There’s much talk online about a new study showing that East Antarctica (plus the west Antarctic Peninsula) has gained a record breaking amount of ice mass between 2021 and 2023, after a significant and continuous decline from 2002, which accelerated in the decade 2011-2020.
"The resulting bipartisan conspiracy has gained control of the US government and imposed draconian luddite laws which, in attempts to curb global warming, have ironically brought about the greatest environmental catastrophe in recorded history: an ice age which may eventually escalate into a Snowball Earth.
"The exact process is described: clouds are water condensation, and so cannot form without cloud condensation nuclei in the atmosphere. The emission laws have removed most of this, reducing cloud cover, meaning the ground loses heat faster..."
My husband worked in a NASA group that did airborne laser altimetry in Greenland, some in Antarctica, some in Alaska. This was from the mid-90s till Ice Sat 2 got geared up in the 2010s. I remember him saying some of the Greenland glaciers were growing, some were shrinking. It's a complex picture but complexity does not attract the big research bucks the way a simple apocalyptic picture does.
I worked for NASA for nearly 30 years. There's a lot of research done there that is valuable, and done on relatively low budgets because it hasn't been hyped by panic-mongers. My work was on diode lasers and then turned to developing far IR remote sensing cameras deployed from space. We did the work because the development of those technologies was perceived as beneficial. The thermal IR camera we developed led to the FLIR cameras now available. The advantage was they didn't need cryogenic cooling. This work was done with funding my PI obtained during the late 80s and during the 90s. It was relatively cheap. It didn't hurt that my PI was studying the effects of cirrus cloud in particular, on global atmospheric temperatures. It got us enough money to achieve our goals, but for us it was crumbs compared to what some projects got through the then-panic-du-jour of "global warming". I guess my point is that there has been a lot of good work done by NASA but there has been a lot of waste as well.
A number of years ago I had a long debate with another poster (whose name I forget) as to wether the variation in day length was a proxy for polar ice distribution.
In the end he agreed with me - after the astronomers had to ditch the leap second which had annoyingly gone negative, causing all sorts of ructions!
Anyone who claims that they understand natural climatic variability at this point is wrong. We simply don't have sufficient data from the coupled atmospheric and oceanic systems to document climatic trends.
Plate climatology theory links polar ice caps to underwater volcanic activity more broadly than just Hunga-Tong https://www.plateclimatology.com/#:~:text=Plate%20Climatology%20Theory%20Overview,glacial%20polar%20areas%2C%20and%20atmosphere.
Well, it's a no brainer.
If the media says the world is warming, that means it must be cooling.
Luckily (actually intentionally), I live on the Equator, coz I hate the cold.
Ice Age cometh.
Back to the 1970s...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallen_Angels_(Niven,_Pournelle,_and_Flynn_novel)
"The resulting bipartisan conspiracy has gained control of the US government and imposed draconian luddite laws which, in attempts to curb global warming, have ironically brought about the greatest environmental catastrophe in recorded history: an ice age which may eventually escalate into a Snowball Earth.
"The exact process is described: clouds are water condensation, and so cannot form without cloud condensation nuclei in the atmosphere. The emission laws have removed most of this, reducing cloud cover, meaning the ground loses heat faster..."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Normandy
My husband worked in a NASA group that did airborne laser altimetry in Greenland, some in Antarctica, some in Alaska. This was from the mid-90s till Ice Sat 2 got geared up in the 2010s. I remember him saying some of the Greenland glaciers were growing, some were shrinking. It's a complex picture but complexity does not attract the big research bucks the way a simple apocalyptic picture does.
I’ve worked with lots of NASA scientists and managers. It’s all about funding and what brings it in
I worked for NASA for nearly 30 years. There's a lot of research done there that is valuable, and done on relatively low budgets because it hasn't been hyped by panic-mongers. My work was on diode lasers and then turned to developing far IR remote sensing cameras deployed from space. We did the work because the development of those technologies was perceived as beneficial. The thermal IR camera we developed led to the FLIR cameras now available. The advantage was they didn't need cryogenic cooling. This work was done with funding my PI obtained during the late 80s and during the 90s. It was relatively cheap. It didn't hurt that my PI was studying the effects of cirrus cloud in particular, on global atmospheric temperatures. It got us enough money to achieve our goals, but for us it was crumbs compared to what some projects got through the then-panic-du-jour of "global warming". I guess my point is that there has been a lot of good work done by NASA but there has been a lot of waste as well.
Maybe the impending cold phase of the AMO 70-year cycle? The UAH global temperature record continues to tease us but at least the post-Hunga Tonga warming spike moving average is in decline: https://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_April_2025_v6.1_20x9-scaled.jpg
Roy Spenser is top notch. You can trust his work.
Has the abrupt change in the Earth's moment of inertia affected its day length?
It changes all of the time. The Three Gorges dam changed the Earth’s rotational velocity
I'm aware of that.
A number of years ago I had a long debate with another poster (whose name I forget) as to wether the variation in day length was a proxy for polar ice distribution.
In the end he agreed with me - after the astronomers had to ditch the leap second which had annoyingly gone negative, causing all sorts of ructions!
No idea David.
Anyone who claims that they understand natural climatic variability at this point is wrong. We simply don't have sufficient data from the coupled atmospheric and oceanic systems to document climatic trends.
Don’t forget solar, especially solar wind, impacts