Warmie Silliness Over Icemelt

If all the Earth's ice melted, oceans would rise by over 60 meters (200 feet). Sell the beach house, Sadie!

Better yet, buy all the beach houses that frightened Warmies are putting on the market so they can move inland, neglecting as they do to take note of the word "if." As it turns out, it's a mighty big if, says some folks who know a thing or two about ice: the Russians.

Nicolai Osokin, a glacialist with the Russian Institute of Geology writes that Russia's climate models show no such catastrophe is likely to happen any time in the next 1,000 years.

Our institute has prepared an atlas of the world's snow and ice resources, which describes all the ice on the earth and even offers a map of the world without ice. It is, however, a model, not a forecast. Yet there are forecasts warning that if the global warming seen at the end of the 20th century continues for several decades, a lot of ice in the Artic Ocean will melt.

Well, forget that. Melting Artic ice has no impact on sea levels because the volume of water created by melting ice is equal to the volume of water ice dissipates when floating. It's Antarctica and Greenland that we need to watch.

The melting of this ice could lead to a catastrophe. But is there any reason to panic? The temperature rise of 3-6 degrees Celsius over the next century promised by pessimists could not have a significant influence on the Antarctic.

Why is that? Well, because the average temperature in Antarctica is 40 degrees Celcius below zero. Did the Warmies forget to tell you that?

Osokin also confirms that permafrost has been receding in the Siberian Artic, just as the Warmies fret about -- but:

Today, scientists say that the melting of the permafrost has stalled, which has been proved by data obtained by meteorological stations along Russia's Artic coast.

If temperatures are rising -- and Osokin says they are -- why is the melting of permafrost not expanding? Well, it turns out it's one of the those tricky little global balance things:

An important factor is the snow cover. Global warming reduces it, therefore making the heat insulator for the permafrost thinner. Then even weak frosts are enough to freeze the ground deeper below the surface.

Did the Warmie models consider that? Or will we be accused of censorship if we suggest altering their findings with truth from the field?

And by the way, before fretting too much about the permafrost, remember that the earth is frozen as deep as 500 to 800 meters in the permafrost zones. What's happening is some piddling around near the surface.

Gee, maybe there's something going on here that could influence the whole global warming debate.

But I forgot ... the debate is over.

Hat-tip: Greenie Watch