A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.
The research challenges the conclusions of other studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 report, which says that Antarctica is overall losing land ice.
According to the new analysis of satellite data, the Antarctic ice sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001. That net gain slowed to 82 billion tons of ice per year between 2003 and 2008.
“We’re essentially in agreement with other studies that show an increase in ice discharge in the Antarctic Peninsula and the Thwaites and Pine Island region of West Antarctica,” said Jay Zwally, a glaciologist with NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, and lead author of the study, which was published on Oct. 30 in the Journal of Glaciology. “Our main disagreement is for East Antarctica and the interior of West Antarctica – there, we see an ice gain that exceeds the losses in the other areas.” Zwally added that his team “measured small height changes over large areas, as well as the large changes observed over smaller areas.”
End of quote.
So much for that myth.
And we see videos focussing on the ice discharge in West Antarctica, which has been identified as being due to volcanism underneath the ice sheet.
This lie about the melting Antarctic ice was also pointed out in the Dr Don Easterbrook presentation I mentioned recently. Of course those promoting the anthropogenic global warming lie focus on the calving of massive icebergs from the Western Antarctic ice shelf. They look dramatic and they look very convincing. They MUST represent anthropogenic global warming when such large masses of ice fall into the sea. How could it be otherwise? These presentations deal in emotion, not the underlying facts.
And of course there are scientists who support anthropogenic global warming. Their livelihoods depend upon it.
And people in general think that the outcomes of scientific studies are impartial and deal in the revealing of absolute truth. Most scientists are reserved, conservative people, who want a secure income for themselves and their families. To do this, what they look for and what they find is directed by what those paying want to see. But we are not encouraged to acknowledge this. Quite the opposite, in fact. And so, science has long been a prisoner of the global elite, something many scientists themselves do not fully understand and nor, perhaps, do many of them care.