Depends,...the same argument is held regarding some ice packs in the Antarctic, where the temperature never rises above freezing.
If global temperatures rise, there will be greater amounts of water vapor evaporated from the oceans, then passed over the Antarctic continent, where they consense and precipitate over the ice pack as snow.
Accordingly, when scientists measured the icepack and determined the more recent annual layers of snow and ice were less thick than older years’, they had proof that global temperatures over waters beneath wind currents approaching the Antarctic had actually decreased.
The Global Warming proponents were mistakenly using the data as evidence of global warming, whereas it actually gave evidence of the opposite effect.
Now in this case, the glacial ice is reportedly increasing in size, merely indicating a larger amount of precipitation is being directed at the glacier.
The next step is to study the historical wind patterns, and as the article implies, the El Nino/La Nina effect predominated over those factors, reducing the linkage to global warming.
Besides, we all know it’s Karl and his weather machine anyways, so what’s the fuss all about? <8^0
ping