"Fingerprint" of Greenland ice melt seen in satellite sea level data

[abu afak]

Did you read the citation? ... which part of the error analysis do you disagree with? ... that was pretty harsh of the authors the way they dismissed the tidal gauge data ... just brutal ...

You don't know who you are talking to/trying to talk to.
LUNATIC

Top ten Zionist people frauds of all time

Zionist Jews, the folks Einstein warned us were fascist in 1948, use frauds to manipulate other to do their bidding. Jews masquerade as non-Jews. Here are my top 10 all time... 10. Rev Billy Graham - got all those Christians to support israel 9. Rupert Murdoch - wrecked the GOP and the US by...

www.usmessageboard.com

Zionist Jews, the folks Einstein warned us were fascist in 1948, use frauds to manipulate other to do their bidding. Jews masquerade as non-Jews. Here are my top 10 all time...
10. Rev Billy Graham - got all those Christians to support israel
9. Rupert Murdoch - wrecked the GOP and the US by pushing Zionism and flushing fiscal conservatism - always for another US war to help Israel.
8. Gadaffi - the terrorist behind Pan Am 103 can be outed by typing Gadaffi Jewish into any search engine - notice the Israeli media admits he was Jewish, the us media does not.
7. LBJ - the second worst traitor in US history - offed JFK, MLK, and RFK - started 'nam to run US weapons factories and ship new weapons not to US troops, but to Israel while billing the US taxpayer
6. Saudi Royal family - That's why the current crown price was Epstein Island's top customer
5. Mitch McConnell - the wrecking of the US balance sheet and the 911 fraud were not possible without his treasonous help
4. Mike pence - this failed Jew became a faux Christian politician backed by Zionist money and media coverage, and by stabbing the GOP and the US in the back, he proved it
3. Mitt Romney - if you haven!t figured it out, Brigham Young was a Jew, and so are most of the Mormon elites like Zionist traitor mitt.
2. Col. Tim Osman - this Zionist Jew CIA asset stayed in afghan beyond the mission to help resist the soviets, changed his name to Osama, and popped up on tv to lie and take credit for that which the CIA and Mossad did, namely 911
1. Moses - and when he came down the mountain, he looked different (because it wasn't the real one), and then it became necessary to off 3500 for noticing that... Cough cough.... No, they needed to be offed because they were guilty of the worst possible crime - they were dancing (around a golden calf)

`

 

[Crick]

That's good in a way. 1981 was the START of ANY accurate measurements of GW and GW phenomenon. I'm not griping about that. I'm pointing out that they BURIED the data by highlighting just the 2 WORST years of that record as FULL graphed years, The other 37 or 38 years are just part of the "mean and and interdecile" data all lumped together.

The whole point of this was a response to your claim that the procedure used to detect the meltwater signature in sea level data was blind to ice mass gain. Greenland has seen no ice mass gain of ANY significance since the beginning of the satellite record.

Who said it did?

You did when you attempted to suggest that the melt and albedo loss being greatest at the coasts was an indicator that the melt was not significant.

Just the normal temperature lapse from sea level to 1000 feet is many times LARGER than the GW anomaly realized during that time period. So both ALBEDO loss and Ice Loss is LARGER at the coasts. AND it's a very narrow band of land. So which is it? The alarmists are talking about 7 meter sea level rise if Greenland melts -- but most studies including this one are detecting the MAJORITY EFFECTS at sea level.

I guess its a good thing, then, that that lapse rate isn't being altered by human GHG emissions the way global (meaning, among other things, ALL Greenland) temperatures are.

Yeah -- shame on me for pointing out the MORE INFORMATIVE way of presenting the WHOLE truth. It's what I would have done -- if ALL that data was in front of me.

Don't tell me about it. Justify yourself to Billy Boy before he works himself into a tizzy of some sort.

Like I SAID -- just the normal atmos temp lapse rate to 1000 ft elevation is MANY TIMES the ENTIRE GW temp anomaly. 5.4 DEGF per 1000 ft VERSUS the anomaly change in your lifetime of about 1.1DegF.

Apparently not big enough. I'm pretty sure you and I both remember a few years back when the entire surface of Greenland got above freezing.

That's NOT what this study is showing in there graph there. Mass LOSS didn't occur in any suspicious amounts til the mid - 90s. That's 12 or 14 years INTO THE GRAPH you're misinterpreting. The authors even copped to that in the Abstract.

As I noted earlier, I was pointing out that there had been no mass gain in response to your contention that the 'signature' procedure couldn't detect it. I will admit I did not phrase myself correctly in the first post despite having seen the level ice mass in the 70's and 80s. But, in my defense, the satellite era for ice thickness measurements didn't begin till 2003 with the IceSAT mission.

On a positive note -- I'll EVEN QUOTE the biased Climate.gov site. Which uses the most USEFUL measurement of GW driving ice melt -- which is #of Ice melt days. EVEN THO -- as I said -- ONE day about freezing COULD BE 0.001DegC above freezing or 1.000DegC above which gives a melt result diff of a THOUSAND TIMES DIFFERENCE.

So... these data cause you no concern?

Greenland ice sheet mass balance from 1840 through next week

Abstract. The mass of the Greenland ice sheet is declining as mass gain from snow accumulation is exceeded by mass loss from surface meltwater runoff, marine-terminating glacier calving and submarine melting, and basal melting. Here we use the input–output (IO) method to estimate mass change...

essd.copernicus.org

Seems like the ice melt in 2021 was about THREE TIMES LOWER than the satellite era AVERAGE of 280Gtons. QUICK WRITE A PAPER -- the TREND IS DECREASING !!! LOL..

The data in the graph above show an increasing melt rate beginning in mid-2019. Quick, write a paper.

 

[EMH]

Fudge parroted as usual.

The satellite data, as in the case of AA, shows Greenland ice mass still growing.

 

[Crick]

The satellite data, as in the case of AA, shows Greenland ice mass still growing.

Then show it to us.

 

[EMH]

Then show it to us.

Thickening of the western part of the Greenland ice sheet | Journal of Glaciology | Cambridge Core

Thickening of the western part of the Greenland ice sheet - Volume 44 Issue 148

www.cambridge.org

 

[Crick]

Thickening of the western part of the Greenland ice sheet | Journal of Glaciology | Cambridge Core

Thickening of the western part of the Greenland ice sheet - Volume 44 Issue 148

www.cambridge.org

First, thank you for posting that. Second, it is good to see such news. Unfortunately, as far as this study is concerned, the thickening and mass balance are localized and the authors are unable to come to any conclusion on mass balance for Greenland as a whole and state such conclusion will have to await further research. Here though, was an odd thing. The report itself was published 20 Jan 2017 but the text of the results talks about events in 1997, 1998 and 2001 as taking place in the future. And, as you have seen here from several sources, other contemporary researchers have concluded that Greenland, as a whole, is experiencing a significant and ongoing negative mass balance.

 

[EMH]

First, thank you for posting that. Second, it is good to see such news. Unfortunately, as far as this study is concerned, the thickening and mass balance are localized and the authors are unable to come to any conclusion on mass balance for Greenland as a whole and state such conclusion will have to await further research. Here though, was an odd thing. The report itself was published 20 Jan 2017 but the text of the results talks about events in 1997, 1998 and 2001 as taking place in the future. And, as you have seen here from several sources, other contemporary researchers have concluded that Greenland, as a whole, is experiencing a significant and ongoing negative mass balance.

The vast majority of greenland's ice thickens every year. That is what ice age glacier does. That is why ice cores produce climate gas records. Every year Greenland adds another layer of ice. Does the portion of Greenland south of the arctic circle melt in the summer? Yeah. Ice age glacier will go south of arctic circle, but not that far. North American ice age got to Indiana, but not Georgia, for example. Granted, that land was a bit further north when that occurred, but not 100 miles further.

That is what happens. Unfrozen land moves towards a pole. When it gets to 600 or so miles, the annual snowfall ceases to fully melt, and it starts to stack. A million years later, land formation cooperating, that ice will stick out a few hundred miles beyond the polar circle, but no further.

You are arguing Greenland is melting. The northern 80%+ of Greenland's ice age glacier is still in the "glacier manufacturing zone" and is not going to stop manufacturing ice until it moves further away from North Pole.

Hysteria about melt on the southern tip is hilariously hypocritical, since the Vikings grew crops there until the 1400s, and all of that farmland is buried under ice today....

But that is all your side has

Lies
Fudge
Fraud
Photoshopped photos
Deliberate misdiagnosis

 

[ReinyDays]

Your side cannot refute one word of that post.

That is climate science.

Your side has "the science"

Atmospheric scientists ... which includes both meteorology and climatology ... use Planck's Law to model the universe ... all of it ... to my knowledge, GR is never used ... weather is strictly classical physics and then QM when needed ... Stefan-Boltzmann's Law is derived from Planck's Law and gives us a mathematical model of temperature ... in all the universe ... so that includes Earth's atmosphere ... and these results are easily demonstrated, measure the temperature of a red-hot piece of iron ... yeah, that shade of red is unique to it's temperature ... and it's the same shade of red for that temperature for all materials, whether iron, glass or hydrogen gas ...

If you want to model this as smooth, then you need to explain where all the extra UV is ... everyone else is modeling this incrementally, thus we don't have any extra unaccounted for UV radiation filling the universe ...

You've been learning your science from the National Enquirer? ... just curious because even an old shit like myself has heard of modern physics, why haven't you? ...

 

[EMH]

Atmospheric scientists ... which includes both meteorology and climatology ... use Planck's Law to model the universe ... all of it ... to my knowledge, GR is never used ... weather is strictly classical physics and then QM when needed ... Stefan-Boltzmann's Law is derived from Planck's Law and gives us a mathematical model of temperature ... in all the universe ... so that includes Earth's atmosphere ... and these results are easily demonstrated, measure the temperature of a red-hot piece of iron ... yeah, that shade of red is unique to it's temperature ... and it's the same shade of red for that temperature for all materials, whether iron, glass or hydrogen gas ...

If you want to model this as smooth, then you need to explain where all the extra UV is ... everyone else is modeling this incrementally, thus we don't have any extra unaccounted for UV radiation filling the universe ...

You've been learning your science from the National Enquirer? ... just curious because even an old shit like myself has heard of modern physics, why haven't you? ...

This is a classic example of science vs. "the science"

What does the highly correlated raw data from satellites and balloons say?

No warming in the atmosphere


What does science say about that?

Co2 went up, temps did not...


THEORY REJECTED


What does "the science" do?

It fudged both with uncorrellated "corrections" and then funds the fudge baking liars to come up with "models" based on lies.

25 years ago theses "models" said the Arctic would be "ice free" by 2020...

 

[EMH]

Key claim against global warming evaporates

Satellite and weather balloon data used to argue that climate models were wrong and that global warming isn't really happening turns out to be based on faulty analyses, according to three new studies.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[Crick]

Atmospheric scientists ... which includes both meteorology and climatology ... use Planck's Law to model the universe ... all of it ... to my knowledge, GR is never used ... weather is strictly classical physics and then QM when needed ... Stefan-Boltzmann's Law is derived from Planck's Law and gives us a mathematical model of temperature ... in all the universe ... so that includes Earth's atmosphere ... and these results are easily demonstrated, measure the temperature of a red-hot piece of iron ... yeah, that shade of red is unique to it's temperature ... and it's the same shade of red for that temperature for all materials, whether iron, glass or hydrogen gas ...

You seem to have forgotten about material emissivity.

 

[ReinyDays]

This is a classic example of science vs. "the science"

What does the highly correlated raw data from satellites and balloons say?

No warming in the atmosphere


What does science say about that?

Co2 went up, temps did not...


THEORY REJECTED


What does "the science" do?

It fudged both with uncorrellated "corrections" and then funds the fudge baking liars to come up with "models" based on lies.

25 years ago theses "models" said the Arctic would be "ice free" by 2020...

Which theory are you rejecting here? ... my claim is the CO2 warming effect is trivial, and we have far better reasons to move away from burning fossil fuels ... and I base that warming claim on SB's fourth root relationship ... that's a math thingy, over your head it seems ...

I have no problem with these computer simulations no matter which model is used ... as long as we keep perspective of the limits to computer simulations ... they're great at telling us where to look, but it still remains for us to go and actually look and see for ourselves ...

"Lies, damned lies and statistics" -- Benjamin Disraeli ...

 

[Crick]

Key claim against global warming evaporates

Satellite and weather balloon data used to argue that climate models were wrong and that global warming isn't really happening turns out to be based on faulty analyses, according to three new studies.

www.nbcnews.com

I hope you realize you posted a link here to an article that refutes the argument you just made.

 

[EMH]

Which theory are you rejecting here? ... my claim is the CO2 warming effect is trivial, and we have far better reasons to move away from burning fossil fuels ... and I base that warming claim on SB's fourth root relationship ... that's a math thingy, over your head it seems ...

I have no problem with these computer simulations no matter which model is used ... as long as we keep perspective of the limits to computer simulations ... they're great at telling us where to look, but it still remains for us to go and actually look and see for ourselves ...

"Lies, damned lies and statistics" -- Benjamin Disraeli ...

Ok

The debate here in America is about co2

If co2 is not the cause of earth climate change, a lot of liars deserve death and total asset forfeiture...

 

[EMH]

I hope you realize you posted a link here to an article that refutes the argument you just made.

This article is

Science vs "the science"

Co2 went up as a miniscule % of the atmosphere.

We have two and only 2 measures of atmospheric temperatures. Both returned highly correlated data showing no warming in the atmosphere despite rising co2 (and increasing urban heat sink effect).

Science says the theory was more co2 causes warming.

The data said THEORY REJECTED

The completely conflicted taxpayer funded fudge bakers you parrot every day took both and fudged them with laughably uncorrellated "corrections." That is "the science" which isn't about truth it's about

BILKING THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER
WRECKING THE AMERICAN ECONOMY


And intentionally misdiagnosing real problems like overpopulation....

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

We have two and only 2 measures of atmospheric temperatures.

What are they?

 

[EMH]

What are they?

Satellites and balloons

 

[Crick]

Ok

The debate here in America is about co2

If co2 is not the cause of earth climate change, a lot of liars deserve death and total asset forfeiture...

There is no debate. CO2 is the primary cause of global warming. You talking about death makes me think you've got serious mental health issues.

 

[ReinyDays]

Ok

The debate here in America is about co2

If co2 is not the cause of earth climate change, a lot of liars deserve death and total asset forfeiture...

So which theory are you trying to refute? ... do you even know what a theory is? ... did you know lying is protected speech here in the USA? ... didn't think so ...

Where on Earth is climate changing ?... just pick a point and we can discuss how CO2 effects weather there ... most likely it doesn't, not because the theory is wrong, but there's just not enough CO2 in the atmosphere to cause these changes ... I've already stated the physics reasons, too bad you can't understand that ...

 

[Crick]

So which theory are you trying to refute? ... do you even know what a theory is? ... did you know lying is protected speech here in the USA? ... didn't think so ...

Where on Earth is climate changing ?... just pick a point and we can discuss how CO2 effects weather there ... most likely it doesn't, not because the theory is wrong, but there's just not enough CO2 in the atmosphere to cause these changes ... I've already stated the physics reasons, too bad you can't understand that ...

I wish you luck. If this guy's The Doctor, his CPU seems to have taken a phaser blast.