Greenland Melt

Crick

Gold Member
May 10, 2014
27,875
5,291
290
N/A
An article by Dr Jeff Masters, PhD meterologist and founder of the Weather Underground website. Dr. Jeff Masters' WunderBlog : The Heat is on in Greenland: Support the Dark Snow Project | Weather Underground


greenland-melt.png

Figure 2. Monthly changes in the total mass (in Gigatonnes) of the Greenland ice sheet estimated from GRACE satellite measurements between March 2002 - July 2013. The blue and orange asterisks denote April and July values, respectively. Note that the decline in ice mass lost from Greenland is not a straight line--it is exponential, meaning that in general, more ice loss is lost each year than in the previous year. However, the mass loss during the 2013 summer melt season was probably smaller than during 2012, said the 2013 Arctic Report Card.

Saving Greenland's Ice Sheet is Imperative
Human-caused global warming has set in motion an unstoppable slow-motion collapse of the glaciers in West Antarctica capable of raising global sea level by 4 feet (1.2 meters) in a few hundred years, said NASA in a May 2014 press release. What's more, one of the glaciers involved, the Thwaites Glacier, acts as a linchpin on the rest of the ice sheet, which contains enough ice to cause a total of 10 to 13 feet (3 to 4 meters) of global sea level rise over a period of centuries. This unstoppable collapse makes saving Greenland "absolutely essential", said glaciologist Richard Alley in a May 2014 interview in Mother Jones. Greenland's ice sheet holds enough water to raise global sea levels by 7.36 meters (24.15 feet) were it all to melt, and civilization would be hard-pressed to deal with 10 - 13 feet of sea level rise from West Antarctica, let alone another 20+ feet from Greenland. "If we've committed to 3.3 meters (10.8') from West Antarctica, we haven't committed to losing Greenland, we haven't committed to losing most of East Antarctica," said Alley. "Those are still out there for us. And if anything, this new news just makes our decisions more important, and more powerful." Unfortunately, the Greenland Ice Sheet is much more vulnerable to melting than previously thought, found a May 2014 study by Morlighem et al., Deeply incised submarine glacial valleys beneath the Greenland ice sheet. The researchers found that widespread ice-covered valleys extend much deeper below sea level and farther inland than previously thought, and would likely melt significantly from steadily warming waters lapping at Greenland's shores.

Support for the Dark Snow Hypothesis
Observational evidence for the Dark Snow project's hypothesis that upwind forest fires might darken the Greenland Ice Sheet and cause significant melting was provided by a May 2014 paper by Keegan et al., Climate change and forest fires synergistically drive widespread melt events of the Greenland Ice Sheet. Their ice core study found that black carbon from forest fires helped caused a rare, near-ice-sheet-wide surface melt event that melted 97% of Greenland's surface on July 11 - 12 2012, and a similar event in 1889. Since Arctic temperatures and the frequency of forest fires are both expected to rise with climate change, the results suggest that widespread melt events on the Greenland Ice Sheet may begin to occur almost annually by the end of century.

Another factor contributing to a darker Greenland Ice Sheet and more melting may be additional wind-blown dust landing on the ice, according to a June 2014 study, Contribution of light-absorbing impurities in snow to Greenland's darkening since 2009. In an interview with ClimateWire, lead author Marie Dumont of France's meteorological agency said, "Our hypothesis is that now that seasonal snow cover in the Arctic is retreating earlier than before, and bare soil is available earlier in the Spring for dust transport."
 
How did humanity manage to survive back when it was warm enough for Vikings to farm in Greenland in areas in which farming is still impossible today? They set up settlements as far north as Godthab. The pasture land of greenland was better than those in either norway or iceland.

Dr Masters is a screaming hysteric with zero historical perspective.
 
The icelandic sagas and the history of Norway happen to be a hobby of mine. Your statement is complete crap. The settlements of Greenland failed, repeatedly.
 
Wikipedia:

The settlements, such as Brattahlíð, thrived for centuries but disappeared sometime in the 15th century, perhaps at the onset of the Little Ice Age.[20] Apart from some runic inscriptions, no contemporary records or historiography survives from the Norse settlements. Icelandic saga accounts of life in Greenland were composed in the thirteenth century and later, and do not constitute primary sources for the history of early Greenland.[21] Modern understanding therefore depends on the physical data. Interpretation of ice core and clam shell data suggests that between 800 and 1300 AD, the regions around the fjords of southern Greenland experienced a relatively mild climate several degrees Celsius higher than usual in the North Atlantic,[22] with trees and herbaceous plants growing and livestock being farmed. Barley was grown as a crop up to the 70th parallel.[23] What is verifiable is that the ice cores indicate Greenland has experienced dramatic temperature shifts many times over the past 100,000 years.[24] Similarly the Icelandic Book of Settlements records famines during the winters in which "the old and helpless were killed and thrown over cliffs".[25]

The last written records of the Norse Greenlanders are of a marriage in 1408 in the church of Hvalsey—today the best-preserved Nordic ruins in Greenland. These Icelandic settlements vanished during the 14th and 15th centuries, probably as a result of famine and increasing conflicts with the Inuit.[26] The condition of human bones from this period indicates that the Norse population was malnourished, probably due to soil erosion resulting from the Norsemen's destruction of natural vegetation in the course of farming, turf-cutting, and wood-cutting, pandemic plague, a decline in temperatures during the Little Ice Age, and armed conflicts with the Inuit.[20]
***************
There is no evidence that Greenland's ice cover has been lower than current levels at any time in recorded history.
 
Last edited:
LMAO.....Antarctic sea ice largest on record!!!

Why is Antarctic sea ice growing?

Now isn't that something?

Yes it is. It's growing because it's sliding off the Antarctic coastline at five times its normal pace and it's doing that because of warm sea water lapping away at it's grounding line. As you well know, the grounding line is now unstoppably receding into areas where the base rock below the ice is below sea level.

You know you get a lot of grief here for being stupid. Surely you're smart enough to have read and understood and recall what's happening in Antarctica. It is NOT what a denier wants to bring up these days (not that anything is). The Antarctic glaciers sliding inexorably into the Amundsen Sea is NOT a good thing.

PS, the topic of this thread is Greenland. Not Antarctica. Greenland.
 
Last edited:
More AGW cult religious teachings.

Let us pick some arbitrary dates and make it look like it worse than it really is.

Once upon a time (not that long ago) farm land was abundant on this island.

Yet the AGW cult wants you to believe that climate does NOT change ever and that any change is due to human activities.

That is not teaching science, but a religion to promote their cult like belief system.
 
An article by Dr Jeff Masters, PhD meterologist and founder of the Weather Underground website. Dr. Jeff Masters' WunderBlog : The Heat is on in Greenland: Support the Dark Snow Project | Weather Underground


greenland-melt.png

Figure 2. Monthly changes in the total mass (in Gigatonnes) of the Greenland ice sheet estimated from GRACE satellite measurements between March 2002 - July 2013. The blue and orange asterisks denote April and July values, respectively. Note that the decline in ice mass lost from Greenland is not a straight line--it is exponential, meaning that in general, more ice loss is lost each year than in the previous year. However, the mass loss during the 2013 summer melt season was probably smaller than during 2012, said the 2013 Arctic Report Card.

Saving Greenland's Ice Sheet is Imperative
Human-caused global warming has set in motion an unstoppable slow-motion collapse of the glaciers in West Antarctica capable of raising global sea level by 4 feet (1.2 meters) in a few hundred years, said NASA in a May 2014 press release. What's more, one of the glaciers involved, the Thwaites Glacier, acts as a linchpin on the rest of the ice sheet, which contains enough ice to cause a total of 10 to 13 feet (3 to 4 meters) of global sea level rise over a period of centuries. This unstoppable collapse makes saving Greenland "absolutely essential", said glaciologist Richard Alley in a May 2014 interview in Mother Jones. Greenland's ice sheet holds enough water to raise global sea levels by 7.36 meters (24.15 feet) were it all to melt, and civilization would be hard-pressed to deal with 10 - 13 feet of sea level rise from West Antarctica, let alone another 20+ feet from Greenland. "If we've committed to 3.3 meters (10.8') from West Antarctica, we haven't committed to losing Greenland, we haven't committed to losing most of East Antarctica," said Alley. "Those are still out there for us. And if anything, this new news just makes our decisions more important, and more powerful." Unfortunately, the Greenland Ice Sheet is much more vulnerable to melting than previously thought, found a May 2014 study by Morlighem et al., Deeply incised submarine glacial valleys beneath the Greenland ice sheet. The researchers found that widespread ice-covered valleys extend much deeper below sea level and farther inland than previously thought, and would likely melt significantly from steadily warming waters lapping at Greenland's shores.

Support for the Dark Snow Hypothesis
Observational evidence for the Dark Snow project's hypothesis that upwind forest fires might darken the Greenland Ice Sheet and cause significant melting was provided by a May 2014 paper by Keegan et al., Climate change and forest fires synergistically drive widespread melt events of the Greenland Ice Sheet. Their ice core study found that black carbon from forest fires helped caused a rare, near-ice-sheet-wide surface melt event that melted 97% of Greenland's surface on July 11 - 12 2012, and a similar event in 1889. Since Arctic temperatures and the frequency of forest fires are both expected to rise with climate change, the results suggest that widespread melt events on the Greenland Ice Sheet may begin to occur almost annually by the end of century.

Another factor contributing to a darker Greenland Ice Sheet and more melting may be additional wind-blown dust landing on the ice, according to a June 2014 study, Contribution of light-absorbing impurities in snow to Greenland's darkening since 2009. In an interview with ClimateWire, lead author Marie Dumont of France's meteorological agency said, "Our hypothesis is that now that seasonal snow cover in the Arctic is retreating earlier than before, and bare soil is available earlier in the Spring for dust transport."

So with all that on that graph, the sea level didn't rise, so what exactly is your point?
 
So with all that on that graph, the sea level didn't rise, so what exactly is your point?

Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea?

That is, who fed you such a crazy lie? And why did you fall for it?

Don't worry, it wasn't directed at you. We already know you have no proof of 120ppm of CO2 driving climate. So your further comments aren't important until that proof is provided. bye.
 
So with all that on that graph, the sea level didn't rise, so what exactly is your point?

Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea?

That is, who fed you such a crazy lie? And why did you fall for it?

Don't worry, it wasn't directed at you. We already know you have no proof of 120ppm of CO2 driving climate. So your further comments aren't important until that proof is provided. bye.

How long are you going to use that excuse to shit yourself and run every time it gets pointed out you're just making shit up again?

I'd ask you to find your balls and address the issues, but that's usually not possible for deniers, since the denier cult now requires its acolytes to become eunuchs before joining. However, perhaps you could convince a vet to implant a set of neuticles, after which you can explain why you think there's no sea level rise.
 
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea?

That is, who fed you such a crazy lie? And why did you fall for it?

Don't worry, it wasn't directed at you. We already know you have no proof of 120ppm of CO2 driving climate. So your further comments aren't important until that proof is provided. bye.

How long are you going to use that excuse to shit yourself and run every time it gets pointed out you're just making shit up again?

I'd ask you to find your balls and address the issues, but that's usually not possible for deniers, since the denier cult now requires its acolytes to become eunuchs before joining. However, perhaps you could convince a vet to implant a set of neuticles, after which you can explain why you think there's no sea level rise.

So in other words you do not are a link to datasets with source code that proves CO2 drives climate.

All we get is AGW cult talking points..
 
So in other words you do not are a link to datasets with source code that proves CO2 drives climate.

I just need to show the smoking guns. That would be the outgoing longwave radiationn decreasing in the greenhouse gas absorption bands, and downward longwave increasing.

And I have shown it. Several times. The deniers, alas, either pretended not to see it, or said it was all faked. Denied reality, in other words, hence why they're called deniers.

So just run back to your cult, Kosh, and pretend with all the others that the data we keep showing doesn't actually exist.
 

Forum List

Back
Top