How To Build An Igloo
By Paul Homewood
If you need to build an igloo, have look at this BBC video from three years ago:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/ideas/videos/how-to-build-an-igloo-when-the-climate-is-changing/p07ycvwz
Naturally the BBC frame it within their climate scare agenda, with silly claims about”melting at a phenomenal rate. The Greenland ice sheet is doing no such thing:
https://arctic.noaa.gov/Report-Card/Report-Card-2021/ArtMID/8022/ArticleID/946/Greenland-Ice-Sheet
5000 Gt in the last twenty years may sound a lot, but the whole ice cap weighs about 2.6 million Gt. So we are losing ice at a rate of 0.01% a year, which means it will take 10000 years to melt away at that rate.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/08/03/greenland-endures/
But much more to the point, temperatures in Greenland are no higher than they were in the 1920s to 40s, with the exception of that solitary year of 2010:
https://verstat.no/sw-greenland-1840-2020/
Greenland is not “warming” and its climate is not changing as the BBC falsely claim. In fact it has been very stable for the last couple of decades.
It is worth noting that the Inuit they interview is 40 years old, so when he claims the climate is changing so much, he can only compare it to those exceptionally cold years when he was a youngster.
But I suspect he will still be building igloos for many more years to come!
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
How about looking at the remains of the structures built by the Vikings….. A lot of rock and sod.
Joan , I remember reading up an article many years ago about a Viking village being uncovered from under the ice in the 1930s .It had been hidden for many hundreds of years .
But that is now under 50 to 100 feet of ice again .
Which is why they only use measurements for the last 50 odd years for ice coverage , because 100 year figures would show the ice cover is now above average .
Yes. There has actually been a lot of ice core work from Greenland which goes back more than 100,000 years. Of course, it would not be useful to those who pedal global warming.
Have a look at the diminished Icelandic sea ice index values for 1920 – 1960 – notably the extended gap years – compared to the timespan 1965 – 2000 …It is doubtful the low 1920 – 1960 values are some freakish anomaly as they correspond to the AMO meanderings and the Greenland temperature data findings of Chylek et al in their 2006 GRL study : ” Greenland Warming of 1920 -1930 and 1995 – 2005 ” :
” Almost all decades between 1915 and 1965 were warmer or at least as as warm as the 1995 to 2005 decade ….suggesting the current warm Greenland climate is not unprecedented …..although the decade 1920 – 1930 was as warm as the decade 1995 – 2005 , the rate of warming was 50% higher ” than during the earlier decade “
There is also Glacier Girl, the P38 Lightning that landed on the ice cap en route to Great Britain on 15 July 1942 and was subsequently retrieved in 1992 from under a build-up of 268 feet of snow and ice.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/air-space-magazine/glacier-girl-the-back-story-19218360/
That’s not history Joan, that’s merely journalism when you consider the results of the recent paper published in Nature that identified 2 million year old DNA from mastodons that roamed the balmy, heavily forested northern tip of Greenland when God’s dog was still a puppy. Those pesky mastodons huh? They’ve put the comparatively trivial man made global warming when Erik the Red was around into a cocked hat didn’t they? And as for us, our impact in purely historical timescales is truly trivial.
Here we go again, Hudson Bay polar bears.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-63603489.amp
Of course Susan Crockford keeps on top of the situation, but there’s quite a bit to dig through.
https://polarbearscience.com/
The ice levels did drop a level in the 90s but it’s not a continuous decline and clearly related to the NAO.
Although Canadian reports claim a decline by what is clearly activist science, the same reports note the IK (Indigenous Knowledge) WHB population is reported as increasing.
She’s done a direct response.
I see the BBC ran a scare story about Hudson Bay Polar Bears being doomed by lack of sea ice on tonights news
Current level of Hudson Bay sea ice is above the 16 year average.
The BBC are totally CLUELESS
Here’s the YouTube link for those interested
I noticed that Yurts are in favour in Hungary especially among young couples with some land available. Not needing Council Approval (as temporary structures), quick to be built (although there is now a waiting list) and less than half the cost of the minimal conventional dwelling.
Another advantage is that they are easily insulated without the traditional thick felt although that could still be used with a rain proof outer barrier.
The disadvantages are that you might have to generate your own electricity (but you probably will have to do that anyway soon in the UK) and that solar panels don’t fit well on the roof.
‘5000 Gt in the last twenty years may sound a lot’
The rate of SLR is unchanged in a hundred years. Either their data is wrong, or IT.JUST.DOESN’T.MATTER.
My dictionary gives two meanings for the adjective ‘phenomenal’:
1 Remarkable or exceptional, especially exceptionally good:
So I congratulate the BBC for giving us the good news that the rate of loss of ice is phenomenally low.
2 Perceptible by the senses or through immediate experience:
If they mean this – that we can see it happening with our eyes – I say they are liars.
But the simpler truth is that people who work for the BBC do not know the meaning of long words.
The memes pedalled by the MSM and the ‘influencers’ work with peoples’ fears that “This is just the start!” Say ‘5 thousand Gt’ and people think ‘5 million Gt’ will be next!’ Of course, hardly anybody even knows what a Gt IS, but that is a detail.
Unfortunately, the traditional population of the UK falls easily for any old tosh. They have not even noticed that they are being physically replaced. Their rulers decided a while ago that we are simply not the right kind of peasants!
One glance at the DMI’s reconstructed SW Greenland temperature chronology and it is apparent why Tom Wigley proposed the erasure of the ” 1940’s blip ” only to shop around how the removal might be justified in a Climategate email . We see the same 1920s – 40’s warmth in the long term Icelandic station temperature datasets that NASA adjusted downwards much to the initial bemusement of the DMI’s Trausti Jonsson until Paul, Malcolm Roberts and Tony Heller probed and publicized the anomalies . Paul have you perused the wealth of historical data in this Appinsys article ? https://appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/RS_Greenland.htm
Look at the Greenland and Iceland sea ice series and you can see the conspicuous decreases match the high temperatures of the 1920s – 40’s
The credibility of climate scares melts at a phenomenal rate. Hence the need to keep dreaming up new ones, or recycling old ones in new guises.
The AGW hoaxers are losing.
Globally, ever-decreasing numbers, now down to less than half:
Concern about climate change shrinks globally as threat grows, survey shows
Fewer than half of those questioned in global poll believe climate change poses a ‘very serious threat’
Concerns about climate change shrank across the world last year, with fewer than half of those questioned in a new survey believing it posed a “very serious threat” to their countries over the next 20 years.
Only 20% of people in China, the world’s biggest polluter, said they believed that climate change was a very serious threat, down 3 percentage points from the last survey by Gallup World Risk Poll in 2019.
Globally, the figure fell by 1.5 percentage points to 48.7% in 2021. The survey was based on more than 125,000 interviews in 121 countries.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/19/concern-about-climate-change-shrinks-globally-as-threat-grows-survey-shows
Concern about climate change shrinks globally as threat grows – study
Concerns about climate change shrank across the world last year, a survey shows, with fewer than half those questioned believing it posed a “very serious threat” to their countries in the next 20 years.
https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/concern-about-climate-change-shrinks-globally-threat-grows-study-2022-10-19/
Heh – “AS THREAT GROWS”!
Seems the increasingly frantic alarmist propaganda efforts of the AGW hoaxers are globally failing and they’re starting to panic, doesn’t it?
As the old saying goes, “you can fool some of the people some of the time and all of the people some of the time but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time”.
The AGW hoax is dying on its feet.
But the bedwetters needn’t worry, the Globalists will dream up something else to make them lose sleep over, lock themselves up, terrorise their kids and hide behind the sofa very soon now.
In fact I think you’ll find they have – GLOBAL PANDEMICS.
So be afraid, be very afraid!
It might be worse than they thought. The survey question may have been, “Are you concerned about the ever growing threat of climate change?”
The respondents said, “FO!”
I assume the survey was constructed to get the answer they wanted, and they still got burned.
See also fig. 3 here:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52017DC0315&from=EN
Reblogged this on Climate Collections.