Growing Iceland, Greenland glaciers make scientists gasp 

Posted: May 20, 2019 by oldbrew in climate, Natural Variation
Tags: ,


Seems like the ‘carbon dioxide control knob’ has gone wonky. Alarmists must wonder: how can that be?
H/T CFACT

It appears that Iceland won’t have to be renamed Tepidlandia anytime soon, says Larry Bell.

According to researchers at the University of Iceland, each of the country’s glaciers will expand this year for the first time in the past 25 years.

As reported in Electroverse, the Hofsjökull, Langjökull, Mýrdalsjökull, and Vatnajökull glaciers have expanded over the last twelve months, from autumn to autumn, “With Mýrdalsjökull showing a really significant addition of ice this year.”

These are the largest glaciers in Iceland: Hofsjökull is third largest after Vatnajökull and Langjökull, while Mýrdalsjökull is the country’s fourth largest ice cap.

The research study project manager, Finnur Pálsson, observed that he regarded the reversal to be “unusual.” He noted that Langjökull had been losing around one and a half meters of ice per year for the past 20 years, “but in the last few years he has been close to zero, that is, he has neither expanded nor diminished. And that applies to this year, both for Vatnajökull and Langjökull as well.”

So why is this happening?

Careful to avoid a politically-incorrect narrative contradicting “global warming” mantra, Pálsson simply observed, “It is a fact that it has been colder the last few years. And there was more snowfall in August on the upper part of Langjökull, which is very unusual.”

Well maybe not quite so unusual after all.

As I recently reported in my April 22 column, Jakobshavn — the previously fastest-flowing, fastest-thinning glacier on Greenland’s west coast — has reversed course as well.

Jakobshavn has represented the largest source of Greenland’s ice mass loss over the last 20 years, and has produced about 10 percent of the country’s icebergs.

A study published in the March issue of the journal Nature stated, “Here we use airborne altimetry and satellite imagery to show that since 2016, Jakobshavn has been re-advancing, slowing and thickening. We link these changes to current cooling in ocean waters in Disko Bay that spill over into Ilulissat Icefjord. Ocean temperatures in the bay’s upper 250 meters have cooled to levels not seen since the mid-1980s.”

Again, scientists registered surprise. As reported in Live Science, lead study researcher Ala Khazendar at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory said, “At first we didn’t believe it. We had pretty much assumed that Jakobshavn would just keep going on as it had over the last 20 years.”

A short sojourn into Greenland’s temperature history might have provided an obvious clue.

The reason that Jakobshavn isn’t shrinking is very likely is due to an entirely natural periodic warm-cold phase shift in the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) which occurs in the northern Atlantic Ocean every 20 or 30 years.

Nevertheless, a study reported in the May 2012 issue of the journal Science observed that individual Greenland glaciers expand and contract for complex reasons. Observations of 200 glaciers between 2000-2010 revealed behaviors that varied both in location and time.

Glaciers with growth rates found to be accelerating during a few years, decelerated in others. Some accelerating glaciers were in proximity to others that were decelerating.

Full article here.

Comments
  1. ivan says:

    When are the ‘climatologists’ going to admit that they know virtually nothing about the climate of Earth and what they are rabbiting on about is only political?

  2. craigm350 says:

    Reblogged this on WeatherAction News and commented:
    Whilst there may be anomalous heat in the polar regions, matched by cold dropping down to lower altitudes, there is also increased water vapour with temperatures in winter still below freezing.

    https://weatheraction.wordpress.com/2019/05/20/watch-bigjoebastardi-american-wx-models-not-spotting-the-cold-why-its-water-vapour-not-co2-thats-boss/

  3. oldbrew says:

    2019 El Niño rated less likely than before…

    The ENSO Outlook has been eased to El Niño WATCH. This means the chance of El Niño forming in 2019 is around 50%, still double the normal likelihood.
    . . .
    By October, five of eight models indicate a neutral ENSO state is most likely.

    http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/enso/outlook/
    [gets overwritten every 2 weeks or so]

  4. stpaulchuck says:

    PDO, AMO, ENSO, etc. Then there’s the ‘newly discovered’ undersea volcanoes https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/12/scientists-discover-91-volcanos-antarctica and tons of other wonders of Mother Nature that have yet to be accounted for in climate “science” [*points at “science” and laughs behind hand*] .Yet we are to believe they’ve got it all settled, so shut up (and hand over your money).

    There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy. – Hamlet

  5. Curious George says:

    “Growing glaciers make scientists gasp.” What “scientists”?

  6. oldbrew says:

    Blowtorch Bill Nye perhaps 😆

    “What I’m saying is, the planet’s on f–ing fire,” Nye declared, while directing a blowtorch at a globe.
    https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/bill-nye-luc-ferrandez-and-the-rise-of-the-environmental-f-bomb

    Might need to re-think that one. Don’t try this at home…

    Note fossil fuel powered blowtorch.

  7. JB says:

    There’s more surprise in today’s science than a child’s birthday party. (‘scusey, Bill. But how is that demo a replication of anything but stupidity?)

  8. TomH says:

    Obama did say “….this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow”. Time to give the bloke his credit due? /sarc off

  9. phil salmon says:

    It seems that wishful thinking about ENSO never goes away – “waiting for El Ninot”. To bring back those good times of alarming warming.

    But the current ENSO outlook at BOM shows a remarkably fast outbreak of subsurface cold across the whole equatorial Pacific from east to west:

    http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/enso/#tabs=Sea-sub–surface

    The outlooks are for cooling both of the Nino regions and also the Indian Ocean – unusual for them both to be cooling simultaneously, usually there is reciprocity between the east-central Pacific and the Indian Ocean.

    http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/enso/#tabs=Outlooks

    With such an outlook it’s odd to hear people in some quarters still talking up an El Niño. ENSO is going negative, fast.

  10. phil salmon says:

    Glacial rebound in Greenland and Iceland is due in my view to a declining Gulf Stream, which marks the cooling phase of the AMO (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation). One of the first to note this Gulf Stream downturn was Michael Mann, about 10 years ago. He’s a good oceanographer and that’s what he should stick to.

  11. nickreality65 says:

    One popular geoengineering strategy proposed for countering imaginary global warming/climate change is reducing solar heating by increasing the earth’s albedo.

    This increase is accomplished by various physical methods, e.g. injecting reflective aerosols into the atmosphere, spraying water vapor into the air to enhance marine cloud brightening, spreading shiny glass spheres around the poles with the goal of more reflection thereby reducing the net amount of solar energy absorbed by the atmosphere and surface and cooling the earth.

    More albedo and the earth cools.

    Less albedo and the earth warms.

    BTW back-of-the-envelope suggests a 1% change in albedo changes the surface temperature about 1 C.

    No atmosphere means no water vapor or clouds, ice, snow, vegetation, oceans and near zero albedo.

    Zero albedo and much like the moon the earth bakes in that 394 K, 250 F solar wind.

    These geoengineering plans rely on the atmosphere cooling the earth and expose the error and delusion of greenhouse theory which says the atmosphere warms the earth and with no atmosphere the earth becomes a -430 F frozen ball of ice.

    A failure of greenhouse theory means no CO2 global warming and no man caused or cured climate change.

  12. Doonhamer says:

    Eny fule do kno that things expand as they get hotter.

  13. oldbrew says:

    Greenland Has Been Cooling In Recent Years – 26 Of Its 47 Largest Glaciers Now Stable Or Gaining Ice
    By Kenneth Richard on 20. May 2019

    Large regions of the oceans surrounding Greenland have been rapidly cooling – by as much as 1-2°C – in the last few years.

    https://notrickszone.com/2019/05/20/greenland-has-been-cooling-in-recent-years-26-of-its-47-largest-glaciers-now-stable-or-gaining-ice/
    – – –
    Trace gases in the atmosphere can’t explain this, given current theory – or any theory seeking to blame mankind?

    Published: 25 March 2019
    Interruption of two decades of Jakobshavn Isbrae acceleration and thinning as regional ocean cools

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-019-0329-3

  14. oldbrew says:

    Climate theory needs a re-think

  15. oldbrew, Ned Nikolov said of the very mechanisms he’s claiming control warming, clouds: “these mechanisms are poorly understood” – so how can he make his first original strong claim if it’s so poorly understood?

    Ned is tacitly endorsing Svensmark’s work. Svensmark claims cloud cover is driven by cosmic rays.

    I claim the same clouds are El Nino produced, insolation driven. Cosmic rays are high now at the solar minimum concurrent with the ending of a cloud-producing weak El NIno, a scenario no different really for the time period of Svensmark’s cloud and cosmic ray plot. His plot is overlayed below on Central Pacific Outgoing Longwave Radiation and the Multivariate ENSO index:

    The cloud cover spikes occur from and persist between spikes in both OLR and MEI, so Svensmark and Nikolov are both 100% wrong.

    Furthermore their individual analyses regarding the effect of TSI are both wrong, as they don’t take into account the accumulation year-to-year of absorbed solar in the ocean throughout the soiar cycle, ie the solar cycle influence.

    Sadly for them they are both wrong on these two counts. Nikolov & Svensmark need to re-think.

  16. Additionally, I determined in my linked work that Greenland’s ice growth is a consequence of low TSI under my decadal ocean warming threshold of 1361.25 W/m2 since 2016, and we are in a ‘mini ice age’ that won’t end until TSI rises higher than this threshold towards the top of solar cycle 25.

  17. Brett Keane says:

    Coolclimateinfo, in studying Venusian data here some years ago, I noticed that clouds ie Albedo seemed less important than previously assumed. Intervening years of observation has led to others seeing them /it as being more an internal effect thermodynamically. To account for all that.
    But the changing of UV etc. input to Oceans by more energy being cycled higher up, not reaching Oceans would lead to other subtle consequences. Maybe? Brett Keane, NZ

  18. Brett, good points. My original assumption (in my poster) that solar activity alone causes warming/cooling was predicated on the additional assumption that clouds, volcanoes, you name it, were not important to the outcome overall, or at least they averaged out that way over my original model training period from 1960-1986, something I wasn’t sure of at the time. It took a few years to confirm it is mostly true in more recent real world tests described in my poster.

    However I did find an important ‘lack of clouds’ albedo effect, ie high insolation starting under low TSI, which produces clearer skies, occurring at the time just preceding the solar minimum TSI ramp-up into the next cycle, after which TSI rises at the fastest annual rate of change during a solar cycle, two conditions which initiate what I call the typical ‘solar cycle onset El Nino’.

    I think UV is over-rated for direct ocean warming, as it’s portion of the spectrum is small compared to the blue-green wavelengths that penetrate deeper and carry more energy. UV effects in the high atmosphere might be important in a small way to albedo and hence ocean warming but I haven’t felt the need to look further into it – it’s lumped in there with ‘you name it’.

    Mine were ‘engineering assumptions’ meant to help decipher the main forcing, which worked out, but those who insist on a completely ‘physical’ reductionist model like the IPCC attempts would be disappointed. For all their ‘physics’ they still haven’t figured out what’s important.

    Stay warm in NZ.

  19. David A says:

    AFAIK, and confirmed by Leif S, nobody has estimated the residence time of disparate W/L T.S.I. as it enters the oceans. Sans this, we cannot begin to estimate the total energy change in the earths Land – particularly Oceans, and atmosphere over multiple decade changes in Solar radiation.

    As this solar W/L flux is considerably greater then the TSI change, and can last for multiple solar cycles, and the ocean residence time os said solar energy input is in many cases as long or much longer then the multiple decadal flux in solar intensity / wavelength, then this change (positive or negative) can accumulate every day for decades, and so over time result in very meaningful amounts of energy flux in earth’s system.

    Clearly there are many other factors and feed-backs to consider in ANY flux of input to a system as complex as earth’s climate; ocean response, water vapor response, cloud response, upper atmosphere affects as often discussed on this blog, etc… As the US President is prone to say, ” Its complicated business folks”.

  20. Brett Keane says:

    cci: Yes, agreed. I did deduce most albedo change seemed an endo/exothermic cycle, probably net neutral inside the system as condensate sent energy towards the void. eg Earth, Titan, Venus. Even Pluto darn it all, though insubstantial sub 0.1 bar atmospheres lack an effective gravitothermal effect. Such is physics including its applied Engineering science. Being an App. Sc. myself in the plant fields; pun intended. The effects of different circumstances is what gives me greatest enjoyment from Physics……

    David A: Well said. Brett Keane

  21. oldbrew says:

    Iceland’s glaciers were growing in 2015.

    20-30% more snow means larger glaciers
    https://icelandmag.is/article/icelandic-glaciers-expand-first-time-over-20-years

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s