Eine neue Kontroverse entwickelt sich über das Abschmelzen des Grönlandeises. Der Times Comprehensive Atlas of the World, verlegt von HarperCollins, behauptet das Eis sein in den letzten 12 Jahren um 15% abgeschmolzen. Spiegel online berichtet hier.
The Guardian has this report:
"This is concrete evidence of how climate change is altering the face of the planet forever – and doing so at an alarming and accelerating rate," said the publishers of the atlas, HarperCollins, in information given to the media last week and reiterated by a spokeswoman on Monday.
But seven researchers at Cambridge University's Scott Polar Research Institute backed by glaciologists in the US, Europe and elsewhere, have said that both the maps and the figure of 15% are wrong.
In a letter to the editors of the Times Atlas they agree that the Greenland ice cover is reducing but at nowhere near the extent claimed in the book. "A 15% decrease in permanent ice cover since the publication of the previous atlas 12 years ago is both incorrect and misleading.
The publisher stood by its claim:
"A spokeswoman for Times Atlas defended the 15% figure and the new map. "We are the best there is. We are confident of the data we have used and of the cartography. We use data supplied by the US Snow and Ice Data Centre (NSIDC) in Boulder, Colorado. They use radar techniques to measure the permanent ice. We have compared the extent of the ice surface in 1999 with that of 2011. Our data shows that it has reduced by 15%. That's categorical," she said."
For how long will this stand?
Posts
9 comments:
Eine mögliche Erklärung. Die Atlas-Ersteller haben eine Karte von Wikipedia genutzt, die lediglich die Flächen Grönlands darstellt, die mehr als 10 m dick sind.
Siehe: http://omniclimate.wordpress.com/2011/09/20/times-atlas-suicide-by-wikipedia/
Polar researchers from Cambridge University already took issue and point out where Times Atlas went wrong:
"Dr. Ian Willis and Toby Benham from SPRI were able to reproduce these contours using ice thickness data. It appears that the Times Comprehensive Atlas of the World may have used 500m ice thickness to map the ice sheet margin. If so, it is obviously an incorrect and flawed procedure."
http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/scientists-raise-concerns-regarding-erroneous-reporting-of-greenland-ice-cover/
http://omniclimate.wordpress.com/2011/09/20/times-atlas-suicide-by-wikipedia/
HarperCollins has embarked on a partial climbdown, as the Guardian reports:
"The publishers of the Times Atlas were forced to admit on Tuesday that they were wrong to claim the Greenland ice pack had shrunk by 15%, as Arctic scientists rounded on the company for misinterpreting data and failing to consult them."
However, they still defend the accuracy of the map:
"We stand by the accuracy of the maps in this and all other editions of The Times Atlas."
It is noteworthy that the Guardian links this story to the Himalayan glacier story which landed the IPCC in trouble and "severely damaged the IPCC's reputation".
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/sep/20/times-atlas-incorrect-greenland
So it was only the Times Atlas cartographer's fault. Not 15%, only 0.1%, according to a scientist in the Guardian. Hm. Problem solved. Or is it a chronic problem? Will there be another case next week or next month? A general problem of representation, maybe? But questions of representation, that's humanities talk, and this doesn't count. So, problem solved. And 0,1% is still enough to cause severe sea level rise, as another scientist in the Guardian says. Until somebody else says that this statement is not backed up with Boulder, Colorado. And so on.
I am so satisfied that at the end this story could be linked to the IPCC. Otherwise I really couldnt imagine what this has to do with anything."Someone made an error, the IPCC made an error, here we go"
@ Werner Kraus: Oh yes, of course there is a chronic problem:
Real scientists correct errors, pseudo-skeptics don´t.
What a surprise that all these very heavy and damaging errors point in the same alarmist direction.
I am convinced that a worldwide conspiracy of (climate) (pseudo-pseudo) deniers produces these false scientific errors. Or maybe the communist block, the christian fundamentalists, Bin Laden? The CIA?
Bazinga
Yeph ;-)
PS: My god am I satisfied ;-)
@Bazinga
This is not a conspiracy, it is just a multi-hundred-,million Dollar business:
WWF and other wannabe-govermental-organisations are spending hundreds of millions of Dollars each year to change our world into their world:
http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2011/09/23/how-the-wwf-infiltrated-the-ipcc-%E2%80%93-part-1/
Post a Comment (pop-up window,non-moderated)