Scientists have been debating whether or not mantle plume heat contributes to western Antarctica’s instability. Some recent studies provided evidence this might be the case, but even this study’s authors were skeptical. “I thought it was crazy,” Hélène Seroussi, the study’s co-author and scientist at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, said in a release. “I didn’t see how we could have that amount of heat and still have ice on top of it,” Seroussi said in a statement. NASA says Seroussi’s study provides more evidence of geothermal activity underneath a portion of the world’s largest ice sheet.
Climatologist Dr. Pat Michaels: "Under the U.S. Global Change Research Act of 1990, the federal government has been charged with producing large National Climate Assessments (NCA), and today the most recent iteration has arrived. It is typical of these sorts of documents–much about how the future of mankind is doomed to suffer through increasingly erratic weather and other tribulations. It’s also missing a few tidbits of information that convincingly argue that everything in it with regard to upcoming 21st century climate needs to be taken with a mountain of salt."
"As first documented in our 2004 book Meltdown, the first Assessment used models that were worse than a table of random numbers when applied to 20th century coterminous U.S. temperatures, and the chief scientist for the report knew it and went ahead anyway!"
Paul Homewood: 'This new climate report is not an objective or an honest assessment of the state of the climate, particularly in relation to the US. Instead, it is a highly partisan and politicized report, designed to promote alarmism. There has been much talk of the need for red and blue teams, to challenge lazy consensus. It is now time for this to happen, so that this Report can be constructively assessed and, where appropriate, criticized. One of the tasks of a counter group should be to produce their own state of the climate assessment. The climate mafia have had it their own way for far too long.'