The Economist and the Greenpeace glacier photo stunt

[CSPP Note: The 9-9-06 Issue of The Economist has global warming as a cover story, The Heat is On. On page 8 of the special section, the Economist lends support to the quip that environmental writers have a post-it-note on their computer screens that reads: “never, ever check facts.” We take note of the fact that it prints two pictures of a Svalbard Glacier from 1918 and 2002 respectively called Blomstrandbreen as implicit
proof of melting ice. Danish professor Ole Humlum from Oslo University, who used to work at the university’s branch in Svalbard, years ago revealed the photos as a Greenpeace hoax. Blomstrandbreen is a so-called galloping glacier, which periodically advances and retreats, regardless of the climate. We reach back to 2002 for a report on the hoax. The Economist seems either oblivious or unconcerned with reality. Makes one wonder what else in the report is science fiction.]

Now you see it, now you don't: Blomstrandbreen glacier, Norway, 1918 and 2002

*****

Jo Knowsley, The Mail on Sunday

http://www.scientific-alliance.org/news_archives/climate/greenpeacestunt.htm

11th August 2002

Scientists dismiss Greenpeace pictures as stunt - Global warming claim meaningless as glacier photos show 'natural changes in shape'.

The pictures appeared to be the most shocking evidence so far of the devastating effects of global warming. But last night scientists who work on the spot where they were taken dismissed them as a misconceived publicity stunt. The two photographs, taken 84 years apart, were released by Greenpeace International last week. They appear to show a radical shrinking of the Blomstrandbreen glacier, on Svalbard, 375 miles north of Norway.

But scientists on the ground at Svalbard say the illustration is 'meaningless' as a measure of climate change because glaciers retreat and advance constantly as part of a natural cycle. At the same time, there has been no significant drop or increase in temperature in the region since the Twenties.

They argue that Greenpeace used the pictures to highlight the effects of global warming caused by what they see as man's pollution.

Blomstrandbreen might now be retreating, but on the west side of Svalbard is Friddjovbreen glacier which has advanced more than a mile in the past seven years - one of dozens of glaciers to do so.

The first photo issued by Greenpeace was taken by scientists in 1918 and shows a mountainous wall of ice. The second, taken by Greenpeace last month, reveals a much smaller wall melted, claims the environmental group, by climate change.
Prof Ole Humlum, professor of physical geography at the Norwegian university research centre in Svalbard, has worked on glaciers in Greenland and the Arctic for the past 25 years. He accused Greenpeace of 'jumping to conclusions'.

He said: 'They have formulated their view based on one glacier which showed what they wanted it to show. It is a simple, even naive, approach. This glacier has retreated, but that doesn't mean anything. There are plenty of other examples of glaciers that have expanded, which they have ignored.

'Svalbard is a very difficult place to use as a climate indicator because the glaciers undergo a dramatic advance, lasting about five to seven years, but then steadily retreat over the next 80 to 100.'

Prof Humlum said the most effective way of measuring climate change in the region would be to study the university's temperature records, which date to 1912.
These showed that the greatest jump in temperatures took place in the Twenties. 'Since then they have been relatively stable,' he said. 'If anything, now, temperatures have once again started to drop.' Benedict Southworth, coordinator of Greenpeace's Climate Campaign, defended the images.

He said: 'We appreciate that glaciers advance as well as retreat, and we accept that Prof Humlum's view raises some interesting issues.

But the photographs we issued accurately sum up the situation with glaciers across the world.'

There is a consensus among scientists that global warming does exist. But there have been scientific and political disagreements over how to interpret satellite data, disputes over how changes in the sun could fuel global warming and debate about the quality of data from satellites used to monitor pollution and rainforest destruction.

Earlier this year, the journal Science published evidence that the West Antarctic Ice Sheet had not only stopped shrinking but was growing at a rate of nearly 27 billion tons a year. And only last week Prof Fangqun Yu, of the State University of New York-Albany, published a paper adding to the argument that what takes place in outer space has more impact on the planet's climate than any human activity.

*****

Also…

http://www.abd.org.uk/climate_change_truths.htm#polar_ice

In the case of arctic climate, the eco publicity stunt took on a different guise but also involved a glacier. Photographs of the glacier Blomstrandbreen on the island of Svalbard were compared between 1918 and 2002, the difference in appearance being put down to man-made global warming — and so, of course, the 'conclusion' is that we are killing the planet and must stop. Professor Ole Humlum of the Norwegian research centre on Svalbard has a different view. He points out that glaciers there typically experience a rapid advance lasting 5 to 7 years, then retreat slowly for the next 80 to100 years. All entirely in nature's way.

Professor Humlum also wondered why that one particular glacier was the focus of attention when dozens of glaciers were advancing — Friddjovbreen, for example, had advanced more than a mile in the last seven years, one of many to do likewise.

Photographs of Svalbard glaciers such as Vonpostbreen and Esmarkbreen taken in the mid- to late 1990s show a very healthy picture. Eco-activists responded that the Professor's views "raised some interesting issues" (!) but that their photos "accurately sum up the situation with glaciers". True but irrelevant — glaciers do advance and retreat, but it has nothing to do with man-made global warming here or anywhere else. Selective reporting and eco-speak weasel words, used in a vain attempt to bring man-made global warming back to life.

Wider studies published in the Journal of Paleolimnology show that large sudden swings in temperature appear to be a consistent feature of the climate in this region, with temperatures rising and falling by as much as 2 degrees C in only a decade. Professor Humlum's records on Svalbard show that the biggest changes took place in the 1920s, well before even the IPCC believe that man-made global warming influences could have been felt. More importantly, records show that since mild warming in the 1950s and 1960s, temperatures have been falling. Remember that the Polar Regions should see early and rapid warming since these times if man-made global warming theory is correct. They don't, and it isn't.