## Record Melt In Greenland

Speed of Greenland Ice Melt Sets New Record

Greenland ice sheet saw record melt, study finds

The ice sheet covering Greenland melted at the fastest rate since records began in 1979, a new study shows. That’s important because the ice sheet is becoming a major contributor to projected sea level rises in coming decades.

http://www.heatisonline.org/

Water was pouring relentlessly into the sea, which caused sea level to increase decline 10 mm during 2010. Isn’t peer review grand?

ftp://ftp.aviso.oceanobs.com/

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

### 8 Responses to Record Melt In Greenland

1. Dave N says:

Something doesn’t add up here.. the article says an area the size of France melted in one year (2010); that’s 674,843 sq km. It also says that the total area is a quarter the size of the US, which equates to 2,456,669 sq km*

If that rate of melt continued each year from now (and remember they’re saying the rate of melt is accelerating), even if we started from no melt at all at the beginning of 2010, the rest would be all gone in under 3 years.

*Area figures from Wikipedia.

• The way they figure area, a potato could cover the whole earth. You just have to slice it thin enough.

If a square km showed any melt on day one, that is one km^2. If that same square shows any melt the next day, that is 2km^2. Over the course of the summer, one km^2 can be counted as 100 km^2.

Complete fraud – pretty standard for the climate science version of the world’s oldest profession.

• suyts says:

lol, Dave, none of it adds up. As Steve points out, the melt numbers are fraudulent. But, we don’t really know the sea-level either, so its OK to just make numbers up. Has anyone asked about exactly how they came up with 0.3mm/yr for the GIA? Given that even if the theory is correct, it doesn’t happen uniformly and it only occurs in certain areas Its just another number they pulled out of their posterior.

But then, if they knew the total volume to begin with, then they’d know the true rate of rise, and it is clearly obvious that they don’t. How is it, that they know the area that is the ocean, the depth, even the rate of increase of the depth, but don’t know the total volume….. especially seeing the know the exact amount of area melting.

2. The source website http://greenland.cryocity.org/ doesn’t show data or estimates for how much ice actually melted, but for how large an area was SUBJECT to melting, that is PARTIAL melting..The analysis there and in the above linked report is alarmist in the truest sense of the word.

The original article http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41197838/ns/us_news-environment/ amplifies the alarmism:
“About a quarter the size of the United States, Greenland has about one-twentieth of the world’s ice — the equivalent of about 21 feet of global sea rise were it to completely melt into the sea”. Presumably the vast bulk of the water will flow uphill from the depressed basin which contains most of the icecap. Physical laws are another casualty of AGW it seems.

3. an area of the size of France melted in 2010 which was not melting in 1979

As if the ice could travel back to 1979 and melt then?

4. Andy WeissDC says:

What a deceptive article. Even if they are correct about this huge new area being subject to melt, how much melt water does it contribute? The amount could be huge, or it could be tiny. Maybe a gallon or so?

5. Michael D Smith says:

Looks like 6mm to me…

6. Another Ian says:

It’s a travesty that we don’t know where the extra water is going!

/Sarc off for those that need prompting