Confronting another failure in scientific communication - Antarctic’s Iceberg A-68

Scientific “Seepage” is an ugly thing. What is “Seepage”.
Simply put it’s when scientists word their communications by the Koch/Murdoch contrarian’s script
rather than focusing on describing the unvarnished truth.
Making a statement of fact and then back peddling, with maybe’s and could be’s,
or making it sound as though ‘more to learn’ equals ‘they don’t know’.

Seepage: The effect of climate denial on the scientific community By Stephan Lewandowsky Professor, School of Experimental Psychology and Cabot Institute, University of Bristol Posted on 7 May 2015
I got lucky and had pretty much two uninterrupted days, so worked on it and managed to finish last night and I want to share it here before I gotta run off to wage slaving again. Around July 11th a trillion tonne chunk of Larson C ice shelf broke off and become the roughly 2,200 sq mile Iceberg A-68. The news was reported by scientists observing the growing crack through the Project Midas website. Martin O’Leary a Research Officer at Swansea University and expert in ice flow modeling was quoted and has been re-quoted ad nauseum saying:
“Although this is a natural event and we’re not aware of any link to human-induced climate change, this puts the ice shelf in a very vulnerable position."
I understand there’s valid reasons for scientists being ultra-conservative in making connections, but that "no link" suggestion is simply weird, pollyannaish even. Reads like it was penned by a Trump team member rather than a dedicated researcher. Or, perhaps it was penned by someone deeply frightened by the Trump Administration and funding concerns. Before labeling me a scientist basher understand my years worth of blogging has been all about defending the solid integrity of scientists, and the work they have been sharing with a public that has a right to know the unvarnished truth without constantly being deluged by lies, slander and disingenuous distractions into irrelevance. It’s true, I’m only a high school grad, class of ’73, but I’ve been actively keeping up on climate science developments and global observations ever since. Does that give me the right to lecture experienced professionals on communicating science? Well if they continue spinning reality into an intellectual parlor game that ignores the existential crisis we have collectively created for ourselves, … if their message sidesteps common sense geophysical interconnections. You bet ! So long as I can support my indictment with rational arguments and valid evidence. This post will be about the mountain of evidence pointing to this recent calving event being part and parcel of an interconnected global climate engine that is being warmed by society’s fossil fuel burning emissions! It will also spotlight other examples of gratuitous misleading words injected into reports purely for their soothing value and political cover. Not having every single detail of every dynamic interconnection mapped out in it’s entirety is no justification for ignoring obvious dynamics and cascading consequences. There is no known mechanism other than current warming that can explain the drum beat of significant ice degradation and calving events being observed along the Antarctic Peninsula. Suggesting that Larson C may be independent of that overall reality, makes no sense. The rest of this post is a collection of articles and quotes from experts that give an overview of Larson C, A68 and what’s unfolding on Antarctic's cryosphere. However it’s couched, this overview leaves little doubt of what’s happening and that the cause is clearly the cascading consequence of manmade global warming.
Then it get's interesting Have a good day. fixed that