New Greenland Paper Demonstrates Again That Climate Experts Know Nothing About Climate

Sea Levels To Rise More Than Expected Due To Warming-Driven Surge In Greenland Ice Loss

Research had also long suggested the northeastern portion of the ice sheet was stable. As a result, it was largely left out of the models used to anticipate future sea level rise.

Sea Levels To Rise More Than Expected Due To Warming-Driven Surge In Greenland Ice Loss | ThinkProgress

As usual, the experts don’t know anything about the topic of their expertise. This is from 1940.

Greenland’s Climate Becoming Milder

Is the Arctic climate becoming more temperate? Remarkable new informa-tion given by the famous Swedish authority, Professor H. W. Ahlmann

By far the largest number of local glaciers in northeast Greenland had receded very greatly during recent decades, and it would not be exaggerating to say that these glaciers were nearing a catastrophe


06 May 1940 – Greenland’s Climate Becoming Milder

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to New Greenland Paper Demonstrates Again That Climate Experts Know Nothing About Climate

  1. seamusfurr says:

    Steven, I think I’m unclear about this logic. Why is it that past predictions being wrong mean that future predictions are wrong?

    Just because some NFL experts thought the Broncos would win the Super Bowl last year, does that mean anyone predicting a Broncos championship this year is an idiot?

    • What could possibly go wrong? says:

      In the past they had the OBSERVATION that glaciers already did “greatly recede” in the decades before 1940.

      This new paper states boldly that the very same glaciers were “long suggested” to be “stable”.

      This means they didn’t bother a bit about the history of these glaciers but just claim something to be true and use that as base for their “research”.

      • Dave N says:

        Alarmists think *everything* was “stable” before they started crying wolf.

        For things that have been stable for a considerable time (like sea-level rise), they act as if their deluded projections are actually happening.

        • gator69 says:

          Correct. Everything before 1979 was ‘stable’ or ‘normal’, and now all contemporary events are ‘unprecedented’ or ‘abnormal’. If you ask me, 1979 was anything but normal, the weather included.

    • Phil Jones says:

      When you’re consistently wrong … Stop making predictions. That’s the problem here. This Article from 1940 … Waving fear and disaster in our faces… Could easily be copied and pasted into the 2014 NY Times “Green” section and nobody would know the difference….

    • This has nothing to do with predictions. It is about researchers who claim to be experts about topics they know nothing about.

      • Don says:

        This is true, we need to stop forgetting that they aren’t making predictions, rather what they are presenting is factual as they claim (see the professor who wants to imprison “deniers”). Which of course it is not factual.

    • No, it means that those experts are idiots, & that their predictions are no more meaningful than dart throws.

  2. Shazaam says:

    Oh yeah, the most recent corrections to the current crop of computer-generated fantasy climate models are ever so much more accurate and believeable than the past computer-generated fantasy climate models……

  3. Gail Combs says:

    The idiots didn’t do a literature search.
    December 2007:


    COLUMBUS , Ohio — Scientists have discovered what they think may be another reason why Greenland ‘s ice is melting: a thin spot in Earth’s crust is enabling underground magma to heat the ice.

    They have found at least one “hotspot” in the northeast corner of Greenland — just below a site where an ice stream was recently discovered.

    The researchers don’t yet know how warm the hotspot is. But if it is warm enough to melt the ice above it even a little, it could be lubricating the base of the ice sheet and enabling the ice to slide more rapidly out to sea….

  4. SMS says:

    Others have calculated that using Hansen’s outrageous and temperature warming scenario A, it will take 3000 years to melt Greenland. But what we are seeing is scenario C. How long will it take to melt Greenland? Effing forever……………because we will be into the next ice age before that happens.

    People are a little worried about a few tenths of a degree in warming and the gorilla in the room is a thick sheet of ice spreading half way down the US.

  5. omanuel says:

    Sadly, Steven, climate experts are like Pavlov’s dogs. They know how to get the next research grant, as the dogs learned how to get the next biscuit.

    Climategate confirmed that deception contains its own seeds of destruction, although sixty-eight years have lapsed since USSR troops captured Japan’s atomic bomb facility at Konan, Korea on 24 Aug 1945, following its first test explosion on 12 Aug 1945:

    Frightened world leaders recalled the last paragraph of Aston’s 1922 Noble Lecture and took control of society to save themselves and the world from nuclear annihilation:

    “Should the research worker of the future discover some means of releasing this energy in a form which could be employed, the human race will have at its command powers beyond the dreams of scientific fiction; but the remote possibility must always be considered that the energy once liberated will be completely uncontrollable and by its intense violence detonate all neighbouring substances. In this event the whole of the hydrogen on the earth might be transformed at once and the success of the experiment published at large to the universe as a new star.” (12 Dec 1922)

    • isbobc says:

      I can remember my father telling me he was taught at school that if they ever split the atom it was game over. This was around 1960 and was obviously wrong which was why he mentioned it.

      • omanuel says:


        Splitting the atom in 1945 revealed the source of energy locked in the cores of:

        1. Heavy atoms like Uranium
        2. Some planets like Jupiter
        3. Ordinary stars like the Sun
        4. Galaxies like the Milky Way
        5. The expanding Universe

        Click to access Chapter_2.pdf

        Although acceptance of reality is required for our survival, in 1945 frightened world leaders agreed to hide the source of energy that destroyed both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, NEUTRON REPULSION, . . .

        Just as in 1543 we refused to accept that Earth moved in orbit about the Sun.

        Thanks to Galileo, we accepted that reality a hundreds years later to start the scientific revolution.

  6. Lawrence13 says:

    The thing that always amuses me is the left, who seem to mistrust all science except the AGW science.

    In the Paul Nurse (current president of the royal society) documentary several years ago he fretted about primarily those sceptics who mistrusted the present state of climate science but to show some balance he spoke of general mistrust in science. He presented video clips on anti GM farmer protesters screaming their heads of . Well what naughty Nurse failed to point out was that those same lefty anti GM food protestors all of a sudden fervently trust scientist; but of course only those that support CAGW.

    Anti GM food is against capitalism and state

    Anti AGW is for seemingly now capitalism and state.

    We’re the revolutionaries now.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s