Skip to content
Subscribe

Another damaging 'oops' from global warming scientists

Published:

A US-Dutch team of scientists has found that the rate of melting ice in Greenland and the western Antarctic is only about half what was previously thought.  The error occurred when the scientists failed to take into account movements in the crust of the earth that occur as tons of ice melts.   Those movements had been read as part of the melting itself, as opposed to the natural rebound of the earth’s crust.  In simple terms, scientists misunderstood satellite readings and interpreted them to mean more melting than has actually occurred.

The findings are couched in scientific terms such as “isostatic adjustments,” “gigatonnes per year” of ice melt and “deformations of the earth’s crust.”  But for global warming skeptics, it’s simply another nail in the coffin of climate change theory.  Check your local talk radio programs this morning for reminders of how this latest error simply reinforces the accidental or purposeful mistakes that have marred global warming prognostications.

This new reversal on the high rate of glacial melting undermines the public’s confidence in scientific objectivity and honesty, and lays the foundation for strengthening the position of the anti-global warming forces.  From the first appearance of Al Gore’s alarming 2006 film An Inconvenient Truth, energy producers and their political partners in both major parties have looked for every and any opportunity to present global warming as a hoax intended to hurt business and eliminate US-based jobs.  2009’s Climategate brouhaha – despite  a thorough debunking – remains proof in certain circles of the nefarious intentions of climate scientists and their enabling academicians.

It’s difficult to know or understand the impact of this new information from the US-Dutch team.  Do we have substantially less to fear from global warming because the ice is not melting as quickly as originally believed?  Or is the inevitable impact of climate change so great that these new findings are of little real meaning?  Those are questions that the scientists don’t bother answering with their sterile statements.  There’s no context or perspective.  Nor is there any form of mea culpa in making the announcement.  It’s all about refinements in scientific data gathering, with no apologies for alarming people unnecessarily.  In fact, the report calls the data correction “innovative,” as if a major course correction is viewed as good news in scientific circles.

The obfuscatory explanation of what went wrong with the multi-satellite, gps-directed data gathering will only add power to the denunciations of the entire climate change scientific community.  And the current environment of economic survival for many Americans will further relegate the climate change issue to the trash heap of secondary concerns facing the public.

Today will not be a good day for those who hold deeply felt concerns for the impact of man-made global warming on the future of our planet.  Sarcasm, skepticism and downright denunciation of global warming as an important public policy matter seems sure to intensify.

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

Another damaging 'oops' from global warming scientists

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us