Wednesday, June 5, 2019

Patagonia's Ice Sheets More Massive Then Scientists THOUGHT

 The capitalized 'thought' is to draw attention to the fact that scientists did NOT know.
They thought? Or assumed?   Which opens up a pile of questions about unproven hypothesis. Thoughts without supporting evidence... Ideas that have no reason/reasoning. 

Patagonia's ice sheets are more massive than scientists thought
June 4 (UPI) -- A seven-year survey of Patagonia's ice suggests the slabs of ice that stretch across vast portions of Argentina and Chile are thicker than scientists thought, measuring more than a mile in thickness in some places.

"We did not think the ice fields on the Patagonian plateau could be quite that substantial," Eric Rignot, professor of earth sciences at the University of California, Irvine, said in a news release. "As a result of this multinational research project, we found that -- added together -- the northern and southern portions of Patagonia clearly hold more ice than anticipated, roughly 40 times the ice volume of the European Alps."
Did the scientists make specific claims regarding the massive ice sheets that have now been proven false? Can't say for sure, but, I suspect that there have been false claims made. Read on...
"Measurements collected using satellite radar altimetry and optical imagery suggest most of Patagonia's ice sheets have been rapidly thinning during the past few decades. Outside of Antarctica, Patagonia's ice fields are the largest in the Southern Hemisphere. But as the glacial reserves in Argentina and Chile melt, water drains into the ocean, fueling sea level rise."
Measurements 'suggest' most of Patagonia's ice sheets have been thinning? How could or should "scientists"have drawn such  conclusions when they'd no clue about the actual size of the ice sheets

"This is why having accurate maps of the ice thickness is a priority," said Romain Millan, who is now a postdoctoral scholar at the Institute of Environmental Geosciences in France but worked on the survey as a graduate student at UCI. "It is fundamental to get the right contours and depth of the glacial valleys; otherwise, simulations of glacier retreat will always be wrong."
Yes, having accurate maps is a priority. However the lack of accurate maps did not stop "scientists" from speculating that the ice had thinned. 
Of course without the accurate mapping 'simulation of glacier retreats" will always be wrong.
I'm of the mind simulations can be wrong with our without accurate maps. It's just a matter of fraudulent/misleading data input . Also, one shouldn't presume glacier retreat. Unless a specific agenda is being advanced. One would also think a  REAL scientists would say glacial changes.
A statement that does not include a pre assumed conclusion

"Sounding techniques can only be used on the shallowest portions of Patagonia's ice fields, and because almost all of the region's ice exists at temperatures close to its melting point, the sheet's water content is unusually high, making measurements using radar less effective.
Scientists conducted the newly concluded seven-year survey using gravimeters, flown in airplanes high above the surface of the ice. After dozens of flights, scientists used the gravitational field measurements to map the ice thickness. The findings -- published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters -- showed Patagonia's ice is much thicker than previous studies suggested"
The science is never settled. Only an agenda is settled on.


  1. "The science is never settled. Only an agenda is settled on."

    Penny, you just gave me my "quote of the month". Thanks!!!

    1. Glad to have provided the quote of the month Yaya!
      Seems apparent that's the reality of the matter

  2. Is there oil under all that ice? Otherwise, why bother?

    1. Could be gc, because Patagonia is supposed to ripe for exploitation- But, I don't know for certain

  3. Hi Penny:

    Wondering what you think of this:

    I found the article very confusing and, in the end, could not understand the rational for the supposition.


    1. I don't like how he goes from Erdogan paying someone off to the US claims regarding Turkey's lobbying in Washington.

      that was a questionable episode- not a lot of evidence supporting it

      besides the presentation being extremely misleading

      "A one-time business partner of the former national security adviser Michael Flynn has been arrested and charged with illegally lobbying to have a Turkish exile returned from the US."
      The indictment accuses Rafiekian and Alptekin of illegally lobbying in the US to discredit G├╝len and have him extradited. According to the indictment, Alptekin worked at the direction of the Turkish government, but the defendants worked to conceal that fact.

      This is of course Gulen associated- which the author doesn't mention - which is weird

      Interesting about that book? Jews?? writing about Turkey slaughtering Christians? There is a certain irony in that and do wonder about the political motivations- because everything is political..

      The article is confusing, you're correct and appears to have been written as a divide to conquer

      "Lenin’s policy was to covertly arm the Ataturk-led nationalists against the Ottoman Sultan’s regime."

      That's loaded. Knowing what I know about both Lenin and Ataturk.

      Overall Greencrow I'd say there is such a pro expansionist Israel agenda embedded in that entire article... it should be tossed to the curb.

      Cyprus... Israel has big interests in the waters there.
      And they don't want Turkey involved (competition)

      At least he acknowledges this fact "The main local helpers in the killing were the Kurds"

      Zealously, I should add. It was the Kurds who after killing and displacing the Christians took all their land. That's how it is they came to be in South eastern Turkey. And north eastern Syria. The Ottomans simply looked away

      I didn't get the impression there was a rational for the supposition and the article seems designed to spread hatred against an entire group of people... that's problematic IMO

  4. Thanks Penny. I thought it was just me.


  5. I came across this article today (it's from last summer) and seems timely for your blog post. This scientist manages to wrap global warming, ice sheets, rotation of Earth and shape of Earth into one tidy package.