Recently I tweeted that according to NASA GHCN V3 data, three of four stations in Iceland saw no warming from 1922 – 2018:
In Iceland, 3 of 4 stations have been a cooling or there has been no warming trend from 1922 to 2018, according to GHCN V3 Unadjusted data.
GHCN V4 Unadjusted data shows how NASA changed the temperature data during the same period.#地球温暖化? #温暖化？ #気候変動 #ClimateChange pic.twitter.com/XjCe4KCqjg— キリエ (@KiryeNet) April 1, 2020
But then NASA adjusted the V3 data and called it GHCN V4 “unadjusted”. The chart shown above in my tweet toggles between the prior V3 chart and the “unadjusted” V4. See the difference?
Note how the lack of warming has been removed and now the V4 data show modest warming. The missing heat was found – in the statistics! So in a sense, global warming has been “man-made” – done through statistical fudging and not human activity.
Greenland
Today we also take a look at Greenland. The map that follows shows the location of the stations we’ve been looking at:
Looking at Greenland V4 mean annual temperatures at the Nuuk and Tasiilaq stations, we see the following plots:
Here even NASA’s V4 data still show no warming. In fact, we saw pronounced cooling from the 1960s to the early 1990s. Since 2002, Greenland temps have stabilized.
Recent findings confirm cooling
In fact, a 2017 paper by Kabashi et al shows a downward trend “in accordance with a North Atlantic-wide cooling”:
Greenland’s glaciers stable
So no wonder Greenland’s glaciers have stopped appearing in alarmist headlines.
After the brief 1990-2010 period of melting, Greenland’s ice sheet mass losses have significantly decelerated since 2013 – a reversal from the rapid retreat from the 1990s to 2012 driven by cloud forcing and the NAO (Ruan et al., 2019).
The 47 largest Greenland glaciers also experienced a “relatively stable” period of a rather insignificant retreat from 2013 to 2018 (Andersen et al., 2019).
Only 21 of the 47 Greenland glaciers retreated in 2018, 12 advanced, and the other 14 showed no trends in either direction (Polar Portal, 2019).
Greenland’s largest glacier, Jakobshavn, earned headlines in 2019 for its surprising and non-predicted rapid thickening in recent years.
In short, absolutely zero alarm up in Greenland – unless your concern is cooling.
Read more at No Tricks Zone
Thank you for this very extensive analysis. Here is my review of the IMBIE team’s work on the satellite based Greenland mass balance analysis.
https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/03/31/imbie/
Greenland . A misnaming on a massive scale . Just like scary global warming .
Called Greenland when Viking settlers went there for dairy herds and sheep in medieval warm period, later abandoned as it became rather less than green.
NASA! The same people that said, the O rings are fine just launch the damn thing already! NASA the same people that said oh a heat shield tile falling out and hitting the rocket at thousands of miles per hour could do no damage, they are very light.[ yeah, imagine getting hit with a ping pong ball at a mere thousand miles per hour] so we will not bother to adjust how we renter the space craft, they will be just fine…. and they want us to believe what they say about climate?
talking about those NASA ”O” rings. I said at that time those guy´s dont have any people from aviation industry. Issues like that ”O” was some thing the aviation industry had dealt with. I did tell them but never got any answer. To day they are still buns of highly educated armatures. I see CO2 is going up with less burning of carbon fuel https://www.co2.earth/co2-records see to days and last months figures.
With SSO Challenger, the fault at launch was not with NASA. NASA set the launch rules, but the solid booster producer Morton-Thiokol had the final say for Go-NoGo and MT told them “Go” for launch. Also, with Columbia, it was insulation shrouding that fell from the sustainer boost during intial boost phase, not a heat shield, which impacted the airfoil. In doing so, the shrouding struck the leading edge at not more than 70 mph, not the 1,000 mph as you stated, since the chunk could not have instantaneously achieved a reversal of speed over that short a distance.
So, while we feel tempted to slam NASA about climate, and use space launch incidents to try undermining their credibility, please do not get your facts confused. NASA, in the realm of climate studies, is nothing more than a study group in New York City call the GISS, once headed by the once-capable-turned-nut-job Robert Hanson. GISS is should be shut down and probably is a huge headache for the agency, except that doing so would be a huge political gaff.