Do you spend sleepless nights worrying about the sea level rise caused by the melting of the Antarctic ice sheet? Well enjoy your slumbers, my friend, NASA has just given you reason to sleep easier.
A new study–entitled “
Mass gains of the Antarctic ice sheet exceed losses” and published in the Journal of Glaciology–overturns previous assessments (including that relayed in the latest IPCC report) that Antarctica is losing land ice and thus contributing to sea level rise. As NASA states in a
press release, previous assessments had falsely assumed that increasing surface height of the ice sheets was due to snow accumulation, but the new study shows that the rise in elevation is in fact due to ice gain.
The upshot is that previous assessments, including the IPCC’s, got the Antarctic contribution to sea level rise–previously pegged at 0.27 millimeters per year–precisely wrong. “The good news is that Antarctica is not currently contributing to sea level rise, but is taking 0.23 millimeters per year away.” Well, they were only off by 185%, I suppose, and got the change in the wrong direction. It could be worse…I mean better.
But don’t worry, things are still bad. “But this is also bad news. If the 0.27 millimeters per year of sea level rise attributed to Antarctica in the IPCC report is not really coming from Antarctica, there must be some other contribution to sea level rise that is not accounted for.”
You see, the same researchers who can’t even accurately say whether the Antarctic ice sheets are gaining or losing mass (let alone how much mass) are able to determine global sea level rise to within hundredths of a millimeter. No
accuracy issues there, of course. So you can continue worrying, I suppose. (Except for that
pesky little Stanford study from September showing that previous models vastly overestimated future sea level rise.)
If this seems like deja vu all over again, then congratulations; you’re paying attention.
Remember when “
NASA satellites detect[ed] unexpected ice loss in East Antarctica” in 2009? The results were “unexpected” because East Antarctica was previously considered stable, with the continent’s ice loss (well, net gain) supposedly taking place in West Antarctica. It took a science-hating-denier-skeptic-heathenbeast to
point out that the numbers were derived from gravity measurements which were picking up on isostatic adjustment, i.e. changes taking place beneath the surface of the ice, not changes in the ice levels themselves. And lo and behold a few months later a team led by another NASA JPL researcher
found that the gravity measurements had in fact been measuring…wait for it…
isostatic adjustment.
But somehow “Unexpected ice loss in East Antarctica” generated more headlines than “Ooops, Sorry About That, We Were Measuring Something Else Entirely.” Go figure.
This is not an isolated phenomenon, of course.
Do you remember when NASA released this dramatic image of the temperature trends in Antarctica showing a clear positive warming trend of between 0.05C and 0.1C throughout most of the continent?
Did you notice the fine print at the
end of the third paragraph where it’s casually admitted that the level of uncertainty in the measurements the map was based on was between 2 and 3 degrees C, or 40-60 times the increment they claimed to be measuring? This type of utterly meaningless exercise in map coloring would get you an “F” in any undergrad science course, but it’s good enough for NASA.
So perhaps it should come as no surprise that the authors of the new paper showing that the Antarctic is in fact detracting from sea level rise, not adding to it, are being treated with derision and hostility by their colleagues. “Please don’t publicize this study” one University of Colorado researcher
pleaded with Al Jazeera. After all, it can’t be right; it “contradicts 13 years of satellite measurements of Antarctica’s ice by NASA’s GRACE mission.”
And that’s the point. You would think this would be treated as wonderful news by people who were genuinely concerned about the supposed disastrous effects of climate change. Any sane person would be delighted to find out they were horribly wrong about their dire predictions of doom and gloom. But not the other researchers whose
$1.5 trillion climate change gravy train are threatened by a cooling off of global warming hysteria.
Unfortunately, however, the unfalsifiable, goalpost-shifting
global warming climate changeglobal weirding pseudoscience is not just about business interests. It’s about a much larger agenda, one first mapped out by the Club of Rome in their 1991 publication
The First Global Revolution, which stated:
In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.
Yes, this is the same Club of Rome that predicted the complete exhaustion of over a dozen resources in its 1972 “
Limits to Growth” publication, every single one of which failed to come true. And yes, this is the same Club of Rome that then celebrated their “Limits to Growth” fearmongering failure by doubling down with a giant 40th anniversary “
celebration” of…40 years of considerable growth?
Failed predictions from “Limits to Growth” (predictions already falsified in red)
And now we’re on the verge of the latest United Nations climate conference, the
COP21 summitscheduled to take place in Paris from
November 30 – December 11. Just like in
Copenhagen in 2009, this conference is threatening a slate of new global governmental institutions, regulations and mechanisms to combat the (non-existent) climate change threat. On the table in the
draft text of the new climate treaty: a new UN Tribunal to adjudicate on non-compliance with climate commitments.
Given the fact that eugenecist Bilderberger
Bill Gates is now piling on UNFCCC Executive Secretary Christiana Figueres’
admission earlier this year that the conference will intentionally “change the economic development model” of the world by admitting that
only big governmentcan save the world from global warming, coupled with China being
drawn into the global warming fold as part of its five year plan bid to become more involved in international institutions and tripled with Obama
threatening to do an end run around the Senate to get the treaty passed, I think it’s safe to say that big things are afoot in this global technocratic power grab.
Stay tuned to these pages for ongoing coverage as we approach COP21.
nosoapradio 
setatliberty 
doublek321 
Fosca 
Let me explain why.
Comments (4)