Joy
That was a genuinely interesting link, thank you. However it merely tells us what we already know and that I wrote about in my article ‘The long slow thaw’.
http://judithcurry.com/2011/12/01/the-long-slow-thaw/
Essentially the world has been warming in fits and starts for some 350 years and glaciers have been retreating since around 1750 following a cold period (the LIA) that itself followed a period warmer than today (the MWP) that our friend Dr Mann wrote about
Of course we must bear in mind that modelling ice melt is still a primitive black art –the article actually uses the word primitive and surely we are still at that stage? In my archives I have an advert from the Met office (local to me) from several years ago confirming that they still didn’t know much about the effects of ice melt and seeking a modeller. To believe we know to any degree of accuracy the effects of ice melt and of sea water rise is hubris.
Incidentally, as I mentioned, Hansen cuts no ice with me (pun intended) due to his quite unscientific remarks about rises as much as 15m by 2100. Seems that this sort of mentality is the norm in warmist circles-or was it just plain inaccuracy on the part of the author of your link- who states;
“Before 1950 the rate had averaged a sluggish one or two centimeters a year; by the end of the century it was twice that.”
Weren’t we supposed to notice that howler? Was it a test to make sure we read it?. Have I passed?
Tonyb