Iceland’s Former PM: ‘Melting Glaciers Are Nothing To Panic About’

iceland glacier

Climate is always changing and humans are always adapting, writes Iceland’s former prime minister, so people should stop panicking over global warming.

Despite the stories delivered by “teary-eyed reporters” about the tragedy of melting glaciers, the fact is that some glaciers melt while others grow and it has been this way for all of history, says David Gunnlaugsson, who served as Iceland’s prime minister from 2013 to 2016.

“Our climate changes, but humans adapt. Instead of scaremongering, we should approach this situation on a scientific and rational basis,” Gunnlaugsson writes in the latest issue of the Spectator.

While distancing himself from the label of climate change “denier,” Gunnlaugsson insists that it is “nonsense” to suggest that humans need to “sacrifice the achievements of modern civilization if we are to save the planet.”

Iceland offers unique insight into the relationship between man and nature, showing that environmental change is natural and nothing to be afraid of, he writes.

“Take Iceland’s melting glaciers. Troubling as a calving glacier might seem, such a phenomenon is by no means out of the ordinary,” he notes. “In fact, this process defines a glacier: they move. Glaciers shed ice at their edges as ice builds up closer to the center. It is a spectacle we have witnessed in Iceland since the first settlers arrived in the ninth century.”

Even the widely reported “death” of the Ok glacier was an exaggerated, media-driven spectacle, Gunnlaugsson contends, since it was a “relatively small mountain-top glacier that had been receding for decades.”

“In 1901, it measured 38 sq km in size; in 1978, it was just three sq km. So the glacier that had its last rites read in August had, in fact, more or less disappeared half a century ago,” he observes.

And what is the real problem with glaciers receding? Gunnlaugsson asks. Mightn’t this be a good thing?

“When the glaciers were expanding, laying waste to what had previously been green meadows and farmlands, the people who lost their homes would hardly have been grief-stricken by the thought that one day that trend might be reversed,” he proposes, noting that when Iceland was first discovered it was completely covered in forests.

All in all, people have a remarkable ability to adapt to environmental alteration, he notes, which should keep us from freaking out over such changes.

“We Icelanders have witnessed severe changes to our natural environment,” he says. “Iceland is a country of remarkable natural alteration, and we’ve had to adapt to that fact. We realize that humans need to respect natural forces, but history has also shown us the power of human ingenuity and our ability to survive.”

We must “adapt to the ever-changing forces of nature and base our societies on essential commonsense rather than superstition or fear,” he writes.

Iceland’s melting glaciers are simply part of “an endless sequence of natural events that have shaped our country’s history,” he adds.

We must respect nature and seek to preserve our environment, but “it is vital not to overreact or fall for scare stories,” Gunnlaugsson concludes. “Whatever some might say, we shouldn’t panic about Iceland melting.”

Read more at Breitbart


PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.

Trackback from your site.

Comments (3)

  • Avatar

    jerry krause

    |

    Hi PSI Readers,

    In the image of the glacier, do you see the subtle fact that only a small portion of it is illuminated by direct solar radiation? For I cannot see any shadows being cast by the people who are quite visible.

    If you ask: So what?, the question should be should be sufficient to help you see the answer to this possible question.

    Have a good day, Jerry
    .

    Reply

  • Avatar

    richard

    |

    Clouds

    Reply

    • Avatar

      jerry krause

      |

      Hi Richard,

      Possibly clouds, but in this case my answer is the shadow cast by the ‘higher’ elevation of the glacier crest between the snow and the downslope of that crest.

      For it I look at the portion directly illuminated by the sun I see the dark slopes of the small peaks of glacier which obviously do not face the sun while other slopes of these small peaks obviously do face the sun.

      Have a good day, Jerry

      Reply

Leave a comment

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
Share via