Greenland’s Melting Ice Nears a ‘Tipping Point,’ (1 Viewer)

[calamity]

Greenland’s enormous ice sheet is melting at such an accelerated rate that it may have reached a “tipping point,” and could become a major factor in sea-level rise around the world within two decades, scientists said in a study published on Monday.

The Arctic is warming at twice the average rate of the rest of the planet, and the new research adds to the evidence that the ice loss in Greenland, which lies mainly above the Arctic Circle, is speeding up as the warming increases. The authors found that ice loss in 2012 was nearly four times the rate in 2003, and after a lull in 2013-14, it has resumed.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/21/climate/greenland-ice.html

More irrefutable evidence that we have a real problem.

 

[Carleen]

More irrefutable evidence that we have a real problem.

I talked to someone today about the 50 degree temp in NJ yesterday and the 7 degree temp this morning. I said shows you climate change is real. His response, yeah so much for global warming. So frustrating!!

 

[OrphanSlug]

We all knew it was coming. Not to worry conservatives, the Koch Brothers are coming up with a counter to all this shortly.

 

[calamity]

We all knew it was coming. Not to worry conservatives, the Koch Brothers are coming up with a counter to all this shortly.

We'll see it by 10PM.

 

[Mircea]

More irrefutable evidence that we have a real problem.

You had the same problem during the last Inter-Glacial Period.

Actually, during the last Inter-Glacial Period the situation was far worse, because the Greenland Ice Sheet nearly melted in its entirety, leaving just a very large mound of ice that snaked along the west side of the eastern mountain range.

Obviously, you haven't read the most recent papers. During MIS-5 and MIS-11, the Western Antarctic Ice Sheet melted in its entirety, and the Eastern Antarctic Ice Sheet underwent substantial melting.

It's all normal.

The average global temperatures during 7 of the last 8 Inter-Glacial Periods was 7.8°F to 15.3°F warmer than the present 58.4°F.

Yeah, that's right...that means it should be 66.2° to 73.7°F and not 58.4°F.

The one Inter-Glacial Period that did not reach those average temperatures ended abruptly after a only 8,000 years, so it is a statistical anomaly.

Aren't you even the least bit curious why the average global temperature during this Inter-Glacial Period is the coldest on record?

I mean, any intelligent person would wonder why it's colder than it normally is.

 

[Jack Hays]

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[h=1]Woods Hole: Greenland Ice Melt linked to the natural AMO cycle[/h][FONT=&quot]Study links natural climate oscillations in north Atlantic to Greenland ice sheet melt WOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTION Scientists have known for years that warming global climate is melting the Greenland Ice Sheet, the second largest ice sheet in the world. A new study from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI), however, shows that the rate…
[/FONT]
September 18, 2018 in Greenland ice sheet.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

More irrefutable evidence that we have a real problem.

cool, push it!

 

[Jack Hays]

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[h=1]New study reveals local drivers of amplified Arctic warming[/h][FONT=&quot]Public Release: 19-Jan-2019 New study reveals local drivers of amplified Arctic warming Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology(UNIST) IMAGE: An international team of researchers, including Professor Sarah Kang (left) and DoYeon Kim (right) in the School of Urban and Environmental Engineering at UNIST, has unveiled that local greenhouse gas… view more Credit: UNIST The…
[/FONT]
21 hours ago January 20, 2019 in Arctic.

 

[Nickyjo]

Don't understand. What is wrong with taking steps to reduce coal burning and other contributers to pollution? As McCain said, even if the science is wrong, most of the prescriptions have other beneficial effects. We are better off less dependent on oil, with higher gas mileage, less acid rain.

 

[Jack Hays]

Don't understand. What is wrong with taking steps to reduce coal burning and other contributers to pollution? As McCain said, even if the science is wrong, most of the prescriptions have other beneficial effects. We are better off less dependent on oil, with higher gas mileage, less acid rain.

[h=3]The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels: Alex Epstein: 9781591847441 ...[/h]
[url]https://www.amazon.com/Moral-Case-Fossil-Fuels/dp/1591847443
[/URL]

The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels [Alex Epstein] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Could everything we know about fossil fuels be wrong?

 

[UtahBill]

Don't understand. What is wrong with taking steps to reduce coal burning and other contributers to pollution? As McCain said, even if the science is wrong, most of the prescriptions have other beneficial effects. We are better off less dependent on oil, with higher gas mileage, less acid rain.

Conserving energy to use another day makes too much sense to many energy consumers.

 

[Nickyjo]

[h=3]The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels: Alex Epstein: 9781591847441 ...[/h]
[url]https://www.amazon.com/Moral-Case-Fossil-Fuels/dp/1591847443
[/URL]

The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels [Alex Epstein] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Could everything we know about fossil fuels be wrong?

The moral case for smog? Look, whale oil was wonderful in its day, gave us the great American novel. LA air was foul. We regulated fossil fuels, reduced their use. LA air got cleaner. London smog killed lots of people. Presumably, regulations over time changed that. Oil will be around for a while and that’s great. Use it myself in my car. But I have solar panels in my house. And I don’t need two Navy fleets to protect my access to the sun, tho the tax break when we installed was nice. All of us, rich and poor nations, will benefit from oil for a while, maybe a good while. Then we’ll move on.

 

[Bullseye]

More irrefutable evidence that we have a real problem.

Guam didn't tip over, neither will Greenland. Dry those tears little guy.

 

[Jack Hays]

The moral case for smog? Look, whale oil was wonderful in its day, gave us the great American novel. LA air was foul. We regulated fossil fuels, reduced their use. LA air got cleaner. London smog killed lots of people. Presumably, regulations over time changed that. Oil will be around for a while and that’s great. Use it myself in my car. But I have solar panels in my house. And I don’t need two Navy fleets to protect my access to the sun, tho the tax break when we installed was nice. All of us, rich and poor nations, will benefit from oil for a while, maybe a good while. Then we’ll move on.

[FONT=&quot]. . . Epstein confronts the most common myths about fossil fuels: they are dirty, unsustainable, and harm the developing world. Drawing on original insights and cutting-edge research, Epstein offers facts to the contrary. Fossil fuels take a naturally dirty environment and make it clean; they take a naturally dangerous climate and make it safer; the sun and wind are intermittent, unreliable fuels that always need backup from a reliable source of energy — usually fossil fuels; and, fossil fuels are the key to improving the quality of life for billions of people in the developing world. Calls to “get off fossil fuels” are calls to degrade the lives of innocent people who merely want the same opportunities we enjoy in the West. . . . [/FONT]

[h=3]The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels | Cato Institute[/h]
[url]https://www.cato.org/events/moral-case-fossil-fuels
[/URL]

In The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels energy expert Alex Epstein argues that we are only hearing one side of a critical story. We are taught to think only of the ...

 

[Nickyjo]

[FONT="]. . . Epstein confronts the most common myths about fossil fuels: they are dirty, unsustainable, and harm the developing world. Drawing on original insights and cutting-edge research, Epstein offers facts to the contrary. Fossil fuels take a naturally dirty environment and make it clean; they take a naturally dangerous climate and make it safer; the sun and wind are intermittent, unreliable fuels that always need backup from a reliable source of energy — usually fossil fuels; and, fossil fuels are the key to improving the quality of life for billions of people in the developing world. Calls to “get off fossil fuels” are calls to degrade the lives of innocent people who merely want the same opportunities we enjoy in the West. . . . [/FONT]

[FONT=Roboto][URL="https://www.cato.org/events/moral-case-fossil-fuels"][h=3]The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels | Cato Institute[/h]
https://www.cato.org/events/moral-case-fossil-fuels
[/URL]

[/FONT]
In The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels energy expert Alex Epstein argues that we are only hearing one side of a critical story. We are taught to think only of the ...

Good grief! Get this guy to the next climate summit. I didn’t know that when I inhaled in LA in the 1960s that the ache in my lungs was actually pleasant, that when I looked at the hills east and west of San Jose in 1970 and couldn’t see either due to pollution, it was actually pollen from fruit trees. Get this guy before Congress. Inhoff, where are you when we need you? Asthmatics of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your inhalers!

 

[Jack Hays]

Good grief! Get this guy to the next climate summit. I didn’t know that when I inhaled in LA in the 1960s that the ache in my lungs was actually pleasant, that when I looked at the hills east and west of San Jose in 1970 and couldn’t see either due to pollution, it was actually pollen from fruit trees. Get this guy before Congress. Inhoff, where are you when we need you? Asthmatics of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your inhalers!

Your air is cleaner because of fossil fuels.

[h=3]A 2 Page Summary of The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels | Center for ...[/h]
industrialprogress.com/fossilfuels/

A 2 Page Summary of The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels. mcffcover. DOWNLOAD THE PDF. Please feel free to share this PDF with anyone and everyone. To read ...

 

[Nickyjo]

Your air is cleaner because of fossil fuels.

[h=3]A 2 Page Summary of The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels | Center for ...[/h]
industrialprogress.com/fossilfuels/

A 2 Page Summary of The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels. mcffcover. DOWNLOAD THE PDF. Please feel free to share this PDF with anyone and everyone. To read ...

So being a good patriot, I should change from a four cylinder car to an eight cylinder car? Get a 58 Lincoln Continental? Weren’t their 12 banger cars back in the day? Can I find one of them? Should I start a forest fire like we had in Calif recently? Created beautiful sunsets, after all.

And I was wasting my time with a VW in the 70s. Sad.

 

[Jack Hays]

So being a good patriot, I should change from a four cylinder car to an eight cylinder car? Get a 58 Lincoln Continental? Weren’t their 12 banger cars back in the day? Can I find one of them? Should I start a forest fire like we had in Calif recently? Created beautiful sunsets, after all.

And I was wasting my time with a VW in the 70s. Sad.

[h=1]“It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.”[/h]― Ronald Reagan

The 12-cylinder Duesenbergs are a bit pricey.

 

[marke]

More irrefutable evidence that we have a real problem.

"The sky is falling, the sky is falling" shouts the secularist seeker of public funding for wasteful research, promising to take the money and put it to good use in exploring ways to possibly change the weather.

 

[calamity]

We'll see it by 10PM.

Ok, make that by 9pm

 

[longview]

Don't understand. What is wrong with taking steps to reduce coal burning and other contributers to pollution? As McCain said, even if the science is wrong, most of the prescriptions have other beneficial effects. We are better off less dependent on oil, with higher gas mileage, less acid rain.

We have taken steps to reduce the major causes of pollution from our burning of hydrocarbon fuels.
That the number of cars in LA went up by a large factor, while the smog went down, is a testament to how much better emissions have gotten.
We can take the steps, but with each step there needs to be a place to stand on.
We currently do not have the capability to simply stop using coal, we could have if Nuclear had been developed, but it was not.
At this stage what we need is massive energy storage capability, this will fill the gap between the type of energy alternatives produce,
and the type of energy we use. (low duty cycle vs on demand).

 

[Threegoofs]

More irrefutable evidence that we have a real problem.

I just wish we had a place to discuss this without having to wade through dozens Jacks cut and paste denier blog posts, with no (or vapid) commentary from him.

Every friggin thread.

 

[Jack Hays]

I just wish we had a place to discuss this without having to wade through dozens Jacks cut and paste denier blog posts, with no (or vapid) commentary from him.

Every friggin thread.

In this thread so far my contributions are two peer-reviewed papers and a book from the NY Times bestseller list. Your problem is you are data-averse.

 

[Threegoofs]

In this thread so far my contributions are two peer-reviewed papers and a book from the NY Times bestseller list. Your problem is you are data-averse.

Every friggin thread

 

[Into the Night]

More irrefutable evidence that we have a real problem.

There is no 'tipping point'. The level of Greenland's ice is a stable system. Unstable systems would have already triggered. It is not melting, either.