Atmopshereic Physicist Dr. Fred Singer reacts to media touted Greenland/Antarctic ice study

Singer:

Number of the Week: 55.5 mm or 2.2 inches per century. The international research group of polar scientists, IMBIE, announced that melting glacial ice on Greenland and Antarctica has increased sea levels by 11.1 mm over 20 years, from 1992 to 2011, which can be extrapolated to the numbers above. However, one must not rely on long run extrapolations from short run data.

Yet, IMBIE did so. It stated that sea level rise increased in the second decade over the first decade. What is particularly interesting is the early data shows a decline in sea levels from an accumulation of ice, which indicates a cooling. Yet the 1980s and 1990s were decades of warming.

Further, there has been no surface warming for about 15 years. This indicates that the ice melt does reflect current temperatures, and other factors must be involved. If ice melt constitutes 30% of the sea level rise as the article suggests, then the 21 st century increase will be at the low end of the range suggested by the IPCC, which is consistent with Fred Singer’s suggestions, and far from Jim Hansen’s predictions.

It is also interesting that news reports, such as in the Washington Post, excitedly reported the polar melt and sea level rise, but failed to provide information on how tiny the rise is. Please see Article # 1 (for a graph), links under Communicating Better to the Public – Exaggerate, or be Vague?, Changing Seas, and http://imbie.org/

Media touted model driven study exposed: ‘New Ice Surveys Finds Slower Ice-sheet Melting’ — ‘E. Antarctic Ice Sheet — over 75% of Antarctica, experienced mass gains during final years of study’

Excerpted Analysis — For Doug L. Hoffman’s complete analysis see here:

The good news, according to Riva, is that Antarctica is not losing ice as rapidly as suggested by many recent studies. Moreover, snowfall in east Antarctica seems to be compensating for some—if not quite all—of the melting elsewhere in Antarctica’

For Greenland things are a bit murkier. “Assessments of GrIS mass balance require more careful consideration than was possible here, because the surrounding mountain glaciers and ice caps are included in some, but not all, of our geodetic surveys and because the ice-sheet domains varied in area by 2%,” explain Shepherd et al..

It is unclear how these trends, such as ice loss from Greenland, will evolve, says Ian Joughin, one of the paper’s co-authors and a satellite expert at the University of Washington in Seattle: “It really remains unclear whether such losses will decline, whether they’ll level off or they’ll accelerate further.” This should be viewed in light of recent data that show Greenland underwent a similar episode of ice loss in the 1930s.

Indeed, Shepherd et al. admit that their work is biased on too short a time span to draw any meaningful long-term conclusions. “We have shown that assessments of mass imbalance based on short geodetic records should be treated with care, because fluctuations in SMB can be large over short time periods,” they admit, hinting at the study’s fundamental problem. Recent ice-core data reveal that theAntarctic Peninsula area undergoes bouts of rapid warming periodically.

It is striking that supporters of calamitous climate change always base their projections on the last three decades or so—a period that was, in fact, a time of increasing warmth. In this case, they found melting ice around the globe, just not as much as often claimed and certainly not justification for projections into the future for 50 or 100 years. Go back 150 years and people were not worried about retreating glaciers but advancing ones.

Global warming still stalled since 1998, WMO Doha figures show: ‘There is now some admission even from the hardest climate hardliners that something may be going on which is not understood’

‘The official position of the climate establishment is that global warming is still definitely on and the flat temperatures seen for the last 14 years or so are just a statistical fluke of the sort to be expected when trying to measure such a vast and noisy signal as world temperatures with such precision.’

125 International Scientists Rebuke UN for Climate Claims in Open Letter: ‘Global warming that has not occurred cannot have caused extreme weather of past few years’

“We ask that you desist from exploiting the misery of the families of those who lost their lives or properties in tropical storm Sandy by making unsupportable claims that human influences caused that storm. They did not.”

Full Letter:

Open Letter to the Secretary-General of the United Nations
H.E. Ban Ki-Moon, Secretary-General, United Nations
First Avenue and East 44th Street, New York, New York, U.S.A.
November 29, 2012

Mr. Secretary-General:

On November 9 this year you told the General Assembly: “Extreme weather due to climate change is the new normal … Our challenge remains, clear and urgent: to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, to strengthen adaptation to … even larger climate shocks … and to reach a legally binding climate agreement by 2015 … This should be one of the main lessons of Hurricane Sandy.”

On November 13 you said at Yale: “The science is clear; we should waste no more time on that debate.”

The following day, in Al Gore’s “Dirty Weather” Webcast, you spoke of “more severe storms, harsher droughts, greater floods”, concluding: “Two weeks ago, Hurricane Sandy struck the eastern seaboard of the United States. A nation saw the reality of climate change. The recovery will cost tens of billions of dollars. The cost of inaction will be even higher. We must reduce our dependence on carbon emissions.”

We the undersigned, qualified in climate-related matters, wish to state that current scientific knowledge does not substantiate your assertions.

The U.K. Met Office recently released data showing that there has been no statistically significant global warming for almost 16 years. During this period, according to the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations rose by nearly 9% to now constitute 0.039% of the atmosphere. Global warming that has not occurred cannot have caused the extreme weather of the past few years. Whether, when and how atmospheric warming will resume is unknown. The science is unclear. Some scientists point out that near-term natural cooling, linked to variations in solar output, is also a distinct possibility.

The “even larger climate shocks” you have mentioned would be worse if the world cooled than if it warmed. Climate changes naturally all the time, sometimes dramatically. The hypothesis that our emissions of CO2 have caused, or will cause, dangerous warming is not supported by the evidence.

The incidence and severity of extreme weather