Re: Greenland's rising air temperatures drive ice loss at surface and beyond


<mathew.jakie@xxxxxxxxx> skrev i meddelandet
news:9ab5db2f-e2ad-4ea3-a459-4d55d875123f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
A new NASA study confirms that the surface temperature of Greenland's
massive ice *** has been rising, stoked by warming air temperatures,
and fueling loss of the island's ice at the surface and throughout the
mass beneath.

http://www.theanalystmagazine.com/pr/678269687.htm

Sorry but that's not the case. You can't do computer-models or using
ice-core to get correct information of what the temperature was in one place
in Arctic or in Greenland before the first scientific expedition measured
the temperatures.

Why can't ice core be used. As you might know we do have gravitation and
that's allright had it been solid ground we are discussing when discussing
ice core. BUT and that is one of the basic facts one learned in the past but
which some of todays scholars seem to have forgotten. Ice is the same as
water and it's 'living' and not solid. Ice moves in Arctic as well as
elsewhere out to the sea and on top of that the erosion, wind and
temperature the two main factors here makes the top layers of the ice moving
in directions which definitely not together with the ice under. This means
that all calculations from ice core are just calculations since you never
ever can go stright down in ice no matter how thick and find same place's
ice lying directly under the surface of the place's today.

That's basic knowledge. But one other basic knowledge, which many so called
scholars of today forgotten is that we do have maps of Greenland, which btw
isn't o n e island, showing areas which ice and permafrost today can't show
with correct shorelines.

What's also been forgotten by scholars looking at, at best the last 50 years
readings for places not close to coast, is that there still are farms under
ice and with permafrost where farmers from Viking Age up to late 15th
century (!) farmed land and also exported products from their farming. The
later is documented up to 1430's.

So what does NASA's study, which been discussed and rejected by many who
knows both geology, hydrology, climateology and oceanography, show? Not the
true picture of the past.But then again, politic never show true picture
only one way of presenting a picture of something...

Inger E


.

Quantcast