So, That's How The New York Times Framed the ICE Ambush in Minneapolis...
The Departure of Top DOJ Attorneys Allegedly Over the ICE Shooting in Minneapolis...
Remember When CNN Did Ride-Alongs With ICE? Here's the (D)ifference.
Why This Exchange Between Josh Hawley and a Lib Doctor on Abortion Pills...
Why the FBI Searched a Washington Post Reporter's Home Yesterday
US Military Intervention in Iran Could Be Imminent
Jacob Frey Just Said He Never Incited Violence Against ICE. Here Are Times...
Voters Rejected the ‘Values’ Minneapolis Democrats Hold Dear
Trump Just Gave Minnesota an Ultimatum
St. Paul Teachers Union Orders Members to ‘Pick a Side’ and Walk Out...
Cea Weaver Identifies the 'Huge Problem' Obstructing Her Communist Housing Agenda, and Gue...
Here’s How Jasmine Crockett Handled Tough Questions About Her Double Standard
Oh, Wittle Zohran Got So Mad Did He
White House Tells Walz to 'Resign in Disgrace' After Anti-ICE Meltdown
Iran Past, Present, and Future: A Conversation With Marziyeh Amirizadeh, Part 2
Tipsheet

NASA: Key Antarctic Glacier Not Melting As Rapidly

Al Gore thinks the weather has been out of the Book of Revelation, while Time and ABC News have reported that Antarctica is melting very quickly. Now, it’s not (via NASA):

Advertisement
The melt rate of West Antarctica's Thwaites Glacier is an important concern, because this glacier alone is currently responsible for about 1 percent of global sea level rise. A new NASA study finds that Thwaites' ice loss will continue, but not quite as rapidly as previous studies have estimated.
The new study, published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, finds that numerical models used in previous studies have overestimated how rapidly ocean water is able to melt the glacier from below, leading them to overestimate the glacier's total ice loss over the next 50 years by about 7 percent.

Despite what liberals may say about global warming, science is never a settled issue. That’s what you should glean from this. The studies can be wrong. The models can be wrong. And the question nations face concerning so-called global warming is whether they wan to invest hundreds of billion, if not trillions, of dollars on a group of people who have been wrong before. How much economic growth, decreased standard of living, less prosperity, and the accompanying misery will you artificially inflict among those in your society on predictions that have been grossly inaccurate? In the 1970s, global cooling was the threat that could spell mankind’s doom. Nothing ever happened.

Advertisement

Peter Gwynne has gone back and updated his 1975 Newsweek piece to deny climate change skeptics of using is as ammunition. Still, he had to change it because the science was wrong—and Gwynne admits that. He said that this field of study is always advancing. Yet, if you speak to these green warriors, the issue is settled. There is no more debate. 

I beg to differ.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos