The warming of Greenland progressing more rapidly than predicted

LOL, the article is written in the scaremongering/propaganda style while it ignored that just a few thousand years ago Greenland was much warmer with a lot less ice than now and the world goes on anyway all at the 260-280 ppm level.....

I posted this recently of a much less snow and ice and a lot warmer Greenland, and he ignored it to argue over irrelevant stuff in the thread.

New Study: Greenland Was 3-7°C Warmer And Far Less Glaciated Than Today 6000-8000 Years Ago​


Excerpt:

By Kenneth Richard on 12. January 2026

A large portion of the Greenland ice sheet that is today over 500 m thick did not exist during the Early to Mid Holocene.


Prudhoe Dome (PD), a 2500 km² section of northwestern Greenland’s ice sheet (GIS), is today 500 to 600 m thick (Walcott-George et al., 2026).

Approximately 6000-8000 years ago, or when atmospheric CO2 was alleged to be ~260 ppm, PD had deglaciated completely, exposing the soil to sunlight.

LINK
 
Meanwhile here is what is really going on based on the official data:

Greenland Ice losses,

1769737179208.webp

The changes of total mass balance,

1769737222674.webp


Oooooo, I am sure Old Rocks is in deep panic now!!!!
 
The warming and melting of Greenland, in fact, of the whole Arctic, is progressing much more rapidly than the scientists predicted. Evidence from the ice cores and ground underneath the ice show that in the past there was major ice loss at lower GHG levels than we have today. And as the warming Arctic makes the jet stream Rossby waves more extreme, southern areas are seeing colder winter storms, while the Arctic sees brief periods of above freezing temperatures in the dead of winter.

"A rapidly warming Arctic that feels unfamiliar even to experts​

The changes in Greenland are part of a broader pattern across the Arctic, where warming is proceeding at roughly four times the global average. Long term assessments like the annual Arctic Report Card have documented how sea ice, snow cover, and permafrost are all shifting in ways that would have been hard to imagine a generation ago. One recent installment described how the region now looks dramatically different than it did 20 years ago, noting that it is the continuation of a long term pattern and that the Arctic has shifted into a new state of being. That new state includes more rain on snow, more open water in autumn, and more frequent episodes of extreme warmth.


Some of those extremes have stunned even veteran researchers. Earlier this month, temperatures near the North Pole spiked more than 36°F above average, briefly pushing conditions above the melting point in the heart of winter. Scientists who work in Svalbard, Norway, in the high Arctic have described how the signs of rapid climate change are unmistakable, as documented in a detailed Transcript of their observations. When I hear glaciologists and sea ice experts say that the Arctic they study today barely resembles the one they first encountered in their careers, it becomes clear why the word “terrifying” is no longer considered hyperbole."


How much more should I pay for energy to save Greenland?
 
The warming and melting of Greenland, in fact, of the whole Arctic, is progressing much more rapidly than the scientists predicted. Evidence from the ice cores and ground underneath the ice show that in the past there was major ice loss at lower GHG levels than we have today. And as the warming Arctic makes the jet stream Rossby waves more extreme, southern areas are seeing colder winter storms, while the Arctic sees brief periods of above freezing temperatures in the dead of winter.

"A rapidly warming Arctic that feels unfamiliar even to experts​

The changes in Greenland are part of a broader pattern across the Arctic, where warming is proceeding at roughly four times the global average. Long term assessments like the annual Arctic Report Card have documented how sea ice, snow cover, and permafrost are all shifting in ways that would have been hard to imagine a generation ago. One recent installment described how the region now looks dramatically different than it did 20 years ago, noting that it is the continuation of a long term pattern and that the Arctic has shifted into a new state of being. That new state includes more rain on snow, more open water in autumn, and more frequent episodes of extreme warmth.


Some of those extremes have stunned even veteran researchers. Earlier this month, temperatures near the North Pole spiked more than 36°F above average, briefly pushing conditions above the melting point in the heart of winter. Scientists who work in Svalbard, Norway, in the high Arctic have described how the signs of rapid climate change are unmistakable, as documented in a detailed Transcript of their observations. When I hear glaciologists and sea ice experts say that the Arctic they study today barely resembles the one they first encountered in their careers, it becomes clear why the word “terrifying” is no longer considered hyperbole."

C'mon Greenland. I am thinking of buying a summer home there and need some terra firma to put it on. How much more ice do we have to go before I see the actual Greenland?
 
Your reply is all part of the willful ignorance of the denialists. So who to believe, a non-scientist that has probably never taken even a basic first level science at university level, or scientists who have spent decades of research in their discipline?
I have master of science degree. There is no valid research that shows humans cause climate change. There are insignificant correlations and biased research. No one really cares anymore and nations that switch to renewable energy will destroy their economies with high energy costs and shortages
 

Old Rocks

Diamond Member​

Look at the minimum for this years arctic ice. Almost as low as 2007, and still declining.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.area.arctic.png

Now look at the global sea ice area, note the right hand side of the graph. See how much time the ice area is below the zero line since 2003.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg

And here is the present line of the Arctic Ice area

http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png

Still trending down. Another week of no uptrend, and we may well see another low for the Arctic Ice Melt.
No idea why you posted that.
 
Yet more reason for a US takeover of the island.
As if Greenlanders are going to give up their free Healthcare, free childcare, mandatory vacation, and free tuition for your lizard brained cult fetish.

Get a grip, cultist.
 
Yes, those pesky denialists.


Many of whom talk about Global Warming even though their discipline doesn't come close to touching on it.
So what? Stop yer pointless crybabying and go read the IPCC report.
 
Nobody gives a shit, nor does it qualify you to be taken seriously on climate science matters.
I was asked so I answered. I would suggest you find something real to believe in. Humans dont change the climate. The sun creates climate. Let me know when you can control that. Also the solutions to the problem that doesnt exist such as renewable unreliabe expensive energy that cant meet the demand of AI and data banks will wreck the economy. Thanks to Trump that wont happen. Drill baby drill
 
As if Greenlanders are going to give up their free Healthcare, free childcare, mandatory vacation, and free tuition for your lizard brained cult fetish.

Get a grip, cultist.
Ever been there? Its not great place to live. Nothing free they live in shacks and freeze their asses off
 
15th post
Lie. He related the prediction of it being possible. Stop lying, Frank.
Here are 18 examples of the spectacularly wrong predictions made around 1970 when the “green holy day” (aka Earth Day) started:

1. Harvard biologist George Wald estimated that “civilization will end within 15 or 30 years [by 1985 or 2000] unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.”

2. “We are in an environmental crisis that threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation,” wrote Washington University biologist Barry Commoner in the Earth Day issue of the scholarly journal Environment.

3. The day after the first Earth Day, the New York Times editorial page warned, “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction.”

4. “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make,” Paul Ehrlich confidently declared in the April 1970 issue of Mademoiselle. “The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years [by 1980].”

5. “Most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man have already been born,” wrote Paul Ehrlich in a 1969 essay titled “Eco-Catastrophe! “By…[1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s.”

6. Ehrlich sketched out his most alarmist scenario for the 1970 Earth Day issue of The Progressive, assuring readers that between 1980 and 1989, some 4 billion people, including 65 million Americans, would perish in the “Great Die-Off.”

7. “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” declared Denis Hayes, the chief organizer for Earth Day, in the Spring 1970 issue of The Living Wilderness.

8. Peter Gunter, a North Texas State University professor, wrote in 1970, “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China, and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions….By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.”

Note: The prediction of famine in South America is partly true, but only in Venezuela and only because of socialism, not for environmental reasons.

9. In January 1970, Life reported, “Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….”

10. Ecologist Kenneth Watt told Time that, “At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.”

11. Barry Commoner predicted that decaying organic pollutants would use up all of the oxygen in America’s rivers, causing freshwater fish to suffocate.

12. Paul Ehrlich chimed in, predicting in 1970 that “air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone.” Ehrlich sketched a scenario in which 200,000 Americans would die in 1973 during “smog disasters” in New York and Los Angeles.

13. Paul Ehrlich warned in the May 1970 issue of Audubon that DDT and other chlorinated hydrocarbons “may have substantially reduced the life expectancy of people born since 1945.” Ehrlich warned that Americans born since 1946…now had a life expectancy of only 49 years, and he predicted that if current patterns continued this expectancy would reach 42 years by 1980 when it might level out. (Note: According to the most recent CDC report, life expectancy in the US is 78.6 years).

14. Ecologist Kenneth Watt declared, “By the year 2000 if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate…that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, `Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say,`I am very sorry, there isn’t any.’”

Note: Global oil production last year at about 95M barrels per day (bpd) was double the global oil output of 48M bpd around the time of the first Earth Day in 1970.

15. Harrison Brown, a scientist at the National Academy of Sciences, published a chart in Scientific American that looked at metal reserves and estimated that humanity would totally run out of copper shortly after 2000. Lead, zinc, tin, gold, and silver would be gone before 1990.

16. Sen. Gaylord Nelson wrote in Look, “Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, believes that in 25 years, somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.”

17. In 1975, Paul Ehrlich predicted that “since more than nine-tenths of the original tropical rainforests will be removed in most areas within the next 30 years or so [by 2005], it is expected that half of the organisms in these areas will vanish with it.”

18. Kenneth Watt warned about a pending Ice Age in a speech. “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years,” he declared. “If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an Ice Age.”

MP: Let’s keep those spectacularly wrong predictions from the first Earth Day 1970 in mind when we’re bombarded again this year with dire predictions of “gloom and doom” and “existential threats” due to climate change. And let’s think about the question posed by Ronald Bailey in 2000: W
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom