Graham seems have to stopped the ultra-Left contrarian, Steeleredux, dead in his tracks. Good stuff.

Dear Grahamy,

We have hoed this row more than once so I'm a little loathed to put too much time into it particularly as chasing shifting goal posts can get a little tiresome.

Perhaps we can bite off some small chunks and see where that leads us.

You stated; “They might be melting, but you need more than a doco to prove that.”

Here is a Greenland surface ice melt chart which I like. It is interactive and features figures from 1979 through to 2017.

If you look at the first 10 years and their relation to the defined median 1981-2010, then compare that to the last 10 years, there certainly seems to have been an overall increase even given the fact that the last two have not been as pronounced.

http://nsidc.org/greenland-today/greenland-surface-melt-extent-interactive-chart/

So we had better ascertain whether the National Snow and Ice data Center is an acceptable source to you? If not you should probably furnish a reasonable explanation why?

If you accept the veracity of the data but would like more I am happy to put some time in to looking for it.

He had to prove me wrong, but he still doesn't know the difference between 'loath' and 'loathe'. He's also stuffed up big time by saying "I am loathed....". On the other hand, he might have got the message that he is loathed by many posters. Nobody so ignorant of the basics of his own language has any business laying down the law to anyone.

High Graham,
You will have noticed that those who understand Climate Change no longer post to, or comment on, this site. The reason is obvious - your post would suit a comedic site, as would past posts on Climare Change. And your current post references another comedic site, where graphic artists have followed Trumpism with fake data.

I guess you are into government created conspiracies, such as man landing on the moon.

Could you provide intelligent commentary on this site: it might be full of such conspiracies:

www.climate.nasa.gov

This graph (http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/Report-Card/Report-Card-2016/ArtMID/5022/ArticleID/277/Greenland-Ice-Sheet) from NOAA shows that, in the period 2002 to 2016, Greenland lost about 3200 GT of ice mass. We know from Danish measurements that about 500gt we added in 2017. (NOAA hasn't updated their data for 2017 yet...it always seems to take longer to update when the news doesn't suit the narrative).

So lets say 3000gt in 15 yrs. Sounds like a lot.

But the total ice mass of Greenland is approximately 2.7 million gt.

So 3000gt is approximately 0.1% of the total. And anyone who thinks we can measure to to level of accuracy should contact me about this bridge I have for sale.

Let's assume those numbers are in the ball-park. Its said that a complete melt of Greenland's ice would raise sea levels by 7.2metres. 0.1% of 7.2metres is 0.7 cm (about .5 mm per year) which is within the margin of error for sea levels measurements.

So, is it melting? Perhaps. It seems to have been for 14 of the past 15 yrs. But as with all things climate, less than 30 yrs data is entirely speculative.

Does it matter if it is melting? Not in the slightest. Its in the ho-hum category.

As to the causes of the putative melt, given the apparent lack of warming.

Maybe geo-thermal....http://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-19244-x

Maybe microbes....http://academic.oup.com/femsec/article/92/9/fiw127/2197710

or maybe its just the ebbs and flows of climate.

Steele, I opened this thread to explore an issue that some posters were using to try to obfuscate the issues on Jennifer's article. I don't know whether Greenland is losing ice or not. I have an open-mind. Interesting interactive graph, but there must be some better data than that. And you might address the issue that temperature has been very stable in Greenland. The real issue isn't whether ice is melting, but if it is, why. Temperature doesn't look like the answer.