- Apr 21, 2010
- 99,323
- 60,679
You do realize that science fiction.... isn't science....right?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
![]()
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?
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.
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 Tipping Point is upon us. Thanks a lot deniers.![]()