|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 17, 2011 19:29:21 GMT 1
Here the Atlas is compared with current satellite imagery.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 17, 2011 19:32:07 GMT 1
DMI (Danish Meteorological Institute) Calls Out The Times Atlas On Their StupidityPosted on September 17, 2011 by Steven Goddard www.real-science.com/uncategorized/dmi-offiical-fools “There is no scientific evidence that the area of the Greenland ice sheet since 1999 has shrunk by 15% as the latest edition of the ‘Times Atlas shows,” says climate researcher Ruth Mottram, DMI. The marked difference between the two ‘Times atlas’-map of Greenland for 1999 and 2011 is that the coastline, especially on the east side, is no longer covered by ice. The true picture is another. The error may have occurred if katograferne from the ‘Times Atlas" have used satellite images of Greenland to assess ice spatial distribution. “When I look at satellite images of Greenland, it looks real enough dark along the coast, but that does not mean that the ice has disappeared” says climate researcher and continues: “The dark color is caused by dirt, dust and volcanic ash that makes the ice dark especially in Southeast Greenland. ” translate.google.com/
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 17, 2011 19:34:08 GMT 1
So the alarmists have "captured" an Atlas's publishers. How pleased they must be! Glee at Warmist HQ.
|
|
|
Post by eamonnshute on Sept 17, 2011 20:19:19 GMT 1
How do you know that it is all permanent ice and not merely winter snow? This shows that the part of Greenland shown above is actually free of snow and ice at the moment, in good agreement with the atlas. www.arctic.io/observations/
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 18, 2011 11:52:09 GMT 1
"How do you know that it is all permanent ice and not merely winter snow?" asks little alarmed Eamonn. "Winter snow" in September? It has already been explained by DMI that much arctic ice is very "dirty". Have you never wondered about that in images of the arctic, Eamonn? It is even evident on the iconic photos of "stranded" polar bears. Ice Floes With Algae Growth Chukchi Sea, Alaska Dirty ice covered in some places by newly fallen snow on the east coast of Greenland near Mestersvig at Kong Oscars Fjord. Photo: Michele Citterio. Copyright GEUS. Richard Betts (of the UK Met Office), who wrote sections of the atlas, is now complaining about misrepresentation by the Guardian. Atlasgate anyone? [Richard Betts, is Head of Climate Impact for, UK Met Office, and an AR4 working gp 1 contributor, and a lead author for IPCC AR5, working group2]
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 18, 2011 11:58:42 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 18, 2011 12:19:56 GMT 1
I have long been facinated to hear the climate scientist explanation for the "glacier girl" entombment in Greenland, since here we have direct evidence of the accumation of 268 feet of new ice in Greenland between July 15, 1942 and July 15, 1992. Exactly 50 years to the day of proven ice accretion in Greenland spanning most of late 20th C supposed warming.The story starts here p38assn.org/glacier-girl.htmAnd ends here p38assn.org/glacier-girl-recovery.htmSep 17, 2011 by Pharos on Bishop Hill
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on Sept 18, 2011 16:53:47 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 19, 2011 18:33:21 GMT 1
Goodness me! Even Richard Black of the Beeb is rejecting the Times Atlas assertions? Abandoning the AGW meme in favour of kicking the more pressing enemy, Rupert Murdoch (for he it is who owns the publisher of the the Times Atlas!) Spoilt for choice, an embarras of targets, Richard! www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14969399
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 19, 2011 18:41:59 GMT 1
"A spokesperson for HarperCollins said its new map was based on information provided by the US National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC)."
Here's the correct title for NSIDC - No Snow Is Due Climatechange.
Some of us are used to this propaganda by now.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 19, 2011 18:52:14 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 20, 2011 9:15:40 GMT 1
Bishop Hill says The brouhaha over the Times atlas seems to be developing legs, with NSIDC denying any involvement in the errors. But it not NSIDC, then who was it that supplied the duff data? Maurizio Morabito has been examining the amusing possibility that the source was Wikipedia. more here bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2011/9/20/atlas-mounting.html
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 20, 2011 10:36:01 GMT 1
Statement from NSIDC regarding the Times Atlas citing NSIDC as the source of its information on Greenland: NSIDC has never released a specific number for Greenland ice loss over thepast decade. However, we archive and distribute several Greenland data sets and imagery. While it is possible that the Times Atlas obtained data from NSIDC, they may have made their own interpretation of the data, independent of advice of NSIDC.
While mass loss in Greenland is significant, and accelerating, the loss of ice from Greenland is far less than the Times Atlas indicates. People interested in this topic should refer to the peer-reviewed literature for the latest published studies estimating ice loss in Greenland. For further information or questions, contact NSIDC at 303-492-1497 or nsidc@nsidc.org.
from Julienne Stroeve of NSIDC ..Currently, Greenland is losing mass at about a rate of 150 Gt per year, or about one third of a millimetre of sea level rise per year. That means in the 12 year period from 1999 through 2011 that the Times Atlas analysed, meltwater from the Greenland ice sheet has contributed roughly 3 mm to global sea level rise – not one meter.more here wattsupwiththat.com/2011/09/19/atlasgate-deepens-nsidc-rebuts-being-a-specific-source-of-the-times-atlas-15-greenland-ice-loss-claim/#more-47715and for those who who think WUWT is merely a warmist crib sheet why not sample The Guardian's take? www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/sep/19/times-atlas-wrong-greenland-climate-change?intcmp=122
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 20, 2011 10:56:27 GMT 1
one third of millimetre per year is equivalent to global sea level FALL due to isostatic rebound so can we assume no net change in sea level due to Greenland ice melt?
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 20, 2011 13:50:04 GMT 1
|
|