Greenland Glacier Starts Growing Again..Does It Prove Global Warming Theory A Myth?

Well, global warming alarmists, how do you explain this? Is this a temporary glitch like some argue?

From an article just released today:

A large and fast-melting glacier in Greenland is growing again, according to a new NASA study. The Jakobshavn (YA-cob-shawv-en) glacier on Greenland's west coast had reportedly been retreating by around 1.8 miles and thinning by nearly 130 feet annually in 2012.

According to a study published in Monday's peer-reviewed Nature Geoscience, however, the glacier began growing at about the same rate over the past two years. That said, the authors of the study swear it's temporary.

www.zerohedge.com...


Is this temporary? Or could this be proof that there are natural warming and cooling cycles on this planet, that have been in place for 100's of thousands of years? There is also the impending Maunder minimum phenomenon (decrease in solar sunspot activity), that may "result in a global cooling phase."

Data from NASA’s TIMED (Thermosphere Ionosphere Mesosphere Energetics and Dynamics) satellite shows that the thermosphere (the uppermost layer of air around our planet) is cooling and shrinking, literally decreasing the radius of the atmosphere. This reduction of solar activity could result in a global cooling phase.

The last time there was a prolonged solar minimum, it lead to a mini ice-age which was scientifically known as the Maunder minimum.

www.zerohedge.com...

The Maunder minimum coincided with the coldest part of the “Little Ice Age” (c. 1500–1850) in the Northern Hemisphere, when the Thames River in England froze over during winter, Viking settlers abandoned Greenland, and Norwegian farmers demanded that the Danish king recompense them for lands occupied by advancing glaciers.

www.britannica.com...

“The thermosphere always cools off during Solar Minimum. It’s one of the most important ways the solar cycle affects our planet,” said Mlynczak, according to The New American.

It proves the supposed experts are unable to prove that their ideas are anything more than theories.

But it's all about getting grants....

originally posted by: Bluntone22
It proves the supposed experts are unable to prove that their ideas are anything more than theories.

But it's all about getting grants....

Quoted for truth, 👌

No it doesn't.

Glad to clear that up for you.

It proves - as anyone who knows tuppence about glaciers already knew - that air temperature alone does not dictate glacial advance and retreat.

And anyone who thinks the movement of a single glacier can be used to determine long tern regional and global temperature trends needs to have a long search at the back of their cupboard, under the bed and behind the sofa. Because they appear to have lost their brain

Your article came out today. It's a reflection of articles that surfaced a few days ago and based on things observed for the past 2 years.

It also is not an indicator that global warming is not real. It is an indicator of cyclical ocean cycles.

But sure. Don't read the actual study.

It's about as much proof as sea level rise, IMO.

I live on the coast in a port town, there are buildings from the 1700's still standing, not under water. The piers haven't moved inland.

Yet, I'm told there are entire cities in Florida going underwater in the next twenty years.

Who'se wrong?
Guess we'll find out... but the rising sea level people aren't looking at all the data, it seems- only the data that fits their conclusion. Where have we seen that before?
Oh yeah, in every study where there's money to be had by agreeing with the narrative.

Alternative theory for sea level rise- glaciers running across the continental US pushed the crust of the earth down ever so slightly, like the surface of a balloon- changing the elevation of not only the area around the glacier, but raising the surrounding areas. As they melted, the force left, and now the crust of the earth is releasing that tension, slowly rising where the ice once sat, letting places like florida ease back into the water.

Must be proof the globe is cooling. So we should start cranking out as much CO2 as possible to counteract.

The Earth has seen these changes and much more for millions of years.

a reply to: whywhynot

Sure. And animals have gone extinct.

Personally I think the general devastation of habitat is the real concern. When we have monocropped and devastated wildlife and disease or famine run wild our ability to rebound will be very limited.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: whywhynot

Sure. And animals have gone extinct.

Personally I think the general devastation of habitat is the real concern. When we have monocropped and devastated wildlife and disease or famine run wild our ability to rebound will be very limited.

At the rate we're pumping radioactive waste and microplastics into the ocean, I'm not sure the planet will have to worry about the current iteration of complex organisms much longer. In a few million years though, the next lifeforms to thrive will have some interesting new sources of energy to work with...

originally posted by: luthier
Your article came out today. It's a reflection of articles that surfaced a few days ago and based on things observed for the past 2 years.

It also is not an indicator that global warming is not real. It is an indicator of cyclical ocean cycles.

But sure. Don't read the actual study.

It's an indication that some of the gloom and doom predictions are wrong. I don't think anyone disputes the warming trend, it's my understanding that some question the cause being human related. Thus the push back from AGW.

We can all fight about who needs to be blamed, and while we are doing that, the Earth will do what it has always done. But buck up little camper, chances are we will destroy ourselves before Global Warming gets us.

I can say with a large degree of certainty, if it turns out that AGW was indeed a hoax, there won't be any safe places to hide.

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad
Must be proof the globe is cooling. So we should start cranking out as much CO2 as possible to counteract.

As far as I know CO2 is a cooling agent.

I’ve always wanted the “97% of climate scientist” to explain to me how they’re finding artifacts from the neolithic period under glaciers .


www.smithsonianmag.com...


Not to mention an explanation for warmer weather durning the Eemian and Paleolithic periods.

Stone Age man went through three interglacial periods.

If those were due to man made CO2 there must’ve been a hell of a lot of cavemen rubbing sticks together .


Wait a minute never mind I can explain all those periods of global temperature change .

They happened because of slight changes in the earths axis ( wobbles) also known as Milankovitch cycles.

originally posted by: Fallingdown
I’ve always wanted the “97% of climate scientist” to explain to me how they’re finding artifacts from the neolithic period under glaciers .


www.smithsonianmag.com...


Not to mention an explanation for warmer weather durning the Eemian and Paleolithic periods.

Stone Age man went through three interglacial periods.

If those were due to man made CO2 there must’ve been a hell of a lot of cavemen rubbing sticks together .


Wait a minute never mind I can explain all those periods of global temperature change .

They happened because of slight changes in the earths axis ( wobbles) also known as Milankovitch cycles.

I guess these climate scientists come to the conclusion Atlantis was sunk by rising sea level caused by CO2 put into air by Atlanteans burning fossil fuels. Derp

a reply to: climateexp

Welcome to ATS!

Dry ice is really cold.
I remember that CO2 cartridges get cold too, when the gas is released.

Lets see now....got one around here somewhere
yeah here we go...
put the nail here
tap with hammer
…
Damnit! It shot out of my hand and blasted my little toe off!
It's cold though. Let's see if it's cold enough to stop the bleeding.
Well, not quite.
I should have just watched this YouTube.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: luthier
Your article came out today. It's a reflection of articles that surfaced a few days ago and based on things observed for the past 2 years.

It also is not an indicator that global warming is not real. It is an indicator of cyclical ocean cycles.

But sure. Don't read the actual study.

It's an indication that some of the gloom and doom predictions are wrong. I don't think anyone disputes the warming trend, it's my understanding that some question the cause being human related. Thus the push back from AGW.

We can all fight about who needs to be blamed, and while we are doing that, the Earth will do what it has always done. But buck up little camper, chances are we will destroy ourselves before Global Warming gets us.

I can say with a large degree of certainty, if it turns out that AGW was indeed a hoax, there won't be any safe places to hide.

Only if you don't read the report and dont have any basis of understanding..

I guess the extinction event fueled by humans is false to and all those bugs and reptiles will respon..

a reply to: climateexp

I looked into a climate scientists a little bit.

From what I could see the only degree you need is a bachelors . 🤦‍♂️

originally posted by: Fallingdown
a reply to: climateexp

I looked into a climate scientists a little bit.

From what I could see the only degree you need is a bachelors . 🤦‍♂️

William Happer is dean of physics faculty at Princeton. I'd take his word over any average climate scientist.

a reply to: Fallingdown

Uhhh..no