At least Greenlanders will be pleased with the massive area that may soon be ready for planting.
Greenlanders will be astounded to know that they HAVE much in the way of farms, other than a few livestock on the grassy boundary plains, and some potatoes that can grow in the glacial sand ( given enough irrigation).
More rock, denudiated by millenia of glaciers, will hardly be of use for anything but 'rock gardens' or maybe an inukshuk or two.
And the increase in the potatoe harvest will hardly compensate for the loss of hunting from ecological decline of the arctic systems. So no surpluses for the refugees. Sorry.
Greenland would be a good destination for all those displaced by the expected sea level rise it may cause.
Well only if you like building on rock in a polar climate. We have Eslemere island already available but no takers. Wonder why? Makes a good Mars simulator. You'd think that would be enough.
The following comment just about sums up climate science in the 21st century:
Certianly, unlike the random drivel you post, the scientist know how LITTLE we really understand about the climate and thus are a little worried about our 'poking it with a big stick'.
But ignorance is bliss, I guess since you seem blissfully ignorant of event hte most obvious scince, such as the fact that this illustrates three or more causes of greater than expected ice sheet loss, making the 'slow decay' model of ice sheet decay a bit naive. Obviously we don't know how FAST the ice sheets will add to sea level rise but it is CERTAIN to be at a pace we would find astouding using our current expectations.
I guess you missed that point..