About a month ago, we saw a sad display of the wooden, scripted answers climate alarmists can give while desperately “toeing their party line”, facts be damned.
The video of Sierra Club’s Aaron Mair being questioned by the Senate Judiciary Committee on climate data went viral because it was equal parts hilarious and sad. But now, the same Government Agency that started so many wringing their hands about impending Armageddon has a news release of a very different sort.
NASA, who formerly gave us James Hanson, melting ice caps, catastrophic rises in sea level has released a new report on polar ice and sea levels. Anyone raking in the cash from climate alarmism will not like it at all.
You remember how they like to goad us with is the total flooding of coastal areas? We must, they say, mend our ways before our selfish reliance on fossil fuels dooms poor people in faraway places? Yeah, well — they might want to revisit that prediction.
This Growth of Antarctic ice cap is having a measurable effect on the oceans. What effect? It will reduce sea level by .23 mm per year. Yes, you read that correctly. Reduce.
A well-known website critical of climate alarmism has been following this Polar Ice trends (among other things) for years now, showing inconsistencies in the official gloom-and-doom reports, data trends, and dishonest apples-to-oranges comparisons often used for emotional impact. That website is run by one Anthony Watts.
This NASA report is exactly in line with what he’s been saying all along, and Watts gives a helpful assessment for how to place this latest NASA in context against the other reports and predictions.
For anyone still paying attention to the “Settled Science” crowd, IPCC this 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.
Oops. Now NASA is contradicting the IPCC? Does that make one of them a Denier? This politically correct dance gets so complicated.
“Settled science”, indeed.
