"West Antarctic Ice Sheet's Collapse Triggers Sea Level Warning"

Sea rising seems to be the new clued-in scientist's witch hunt for emptying successful economies of their working cash by skimming foundations and tapping governments of their taxpayers' savings to keep up their works.

Why do you say that? Scientists have been warning of rising sea levels as a result of global warming since before the IPCC was formed. Nothing new about it. The news - that the glaciers feeding the Amundsen Sea have begun to break loose from their beds in what appears to be an unstoppable process, is something that scientists have also been warning about for years. That the bedrock under most of the West Antarctic ice sheet is below sea level leads to the obvious conclusion that the system as a whole is inherently unstable.

And where do you see scientists trying to get money from governments or taxpayers? The message on this one is that there's nothing we can do about this, it's too late. Doing nothing costs nothing. Until the world's coastlines are inundated with 15-20 feet of water. What do you think that'll cost?

Someone must've added cash maneuvers into curriculums to get scientists to monitor every source to enlarge the body of research.

Please show us what you're talking about.

The scaring of societies with lies will cause us to lose good scientists and leave us with the vacuous ones.

Since scientists warned us for years that precisely what has happened would happen, the ones spouting lies would be... well.. you.

Can YOU explain how disconnecting a small segment of below sea level ice from bedrock, causes a 600 mile long glacier to disconnect from it's BEDROCK CONNECTIONS on the bulk of it's LAND-BASED route? That seems to defy physics. ALL glaciers calf off ice when they reach the sea.. It's what glaciers do.. ---- THe ones that HAVE a sea connection.

And can you show me a Temperature chart that CONFIRMS the coastal melt they are observing has anything to do with "warmer seas" ????
 
54681z.jpg

2014_rel3: Global Mean Sea Level Time Series (seasonal signals removed) | CU Sea Level Research Group

Every 10 mm = .39 inches of sea level rise. This isn't a joke. We have seen 2.5 inches of sea level rise since 1992. Over 8 inches since 1880...
 
You have the same access to the pertinent papers as do I. If you want to challenge one, pull it up and challenge it.
 
You have the same access to the pertinent papers as do I. If you want to challenge one, pull it up and challenge it.






YOU made the claim. YOU have to support what you claim. That's how science works bucko.
 
You have the same access to the pertinent papers as do I. If you want to challenge one, pull it up and challenge it.

With what you know and observed about the world of ice, does this even make INTUITIVE sense to you ? Or are you inclined to believe the horseshit because of your general views on GWarming?

I posted and prepped the comprehensive observations of the temperature of the Southern Ocean from satellite. Some of this debate is no more complicated than learning to grade papers "on a curve". And a LOT of it exists just to prep the news cycle for political action.
 
A centuries long process that glaciers dump ice into the ocean comes as a surprise to "scientists" who monitor such things? We didn't cause it. American decadence didn't occur until the ice sheet was well on it's way to oblivion.
 
You have the same access to the pertinent papers as do I. If you want to challenge one, pull it up and challenge it.

With what you know and observed about the world of ice, does this even make INTUITIVE sense to you ? Or are you inclined to believe the horseshit because of your general views on GWarming?

I posted and prepped the comprehensive observations of the temperature of the Southern Ocean from satellite. Some of this debate is no more complicated than learning to grade papers "on a curve". And a LOT of it exists just to prep the news cycle for political action.

I thought you were going to challenge the science. I see no such thing here.
 
You have the same access to the pertinent papers as do I. If you want to challenge one, pull it up and challenge it.

With what you know and observed about the world of ice, does this even make INTUITIVE sense to you ? Or are you inclined to believe the horseshit because of your general views on GWarming?

I posted and prepped the comprehensive observations of the temperature of the Southern Ocean from satellite. Some of this debate is no more complicated than learning to grade papers "on a curve". And a LOT of it exists just to prep the news cycle for political action.

I thought you were going to challenge the science. I see no such thing here.

I did and you missed all that. If you make this assertion as "science" --- explain the graph of Southern Ocean temperatures I posted or the observation about the 600 miles of BEDROCK GROUNDING under these Antarctic glaciers... OR how they decrease on the Continent AT ALL with the current record low temps...

It's all agi-prop for a convieniently timed push on the political side..
 
State of the art "science" on these wildly exaggerated claims..

http://www.igsoc.org/journal/60/220/t13J117.pdf

Thwaites Glacier grounding-line retreat: influence of width and
buttressing parameterizations
David DOCQUIER,1 David POLLARD,2 Frank PATTYN1
1Laboratoire de Glaciologie, Universite´ Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium

ABSTRACT. Major ice loss has recently been observed along coastal outlet glaciers of the West Antarctic ice sheet, mainly due to increased melting below the ice shelves. However, the behavior of this marine ice sheet is poorly understood, leading to significant shortcomings in ice-sheet models attempting to predict future sea-level rise.

................... Here we use an ice-stream/ice-shelf model and perform a number of
experiments along a central flowline to analyze the sensitivity of its grounding line on centennial timescales. In the absence of width and buttressing effects, we find that the grounding line retreats by 300 km in 200 years from the present day (rate of 1.5 km a–1). With variable glacier width implemented in the model, flow convergence slows the retreat of Thwaites grounding line at 0.3– 1.2 km a–1. The parameterization of ice-shelf buttressing according to different observed scenariosfurther reduces the glacier retreat and can even lead to a slight advance in the most buttressed case.

Oh YEAH.. Irreversible, UNSTOPPABLE, GUARANTEED DOOM --- that 2014 paper is closer to the truth.. They DON'T KNOW, HAVEN'T got a clue as to the advance rates within a FACTOR OF FOUR.. There's your "unsettled science".. The rest of this circus is inspired by AGENDA -- not science.


All of this is occurring in a frozen portion of the planet so hostile to human life because of the cold, that scientists can only visit for a couple months a year and STILL risk getting their expeditions stranded in the ice in MID-SUMMER...
 
The sea level slowed to mm/century by 8,000 years ago until the 1800th century.
http://curryja.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/post-glacial_sea_level.png

post-glacial_sea_level.png

Instead of repeatedly tossing the SAME DAM plot up there Matthew. Why don't you LOOK at it?

How would 3mm/yr look on a chart who's Y axis is scaled to 120 meters or more??
Hmmmmm...... Am I supposed to get hysterical about something that JUST LOOKS flat on that type of scale???
What should my reaction BE to this??
 
Centuries long process? Isn't that what coming out of an ice age is like? Prior to the beginning of the ice age that the earth is now exiting there was little, if any, ice at either of the poles. Is there any reason to expect that the earth won't return to the temperature before the beginning of the ice age which will be so warm that little if any ice will remain at the poles just as it has done over and over and over again?

Unfortunetly, the models the predications were based on do not take the increasing warmth of the ocean water into account. The models failed to predict that the shelf would be where it is at right now, and they well may be far too conservative on the speed of the shelf breakup.

When you add the rapidity of the Greenland melt, the rise over the next few decades may be very serious, and far higher than that predicted for 2100.
 
Centuries long process? Isn't that what coming out of an ice age is like? Prior to the beginning of the ice age that the earth is now exiting there was little, if any, ice at either of the poles. Is there any reason to expect that the earth won't return to the temperature before the beginning of the ice age which will be so warm that little if any ice will remain at the poles just as it has done over and over and over again?

Unfortunetly, the models the predications were based on do not take the increasing warmth of the ocean water into account. The models failed to predict that the shelf would be where it is at right now, and they well may be far too conservative on the speed of the shelf breakup.

When you add the rapidity of the Greenland melt, the rise over the next few decades may be very serious, and far higher than that predicted for 2100.





What "increasing warmth"? So far the error bars are larger than the instruments ability to measure. That means there has been nothing measurable.
 
There likely WILL be critical SL rise by 2100.. But CO2 is not the primary cause of this climate event.
But OTH -- we could also be slipping into the next glacial period soon thereafter.
 
Centuries long process? Isn't that what coming out of an ice age is like? Prior to the beginning of the ice age that the earth is now exiting there was little, if any, ice at either of the poles. Is there any reason to expect that the earth won't return to the temperature before the beginning of the ice age which will be so warm that little if any ice will remain at the poles just as it has done over and over and over again?

Unfortunetly, the models the predications were based on do not take the increasing warmth of the ocean water into account. The models failed to predict that the shelf would be where it is at right now, and they well may be far too conservative on the speed of the shelf breakup.

When you add the rapidity of the Greenland melt, the rise over the next few decades may be very serious, and far higher than that predicted for 2100.

...or not, as predicted by the models
 
Centuries long process? Isn't that what coming out of an ice age is like? Prior to the beginning of the ice age that the earth is now exiting there was little, if any, ice at either of the poles. Is there any reason to expect that the earth won't return to the temperature before the beginning of the ice age which will be so warm that little if any ice will remain at the poles just as it has done over and over and over again?

Unfortunetly, the models the predications were based on do not take the increasing warmth of the ocean water into account. The models failed to predict that the shelf would be where it is at right now, and they well may be far too conservative on the speed of the shelf breakup.

When you add the rapidity of the Greenland melt, the rise over the next few decades may be very serious, and far higher than that predicted for 2100.

...or not, as predicted by the models


The surface temperature pause does come as a surprise.
 
The Tipping Point is upon us. Thanks a lot deniers. :thup:





You're welcome! What do we win? And which tipping point is this one? You guys have bleated about so many it's hard to keep track...
 

Forum List

Back
Top