Read Koonin's book back in the day (articles here and here)

I've looked at the research now and again, and the (poor-quality) evidence about changes in any such remote/massive-sized planetary area is altogether unconvincing.

Koonin, too:

After a bit of analysis, I was so surprised by what I found that I penned a Wall Street Journal op-ed in February 2022. Unusual for mass media, I also included the following graph of the data, which shows the amount of ice that Greenland has lost every year since 1900, averaged over ten-year intervals:

Recent periods look (slightly) out of the ordinary, but certainly not enough to warrant the massive leftie-wokey-climate change doomerism outcry. Plus: trend is your friend and it's clearly slowing down/stagnating.

Point of Koonin's 2022 WSJ op-ed was

...that headlines describing a dramatic, unprecedented acceleration since 1990 were misleading. In fact, the graph belies the simplistic notion that humans are melting Greenland.

Since human warming influences on the climate have grown steadily—they are now ten times what they were in 1900— you might naively expect Greenland’s losses to march upward in lockstep. Instead, there are large swings in the average annual ice loss and it is no larger today than it was in the 1930s, when human influences were much smaller. Moreover, the annual loss of ice had been decreasing in the past decade even as the globe continued to warm.

After more than four years, it’s worth revisiting the issue, particularly at the beginning of September, when the rapid summer melt of the surface changes to the slower accumulation of snow. The graph below^[1] now includes the most recent five years of data, clearly showing that the decline in mass loss that began before 2020 has now firmly set in, even as the globe has warmed further.

... the trend continued!

It’s too easy to portray natural variability as an accelerating anthropogenic signal. If you choose a time window that starts near a trough and ends near a peak, the resulting “acceleration” can look alarming. The ongoing effort to promote a sense of climate catastrophe often exploits such selective framing to obscure natural variability and imply an ever-worsening trend.

Isso! In economics (and esp popular macro writings), we face this problem a lot.

"The ice sheet has been shrinking for more than a century at a rate that rises and falls with natural weather cycles and the average annual mass loss has slowed in recent years, not accelerated"

yahz, yahz: nothing to see here, doomerists.