melting....wait, what, they're not?.....nevermind. - Roseanne Roseannadanna
"…you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts." -the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan.
When Glaciers warm up
August 10, 2007 - 10:51 ET by HelenSWhen glaciers warm up, they retreat. Back up. Get shorter. Smaller. Reduce in size. Etc.
When they get colder or grow, they calve and bonk tourists on the head with blocks of ice.
As in: "Arctic Glacier Breaks, Ice Hits Tourist Boat"
So I'm guessing that a warming spell would not wreak havoc amongst the boating tourists. But that's just my guess.
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war" - Shakespeare
I remember the media
August 10, 2007 - 11:51 ET by BacchusI remember the media hysteria over that large chunk of glacial ice that broke away. Was that from global warming and a retreating glacier, or was it the result of growth, breaking away because of having extended itself out into warmer waters? Hmmm.
I Think It's Called . . .
August 10, 2007 - 14:28 ET by Junk Science Skeptic. . . Gravity!
Like they say, "Gravity; it's not just a poorly proposed* hypothesis, it's the LAW!!!"
Gravity makes the glacier flow downhill, then once it extends far enough off the edge of land, gravity causes it to fall off. Some people chalk it up to "warming," I call it obeying the law of gravity.
(* - Like AGW)
Thompson/Giuliani 2008
See now that's where you're
August 10, 2007 - 15:19 ET by dscottSee now that's where you're wrong, let me explain in lib logic: Since gravity is applied all over the earth and is constant, gravity can not be a variable. While gravity does vary somewhat over the face of the earth, the differences are so small as to be negligible. Therefore Gravity has nothing to do with it, the only variable is Man caused by his activities and therefore it's man's fault. <sarcasm, as if I really do need to say this but I have been stunned before>
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. Marcus Aurelius
My lips are turning blue.
August 10, 2007 - 10:54 ET by CrashI'm holding my breath to see when the media will use facts in their stories and comment on verifiable scientific research.
So, Pelosi and Boxer visited during the summer? Hey you two genius', if I move my ice tray to my refrigerator all I get is cold water. Why don't try braving Greenlands long winter the next time you want to see the world at our expense?
They do the same with ANWR...
August 10, 2007 - 11:02 ET by vrwc13They do the same with ANWR...
It's an arctic desert....but if you go there in spring and get just the right camera angle...you can capture the wildflowers with a background of snowcapped mountains. What a crock.
Men stumble over the truth from time to time, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing happened. -Winston Churchill.
vrwc13
August 10, 2007 - 11:12 ET by mandrake"arctic desert"???
Have you ever actually been to Alaska? I have, several times. Salmon fishing is good the last two weeks of June. But you need lots of rain gear, it gets rather wet.
Prudhoe Bay 1979 - 1986....just west of ANWR
August 10, 2007 - 11:22 ET by vrwc13Prudhoe Bay 1979 - 1986....just west of ANWR
And before that, on the Alaskan Pipeline from 1975 to 1979. Spent time at Pump Station 10 in the Alaskan Range, PS 6 overlooking the Yukon River, and PS 8 after it blew up, just outside of Fairbanks.
Beautiful country, vast, and truely awesome. But Prudhoe and ANWR are Artic deserts. Pretty in some ways, in some areas, in some views. But for the most part where they do the oil/gas work...you wouldn't want to live, work (other than the money), or fish there.
Men stumble over the truth from time to time, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing happened. -Winston Churchill.
vrwc13
August 10, 2007 - 11:28 ET by mandrakeFair enough, I guess I didn't venture far enough inland. I just remember it raining alot near the coast and being driven crazy because there was 20 hours of daylight in the summer!
ANWR spin...a great deal of
August 10, 2007 - 12:33 ET by vrwc13ANWR spin...a great deal of Alaska is pristine. Seen a lot of it. But it's huge. About 1/3 the size of the "lower 48".
The North Slope, as it is called, is an artic desert. Mostly tundra from the coast inward to the foothills of the Brooks Range. It's frozen in the winter and marshy in the summer. In fact most of the cross-country work is done in the winter on ice roads.
Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore
"Snow Walker"
August 10, 2007 - 13:03 ET by HelenSThere's a movie out called "Snow Walker" (that I happened to really really like) which was filmed somewhere in the Arctic north (Canada, I believe).
In the extra features you get the usual self-congratulatory cogitations about what went into making the movie, what the inspiration was, etc., etc. (some wonderful footage of some of the little local kids who got to be in it :o) but the point I was striving to get to is this: when they talk about the filming experience, they said that the mosquitos were so horrendously bad that they could barely breath without inhaling a huge bunch of them. They were edited out or valiantly ignored for the actual shots but the extra features sure showed them.
If that's paradise, then I say "DRILL ANWR!!!"
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war" - Shakespeare
could barely breath without inhaling a huge bunch of them
August 10, 2007 - 13:37 ET by vrwc13"they said that the mosquitos were so horrendously bad that they could barely breath without inhaling a huge bunch of them"
Absolutely true. In the "summer" we would go out to play softball. It would be a pleasant 40 degrees or so. As a few of the evenings progressed it would get slightly warmer and then the sky would turn gray. Even spray wouldn't be much help. They wouldn't bite but you could suck in a mouthful very easily. Game ended abruptly.
ANWR is an artic desert -
Men stumble over the truth from time to time, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing happened. -Winston Churchill.
ANWR Land Area
August 10, 2007 - 14:47 ET by Junk Science SkepticOne day long ago, I figured we'd all been fed a line of crap about ANWR and decided to do something few journalists ever do. It's a strange process called research.
Turns out that unlike what we've been lead to believe, ANWR is just a tiny fraction of the state of Alaska, roughly comparable to the size of South Carolina, in an area roughly 1/3 the size of the Lower 48.
So then I checked to see how much of ANWR folks are trying to drill. Surely from all of the news clips, it must be like 95-98%, right?
Nope, the area in question is a square roughly three miles on each side.
I'm sure that one of the armchair statisticians here can come up with a better comparison that puts this into perspective, but just guessing, I'd say that the portion of Alaska sought for drilling is likely comparable to a single hair on one's entire scalp.
American Oil -- The New Alternative Fuel
Thompson/Giuliani 2008
JSS... Just wanted to say
August 10, 2007 - 14:49 ET by bigtimerJSS...
Just wanted to say thanks for that great post.
Some days I just tire of fighting the good fight about ANWR and the urgent need for self-dependency here.
Drill Often!...Drill Everywhere!
ANWR... Or one cell in a
August 10, 2007 - 14:50 ET by Clear thinkerANWR...
Or one cell in a libs brain!
Get Email updates from Fred http://socialnet.imwithfred.com/email_alert_july_26.html
Um CT one cell in a lib
August 10, 2007 - 14:51 ET by The Wicked ConservativeUm CT one cell in a lib brain is the majority.
You can't save the Earth unless You're willing to make other people sacrifice. Dogbert the Green Consultant summing up the elite left.
Whooops! ;-) Get
August 10, 2007 - 14:55 ET by Clear thinkerWhooops!
;-)
Get Email updates from Fred http://socialnet.imwithfred.com/email_alert_july_26.html
I'm getting tired of this
August 10, 2007 - 11:16 ET by TruthMattersI'm getting tired of this crap. Just nuke the world so we can have a nuclear blizzard. I like cold weather better than warm weather anyway. Where is that red button and key when you need it???
For a reasonable price, I
August 10, 2007 - 14:48 ET by pbanks7For a reasonable price, I can sell you the blue button to get you down. - Bugs Bunny to Elmer Fudd
Ignorance is bliss. It's easier to repeat a mindless slogan than to do some actual research.
Heretic! Noel, they'd burn
August 10, 2007 - 11:59 ET by Chris NormanHeretic! Noel, they'd burn you at the stake, except it would add to carbon emissions...
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
Growing glaciers - all over da place
August 10, 2007 - 11:30 ET by Gary HallNoel. There seems to be a sea of new and exciting news each and every day. Thanks for doing what the media has no interest in - sharing the news.
Today's reminds me of Robert Kennedy, Jr. gaff, a few months back.
Elsewhere, in addtion to Greenland, some of the world's largest glaciers have been getting bigger over the last decade, or so: Glaciers in the eastern Karakoram Range. Note: click on the picture for a blow up.
I might add, that these glaciers are growing in spite of the warming effect caused by soot in the air as reported recently.
Agree. Good job Noel.
August 10, 2007 - 11:48 ET by TruthMattersAgree. Good job Noel.
You mean James Hansen was
August 10, 2007 - 11:36 ET by dscottYou mean James Hansen was in error to claim that increasing amount of icebergs breaking off the glaciers of Greenland was not due to AGW and melt water greasing the skids so to speak causing the ice to move so fast???? What else was Hansen wrong about?? Hmm, he's been very busy not attending to his job at GISS making sure that data sets are entered properly and definitely been very busy making sure not to check on the status of the weather stations throughout the US being affected by the Urban Heat Island effect.
So in reality we haven't been experiencing Global Warming (AGW) but Global Cooling (AGC) and because of this screw up we lost precious time preparing for the next Little Ice Age. This is rich and ironic, the scientist of the 1970s were right after all. Everyone start your engines and pump out more CO2 we need to offset Global Cooling! Fire up those Coal plants we need soot on the snow to stop all that energy from reflecting back into space in the Northern latitudes.
Whom are we at war with, Eastasia or Eurasia????
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. Marcus Aurelius
I've been saying for a long
August 11, 2007 - 09:11 ET by danboI've been saying for a long time. The case for global cooling is far better than the case for warming. We have a track record of it.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Noel; You obviously have
August 10, 2007 - 11:51 ET by bassndudeNoel; You obviously have not seen the latest data here. Your study is now irrelevant. Global warming has been put off untill 2009.
PS, Al needs the lee way here. Things are not panning out for him and his global warming lately.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
What Year?
August 10, 2007 - 14:56 ET by Junk Science Skeptic"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Global warming is forecast to set in with a
vengeance after 2009, with at least half of the five following years
expected to be hotter than 1998, the warmest year on record, scientists
reported on Thursday."
Guess they missed that <sarc>widely reported</sarc> correction about 1934 taking over the honor of "warmest year on record."
Thompson/Giuliani 2008
Maybe they heard everyone
August 11, 2007 - 09:08 ET by danboMaybe they heard everyone talking about the ten years that never starts. So in desperation, they decided to raise the pot.
But we know they're holding a pair of duces. We can see that in the mirrored sunglasses they use to cover their eyes.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
We'll be right! Just you
August 10, 2007 - 21:06 ET by dahliatraversWe'll be right! Just you wait and see! It's just around the corner! No, really!
Did someone comment that
August 10, 2007 - 12:47 ET by BeanManDid someone comment that the MSM hasn't reported on this?
I'm shocked...okay, I'm over my shock.
Since government is coercion, politics is largely the exercise of deception regarding the intended use of coercion - George Orwell
"in the Arctic, the
August 10, 2007 - 12:51 ET by taznarWho cares? The most reliable database of temperatures in the world indicates 1998 was the hottest year on record, and this last decade has been the hottest ever! That data coming out of NASA completely invalidates any notion that the 30's could have been warmer!
...
What do you mean, "NASA revised their numbers"??? The 30's really were warmer??? But that would mean AGW doesn't exist... and that can't be right!
I think AGW`ers have already
August 10, 2007 - 14:08 ET by chessplayerI think AGW`ers have already responded to the glaciers-are-growing argument. They claim global warming causes more precipitation (in this case, snowfall) that accounts for thicker ice.
Hmmm, so if the
August 10, 2007 - 14:13 ET by dscottHmmm, so if the temperatures drop is that Global Warming too?? The AGW cultists really do engage in double think and Newspeak, Orwell would be scared.
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. Marcus Aurelius
"Hmmm, so if the
August 10, 2007 - 14:23 ET by chessplayer"Hmmm, so if the temperatures drop is that Global Warming too?? The AGW cultists really do engage in double think and Newspeak, Orwell would be scared."
Yep. They have it down to an art form now.
This is typical of Libs,
August 10, 2007 - 14:33 ET by mattmThis is typical of Libs, not just AGW cultists. They start from the conclusion and then interpret all the data in such a way as to fit their pre-conceived conclusion. Seem a bit bass-ackwards? It is.
Mattm...dont know if you
August 10, 2007 - 14:38 ET by bassndudeMattm...dont know if you have seen it or not, but global warming has been delayed untill 2009. This is to give Al time to make a new movie. I think the name of this one will be "The Golbal Ultimatum". This will make it more dramatic when the glaciers fall off the edge of the world.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Al "Snake Oil" Gore
August 10, 2007 - 19:07 ET by stratmanActually, the next Al Gore production will be a book and a movie released simultaneously on the net detailing how coumputers and the internet cause cancer. But if you by some of Al's Cancer-Offsets then you'll be okiedokie. And he's coming out with an exclusive line of cancer-free computers too. Hurry and get 3 or 4 before you get cancer and die a horrible painful death. Oh yeah, your children will doomed unless you buy my crap, er, scientific consensus approved widgets.
Killing them with kindness isn't working. Time to get scrappy with the Donkeys.
Circular reasoning. It's
August 10, 2007 - 15:12 ET by dscottCircular reasoning. It's just so much easier when you already know the answer.
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. Marcus Aurelius
Warmer Logic Or is it Magic?
August 11, 2007 - 09:03 ET by danboA while back a number of us were involved in a discussion on observations that contradict the "theory" of Anthropogenic Global Warming.
The discussion got around to, can we accept independent observations as fact. For example if we saw a pen drop is that observation real? The response. I copied it.
I never cease to be amazed.
I guess the problem isn't climate. It's the theory. Since without a theory it isn't real.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
They claim global warming
August 10, 2007 - 14:53 ET by pbanks7They claim global warming causes more precipitation
Except when they say it will result in droughts. This is delicious.
Ignorance is bliss. It's easier to repeat a mindless slogan than to do some actual research.
More on Greenland
August 11, 2007 - 21:58 ET by PopularTechGreenland - ERS altimeter survey shows growth of Greenland Ice Sheet interior (ESA - European Space Agency)
"Researchers have utilized more than a decade's worth of data from radar
altimeters on ESA's ERS satellites to produce the most detailed picture
yet of thickness changes in the Greenland Ice Sheet. A Norwegian-led
team used the ERS data to measure elevation changes in the Greenland
Ice Sheet from 1992 to 2003, finding recent growth in the interior
sections estimated at around six centimeters per year during the study
period." - ESA
Greenland - Fossil DNA Proves Greenland Once Had Lush Forests; Ice Sheet Is Surprisingly Stable (Science Daily)
Greenland - Greenland's Glaciers Have Been Receding for 100 Years (University of Aarhus, Denmark)
Greenland - Greenland’s Glaciers Take a Breather (The New York Times)
"Greenland was about as warm or warmer in the 1930’s and 40’s, and many of the glaciers were smaller than they are now." - NYT
Greenland - Latest Scientific Studies Refute Fears of Greenland Melt (US Senate Environment & Public Works Committee)
Greenland - Study Shows Greenland’s Ice Growing (CO2 Science)
The Anti "Man-Made" Global Warming Resource
AGW Predictions
August 13, 2007 - 13:51 ET by GMFSomeone should setup a list of AGW predictions and track just how many of them come true.
Here's a short list of them.
1. Ice caps will melt. Especially Greenland and Antarctic.
2. This will cause sea level rise.
3. AGW will cause more severe storms and devastate cities a la New Orleans.
4. The earth is getting hotter all the time (and will presumably get hotter and hotter until planet melts).
5. Glaciers are melting all over the world.
6. AGW will lead to droughts.
7. UK Met Office predicted 2007 UK Summer would be a record (for heat)
And how did these geniuses with their "science is settled" consensus do ?
1. Ice caps are doing ok. Greenland is not showing signs of melting. Antarctica is growing. Arctic sea ice is at a low point (but this varies enormously) and in any case Arctic ice cover doesn't raise sea levels.
2. Sea levels seem to be frustratingly constant (and if Antarctic ice cap is growing-does that mean sea levels will fall???)
3. 2006 hurricane season was a bust. 2007 not quite finished, but pretty quiet.
4. Earth doesn't seem to be getting hotter at all since 1998. And now US temps are lower than previously thought, 1934 is the hottest year not 1998.
5. Glaciers in some areas (NZ, Norway and Greenland) are advancing. Others (eg Asia) may be retreating due to soot rather than CO2. In any case glaciers have been retreating since 1850.
6. Despite warnings about droughts, UK and Australia hit by floods. AGW now deemed to cause flooding since hot air "can hold more moisture". This means that AGW causes both droughts AND flooding. Don't know how the damn AGW can make up its' mind. It's kind of like weather used to be - before it was socialized by Al Gore and the political left.
7. UK summer was colder than usual and wetter. But if temps are not hot today just wait until 2009 - then have we got a global warming for you !!
So basically these guys have a strike rate somewhat less than the psychic friends hotline (and the psychics are billions of dollars cheaper too). So just why is it that we are supposed to believe that they can predict what the world is going to be like in 2050?
Here's a few predictions that I do believe in.
1. AGW propaganda will get hotter as anything resembling proof gets cooler.
2. Anti-AGW conspiracies will be discovered everywhere. ExxonMobil will give so much money to right wing think tanks that they will not only order pizza, but will have extra cheese.
3. Al Gore will become even more delusional, will announce that democracy is bad for the environment, will declare himself Eco-Fuhrer (only out of a sense of duty you understand).
4. UN will continue to blame every problem in the world, but especially any problem that they can't solve on AGW caused by the US (but not China, India or EU).
5. Green frauds will make even more demands for money and power.
Global warming isn't the problem. Global dumbing is the problem.