Current climate experts simply forgot to mention that WAIS thinning has been going on for centuries, and has nothing to do with CO2.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- The Real Hockey Stick Graph
- Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Gaslighting 1924
- Climate Abstract Generator
- Climate Abstract Generator
- “Why Do You Resist?”
- Climate Attribution Model
- Fact Checking NASA
- Fact Checking Grok
- Fact Checking The New York Times
- New Visitech Features
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
- Analyzing Big City Crime (Part 2)
- Analyzing Big City Crime
- UK Migration Caused By Global Warming
- Climate Attribution In Greece
- Climate Attribution In Greece
- “Brown: ’50 days to save world'”
- The Catastrophic Influence of Bovine Methane Emissions on Extraterrestrial Climate Patterns
- Posting On X
- Seventeen Years Of Fun
- The Importance Of Good Tools
- Temperature Shifts At Blue Hill, MA
- CO₂²
Email Subscription
Join 1,944 other subscribersRecent Comments
Jeff L. on Analyzing The Western Water Cr… Morgan Wright on Great Lakes Approaching 100% I… Morgan Wright on Great Lakes Set Another Spring… gelcarrion0t on New Visitech Features saveenergy on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014 gelcarrion0t on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014 gelcarrion0t on Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast gelcarrion0t on Seventeen Years Of Fun Barbara Stockwell on Nuclear Safety In The US saveenergy on 100% Tariffs On Chinese EV…


There is also this.
Copy of original report by Dodson. 1948.
See Page 8 for Deglaciation. Please note the term “geologically speaking”!
http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/IPY/ipy_12_pdf/QC851R66no6.pdf
“As the upper limit of glaciation was not found it is obvious that a short time ago geologically speaking the ice was more than 600 ft. thick ten miles off shore. When due allowance for the gradient of the glacier is made it seems certain that the ice was at that time a 1000 ft. thicker on the mainland than at present.”
Anyone who says that the Antarctic glaciers are getting thinner due to CO2 and CAGW has absolutely no idea what they are talking about. The irony is that NOAA say this and yet have the scientific evidence of the opposite in their library.
Excellent find!