Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Cut Greenland Ice Loss Estimate By Half
bonch writes "A new study on Greenland's and West Antarctica's rate of ice loss halves the estimate of ice loss. Published in the journal Nature Geoscience, the study takes into account a rebounding of the Earth's crust called glacial isostatic adjustment, a continuing rise of the crust after being smashed under the weight of the Ice Age. 'We have concluded that the Greenland and West Antarctica ice caps are melting at approximately half the speed originally predicted,' said researcher Bert Vermeeersen."
The ice caps are increasing. That's because the gulf stream current is slowing down because of global warming!! If the ice caps were melting that would also prove global warming too. When are you going to face up to the facts global warming deniers! Can't you see! Falsifiability is for republicans and oil executives.
Yeah, man, really true words. Like that would have happened without the scandals that shook the field and removed a lot of the clout of the "redefine peer-review" gang.
Some bright researchers managed to refine a previous model and come up with better and more accurate predictions. You may want to note how, contrary to some "skeptics" beliefs this wasn't suppressed or refused publication or any other such shenanigans.
It is now a known fact that at least one journal (Climate Research), when publishing papers that the "top dog" climate scientists didn't like, then faced retribution from those same "top dogs" who conspired to then boycott said publication (to not publish in it, or even cite any publications in it) to manipulate its editorial staff. This came to light less than a year ago when communications between those "top dogs", which were lifted from the University of East Anglia's servers, contained emails documenting their conspiracy against this publication.
It should come as no surprise that more dissenting papers are being published now than were before, as those conspiring "top dogs" have lost much of their influence.
"His name was James Damore."
There is no doubt that they conspired to manipulate the journal Climate Research. Its right there in the emails in plain cant-be-taken-out-of-context English. What you are citing is that they were cleared of wrong-doing by the very university (UEA = University of East Anglia) that was hacked to attain these emails and plays host the the CRU.
I realize that the many acronym's are confusing and that you thought the UEA was most-likely independent of the CRU.. but its not.
"His name was James Damore."
I didn't know you were so anti-science. If that a scientific theory's claims that X is correct do not mean that they are true, that they apply to the real world.
I guess you don't believe in agw then ? (unless of course, those theories are true, because of the magical pixie dust) ...
Every theory, for obvious reasons, is based on a dataset.
I didn't think that there were 21st century Americans who didn't believe in science. Clearly I was wrong.
I only read the first paragraph; I skimmed the rest of it and won't bother with it since it's obviously just conspiracy theory nonsense.
Anyway, the famous Hockey Stick graph is from a study that was simply a conglomeration of previous studies with no original research. In scientific circles they call this secondary research (primary research is done by the people actually pulling the ice cores and recording the sensor data), but apparently csicop.org considers it a "literature review".
I assume, then, that they discount the centerpiece to the AGW theory for the exact same reason, right? No? Oh, well then it sounds like biased bullshit to me.
Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller