SOS Forests

Meanwhile, Al “The Michelin Man” Gore travels the world in his Gulfstream telling everyone the sky is falling and collecting huge amounts of money for speaking engagements and all of the so called “Green” energy companies he partially owns.

keep up the good work!

“Greenland Ice Sheet Melting Faster Than Expected; Larger Contributor To Sea-Level Rise Than Thought ScienceDaily (June 13, 2009) — The Greenland ice sheet is melting faster than expected, according to a new study led by a University of Alaska Fairbanks researcher and published in the journal Hydrological Processes.” http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090612092741.htm

“The 2007 melt extent was 20% greater than the average for 1995-2006. … Runoff in 2007 was approximately 35% greater than average for 1995-2006.” Sebastian H. Mernild, Glen E. Liston, Christopher A. Hiemstra, Konrad Steffen, Edward Hanna, Jens H. Christensen. Greenland Ice Sheet surface mass-balance modelling and freshwater flux for 2007, and in a 1995-2007 perspective. Hydrological Processes, 2009; n/a DOI: 10.1002/hyp.7354

ditto TreeC123

Greenland Ice Cap Melting Faster Than Ever

ScienceDaily (Nov. 13, 2009) — Satellite observations and a state-of-the art regional atmospheric model have independently confirmed that the Greenland ice sheet is losing mass at an accelerating rate, reports a new study in Science

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091112141311.htm

Mike, I thought your website was fair and balanced and was a good source of info. I’ve been hoodwinked!

Reply: And here I was thinking that you weren’t a jerk! I post a nice letter from a friend and you accuse me of hoodwinking you! You must be an easy mark, Frankly, prone to getting fooled by almost everything. btw, Greenland ice melt estimates are all over the place. There is no consensus about it, that’s for sure.

In response to the ScienceDaily (Nov. 13, 2009) article:

* The numbers quoted for sea level rise from Greenland melt are model calculations, not measurements. Sea level has risen about 2 to 3mm/year for the last 8,000 years, But based on our best satellite measurements, it has not gone up in the last three years as the article claims. Even local Alarmists like Phil Mote’s group at OSU and the Washington Department of Ecology admit that sea level is not rising now.

* The photo with this article illustrates that the vertical faces of the Ilulissat Glacier are calving, not melting, into the ocean. Glacial melting would produce rounded glacial surfaces, not the angular faces shown in the photo. The retreat of the Ilulissat Glacier approximately 15 km over the past decade is occurring by calving into the ocean, not because of melting. (Calving is caused by an abundance of ice volume and pressure pushing a glacier to sea.)

* The statements of acceleration of Greenland glaciers are significant only for marine terminating outlet glaciers — that is glaciers that calve into the ocean. The thinning of the Greenland ice sheet is most pronounced for marine terminating outlet glaciers and increased thinning of terminus regions has ungrounded the glacier tongues and allowed acceleration, retreat by calving, and further thinning. The vast majority of the glacial melting is occurring from the icebergs that were calved into the ocean, not from the Greenland glaciers themselves. In fact, in various interior portions of Greenland the ice level is rising.

* The article claims the ocean temperature is going up. However, the extensive ARGO array of buoys report a steady or declining ocean energy content.

* Their claimed loss of ice (273 billion tons/year) will take 10,000 years to melt the ice cap. That’s far, far longer than anyone believes this interglacial period will last. In other words, we will be well into the next ice age before their hypothetical scenario plays out!

* As is typical of the hype, they quote an apparently huge number (273 billion tons) that is really .01 % of all the ice there and expect that everyone will be impressed.

* They admit that the figure of 273 billion tons is calculated from their models and not measured directly. We are never told what they really did measure! No reputable scientist will stand for unexplained conclusions.

* 273 billion tons is equivalent to about five inches of rain or snow equivalent over Greenland. That is hardly more than a typical variation in annual precipitation.

* From CO2Science.org: “In conclusion, Greenland, like most of the rest of the world, is subject to a likely solar-induced millennial-scale oscillation of climate that produced a Medieval Warm Period there about a thousand years ago that was approximately 1°C warmer than what it is today; and in contrast to climate-alarmist claims, it has not experienced unprecedented warming over the past few decades. Rather, it has experienced cooling in most places. As a result, Greenland is anything but a shining example of what anthropogenic CO2 emissions might do to earth’s climate. In fact, it’s a good example of what they likely will not do, i.e., prevent cooling when some other more powerful factor nudges earth’s climate in the opposite direction.”

* Greenland was named Greenland during the Medieval Warm Period for a reason: it melts a little around the edges during warmer periods. During this warm period, the best evidence we have suggests that it is both melting around the edges and thickening in the center. That means little net change.

* The Greenland ice cap did not melt over the last 10,000 years when it was mostly as warm or warmer than today. During the recent Little Ice Age, it turned notably colder, and the Vikings were forced out. At one location, land that they dug up for a cemetery before they departed is still frozen in permafrost.

* A BBC article about the study implies that the much larger glaciers in Antarctica are melting in the same fashion. But we know that Antarctica is colder than 50 years ago and not melting in any significant way.

* The present temperature at Thule, Greenland is -9.6 F and it has not been above zero during the last 24 hours. There is no melting at this temperature.

* Glaciers do melt in the summer and accumulate ice in the winter. There is nothing new about that!

* During the previous interglacial (the Sangamon, 128,000 to 116,000 years ago), the Greenland ice sheet melted significantly more than in this interglacial (the Holocene). That big melt did not cause the extinction of the polar bear or any other polar animals or plants that I am aware of.

* Melting icebergs in the Arctic are responsible for a quarter of the total carbon sink capacity in the world. The melting surface water contains minerals that feed the strong phytoplankton blooms in Arctic waters. If atmospheric CO2 causes Greenland ice to melt (a big if), then the melting ice in turn causes increased CO2 sequestration and is thus self-correcting.

TreeC123, anytime I am referred to a new story with the quote, “_______ faster than expected” e.g., I do put on a critical thinking cap.

The actual observations are not matching the alarmist models at all, hence the frantic measures of the Climategate scientists to ‘hide the decline.’ So, how can it be (warming, melting) faster than expected — which puts the action ABOVE the models — when we know from direct observations that the actual rates are BELOW the models on the charts.

There is a great document, quietly put out by a media services group, that tells scientists and activists how to ‘frame’ the arguments for AGW. The actual statement is there: our people should state “______ (fill in the blank) faster than expected.” It’s guaranteed to get media attention, as it did in the references you shared.