Sea level potential rise doubles in new study

[westwall]

By 2030, it is very probable that Glacier National Park will have no glaciers. Yet, if they have one snowfield left that lasts over the summer, those in denial of reality will claim that disproves the whole of global warming, even though when the park was established, there were over 150 glaciers. And if Mr. Westwall lasts that long, he will be the first in line to make the denial, even though, as someone claiming a Phd in Geology, he really should know the differance between a snow field and a glacier.

And the water from all the alpine glaciers ends up in the sea.

And the Park has had many times when there were no glaciers. So what? The only glaciers that matter are those in the Antarctic and on Greenland. The rest of the glaciers account for so little that they truly don't really matter in the overall scheme of things. If we went back to the rate of loss that was going on in the 1990's it would take well over 1000 years for there to be a noticeable increase. 10,000 years for the glaciers to melt to over 50% of their mass. This hogwash about sea level rising by over a meter in 100 years is just that, hogwash.

 

[Old Rocks]

Well now, just a whole bunch of very prominent scientists are saying otherwise. Looks to me like you don't know much of what you are talking about.

 

[westwall]

Well now, just a whole bunch of very prominent scientists are saying otherwise. Looks to me like you don't know much of what you are talking about.

People desperate to maintain their cash flow by telling lies don't impress me in the slightest.

 

[Crick]

And you base that not on the slghtest shred of evidence that they are actually lying, but on their scientific, peer-reviewed conclusions. I think the point is that no one is impressed by you and your unsupported and unsupportable rants.

 

[westwall]

And you base that not on the slghtest shred of evidence that they are actually lying, but on their scientific, peer-reviewed conclusions. I think the point is that no one is impressed by you and your unsupported and unsupportable rants.

I base my statement on logic, and on verifiable fact. Unlike you.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

we have been hearing from the fanatical religious left wing GW fanatics, that with the increase of CO2 that the oceans have been warming to the point that there would be an increase in the frequency and the increase in power of hurricanes. Someone please tell me that with the melting icecaps(temperature increases) that there is a cold blob in the Atlantic that will interfere with the predictions of those fanatics(oh boo hoo, libtards fucked up again). You think they way this was reported that an alien from outerspace caused that blob. 'Cold blob' to be a wild card in the 2016 Atlantic hurricane season

Whether or not ocean currents draw cold water from this blob southward into tropical regions of the Atlantic could determine how active the season becomes.

With all potential factors in mind, forecasters are predicting that tropical storms and hurricanes in the Atlantic will total 14 this season, two more than what is considered normal.

If the cooler water migrates southward across the eastern Atlantic, then westward into tropical breeding grounds, it will lower sea-surface temperatures over the region where 85 percent of Atlantic tropical systems develop.

At one time the libtards only predicted Hurricanes, but since 2005 the lack of storms has now caused them to put any storm into the predictions.

 

[mamooth]

we have been hearing from the fanatical religious left wing GW fanatics, that with the increase of CO2 that the oceans have been warming to the point that there would be an increase in the frequency and the increase in power of hurricanes.

Nope. You're just making up strange tales.

Increased frequency was never predicted. That's a big ol' whopper on your part.

Increased strength is predicted for the future, and we are beginning to see that.

Got any other fantasies for us, or are you just going to pout more about the "libtards" who keep spanking you and sending you home to momma in tears?

Someone please tell me that with the melting icecaps(temperature increases) that there is a cold blob in the Atlantic that will interfere with the predictions of those fanatics(oh boo hoo, libtards fucked up again). You think they way this was reported that an alien from outerspace caused that blob. 'Cold blob' to be a wild card in the 2016 Atlantic hurricane season Whether or not ocean currents draw cold water from this blob southward into tropical regions of the Atlantic could determine how active the season becomes.

Ruh-roh. You seem confused. First you told us those awful liberals predict more hurricanes, now you say they predict less. Can you make up your mind?

Anyways, we're glad you're here in the Environment folder. Fresh meat is always welcome. We were getting bored smacking around the same old kook losers.

 

[westwall]

we have been hearing from the fanatical religious left wing GW fanatics, that with the increase of CO2 that the oceans have been warming to the point that there would be an increase in the frequency and the increase in power of hurricanes.

Nope. You're just making up strange tales.

Increased frequency was never predicted. That's a big ol' whopper on your part.

Increased strength is predicted for the future, and we are beginning to see that.

Got any other fantasies for us, or are you just going to pout more about the "libtards" who keep spanking you and sending you home to momma in tears?

Someone please tell me that with the melting icecaps(temperature increases) that there is a cold blob in the Atlantic that will interfere with the predictions of those fanatics(oh boo hoo, libtards fucked up again). You think they way this was reported that an alien from outerspace caused that blob. 'Cold blob' to be a wild card in the 2016 Atlantic hurricane season Whether or not ocean currents draw cold water from this blob southward into tropical regions of the Atlantic could determine how active the season becomes.

Ruh-roh. You seem confused. First you told us those awful liberals predict more hurricanes, now you say they predict less. Can you make up your mind?

Anyways, we're glad you're here in the Environment folder. Fresh meat is always welcome. We were getting bored smacking around the same old kook losers.

Poor mammy, you had better confab with your masters so you can remember which lie to tell.. Here you go, I'll help...





"An increase in extreme events increases the risk of flooding, drought, erosion, turbidity, debris in reservoirs, nutrient and pollutant loading, and wildfires. It also impacts surface runoff and groundwater recharge rates. The severity of these impacts will range geographically. For example, increased variability in semi-arid regions will increase aquifer recharge rates, while greater variability in humid regions will decrease aquifer recharge rates as more water is lost to runoff."

Changes in Storm Intensity and Frequency


"Extreme heatwaves and heavy rain storms are already happening with increasing regularity worldwide because of manmade climate change, according to new research.

Global warming over the last century means heat extremes that previously only occurred once every 1,000 days are happening four to five times more often, the study published in Nature Climate Change said."

Extreme weather already on increase due to climate change, study finds

 

[jc456]

And another whiff. Westwall gives us 107 examples of ...

1. Predictions that came true
2. Predictions that weren't actually made, having been ripped screaming out of context.
3. Predictions made by people who weren't climate scientists
4. Predictions made by a single scientist that didn't represent any sort of consensus.

So, we've still got deniers unable to show even a single case of a consensus climate science prediction being wrong.

What will it take for you deniers to stop deflecting and admit your "scientists have been wrong" nonsense is merely a dishonest mantra that the denier religion orders its acolytes to chant?

Really? Which one of those predictions came true?

January and February of this year have been the warmest ever recorded. That does look like a warmer winter, now doesn't it. Dry summers? Oregon and Washington just had a summer where the fires were so intense that they did not try to save the forests, instead they were trying to save the small towns. Damned near lost three of them in my home area.

no it doesn't, I deny the reported reports. I don't believe them, nor will i accept them. I'm allowed. So what is it exactly are you going to do?

 

[jc456]

And the sea level rise continues to accelerate. A whole bunch of people with actual Phd's on their wall in oceanography are providing us with evidence of that.

no they are not, and no the water isn't up and it hasn't been up and you can't prove it was up. So you are again posting up mumbo jumbo about sea level fear that ain't so Joe.

 

[jc456]

Ha try this one bitch I have the book right in front of me,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, page 30

"I would not bet that the Mississippi Gulf Coast will get hit by a super hurricane in any particular year, but I certainly plan on it being hit again sometime over the next ten years:I wouldn't be surprised if it where hit by more then one" Joesph Romm

the book is copyrighted 2007.........................................

And it's not a prediction. It's a statement of probability.

Keep trying, Bear. Maybe someday, you'll figure out what a prediction is.

well my statement of probability is that they are full of shit and that the sea level is unchanged and will remain unchanged. Prove me wrong.

 

[jc456]

Most Floridians plan on being struck by a hurricane every season. We don't get hit every season, but we still plan on it.

Idiot.

and every year the state of Illinois buys mountains of salt to put on icy roads, cause they are icy every year. What's your point?

 

[jc456]

Wow. You dance hard but not well. Share with us the definition of "statement of probability". I'll wait.

Sure thing.

I'll predict that of 6 coin flips, it's likely about half will be heads.

If 5 end up as heads, that doesn't mean the statement of probability is wrong.

And someone who wasn't hilariously ignorant of statistics would understand that.

Oh, Caltech called. They want you to stop associating yourself with them, due to the embarrassment you cause them.

well if you laid down all your money on that prediction, you'd be broke. i think that would mean you were wrong and broke. hahahahahaahhahahahaahhahhahaha

 

[jc456]

Where have they been milder?

Most of the world. Do keep up with temperature trends.

And how exactly is that predictive?

It says winter temperature trends will go up. They have.

In other words it is non falsifiable.

It's entirely falsifiable, because it's real science. If average global winter temperatures went down, it would be falsified. Climate science makes many falsifiable predictions. Instead of being falsified, they all keep being confirmed.

What is the other name for a non falsifiable science?

Denialism.

There's literally nothing that could falsify your denialist beliefs. When something does falsify them, you simply declare the data is faked. Hence, it's clear denialism is pseudoscience. Superstition. Religion.

hey tooth, let's see how smart you are, which hemisphere, north or south is cooler?

 

[jc456]

By 2030, it is very probable that Glacier National Park will have no glaciers. Yet, if they have one snowfield left that lasts over the summer, those in denial of reality will claim that disproves the whole of global warming, even though when the park was established, there were over 150 glaciers. And if Mr. Westwall lasts that long, he will be the first in line to make the denial, even though, as someone claiming a Phd in Geology, he really should know the differance between a snow field and a glacier.

And the water from all the alpine glaciers ends up in the sea.

and how are you held accountable if the probability doesn't come in? See there is none, so you can say whatever you want with no repercussions. That isn't impressive! What would be impressive is if you had something to actually lose if the probability didn't come in. Now I'm game for that.

 

[jc456]

Well now, just a whole bunch of very prominent scientists are saying otherwise. Looks to me like you don't know much of what you are talking about.

name me one that isn't receiving government money.

 

[mamooth]

Poor mammy, you had better confab with your masters so you can remember which lie to tell.. Here you go, I'll help...

Yes, your usual help, where you change the topic and then declare victory for "disproving" something that nobody ever claimed.

"An increase in extreme events increases

That's not talking about hurricane frequency, which was the topic.

Sucks to be you, having all the evidence contradict you, and always being forced to deflect like that.

 

[westwall]

Poor mammy, you had better confab with your masters so you can remember which lie to tell.. Here you go, I'll help...

Yes, your usual help, where you change the topic and then declare victory for "disproving" something that nobody ever claimed.

"An increase in extreme events increases

That's not talking about hurricane frequency, which was the topic.

Sucks to be you, having all the evidence contradict you, and always being forced to deflect like that.

Like I said mammy, you dance real hard, just not good. In other words you're full of poo.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Scientists say Antarctic melting could double sea level rise. Here’s what that looks like.

And still the RW lugnuts deny...deny...deny. Thankfully, their numbers are diminishing...

Deny what exactly? That the "study" is based entirely on computer models thus is nothing more than fiction? It is you who need to learn some basics dude.

Just sayin...

That is how science works. Or would you rather wait until Phrump tells another one of his lies. You believe him but not science. You are blissfully ignorant. ENJOY YOUR FANTASY LAND.

No, it's not. Science is about facts and the observation of natural processes. Computer models are neither. Try again.

Mr. Westwall, you are one silly ass. Even the equations we use in physics are nothing but models of the real world, and many come with warnings concerning the parameters for which they can be used with any accuracy. And, when you are using models created by past observations, and the world is in the process of change, then those models are no longer that accurate, because the parameters are changing.

Now you have in the past referred to the Maunder Minimum for predicting a cooling. What was that but a prediction based on a model? And a very poor one as we can see from the last two years and the present year.

Untrue. Equations tell you EXACTLY what is going to occur if you do A+B the product is ALWAYS C. That's what it means to be an exact science. Something that climatology is not.

Your talking to a common core math whiz... you might need to dumb it down some..

 

[Old Rocks]

Sea-level rise from Antarctic ice sheet could double | Penn State University

Ocean warming has previously been identified as the main cause of ice retreat occurring today. Warmer water quickly erodes the underside of floating ice sheet portions. Floating ice shelves act as buttresses for the grounded ice inland, whose base is below sea level. Once the shelves are gone, the grounded ice can move faster. However, in previous models, this process did not simulate enough melting to explain the past sea levels, with only West Antarctica collapsing even though similar areas in East Antarctica with huge amounts of ice could collapse in the same manner.

Pollard, working with Robert M. DeConto, professor of geosciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, looked at two further mechanisms that could account for greater melting. The first mechanism is fracturing and deepening of crevasses on the low-lying floating ice shelves by pooling of surface meltwater and rainfall caused by warming air temperatures. If emissions continue unabated, this process will begin to dominate ocean warming within 100 years. It already caused the disintegration of the Larsen B Ice Shelf in 2002.

The second mechanism comes into play once floating ice sheets disintegrate back to the grounding zone, leaving extremely high walls of ice. These walls are so high that simple physics says they cannot structurally support their weight, and then collapse into the sea, eroding the cliff further and further inland as long as the bedrock stays deep enough below sea level. Similar cliffs, with about 328 feet of ice above sea level and 2625 feet below, exist today at a few of the largest outlet glaciers in Greenland and the Antarctic Peninsula, where huge calving events occur regularly.

Guess we will see who is correct on this.