Destruction of Self, Family, Home, and Country

ThyArt Website BOOKS - MINDS YouTube Facebook Twitter
Greenland is not Melting Away
Tim of ThyArt   14 Nov 2018 / updated: 11/Jan/2019

My evaluation is it is a FACT Greenland is not melting away and it is a serious concern when so many entities and news outlets are supporting this lie and being deceptive; entities we should have trust in their content.

GREENLAND Part 1 of 6

Why Greenland: If anyone tells you that Greenland is losing ice and this ice loss is causing the sea level to rise, your response to them should be, "Do you know what you are talking about?", followed with the information provided here, make them feel foolish for listening to someone that told them incorrect information. Greenland is the world's largest island by classification. Three-quarters of Greenland is covered by one of only two permanent ice sheets on Earth; the other is Antarctica. If ALL of this ice were to melt into the sea surrounding Greenland it could possibly raise the Earth’s sea levels up by approximately 7 meters (23 feet). The purpose of this content is definitively to prove Greenland as a non-player in the Climate Change rhetoric and that Greenland will not cause concerning sea level rise in the next thousand years.  Greenland accumulation by snow, rain freezing, and condensation is more than its loss to melt and evaporation by around 350 Gigatons per year. Greenland claimed net loss of 200 Gigatons is mostly due to glaciers that are questionable numbers. But even at 200Gt, this net loss is unconcerning as the Greenland ice mass is 2,880,000Gt; at this rate would take 14,000 years to lose all its ice mass, but glaciers would slow and stop due to lack of forcing from less mass and the design of the Greenland landscape. Greenland causing concerning sea level raise is a lie to promote an Agenda.

Greenland is only one of two locations that ice can add concerning sea level rise. Greenland is claimed to be the primary factor in the current sea level rise.

The Fear of what is to Come: The stories read that the Greenland ice melting and glaciers calving into the ocean will cause the sea level to rise as much as a meter (3 feet) in the next 100 years. The images in the news and across the Internet are of large coastal cities engulfed by the surrounding water. According to the scientist supporting this idea, this rise in sea level will place many populated areas under water affecting tens of millions of people in the near future. Most of this sea level rise predicted is to come from Greenland's ice sheet melting or calving glaciers or from the doomsday fantasies that Antarctica ice is going to fall off in a large chunk. The claims are that if Climate Change is not stopped and carbon dioxide reduced from the atmosphere, eventually all the ice on Greenland will be lost to melt and icebergs resulting in 7 meters (23ft) of sea level rise. In Accordance with these so called scientists, this affect will become exponentially worse and soon will be serious but also unstoppable, demanding a cry for urgency.

All the mainstream media outlets, entertainment, and popular science entities are pushing this fear of sea level rise by carbon dioxide induced Climate Change. Are they truthful or bowing to greater money?

GREENLAND Part 2 of 6

Greenland Size: On most maps that we run across and use, Greenland is beyond extremely exaggerated as much larger than its physically size is by use of what is called the Mercator style of map. The Mercator style map attempts to create a flat map of the Earth resulting in exponential stretching starting at the equator reaching out to north and south poles. In the middle of a Mercator map from left to right at the equator equals 24,901 miles, while at the North or South Pole, from left to right on the top or bottom of the map equals an inch or less, that being a great stretch on the map from what is reality. Then, in order to make the land look proportionally correct, vertical stretching is applied making Greenland taller along with wider. Turning a three dimensional sphere into a flat map and maintaining accuracy is impossible. Therefore, we are stuck with using deceptive maps. The United States is 4.6 times bigger than Greenland and Africa is 14.1 times bigger than Greenland. Greenland is at its widest east to west around 1,300km (800 miles) and height from north to south around 2,670km (1660 miles). Therefore, Greenland is not small in human sense but small in the overall scope of the Earth's size.

To most, the perception of Greenland is it is much bigger than it really is.

Greenland Shape and Terrain: Greenland is overall a basin, shaped roughly like a bowl with the outer edge being mostly hills and mountains that land locks the lower altitude ice from glacial flow. The eastern and southern parts of Greenland are made up mostly of mountain ranges, while the north and west have some mountains, the altitude of the land otherwise varies from near sea level to around 1,500 meters. The large portion of the center of Greenland is 50 meters to below sea level in altitude. This is important to know when it comes to examining how glaciers flow on Greenland from the forces caused by gravity. The highest point is not the ice sheet but many mountains that include Mt. Gunnbjorn at 3,700 meters (12,139 ft), while the ice sheet highest elevation is around 3,200 meters. Greenland’s low center surrounded by high terrain is a serious obstacle to glacier flow. Across the northern hemisphere are many land masses but none have ice accumulation like Greenland, this is because of its shape, size, and surroundings, Greenland by design will retain its ice mass for a very long time, even if the temperature were to increase by 30C (54F) to 40C (72F) it would take thousands of years to loss half the ice!

Greenland is a basin preventing any serious loss of ice by glaciers.

Greenland's Ice Sheet: The Greenland Ice sheet is massive. Its length‎ is ‎2,400 km (1,500 mi), width‎ at the widest point is ‎1,100 km (680 mi), thickness‎ is ‎ 100  to 3,200 meters (~10,600 ft), and area‎ is ‎1,710,000 km2 (660,000 sq mi). The amount of ice on Greenland is 684,000 cubic miles and weighs 2,882,102,400,000,000 tons (2.88 Petatons). At first thought when hearing that the ice sheet on Greenland is melting is to find evidence that it is or is not. One would need a few decades of time and tens of millions of dollars to self analyze Greenland to validate whether the ice sheet is gaining or losing concerning mass. This is impossible for any individual. HOWEVER, there are proofs that Greenland ice sheet has been gaining accumulation and expanding. One book over 100 years ago showed a mapping of Greenland and the extent of the ice sheet at that time, the book by Albert Perry Brigham & Charles T. McFarlane, Essentials of Geography (New York, NY: American Book Company, 1916). When comparing NSIDC / NASA image of the Greenland ice sheet from 2016, there is no question that the ice sheet is considered now to cover a much larger area than 100 years ago. There are various objects giving clue to the massive accumulation, such as Glacier Girl, a plane that crashed in 1942 and recovered 50 years later. This plane was buried in the packed snow and ice 82 meters (268ft) deep in 50 years time. Other indicators of accumulation on Greenland were the DYE-2 and DYE-3 radar stations, these over 50 meter high radar stations were designed to be periodically raised above the constant accumulation on Greenland. DYE-2 was active from 1959 to 1989 was raised 32 meters while active and now has 22 meters of accumulation around it, for a total of 54 meters (177 feet) since 1959. DYE-3 active from 1959 to 1991 was raised 41 meters while active and now has 35 meters of accumulation around it, for a total of 76 meters (250 feet) since 1959; soon it will disappear under the accumulation. Another factor is that it snows almost daily on Greenland making the melt story not only difficult but also impossible. Concerning melting loss of the Ice Sheet, the Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI), reports on this daily with the average annual accumulation to include loss from melting for a gain of over 350 Gigatons per year. Therefore melting of the Greenland ice sheet is not a concern failing to keep pace with the accumulation. The real loss is supposed to come from glaciers but that must be questioned whether it is a concerning loss. Why is DMI important to the reporting of the status of the Greenland Ice Sheet? DMI is a government entity for Denmark, and Greenland is a territory of Denmark.

Greenland accumulation by snow, rain (turns to ice), and condensation, is greater than its loss to melt, evaporation, and water runoff.

How much ice mass is on Greenland? This is a hard number to find in mass or weight (w=mg) but can be easily calculated from the numbers that are available. There are 684,000 cubic miles of ice on Greenland, there are 4,600,000,000 tons in a cubic mile of water, with water as 1 for density, the ice sheet has a density at a tenth less at 0.916, so the ice sheet on Greenland is 684,000 x 4,600,000,000 x 0.916 = 2,882,102,400,000,000 tons (2.88 Petatons or 2,880 Teratons or 2,880,000 Gigatons). The reason it is important to express it in Gigatons is the claimed loss by DMI is around 200 Gigatons per year, sounds big until one compares it to the total of 2,880,000 Gigatons. At 200 Gigatons per year, it would take 14,000 years for Greenland to lose all its ice and in 200 years at that rate would only equate to add one tenth of a meter (0.33 feet (4 inches)) to sea level rise, NOT MUCH. Problem for the fear mongering scientist is that the last two years of 2016-2017 and 2017- 2018, Greenland IAW DMI has had a net gain rather than the supposed average loss of 200 Gigaton. Where is this Climate Change? Where is the accelerating loss of Greenland ice from 120 years of industrial age and increased carbon dioxide? Are you starting to feel something is not right?

The Greenland Ice Sheet has a mass of 2.88 Petatons.

GREENLAND Part 3 of 6

Greenland Weather Patterns: Two websites provide excellent tools to understand how the Earth's weather works and toward understanding the climate of a particular area such as Greenland. Those websites are and, allowing monitoring of multiple weather forecasting systems, such as ECMWF, GFS, and ICON. Greenland being an island surrounded by sea results in most of its weather coming from off shore bringing in much warmer air with high humidity, the air exiting is colder and drier. One must note that a large amount of the energy in the atmosphere is not just in its temperature but is contained in water in gaseous form released as latent heat as it turns to liquid or solid. For one serious to learn the topic of Greenland's weather, it is suggested to monitor the forecast for a year to understand what causes the most melting over Greenland besides the sun. Watch the pressure systems bringing severe weather over the coast as rain and massive snow storms over the ice sheet in the middle of summer. Often these causes rain and melt on the edge of the sheet of which most of it freezes adding to the total ice mass. Another nice feature of is it provides access to tens of thousands of weather observatory stations with 20 days of history. These weather observatory points help to validate the forecast and weather patterns.

Weather fronts dictate the gain and loss of Greenland's ice mass. The features of Greenland promote weather that results in worthy accumulation to the ice sheet almost daily.

Greenland is constantly subject to weather fronts passing over bringing warm moist air from the Atlantic Ocean and cold dry air from the Arctic. One important physical attribute to mention is that warm air mass always takes the higher altitude over a colder air mass. The warm air will be forced upward creating clouds, rain, and snow, while the cool air will remain near the surface restricting melting to a minimum. This is important to understanding the weather on Greenland and why it snows over the ice sheet almost daily somewhere. This diagram shows a typical front passing over Greenland in the summer resulting in constant accumulation countering most of the loss from the outer edge of the ice sheet. When the warm air passes over Greenland, snow and rain are falling and accumulating on the ice sheet. When the cold air passes over Greenland, it becomes bitterly cold. Most of the water that was in the air becomes accumulation by precipitation or condensation.

The hottest of summer days on Greenland's coast usually means extreme snowfall over the ice sheet.

Greenland and the Sun: The sun plays important roles in both Greenland’s loss through melt and gain through extreme cold winters. During the winter, Greenland has no worthy sunlight. During winter, Greenland is almost completely surrounded by sea ice extent, causing most of the weather reaching the Greenland coast to be below freezing. During the summer, the northern part of Greenland has 24 hours of sun daily, though it does not provide extreme energy due to its low angle of the sun, it does not provide a time of worthy cooling but also little worthy heat to cause melting. In the figure, the white area for temperature will cause minimal melt taking days to melt an inch of snow and pinkish will cause noticeable melt (only on the coastline). Greenland melt season only affects the coast from a period from the middle of June through the middle of August. The sun does not have enough energy to melt the ice sheet by itself and weather causes rain on the outer edges forming pools of water that absorbs more energy from the sun, this resulting in some melting and pooling of water at the fringes. There are also mountains with high enough inclines, not allowing snow retention, these areas having a lower albedo than snow and this absorbed energy does cause more heat to the surrounding area. To summarize this, the sun for a 2 month period at most only is capable of causing melt at the outer fringes of the ice sheet primarily due to the help of weather fronts. It is easy for mainstream media to glorify a few miles of melt in the peak of the summer, while ignoring hundreds of miles without any melting.

About 80 percent of the year Greenland is without any worth sunlight to cause any melting.

GREENLAND Part 4 of 6

Proof Greenland is not Melting Away: The DMI website reads strong of Climate Change but when it comes to the sum of the gain from accumulation and the loss due to melting, evaporation, and runoff, DMI has not reported one year where the sum is a loss, infact the average is an added 350Gt to 400Gt average per year. Greenland is not melting away in accordance with the DMI data published on their website. Problems with DMI reporting is an unusual 2012 with no accumulation from mid June through the end of July, contradicting required weather for melt to occur that causes accumulation. Another flaw is the multiple average accumulations should result in the ability to calculate the year 2011, the average of 1990-2013 dropped 80Gt from the 1990-2011 average, which is over 1600Gt below average sum for the years 2011 and 2012. Go figure! DMI has either become nobler in their efforts or found means to correct their inaccuracies over the last few years, as the reporting seems to be much more believable. NOTE: The year 2018 was a year of late and slow melt rate, this would seem to mean an earlier end of the melt period for reasons of lack of sun energy but also less melt in the process of run off. This fails the science and common sense but it also defies the logic that more melting would cause exponential melt and extend the season; something is wrong with the 2018 numbers.

Geenland melting off the charts. Is a joke entity?

The official website tracking the accumulation and melt indicates 350 Gigatons average added ice mass annually.

Greenland Ice Density and Surface Melt: For reference purposes, water has a normal density of 998 kg/m3 at STP and ice has a normal density of 937kg/m3 The Greenland ice sheet due to the method of creation and its impurities has a density of around 916kg/m3 beyond 140 meters below the surface. Fresh snow depending on how dry or moist it is has a density of around 100 to 300 kg/m3.

Another note is on the DMI website they have a scary melt chart seeming clearly to indicate how bad the melting is on Greenland. In fact looking at the blue line one would gather that 2018 was a really bad year with great melt creating great loss, yet 2018 had more accumulation than any year in the last decade at around 200Gt above the 1981-2000 average.  However, in their text to explain this image they say, “This melt map only shows areas where melt has happened. It does not include evaporation directly from the ice sheet surface or show how much snow and ice has melted. Much of the melt water will refreeze in the surface snow layers rather than running off the ice sheet, this process is included in the calculations of surface mass balance which is why the melt area appears different to the surface mass balance plots above”. It is just fear-mongering JUNK!

High Albedo preventing Melt: Albedo is the measure of the diffuse reflection of solar radiation out of the total solar radiation received by a material. It is dimensionless and measured on a scale from 0 (absorbs all incident radiation) to 1 (reflects all incident radiation). Simply the lower the albedo, the more sun absorbed, and anything as high as .7 to 1.0 is like a mirror, yet on many materials as snow is diffused and not focused. Looking at the chart one can see fresh snow is the most reflective of sunlight. The high slopes of some of the mountains that edge Greenland have no slow with a lower albedo and do promote some melt in the middle of summer, but again only near the coastal edges. The important part to remember here is that it snows new snow almost daily over a good part of the ice sheet and over a period of a couple weeks most of the ice sheet has fresh snow. This means any impurities and snow turned to ice that lower the albedo, is quickly covered with highly reflective fresh snow, removing any potential of concern.

How Cold is Greenland’s Ice Sheet: One means of gathering data that may be overall questionable for the exactness of the speculated conclusions is the Ice Core Data. Ice Cores are where claimed scientist drill with special drills that can retrieve samples of the ice to extreme depths for analysis. Ice cores are cylinders of ice drilled out of an ice sheet or glacier. The oldest continuous ice core records to date extend 123,000 years in Greenland. While some hold dear to the speculation, no matter some information is useful. One fact is the ice on Greenland has been there for greater than 100,000 years. Another fact is the temperature at depth becomes overall stable at -31C from 20 meters deep to near the physical ground the ice sheet rests upon. This is at the highest point of Greenland and the temperature is higher as the ice moves outward closer to the coast.  Greenland's extreme amount of ice would take a serious amount of calories to convert the ice mass to water. Melting is an unlikely scenario and glaciers depend on accumulation to maintain advancing on a level surface that has no incline. Greenland is in overall balance and may fluctuate a few Teratons as greater accumulation equates to greater glacier calving equaling greater loss of mass, resulting in slower glaciers and glaciers retreating, then back to accumulation becoming greater than glacier loss, a vicious cycle that is nothing more than the balance of the Greenland ice sheet.

Most of the ice mass on Greenland has a temperature of -20 to -30 Celsius.

Greenland Ice Sheet is a two Mile high Mountain: In Ecuador, there is a glacier and permanent ice cap volcano Cayambe volcano. This volcano is 5,790 meters above sea level or almost twice the height of the Greenland ice sheet. The reason for mentioning this is this permanent ice cap and glacier exists at latitude of 0:1:30S, with the equator line passing through the mountain it is on. The surrounding towns below Cayambe have a normal temperature range of 65F to 95F with the sun passing within 25 degrees of directly overhead every day of the year, and directly overhead two times a year, March 21st, and Sept 21st. The higher altitudes are colder with thinner air mass equating to less calories to cause melting. Grinnell Glacier was first noted by George Bird Grinnell in 1885. During his final visit of many to the glacier in 1926, Grinnell noted in his diary "the glacier is melting very fast and the amount of water coming from it is great. All these glaciers are receding rapidly and after a time will disappear." Grinnell Glacier is still here in 2018 and though it has lost mass, it is no more concerning than Mr. Grinnell wrote 92 years ago. Grinnell Glacier is another example of altitude the air being colder and thinner will sustain ice sheets all year. Greenland is higher altitude than Grinnell Glacier is and surrounded by an extremely colder environment within the Arctic Circle. There can be no measurable melt to occur on the Greenland summit without severe global climate change causing an increase in average temperature by 30F (20C) to 50F (30C).

Greenland's altitude of the ice sheet creates an environment where ice at the summit cannot melt without an increase in the normal average temperature of the Earth by 30 to 50 degrees Fahrenheit (20C to 30C).

Then the Snow and Ice turned Black: The last few years the rhetoric is the snow turned black or dark for many reasons. Algae growth, forest fires, dirt, dust, black carbon, ashes, etc… With this darkening, more melt will occur and more loss of ice mass on Greenland as more sunlight is absorbed. Both the 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 were near record breaking high accumulations with less melt than the normal average. Again data that does not back the claims, THEIR DATA! Remember the daily snow; well there goes the black ice theory buried by an inch or few of fresh high albedo (reflective) snow.

120 Years of industrial added carbon dioxide with exponential effects, topped with the theory of dark ice resulting in no noticeable reduction in Greenland accumulation of ice mass.

GREENLAND Part 5 of 6

Greenland loss to Glaciers: With Greenland gaining accumulation of 350Gt annually to include the loss by melting, the only means for Greenland to have significant ice mass loss is through the calving of glaciers. The southern area of Greenland is covered with mountains restricting most glacier flow. In the Northern and mid regions, Greenland spans hundreds of miles / kilometers across. With a width of 500,000 to 700,000 meters, a height of 3,200 meters becomes small in comparison. When put into respect to the size of glacier annual calving loss compared to the ice sheet as a whole, one can see how a supposed 500 Gigatons of loss to icebergs would have little effect on an ice sheet that the mass is Petatons with 350 Gigatons of annual added accumulation. The biggest problem is the 500Gt number is a guess that accuracy is likely plus or minus 50% or 250Gt to 750Gt for any given year, and more likely to the lesser amount. This 500Gt figure comes from questionable data and entities trying to promote a fear of sea level rise to keep a paycheck; therefore be cautious in trusting this 500Gt figure as gospel in debate.

Accumulation near the center of the ice sheet has hundreds of miles to travel taking thousands of years to become calved off from a glacier.

Viscosity: Viscosity is discussed to give the reader an understanding of the complexity of glacier flow. The viscosity of a substance is the measure of its resistance to gradual deformation by shear stress or tensile stress. Best way to understand this is a gas such as air have an extremely low viscosity and takes little force to deform it, while water is about 50 times (dynamic) more viscous and takes more force to deform it, with molasses at 5,000 times that of water, and Vaseline at around 64,000 times more viscous than water. One can see that the more viscous a material is that it holds its shape better. Ice has an extremely high viscosity and is considered by some scientist such as C. J McConnell to be a soft solid, referencing that when the force is removed the ice will have a tendency to regain some of its original form, not much though. Many attempts to measure glacier flow come to a variety of results and conclusions to the viscosity. This viscosity of ice is strongly dependent on the temperature. The numbers are 10 to the power of 12 and colder temperatures at 10 and the power of 16 compared to the viscosity of water. That is a 4 with 10 zeros after it, as in 40,000,000,000 poise. Most of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheet are extremely cold and at a much higher viscosity. In the "The Viscosity of Ice" by R. M Deeley, F.G.S., he makes it clear the complexities of Glacier movement. “With a glacier, the viscosity of which is enormous, the great viscosity enables it to transmit thrust to some considerable distance, and for this reason we get velocities at various points that are not wholly due to the effects of gravity at such points.” This unstable movement (along with other factors) makes determining an exact value of viscosity near impossible and only marginally useful in calculations.

Greenland has glaciers that are advancing faster while neighboring glaciers are doing just the opposite and retreating. The technical aspects of glaciers are above this conversation. One that has an understanding of static and kinetic friction will better understand of the forces that play in glacier movement. As more ice is accumulated, the mass through gravity creates energy in the form of pressure, when the pressure becomes too great it will force the ice to flow and as the pressure is relieved, it will cease to flow or flow slower causing rhythmic cycles; very simple analogy of something complex. This was expressed in R. M. Deeley in the Viscosity of Ice, that ice flow was not a constant but more pulsating (thrusting) motion. This is a normal cyclic process of glaciers making glacier velocities difficult to predict and an inconsistent loss annually.

About the Figure: 1. There are areas on Greenland that have fast moving glaciers of greater than 500 meters (0.3 miles) per year velocity are indicated with black. While there are areas elsewhere that glaciers get past the mountainous terrain of Greenland most of these glaciers advance at 20 to 100 meters (60 to 330 feet) per year. The areas where glaciers are flowing at what may be considered a concerning rate are so small in comparison to the outer perimeter of the ice sheet it is not concerning. 2. Most the charts plotting Greenland's Glacier flow rate are deceptive using a logarithmic scale exaggerating the glacier flow rate, most of the flow is relatively slow besides where it is squeezed out between mountain passes. If the flow map of Greenland ice were displayed linear, it would be mostly one color for extremely slow. 3. DMI's reports daily the annual gain and loss, much of the loss due to melt and runoff is outside the ice sheet and could be double dipping to call what was classified as melt that actually is calving loss also within the same year. Greenland basin has created a mound of ice that is self supporting with no perceivable means to upset its ice mass balance to cause any worthy loss. Any loss would slow the glaciers and reduce loss to a net gain. Only the western edge of the Greenland Ice Sheet has any worthy loss due to melting annually.

Greenland has very few outlets where Glaciers are concerningly fast moving, making Greenland ice mass loss through glaciers overall unconcerning.

Retreating Glaciers: A retreating glacier or glacier retreated provides no worthy loss for the Greenland Ice Sheet, becoming only loss to the glacier extent. No or slower Glacier flow equates to less Ice sheet loss. This is important to comprehend, as this is one of the stories they portray as concerning toward sea level rise. If this were true than it would mean the current warming has no real affect on the viscosity of the ice sheet, and the warming is not increasing its velocity. Does this sound like: I did not say left, I said right, no I said left, the story always changing as the Climate Change rhetoric fails reality and science.

DMI on their Greenland mass balance website has a simplified explanation of glacier flow that amplifies the severity of the situation. Greenland loss to glaciers is through the force of gravity. By design as a basin, Greenland is always preventing glacier movement of the mass at the bottom of the ice sheet. While a large higher mass in the middle can force some ice upward on the outer edges, this movement will have to overcome gravitational forces reducing such glacier movement.

The Disgrace of GRACE: Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) was a two satellite system that took detailed measurements of Earth's gravity field anomalies from its launch in March 2002 to the end of its science mission in October 2017.  GRACE is great if we remember the last letter stands for experiment. What served as a great future potential and valuable data was disgraced by sales pitches with trying to produce something worthy to the climate change rhetoric. Rather than promote GRACE as an outstanding experiment, it was promoted as something near perfection, which it was not. Its replacement GRACE-FO (Follow-On) should become active this month (August 2018) with hopes to provide better quality that requires less data manipulation to make it seem flawless, while its predecessor GRACE was full of flaws. GRACE was an experiment that has two serious flaws in its use for reliable data. First, it was just an experiment and the first of its kind having no lessons learned to correct any flaws in the design that could make the collected data unusable and unreliable. Second was the forth letter was C standing for “climate”, the project was funded as a project under evaluating climate and though gravity does affect climate in ways, not the way this device is designed to interpret it though. The data had to be filtered and adjusted to account for many anomalies and distortion inherent by design that allowed the data to be interpreted to meet an expected outcome rather than the data being uncontestable.

1. Earlier data from NASA’s Jet Propulsion Lab showed Greenland as having a fairly steady loss of around 112.5 Gigatons per year from 2002 through 2010. Comparing the data from different entities and versions of the software over time displayed no consistency with an error between some being as much as 90% or nearly twice the loss rate at 212.5 Gigatons per year. That is pathetic!

2. Reviewing Greenland on JPL’s recent images of GRACE data JPL-SS RL05, starting with the first year going to the last year there are oddities that fail any reasoning. By 2003 the accumulation showed a 25cm decrease around the summit of the ice sheet (if white is representative of 20cm and the baseline). By 2007, the anomalies bounced around like waves on the ocean. 3. The most noticeable problem is the reversal of the ice sheet mass reported from 2007 to 2008 with areas that had more loss the past years showed a gain of 15cm, while areas with limited loss over the past years showed a 15cm loss. Looking at the images that are color coded one can see areas that were green in 2007 are now blue in 2008 and blue areas in 2007 are green in 2008.

4. The quality of resolution of Grace was poor at 300km (186 miles (area bigger than Maine, USA)). Like a picture, the resolution can often be enhanced to seem of better quality but often like blurring an image, it creates its own errors within the data. With remote sensing from a satellite that is 400km in altitude, the gravitational pull is from not just below but also from what is below in front, behind, left, and right.

Lipstick on a Pig: Have you ever looked at abstract art with friends using imagination of what it could be? How much guessing and making stuff up are we doing here? Images from University of Texas as this one make a person question does GRACE really provide anything useful. With Greenland and its surrounding area enlarged, this image shows the changes not only of Greenland and the surrounding water, clearly indicating unlike their purple colored image the anomalies are inconsistent with the ice mass loss that would occur by glacier flow. It is all just a matter of how one manipulates the data!

NASA of Lies and Deceit: GRACE satellite system launched in March of 2002 and was operational until September of 2017. Here is the statement from NASA as evidence concerning "Shrinking ice sheets", "Data from NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment show Greenland lost an average of 281 billion tons of ice per year between 1993 and 2016, while Antarctica lost about 119 billion tons during the same time period." Do you think they just made an error in their statement or was it purposeful? Why does NASA continue to put up false information that would benefit the Climate Change rhetoric? From 1993 through 2002 there was no GRACE satellite system! The 281 billion tons (281 Gigatons) is a number pulled from thin air and does not agree with any previous numbers and does not integrate with any of the previous numbers; plain simple it is impossible. Do not forget that the 2017 and 2018 seasons had net accumulation/melt gains of around 200 Gigatons above average, likely the reason the last year of GRACE is not included. LIES and more LIES!


The Year 2012: Both GRACE (glacier loss) and the DMI (melt loss) data display the year 2012 as having an unusual amount of loss compared to any other year on record. For those that think it is some conspiracy of some Elite coming together to plan how they are going to make money and control population. Why was Greenland's 2012 ice mass loss so large for 2012 and why was 2012 so important? I think this explains it concerning the 2012 Climate Summit Meeting COP18/CMP8. "The conference reached an agreement to extend the life of the Kyoto Protocol, which had been due to expire at the end of 2012, until 2020, and to ratify the 2011 Durban Platform, meaning that a successor to the Protocol is set to be developed by 2015 and implemented by 2020. Wording adopted by the conference incorporated for the first time the concept of "loss and damage", an agreement in principle that richer nations could be financially responsible to other nations for their failure to reduce carbon emissions." Proof had to be put forth to validate the concern to have consensus to extend programs and funding. The year 2012 was a make or break year for the Climate Change rhetoric.

Greenland ice mass loss is mostly due to glaciers. This loss is insignificant at the average current rate of loss and 2016 through 2018 the loss through glaciers was less than the gain for a net gain.


Why Greenland: When one talks the concerns of Climate Change, one of the primary concerns is sea level rise. The poster for this is seen in glaciers calving off into a new iceberg, brainwashed into everyone constantly by entities supporting this fear-mongering such as PBS. Greenland is one of only 3 means for sea levels to rise, the others being ice on the continent Antarctica, and ocean water expansion.Greenland is only plausible by through ignorance, where one does not evaluate too closely as science and common sense remove Greenland as a concern.

Climate Cycles effect on Greenland: While the warming of cycles is greatly masked by normal weather, the day / night cycle, and the summer / winter cycle, there are signs that the approximately 1040 year cycle is real in both data and in the writings of authors during roman times, medieval times, and the cooling periods from 1500 to 1800. Some would call these local but when decades and centuries of longevity of one location indicate a constant warm or cool by a few degrees, it becomes impossible to be local, defying common sense of basic science. By looking at the sunspot cycle of 11.1 years, the Gleissberg cycle of 80 years, and the Eddy cycle of approximately 1040 years, the Earth is predicted to be in a warming phase for 200 more years. This will cause the outer area of the ice sheet of Greenland to lose some mass as warmer ocean air over the coast will increase melt. That is what we are experiencing and that rate will change with the 80 year Gleissberg cycle.

Greenland Summary: Greenland Ice Mass is 2,800,000 Gigatons. The claimed rate of loss by DMI is 200 Gigatons per year. This 200Gt per year is from untrustworthy satellite data such as GRACE, which the E stands for experiment. Even though, at that rate it would take 140 years to contribute 4 inches (0.1 meter) to sea level rise. To double this rate would still only equal 4 inches in 70 years and not concerning. The last two periods by DMI have been extreme accumulation and with average glacier loss rate this comes out to a net positive, meaning Greenland did not lose any noticeable ice mass in the last 2 years. Greenland ice sheet has become in equilibrium and while it may lose mass for a few years it will overall gain its loss and remain close to its current balance.

Greenland is a basin and the reason there is a massive ice sheet upon it. Before there was an ice sheet, Greenland center was a land locked lake or area that restricted winter snow melt runoff. During winter with no sun this area turned into a block of ice, during the summer with not enough sun to melt this frozen lake any warm moist cloudy air from the surrounding water condensed, rained upon and snowed upon this frozen area, the rain more likely to freeze than to runoff added to the accumulation. Eventually this created a 2 mile mountain that is in equilibrium between melt, runoff, calving glaciers, evaporation, snow, frozen rain, and condensation, likely fluctuating by up to 300 Gigatons either way in any given year.

Greenland is in balance overall and any serious loss of ice mass will slow glacier loss to calving changing it back to a state of gaining ice mass. Greenland is a two mile high mountain of ice and just like any mountain with that altitude, the colder and less dense air lacks energy (calories) to cause any melt at all. This is especially true when it is located in the Arctic Circle with limited sunlight. The ice sheet is extremely cold on Greenland and the amount of energy to throw it out of balance with concerning results would be a constant climate change of 20C to 30C increase in temperature. HOWEVER, a few degrees warming would increase the humidity and the cloud water content crossing over the Greenland Ice Sheet causing increased accumulation.

The last two years indicate there was no loss of mass. 120 years of industrial era carbon dioxide and nothing to show for it as Greenland gains mass. It is plain as day and night that cycles are responsible for the warmth and any coastal melt. The ice mass changes fail to show any exponential loss of the Greenland Ice Sheet Mass as would happen if the warming was carbon dioxide driven. Then there was the dark ice scare by PBS, Scientific American, National Geographic, AAAS, etc..., nothing but fear mongering as nothing exponential is happening to the Greenland Ice Sheet. Nothing but lies from those we have (had) trust in!

Comment on facebook. Provide your input and help improve this article! Share on facebook Share on facebook

Member's Input: 
no comments

ThyArt DARK Opening
V01 - Semantics
V02 - Education
V03 - Psychology
V04 - Health
V05 - Resources / Money
V06 - Media - Propaganda
V07 - History
V08 - Science
V09 - Technology
V10 - Climate Change
  The Society
  Bad Science and LIES
  Science Primer
  Provable Science
  Ignorant Facts
  Bad Responses
  Cost of the LIE
V11 - Globalization
V12 - US Empire
V13 - Other Countries
V14 - Entities
V15 - Organizations
V16 - Secretive
V17 - Friend or Foe
V18 - Cultures
V19 - ThyArt
Supporting Media

All Material and website design are Copyright of ThyArt Network LLC 2014 - 2021