Today comes a similar report from the UK-based Register newspaper: “1930s photos show Greenland glaciers retreating faster than today”:Recently unearthed photographs taken by Danish explorers in the 1930s show glaciers in Greenland retreating faster than they are today, according to researchers.
The photos in question were taken by the seventh Thule Expedition to Greenland led by Dr Knud Rasmussen in 1932. The explorers were equipped with a seaplane, which they used to take aerial snaps of glaciers along the Arctic island’s coasts.
After the expedition returned the photographs were used to make maps and charts of the area, then placed in archives in Denmark where they lay forgotten for decades. Then, in recent years, international researchers trying to find information on the history of the Greenland glaciers stumbled across them.
Taken together the pictures show clearly that glaciers in the region were melting even faster in the 1930s than they are today, according to Professor Jason Box, who works at the Byrd Polar Research Center at Ohio State University.
Hmmm...that sounds like a cycle to me...
How do we know that? How do we know it does not warm up faster towards the end of every ice age as part of nature? How do we know its not the earths natural cycle? I'm not trying to be a smart butt I'm just asking I'm not a scientist so do we really without a doubt know this does not happen every few thousand years
). Basically it shuts down thermohaline circulation which causes all sorts of climate and temperature issues. And then guess what
some places get a little warmer, some places get a lot warmer some get cooler and other places get a lot cooler. And you also get a sea level raise and is the entire Greenland ice sheet melted you get a rather substantial raise, I am typing from memory here so I could be off but I think it may be as much as 7 meters. And I apologize because again I am typing from memory, if one of the larger Ice shelves in Antarctica melted (cant remember which one) it raises sea level enough to reverse flow and several large rivers (one of those is the Hudson) as well as put a few major cities underwater. Have any idea what reverse flow o major fresh water rivers mean or what major cities underwater means to population and disease issues. And did you know warmer means more water in the atmosphere which equates to draught.
[CSPP Note: The 9-9-06 Issue of The Economist has global warming as a cover story, The Heat is On. On page 8 of the special section, the Economist lends support to the quip that environmental writers have a post-it-note on their computer screens that reads: “never, ever check facts.” We take note of the fact that it prints two pictures of a Svalbard Glacier from 1918 and 2002 respectively called Blomstrandbreen as implicit
proof of melting ice. Danish professor Ole Humlum from Oslo University, who used to work at the university’s branch in Svalbard, years ago revealed the photos as a Greenpeace hoax. Blomstrandbreen is a so-called galloping glacier, which periodically advances and retreats, regardless of the climate. We reach back to 2002 for a report on the hoax. The Economist seems either oblivious or unconcerned with reality. Makes one wonder what else in the report is science fiction.]
Now you see it, now you don't: Blomstrandbreen glacier, Norway, 1918 and 2002
*****
Jo Knowsley, The Mail on Sunday
http://www.scientific-alliance.org/news_archives/climate/greenpeacestunt.htm
11th August 2002
Scientists dismiss Greenpeace pictures as stunt - Global warming claim meaningless as glacier photos show 'natural changes in shape'.
The pictures appeared to be the most shocking evidence so far of the devastating effects of global warming. But last night scientists who work on the spot where they were taken dismissed them as a misconceived publicity stunt. The two photographs, taken 84 years apart, were released by Greenpeace International last week. They appear to show a radical shrinking of the Blomstrandbreen glacier, on Svalbard, 375 miles north of Norway.
But scientists on the ground at Svalbard say the illustration is 'meaningless' as a measure of climate change because glaciers retreat and advance constantly as part of a natural cycle. At the same time, there has been no significant drop or increase in temperature in the region since the Twenties.
They argue that Greenpeace used the pictures to highlight the effects of global warming caused by what they see as man's pollution.
Blomstrandbreen might now be retreating, but on the west side of Svalbard is Friddjovbreen glacier which has advanced more than a mile in the past seven years - one of dozens of glaciers to do so.
