Scientists shoot holes in latest NASA Greenland hysteria

Scientists shoot holes in latest NASA Greenland hysteria

“Unprecedented” shouts the headline on NASA’s press release, which then goes on to contradict itself by saying, “melting events of this type occur about once every 150 years on average. With the last one happening in 1889.”

“This event is right on time,” NASA glaciologist Lora Koenig is quoted as saying.

NASA’s claim that Greenland is experiencing “unprecedented” melting is nothing but a bunch of hot air, say scientists.

Climate skeptics said the NASA report itself was the only “unprecedented” item.


Unprecedented NOT Greenland Ice Melt - Image Credit NASA

Take at look at the Summit webcam as of this morning, 26 July. You will see that the ice is still there.

“The temperature there was -16 C (3 F) when I last looked at the webcam,” says reader Roger Oomkins. “MINUS 16 C!” “The damn ice is 2 MILES thick!”


Greenland Summit Webcam - 26 Jul 2012

“NASA simply can`t turn off the BS,” says the StevenGoddard website, which then includes satellite photos of an UNmelted Greenland ice sheet.


Greenland - 12 Jul 12

“NASA Lying About Their Own Press Release,” reads a different headline on the StevenGoddard website.

“NASA should start distributing dictionaries to the authors of its press releases,” joked Patrick J. Michaels, a climatologist and the author of the World Climate Report blog.

“It’s somewhat like the rush to blame severe weather and drought on global warming,” Anthony Watts, a noted climate skeptic and the author of the Watts Up With That blog, told FoxNews.com. “Yet when you look into the past, you find precedence for what is being described today as unprecedented.”

NASA badly blew it earlier this week with this headline “Satellites See Unprecedented Greenland Ice Sheet Surface Melt,” writes Andrew Revkin in the New York Times.

Unprecedented means “never done or known before.” Yet the news release beneath the headline directly undercuts that description of this melting event, saying that it is rare — the last wide surface melt was in 1889, recorded in separate ice cores at the Greenland ice-sheet summit and in the northwestern part of the vast frozen expanse — and has happened roughly every 150 years over a long stretch of centuries, as recorded deeper in the ice.

“The belief that almost any aberration in weather and climate today can be attributed to global warming is pure folly,” said meteorologist Anthony Watts.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/07/26/skeptics-put-freeze-on-nasa-hot-air-about-greenl and-ice/

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/25/unprecedented-greenland-surface-melt-every-150-years/

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/07/25/97-of-greenland-says-that-nasa-is-fos/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18978483

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/greenland-melt.html

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/24/greenland-ice-melt-every-150-years-is-right-on-time/

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/07/24/nasa-lying-about-their-own-press-release/

Thanks to Bill Sellers, Dave, Nick Re, Adrian, John Reno, Chip, Laurel, Tim Morrison, Bradley Haythornthwaite, Roger Oomkins and Peter Lamb for these links.

“The first thing that came to mind was, figures don’t lie, but liars figure,” says Dave.

“Thought you might like this little piece of scaremongering,” says Nick Re. “Love the website nice to see some independent thought for a change.”


23 thoughts on “Scientists shoot holes in latest NASA Greenland hysteria”

    • not until Hansen leaves, then I would suspect a whole lot will change.
      you do have to ask why NASA a space funded org has NO space work as such happening re umans, and is moving into weather..and mythical warming on earth.
      its NOT what they are supposed to be there for at all.

      • But climate/weather is all there is funding for – space without the necessary “with regard to global warming” phrase gets $10 for cleaner wipes for the telescopes while the climate research gets 10 billion.

  1. Not hard to shoot holes in junk science that is made from mostly holes held together by assumptions and bad computer models

  2. While I am not surprised at the disingenuous and deceptive headline, I am perplexed by the total lack of skepticism or critical thinking skills displayed by some both in and out of the scientific community.
    There must be a psychological explanation.
    I had a relative. Very educated women, masters degree in electrical engineering, favorite character on Star Trek was Spock. Loved logic puzzles. Worked on the Apollo projects among many other achievements. However, she refused to acknowledge that tomatoes were a fruit. No matter what scientific evidence I presented, no matter what logical argument I used, she just refused to admit that tomatoes were a fruit. Not in a joking good humored stubborn kind of way, but almost like I had insulted her faith or something.
    I believe it is this same sort of mule headed psychosis that we are experiencing here. For many it is more important to be thought right than to actually be right.
    I propose to call it Equus africanus asinus syndrome.

  3. I would like to make a comment on this, since this isn’t the first time I have seen this report. I notice that this “edited” version of the report leaves out a little bit of information that should not have been left out, in my opinion. Although the article does spin the bogus sense of global warming, it is unfair to misquote it. The article implies that it is based on the 33 year record of satellite information. It is not stated categorically, of course, as is the statement that this melt is right on schedule is, of course, but clearly it would BE “unpredented” in that time frame. Still the “roughly 150 year cycle” is hardly making this one “right on schedule” if the last one was 1889 – 123 years ago. that’s a pretty rough schedule, if it’s on one.

    I don’t deny that this article, of and by itself, was blatantly intended to hype AGW, but to “edit it down” to make it worse only makes “us” seem as bad as “they” are. Truthfulness in our comments and reporting of their stories is absolutely essential if we are to have any credability at all.

  4. My other half keeps a record of the temperatures from the site every day (snags the image) and has been for about a year now.

    She got really excited the other day when the temperature rose to 0°C

  5. It’s the Big Green Propaganda Machine. As long as the money rolls in, the alarmists will keep beating the drums.

  6. One commentator on Junk Science says there was no more than 1 mm water on the ice, the thaw lasted from July 8th to July 12th. http://junkscience.com/2012/07/25/trying-hard-to-pitch-this-as-new-or-novel-97-of-greenland-ice-sheet-surface-briefly-melting/
    One mm water on top of two miles of ice during five summer days. And how cold is it in Greenland in winter time? One time Paul Driessen went there during the winter, he found out that it was minus 50 degrees Celsius inside his tent, and minus 75 degrees outside. Colder than the cold records of Verkhoyansk and Ojmjakom. The findings of Paul Driessen are no offical temperature data, but I believe him. The MSN payed little or no attention to Driessen’s trip, but it is great news now there was for a few days 1 mm of water on top of two miles of ice.

  7. I sent some realistic, corrective info concerning Greenland’s socalled meltdown according to Nasa, to the dutch main news HQ, the NOS, in order to point out their error concerning the misleading info on Greenland’s glacial meltdown. Haven’t had a reply yet and I couldn’t even email the KNMI, our national dutch weather institute, as they cannot be contacted through an emailadress, which I find very odd. Maybe the KNMI wants to prevent people from protesting against their fixed views on AGW, who want to send all kinds of articles against AGW.
    To be fair, they can contacted by letter or telephone, but that’s not enough in our modern internet age!

  8. So there was some corn snow for a day in July. Must have been pretty neat. A once in a life time event, in that locale. The annual peak in mean temperature has already passed there. Hope everyone enjoyed that one day of “Spring.”

  9. It seems people are now being told indirectly that spring and summer weather is AGW. Every thunderstorm, heat wave and warm day is man made global warming and this is unnatural and must be stopped. This is the underlying message. If you tell lies to the sheeple long enough those lies become the truth and an article of religious faith. This is why democracy, communism , the new world order and everything that goes with it ought to be sent to the dust bin of history. It is just crime, corruption and perversion and for all intents and purposes the work of Satan.

    In the real world weather and climate are not a constant and instead go through complex but regular cycles within cycles. Almost all heat that is not of volcanic origin comes from the sun. Heat from man made sources is almost non existant by comparison. When it comes to CO2 we are recovering from a deficiency in CO2. CO2 is plant food and plants make oxygen. CO2 is a heavy gas relative to oxygen and nitrogen therefore most of the CO2 will be found in the lower atmosphere near ground level.
    If it will ease your mind plant a tree if you must but don’t go for increased taxes, regulations and population reduction based on politically correct science fraud and out right lies.

    The real diabolical conspiracy theory is AGW.

  10. Thunderstorms are actually “dewarming” the Earth. They are nature’s tower heat sinks, moving thermal and even electromagnetic energy out into space. More thunderstorms may mean be very worried about accelerating loss of warmth.

  11. Isnt it funny how ice melts at -16 C !!!! not by the physics I learned! NASA press is probably controlled by the criminal Obama regime, controlled by John P Holdrem criminal eco-fascist in chief. They dare not override him. I expect that in NASA secretly they know its all BS.

  12. Yes when I looked at Australian scyclones, I found it interesting that in the colder recorded temperatures of Australia they have traveled further South. Something that contradicts what BS Algore was saying.

  13. Just a terminological note. Regardless of the charming confusion with which warmists toss the term around, there is no such thing as a “climate skeptic.” If you move from Minnesota to Florida, the odds are the reason is climate. There are indeed AGW skeptics, but there are no climate skeptics.

  14. It is clear that anthropogenic climate change is false. The earth experiences cycles that push the earth into heating and cooling periods.

    Having said this, I find it a little disappointing that many people are just looking at climate change from one point of view (ice age/global cooling).

    1. The changes on Greenland could indeed be correct and its not because of Global warming but due to another very very very important topic called magnetic changes to the earth’s magnetosphere.

    2. It is clear the mid central USA is experiencing unprecedented heating.

    All I am saying is that lots of people seem to be looking for the ice age evidence where they should be looking for changes of all types.

    My humble opinion and from books like “Magnetic Reversals and Evolutionary Leaps” AND “Earth Under Fire”, what is certain based on historical evidence is that change is going to happen. Whether it starts out as massive heating in some places and massive cooling in others due to magnetic changes is unknown yet. What is clear though is that after all the earth changes have taken place, the ice age lasts quite a long time and is partly the cause of the mass extinctions.

Comments are closed.