In the wave of climate alarmism, few narratives are as iconic or misleading as those involving the giant Antarctic iceberg. A recently published study Geophysical Research Letters McGee et al. Challenging this narrative, use nearly half a century of data to dissect the relationship between iceberg calving and climate change. The study's findings not only counterintuitive to the alarmist narrative, but also completely debunk some of its core claims.
Key findings: There is no upward trend in iceberg calving
MacKie and colleagues used extreme value theory (EVT) to analyze 47 years of satellite data to assess trends in Antarctic iceberg calving. The result is obvious: already No upward trend The size of the largest iceberg to calve annually since 1976.
“The risk of major iceberg calving events has not increased over the past 47 years, suggesting that climate change is not necessarily the cause of these large iceberg calvings.”
This is a shocking conclusion, given how often media and activists claim such events are harbingers of climate catastrophe.
Giant icebergs: a natural phenomenon
The researchers also discussed the stochastic nature of calving events, emphasizing that these events are statistically consistent with natural variation. Historical records, including pre-satellite observations, confirm that large iceberg calvings have occurred for centuries, well before modern industrialization:
“Historical shipboard records indicate that such large-scale events predate the onset of significant decline of the Antarctic ice shelves.”
Additionally, the iconic A68 iceberg that broke off the Larsen C ice shelf in 2017 was not statistically out of the ordinary when compared to historical records. The real peak in extreme collapse occurred between 1986 and 2000, with no apparent connection to modern climate trends.
The real threat: small calving events
While the media tends to focus on photogenic giant icebergs, MacKie et al. emphasizes that the real driver of Antarctic ice loss is the cumulative impact of smaller ice avalanche events. These smaller events, rather than large-scale catastrophes, appear to be the primary mechanism by which ice shelves thin and become unstable over time. The study explains the phenomenon as “death by a thousand cuts” rather than the dramatic collapse often highlighted in climate rhetoric.
Policy implications: a reality check
These findings have profound implications for climate policy. If extreme calving events are not related to climate change but are part of natural ice shelf dynamics, then this undermines the case for many expensive mitigation policies for such phenomena. Antarctic ice loss, driven by a combination of small calving events and ocean conditions, will not respond meaningfully to misleading reductions in carbon emissions.
Furthermore, the study acknowledges the limitations of current models in predicting these events. The inherent unpredictability of iceberg calving, combined with the lack of long-term data, makes it nearly impossible to attribute individual events to human activity. As the study points out:
“Comprehensive physical modeling of glacier calving processes is a complex and unrealized endeavor in the field of glaciology.”
This raises serious questions about the reliability of alarmist projections of future sea level rise based on these uncertain models.
Conclusion: Science and Sentimentalism
The study by McKee and others is a sobering reminder that nature, not humans, remains the dominant force shaping Antarctica's ice dynamics. While the media and policymakers rush to link every iceberg and iceberg calving event to climate change, the data tells a more nuanced story – of natural variability and long-term cycles. It’s a story worth hearing, but one that doesn’t fit into the mainstream narrative.
As we continue to evaluate the costs and benefits of climate policy, our decisions must be based on solid evidence rather than sensational headlines. Antarctica’s icebergs are spectacular, but they are not the smoking gun of climate change that alarmists would have us believe. Rather, they demonstrate the power of natural systems that operate on timescales and scales far beyond our understanding.
H/T Tom Nelson
Relevant
