<Is Relocalization Doomed?: A Response to Staniford’s "Fallacy of Reversibility"The Oil DrumThe Universal Mining Machine>
<DrumBeat: January 23, 2008DrumBeatDrumBeat: January 25, 2008>

209 comments on DrumBeat: January 24, 2008

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

jrwakefield on January 24, 2008 - 10:36am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Antarctica Snowfall Increase

The ice caps hold a special place in the cold hearts of the global warming advocates who are all too quick to insist that our ice caps are currently melting at an unprecedented rate. We suspect that they will not be particularly thrilled to learn that a paper has just appeared in Geophysical Research Letters entitled “A doubling in snow accumulation in the western Antarctic Peninsula since 1850.” The article is by scientists with the British Antarctic Survey and the Desert Research Institute in Reno, Nevada; the work was funded by the UK Natural Environment Research Council and the U.S. National Science Foundation. In case you think that the Desert Research Institute in Nevada would have little interest in Antarctica, recall from geography classes you’ve had that Antarctica receives little precipitation and is regarded by climatologists as a frozen desert.

Reference:

Thomas, E. R., G. J. Marshall, and J. R. McConnell, 2008. A doubling in snow accumulation in the western Antarctic Peninsula since 1850. Geophysical Research Leters, 35, L01706, doi:10.1029/2007GL032529.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
shargash on January 24, 2008 - 10:46am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Global warming predicts an increase in snowfall in areas that had previously been extremely cold. This is for the simple reason that warmer air can hold more moisture. This is the origin of the old saying "it is too cold to snow".

Satellite measurements and other observations demonstrate pretty conclusively that the southern ice cap is losing mass. This is entirely consistent with increased snowfall, and both are expected outcomes of global warming. The same thing is happening on Greenland, btw.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
mcgowanmc on January 24, 2008 - 10:56am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Thank you.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
ccpo on January 26, 2008 - 10:35am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Thank you.

Seconded. I don't understand why GW deniers can't get their head around this simple fact: Global Climate Change will be marked by CHAOS above all else. Extremes will be the norm. Given that energy is energy and must be conserved, if it's hotter here, it might just get cooler there. Only the increase in available energy would disrupt this. While that is happening, at any given moment, or any relatively short period of time, the Earth is dealing with only so much energy.

It must stand their hair on end when the realize the shutdown of the thermohaline circulation would bring a mini-Ice Age to Europe... but that climate change would march on...

Cheers

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
SacredCowTipper on January 24, 2008 - 10:57am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Nice editorial site you've found there. Why don't you get back to us when this is on the front page at http://realclimate.org?

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Black_Dog on January 24, 2008 - 11:18am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

The comments on the World Climate Report by Patrick Michaels seem to ignore the fact that precipitation increases as temperature warms. This is especially so for snow, as warmer air can carry more moisture from it's source to the the local where the snow falls. The Antarctic is very cold most of the year, thus little snow actually falls inland. The Antarctic Peninsula is further north of the main land mass and is both warmer and more exposed to the surrounding warm oceans. As temperature rises, it's quite reasonable to expect that the amount of snow fall would increases there.

For example, the WRC comment ends thus:

So while we’ve heard recent reports about Antarctica losing ice, here we again find evidence to the contrary, and then some, at least in these locations. Not only is there no evidence of melting at the Gomez site, snow is accumulating there at an amazingly high rate....

The implication is that the increase in the rate of surface accumulation implies that there is no loss in total mass at lower elevations. The site is located at 74S and 1400m elevation. Rignot's study reported of mass loss in glaciers at lower elevations, reflecting changes in ice flow as well as melt. The comment on the WRC does not refute Rignot's conclusions. In fact, I think Michaels (or whoever wrote this piece) is intentionally misinterpreting the data to spread disinformation about Climate Change. But, that's nothing new, they've been spreading propaganda like this for more than 10 years. That jrwakefield thinks the WRC link is meaningful just shows how successful these guys have been.

E. Swanson

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Leanan on January 24, 2008 - 11:44am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Please don't feed the troll.

Anyone who wants to re-live JRWakefield's propaganda can re-read this thread. It's the same old, same old.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
HughCampbell on January 24, 2008 - 11:47am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Just so we are clear on where this is coming from ...

"This popular web log points out the weaknesses and outright fallacies in the science that is being touted as “proof” of disastrous warming. It’s the perfect antidote against those who argue for proposed changes to the Rio Climate Treaty, such as the Kyoto Protocol, which are aimed at limiting carbon emissions from the United States."

That "About US" statement appears to be about 10 years past its due date.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.