Did you hear about the latest proof of abrupt climate change?

Question

More of Greenland's ice is breaking off into the sea.

Or, are the satellites, and their data, part of the AGW "hoax"?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080821/ap_on_sc/sci_greenland_glaciers

Answer 1

hoax cause i don't see  any cracks...and even if it did..its not melting...its moving and producing even more ice than al gore predicted...i hope that answers ur question

Answer 2

No!

Answer 3

So what?  Every time more ice melts in Greenland, they find more Viking settlements.

So that must mean that at the time that the Vikings were living there, it was warm enough to plant crops, raise cattle, and create all these settlements and that means one thing: It was warmer then it is now.  So why are the Vikings driving SUV's and not Prius's?

Greenland was named that because that's what it used to be.  More ice breaking off Greenland means that things are going to back to normal.

Ice breaks off into the sea all the time, it is called "Still coming out of the last Ice Age we were in" phase.  Ice Ages can last thousands of years and periods between them can last thousands of years as well, these are the Interglacial periods and since Greenland is still covered by ice, we are still in the waning phases of this Ice Age.

Look up Ice Ages and the science of it and you will see that global warming is just ploy to separate the people who care from their money.

Answer 4

Glaciers are advancing ice . This means they are getting thicker , not melting , when they encroach onto the sea . It's called calving and has been happening for millions of years . Understand yet ?  

Answer 5

I don't see how certain event or a "plethora" of events prove AGW. It may prove that the climate is changing but observations don't prove that CO2 emissions by humans are causing it. Especially when they account for such a tiny amount of total CO2 in the atmosphere. It's not as if this has never happened in the history of earth.

Also, can someone please explain to me why these "climate models" are so heavily relied on? I mean, we have a hard time enough forecasting local weather, or where a hurricane will make landfall, much less predict the entire climate of a whole planet for the next 50 to 100 years. Also, these models come up with a number of scenarios ranging from little impact, moderate, and catastrophic. Alarmist have latched on to the most extreme predictions. And, do we really know all the dynamics that control climate for the planet?

Answer 6

This is just one of many natural phenomenons believers have pointed to in an attempt to create the illusion of real-world data. Jumping the gun will only lead to creating a greater degree of doubt from skeptics. Face it, the best data believers can come up with is from faulty computer models. It amazes me that they will say such a minute gas in the atmosphere can have astronomical effects, but won't admitt that their climate models might be missing some minute but very important climate factors that may throw their figures way off. In fact it is highly likely this is the case unless so called climate experts are willing to say they have complete god-like understanding of the earth's climate systems. I wouldn't put it past them, if it supports their agenda.

Answer 7

It is further proof that "freaky things" are the new norm!!  I'm covered in goose bumps!  Somebody, I need 50,000 gallons of standard everyday common garden variety two part epoxy.

Answer 8

Well as the article notes, this event, like any single isolated event, itself does not prove AGW.

However, it's another piece to add to the plethora of evidence supporting AGW.

Then again, maybe James Hansen is camped out in Greenland with a blowtorch, melting big chunks of ice!