New NASA study shows the earth is cooling

[basquebromance]

NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses

Stories MSNBC and CNN are hiding from you

 

[basquebromance]

The problem with progressivism is they believe all things can be decided. Once its been 'scientifically confirmed' the debate is over.

 

[Mousterian]

Well, no, NASA is not saying 'The Earth is cooling'.
The gist of the article is in the first sentence:
"A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers."
That is, snowfall from long ago is driving the increase in some areas, but if you keep reading, you'll find:
“If the losses of the Antarctic Peninsula and parts of West Antarctica continue to increase at the same rate they’ve been increasing for the last two decades, the losses will catch up with the long-term gain in East Antarctica in 20 or 30 years -- I don’t think there will be enough snowfall increase to offset these losses.”

 

[Frankeneinstein]

The problem with progressivism is they believe all things can be decided. Once its been 'scientifically confirmed' the debate is over.

That's the way every religion works, this one is no different

 

[Old Rocks]

NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses

Stories MSNBC and CNN are hiding from you

A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.



The research challenges the conclusions of other studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 report, which says that Antarctica is overall losing land ice.



According to the new analysis of satellite data, the Antarctic ice sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001. That net gain slowed to 82 billion tons of ice per year between 2003 and 2008.



“We’re essentially in agreement with other studies that show an increase in ice discharge in the Antarctic Peninsula and the Thwaites and Pine Island region of West Antarctica,” said Jay Zwally, a glaciologist with NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, and lead author of the study, which was published on Oct. 30 in the Journal of Glaciology. “Our main disagreement is for East Antarctica and the interior of West Antarctica – there, we see an ice gain that exceeds the losses in the other areas.” Zwally added that his team “measured small height changes over large areas, as well as the large changes observed over smaller areas.”



Scientists calculate how much the ice sheet is growing or shrinking from the changes in surface height that are measured by the satellite altimeters. In locations where the amount of new snowfall accumulating on an ice sheet is not equal to the ice flow downward and outward to the ocean, the surface height changes and the ice-sheet mass grows or shrinks.



But it might only take a few decades for Antarctica’s growth to reverse, according to Zwally. “If the losses of the Antarctic Peninsula and parts of West Antarctica continue to increase at the same rate they’ve been increasing for the last two decades, the losses will catch up with the long-term gain in East Antarctica in 20 or 30 years -- I don’t think there will be enough snowfall increase to offset these losses.”

NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses

First, that is one study, there are other studies that contradict this, including the data from the GRACE satellites. Second, just how the fuck do you get the Earth cooling out of that study? Third, what the fuck do you mean, hiding the information? This paper was published two years ago and extensively discussed on this very board.

 

[ScienceRocks]

More snowfall This certainly doesn't have anything about global anything.

Of course, you have to lie.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

First, that is one study, there are other studies that contradict this, including the data from the GRACE satellites.

actally this post/thread was citing this "one" study to show there was contradicting evidence to global warming including those you are citing, your claim would be more accurate if ti read..."this study contradicts those other studies including the data from the GRACE satellites"

Second, just how the fuck do you get the Earth cooling out of that study?

I imagine that comes from all the just as ridiculous claims that melting ice in Antarctica is proof of global warming, a logically thinking person would draw such a conclusion if they were drawing their conclusions based on the same guidelines of what "more or less" antarctic ice proves.

Third, what the fuck do you mean, hiding the information? This paper was published two years ago and extensively discussed on this very board.

which is proof that this is correct

Stories MSNBC and CNN are hiding from you

 

[Old Rocks]

A warming of the air over Antarctica would result in more snow inland as the warmer air, still below freezing, could carry more water vapor. That, of course, would be temporary as the warming would also involve a warmer ocean, and more melting of the ice shelves.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

A warming of the air over Antarctica would result in more snow inland as the warmer air, still below freezing, could carry more water vapor. That, of course, would be temporary as the warming would also involve a warmer ocean, and more melting of the ice shelves.

but what is the proof this is the case? [I'm not claiming one way or the other what is happening here, just want the controlling authority guidelines for what constitutes proof[ and as far as my post is concerned I was pointing out that the OP's post was both accurate and honest even if it may not be right, which is the same "global warmests" do]

 

[gipper]

Old C

A warming of the air over Antarctica would result in more snow inland as the warmer air, still below freezing, could carry more water vapor. That, of course, would be temporary as the warming would also involve a warmer ocean, and more melting of the ice shelves.

but what is the proof this is the case? [I'm not claiming one way or the other what is happening here, just want the controlling authority guidelines for what constitutes proof[ and as far as my post is concerned I was pointing out that the OP's post was both accurate and honest even if it may not be right, which is the same "global warmests" do]

Old Cock doesn’t need proof. He believes !!!

 

[Frankeneinstein]

Old C

A warming of the air over Antarctica would result in more snow inland as the warmer air, still below freezing, could carry more water vapor. That, of course, would be temporary as the warming would also involve a warmer ocean, and more melting of the ice shelves.

but what is the proof this is the case? [I'm not claiming one way or the other what is happening here, just want the controlling authority guidelines for what constitutes proof[ and as far as my post is concerned I was pointing out that the OP's post was both accurate and honest even if it may not be right, which is the same "global warmests" do]

Old Cock doesn’t need proof. He believes !!!

c'mon with that

 

[Old Rocks]

Their work showed that not only was the Antarctic Peninsula warming, but the interior of West Antarctica — the ice sheet most susceptible to potential future collapse — was as well. And not only that, but that "the continent on the whole is warming," Mann said. "This is the first study to demonstrate that."

The study, funded by the National Science Foundation, found that warming in West Antarctica exceeded about 0.18 degree Fahrenheit (0.1 degree Celsius) per decade for the last 50 years — more than enough to offset the cooling in East Antarctica.

And with ozone depletion having leveled off, that cooling is unlikely to continue in the future.

"Efforts to repair the ozone layer eventually will begin taking effect and the hole could be eliminated by the middle of this century. If that happens, all of Antarctica could begin warming on a par with the rest of the world," Steig said.

"The greenhouse signal is now out-competing the ozone depletion signal," Mann said.

The study is "good work," said Kevin Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colo., but he says there are unique aspects of Antarctica's climate that haven't been taken into account. Trenberth was not involved in the Nature study.

Antarctica Is Warming: Climate Picture Clears Up

 

[Old Rocks]

Zwally is a credible researcher. Does that mean he is right? No. The people that state that Antarctica is losing ice are credible researchers. Do that mean that they are correct, No. This is a very complex continent with a number of things happening all at the same time, and most of them in flux due to the general warming of the globe. More research needed.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

Their work showed that not only was the Antarctic Peninsula warming, but the interior of West Antarctica — the ice sheet most susceptible to potential future collapse — was as well. And not only that, but that "the continent on the whole is warming," Mann said. "This is the first study to demonstrate that."

The study, funded by the National Science Foundation, found that warming in West Antarctica exceeded about 0.18 degree Fahrenheit (0.1 degree Celsius) per decade for the last 50 years — more than enough to offset the cooling in East Antarctica.

And with ozone depletion having leveled off, that cooling is unlikely to continue in the future.

"Efforts to repair the ozone layer eventually will begin taking effect and the hole could be eliminated by the middle of this century. If that happens, all of Antarctica could begin warming on a par with the rest of the world," Steig said.

"The greenhouse signal is now out-competing the ozone depletion signal," Mann said.

The study is "good work," said Kevin Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colo., but he says there are unique aspects of Antarctica's climate that haven't been taken into account. Trenbeok, follow me because this is why I so distrust the global warming crowd...I have asked several times what the proof is for claiming this and all I have gotten is "this and/or that is rising in temperature"..."this and/or that scientist said"...."this and/or that study" and not one standard unit of proof...if you would like to see how frustrating listening to something where proof is not the focal point, try adding proof to each and every claim that you are going to try and make from here on out...none exists because everything that is happening to the earth right now is natural and has happened between 17 and 19 times before.

 

[skookerasbil]

The warmers still have yet to make the case. End of story. Let me know when there is evidence of Antarctica melting........until then, you people are full of shit. Also, let me know when world governments scrap fossil fuels because they are convinced of the "consensus" . Until then, all you bozo's have is a hobby.

 

[IanC]

There is a back story to Zwally's laser altimetry findings.

As per usual, climate science ignores or hides inconvenient data. While Zwally's Greenland findings were acknowledged because they went in the right direction, his Antarctic data was relegated to just footnotes in NASA briefings for many years in the hope that further updates or new methodologies could reverse the trend. It was only in 2015 that a paper was released, using data that only went up to 2008.

Several years ago I did a thorough search for this information and found two mentions of it. A 2012 NASA video with no graphics or accompanying data, and a 2011 presentation poster that acknowledged the Antarctic ice gain but only relative to overall ice loss when combined with Greenland. The latter link was broken some time afterwards but the video is still available.

I have a few other examples of inconvenient data simply not being released, notably the Thompson's ice core findings that remain unfinished and unreleased when they fail to support the expected outcome.