Antarctic Glaciers in trouble

[Threegoofs]

Insulting others for disagreeing with you is the first sign of massive insecurity in ones position. AGW is political. Not science.

Ummm, no.

I'm merely pointing out facts.

And please let the National Academy of Science know about your findings. I'm sure they will be interested to know your opinion.

 

[Renae]

Ummm, no.

I'm merely pointing out facts.

And please let the National Academy of Science know about your findings. I'm sure they will be interested to know your opinion.

No, you are slinging personal insults because I do not agree with the agw theory. You believe you are morally in the right to attack me.

 

[Threegoofs]

No, you are slinging personal insults because I do not agree with the agw theory. You believe you are morally in the right to attack me.

So have you contacted the NAS yet? What did they say? Did they agree that AGW is not science. You'd think they would know.

 

[Renae]

So have you contacted the NAS yet? What did they say? Did they agree that AGW is not science. You'd think they would know.

They know. Svience is not immune to corruption.

 

[Threegoofs]

They know. Svience is not immune to corruption.

Oh. So they are in on the plot too?

 

[Renae]

Oh. So they are in on the plot too?

Oh. We're gonna go down this route are we? Algore. He believes in agw, he also massively profits from this. Do you deny this?


James hansen, true beluever with a profit motive. And personal power while at nasa.


Is it a "plot" or an exploutable position for power and money by unscrupolous folks.

 

[Threegoofs]

Oh. We're gonna go down this route are we? Algore. He believes in agw, he also massively profits from this. Do you deny this?


James hansen, true beluever with a profit motive. And personal power while at nasa.


Is it a "plot" or an exploutable position for power and money by unscrupolous folks.

Two more in on the plot! And one is a politician, not a scientist.

How did they convince the NAS to believe them? Do you even know what the NAS is?

 

[flogger]

Two more in on the plot! And one is a politician, not a scientist.

How did they convince the NAS to believe them? Do you even know what the NAS is?

As ever
Please provide the poll on AGW NAS took of its membership in order to arrive at its position ? :waiting:

 

[Threegoofs]

As ever
Please provide the poll on AGW NAS took of its membership in order to arrive at its position ? :waiting:

Ah yes. They don't really believe it. The members are being duped by the leadership.

What a brilliant understanding of the NAS.

 

[jmotivator]

More fun with computer models. Maybe they're right, maybe they're wrong. It will take over 200 years to find out.

I suspect that this is the folks at the JPL trying to get some of that fat funding for climate science. The right kind of climate science, that is.

It's always been the brilliance of the AGW campaign that they rally the most gullible people to fixate on a perceived problem 100 years in the future. By doing this they condition the poor saps to ignore the futility of their sacrifice today while ensuring they will all be long dead by the time they are proved wrong. So the gullible allow the funneling of power to the AGW movement, and abdication of their own personal liberties in the present, with no expectation of reciprocation.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Oh. We're gonna go down this route are we? Algore. He believes in agw, he also massively profits from this. Do you deny this?


James hansen, true beluever with a profit motive. And personal power while at nasa.


Is it a "plot" or an exploutable position for power and money by unscrupolous folks.

Gore is irrelevant, a mere commentator. A RWNJ strawman.

 

[jmotivator]

Western Ice Sheet becomeing unstable:



Active Volcano discovered under western ice sheet

map of all volcanoes... many mysteriously under the the unstable ice sheet:



I'm suddenly hearing Olaf the Snowman singing about what antarctic ice does in volcanoes....


When geologists can determine the activity cycle of these volcanoes then we can start talking about potential anthropogenic causes.

 

[flogger]

Ah yes. They don't really believe it. The members are being duped by the leadership.

What a brilliant understanding of the NAS.

A simple 'no I cannot' provide an answer' would have sufficed

 

[Renae]

Gore is irrelevant, a mere commentator. A RWNJ strawman.

No Manc, that's what you'd like people to believe. Algore is the face of the AGW movement. His stupid "An inconvenient truth", his lavish lifestyle and "Do as I say not as I do" behavior epitomizes the AGW movement and that's why you want to marginalize him. He's the truth in the open.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Gore is the Con strawman face of AGW because he made a movie (established in court as being mostly factually correct) they didn't like. He was never more than an interested amateur like you and I, but with more money.

 

[code1211]

Looks like a couple studies have just been published showing retreat of Antarctic glaciers is not only a reality, but probably not reversible in the short term.

Glaciers draining Antarctic basin destabilized, big sea level rise all but certain [Updated] | Ars Technica

"Today, researchers at UC Irvine and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory have announced results indicating that glaciers across a large area of West Antarctica have been destabilized and that there is little that will stop their continuing retreat. These glaciers are all that stand between the ocean and a massive basin of ice that sits below sea level. Should the sea invade this basin, we'd be committed to several meters of sea level rise.

Even in the short term, the new findings should increase our estimates for sea level rise by the end of the century, the scientists suggest. But the ongoing process of retreat and destabilization will mean that the area will contribute to rising oceans for centuries."


Widespread, rapid grounding line retreat of Pine Island, Thwaites, Smith and Kohler glaciers, West Antarctica from 1992 to 2011. - Rignot - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library

Science | From AAAS


Now this is peer reviewed, published science. I realize it's not nearly as important as, say, Anthony Watts uneducated rambling a on the subject, but it's a little something.

Is it as important as actual data?

According to the folks that measure this, the Antarctic Ice is at the all time high for this date ever.

Perhaps your experts are so busy reviewing one another's peers that they neglect to check the data?

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis | Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag


Figure 6b. The graph above shows Antarctic sea ice extent as of May 5, 2014, along with daily ice extent data for four previous years. 2014 is shown in blue, 2013 in green, 2011 in orange, 2007 in brown, and 2006 in purple. The 1981 to 2010 average is in dark gray. Sea Ice Index data.

Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center
High-resolution image

Following near-record levels in March, a slightly higher-than-average rate of increase led to a record April ice extent, compared to the satellite record since 1978. During April, ice extent increased by an average of 112,600 square kilometers (43,500 square miles) per day. Ice extent on April 30 was a record for that day; record levels continue to be set in early May.
Sea ice extent anomalies are highest in the eastern Weddell Sea (south of the South Atlantic Ocean near longitudes 45°W to 10°E) and along a long stretch of coastline south of Australia and the southeastern Indian Ocean (spanning 40°E to 170°E longitude). These areas of unusual ice extent are following similar anomalies seen in

 

[Threegoofs]

Is it as important as actual data?

According to the folks that measure this, the Antarctic Ice is at the all time high for this date ever.

Perhaps your experts are so busy reviewing one another's peers that they neglect to check the data?

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis | Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag


Figure 6b. The graph above shows Antarctic sea ice extent as of May 5, 2014, along with daily ice extent data for four previous years. 2014 is shown in blue, 2013 in green, 2011 in orange, 2007 in brown, and 2006 in purple. The 1981 to 2010 average is in dark gray. Sea Ice Index data.

Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center
High-resolution image

Following near-record levels in March, a slightly higher-than-average rate of increase led to a record April ice extent, compared to the satellite record since 1978. During April, ice extent increased by an average of 112,600 square kilometers (43,500 square miles) per day. Ice extent on April 30 was a record for that day; record levels continue to be set in early May.
Sea ice extent anomalies are highest in the eastern Weddell Sea (south of the South Atlantic Ocean near longitudes 45°W to 10°E) and along a long stretch of coastline south of Australia and the southeastern Indian Ocean (spanning 40°E to 170°E longitude). These areas of unusual ice extent are following similar anomalies seen in

Do you know what 'extent' means?

Look it up and get back to us.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Western Ice Sheet becomeing unstable:

View attachment 67166533

Active Volcano discovered under western ice sheet

map of all volcanoes... many mysteriously under the the unstable ice sheet:

View attachment 67166534

I'm suddenly hearing Olaf the Snowman singing about what antarctic ice does in volcanoes....


When geologists can determine the activity cycle of these volcanoes then we can start talking about potential anthropogenic causes.

What?

They are finally discovering the geothermal activity under Antarctica we all were taught in school decades ago?

There is also geothermal activity under Greenland and Iceland. Iceland has five geothermal plants that produce more than 26% of their electricity:


Hellisheiði Power Station (303 MW)
Reykjanes Power Station (150 MW)
Nesjavellir Geothermal Power Station (120 MW)
Svartsengi Power Station (76.5 MW)
Krafla Power Station (60 MW)

But no.... Just ask any climastrologist...

Any ice melts are cause by man. Not nature.

 

[Fearandloathing]

More fun with computer models. Maybe they're right, maybe they're wrong. It will take over 200 years to find out.

I suspect that this is the folks at the JPL trying to get some of that fat funding for climate science. The right kind of climate science, that is.

What he said.

 

[Lord of Planar]

We all knows that ice moves. Look what happened after 23 years:



link in pic.

 

[Threegoofs]

What?

They are finally discovering the geothermal activity under Antarctica we all were taught in school decades ago?

There is also geothermal activity under Greenland and Iceland. Iceland has five geothermal plants that produce more than 26% of their electricity:


Hellisheiði Power Station (303 MW)
Reykjanes Power Station (150 MW)
Nesjavellir Geothermal Power Station (120 MW)
Svartsengi Power Station (76.5 MW)
Krafla Power Station (60 MW)

But no.... Just ask any climastrologist...

Any ice melts are cause by man. Not nature.

Gosh, why don't you inform the NSIDC of your discovery!

I'm sure they will be amazed at the facts you know.

 

[Jack Hays]

Looks like a couple studies have just been published showing retreat of Antarctic glaciers is not only a reality, but probably not reversible in the short term.

Glaciers draining Antarctic basin destabilized, big sea level rise all but certain [Updated] | Ars Technica

"Today, researchers at UC Irvine and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory have announced results indicating that glaciers across a large area of West Antarctica have been destabilized and that there is little that will stop their continuing retreat. These glaciers are all that stand between the ocean and a massive basin of ice that sits below sea level. Should the sea invade this basin, we'd be committed to several meters of sea level rise.

Even in the short term, the new findings should increase our estimates for sea level rise by the end of the century, the scientists suggest. But the ongoing process of retreat and destabilization will mean that the area will contribute to rising oceans for centuries."


Widespread, rapid grounding line retreat of Pine Island, Thwaites, Smith and Kohler glaciers, West Antarctica from 1992 to 2011. - Rignot - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library

Science | From AAAS


Now this is peer reviewed, published science. I realize it's not nearly as important as, say, Anthony Watts uneducated rambling a on the subject, but it's a little something.

Antarctic Sea Ice At Record Levels | Watts Up With That?

 

[Aunt Spiker]

I'm actually confused here:

These glaciers are all that stand between the ocean and a massive basin of ice that sits below sea level. Should the sea invade this basin, we'd be committed to several meters of sea level rise.

In total, the basin contains enough ice to raise sea levels approximately four meters, largely because the ice piled in there rises significantly above sea level.

Once ocean waters start infiltrating the base of a glacier, the glacier melts, flows faster, and thins. This lessens the weight holding the glacier down, ultimately causing it to float, which hastens its break up. Since the entire basin is below sea level (in some areas by over a kilometer), water entering the basin via any of the glaciers could destabilize the entire thing.

So they're just basing things on ice-melt. Not ice gain?

What they're saying is: it will melt at a steady rate and these are the results.

But the ice never has and never will melt at a steady rate - it's a process of gain and loss through snowfall and runoff.

 

[Threegoofs]

I'm actually confused here:



So they're just basing things on ice-melt. Not ice gain?

What they're saying is: it will melt at a steady rate and these are the results.

But the ice never has and never will melt at a steady rate - it's a process of gain and loss through snowfall and runoff.

I think they are saying that the rate of ice loss has been accelerating- there is no ice gain on these Antarctic glaciers at all. But now we can map what's under the glacier, and we know that the terrain below holds no obstacles to the sea going underneath.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

I think they are saying that the rate of ice loss has been accelerating- there is no ice gain on these Antarctic glaciers at all. But now we can map what's under the glacier, and we know that the terrain below holds no obstacles to the sea going underneath.

But there has been gain on the easter shield. According to a previous article the west is losing and the east is gaining.