Did These Pro-Hamas Students at CA State Polytechnic University Carry Out an Insurrection?
If Columbia University's President Considers This a Form of Protesting, The Terror Camp...
Former Rolling Stone Editor's Biting Attack on the NYT's 'Adults' Piece About Speaker...
The Left Gets Its Own Charlottesville
Pro-Hamas Activists March on NYPD HQ After Police Dismantled NYU's Pro-Hamas Camp
Democrats Are Going to Get Someone Killed and They’re Perfectly Fine With It
Postcards From the Edge of Cannibalism
Why Small Businesses Hate Bidenomics
The Empire Begins to Strike Back
The Empires Begin to Strike Back
With Cigarette Sales Declining, More Evidence Supports the Role of Flavored Vapes in...
To Defend Free Speech, the Senate Should Reject the TikTok Ban
Congress Should Not Pass DJI Drone Ban Legislation
Republican Jewish Coalition Endorses Bob Good's Primary Opponent Due to Vote Against Aid...
Here's What Kathy Hochul, Chuck Schumer Are Saying About Columbia University's Pro-Hamas P...
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

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement