Increased rainfall is not a fingerprint of Co2 as you claim. As is a reduction in rainfall not a a fingerprint of Co2
That is all opinion and guess work by peeps telling anyone anything that could possibly explain a contradiction.
First up rainfall in Greenland is no different that what has happened before. Thanks to the German data base on this. Will show further down.
1. The conundrum is then if Co2 is responsible then Greenland mass should be expanding due to the settled science view that there should be more rain over Greenland according your source. (for which there is not much difference to past anyway)
2. Many scientist believe rainfall is correlated to Geo magnetic events. I.E solar Wind strength. As observed by the Danish Institutions and many others.
3. Nature has many cycles and sometimes they overlap creating increased events and sometimes they oppose causing less. These cycles are recognised globally and depending on geographical locations they are either positively or negatively highly correlated. The Lunar Node 18.6 year cycle is one recognised cycle that comes to mind
It is so silly that these quotes such as yours ...So if there has been extra snow (we both know the reason to more snow - climate change)... get time. When nature can explain these oscillations perfect.
Anyway just for your information. This is sourced via the Deutsland Meteorology guy's
Or you can use longer data sets if you wish here at KNMI. Unfortunately you will not find anything to sink your teeth into.
