• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

"Old Water" Explains Robust Antarctic Ice

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,342
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
A new paper in Nature Geoscience explains why Antarctica's ice mass is increasing.

Climate News
“Old water”: The latest explanation for the Antarctic Ice Anomaly

Guest essay by Eric Worrall A new research paper claims that the Antarctic Ocean is staying cold, because it receives large infusions of “old water”, water which has been sitting in the freezing cold ocean depths since before the start of the machine age. Antarctic Ocean Climate Change Mystery Could Be Explained By Deep, Old…
A new research paper claims that the Antarctic Ocean is staying cold, because it receives large infusions of “old water”, water which has been sitting in the freezing cold ocean depths since before the start of the machine age.
Antarctic Ocean Climate Change Mystery Could Be Explained By Deep, Old Water
A new study suggests that the Antarctic Ocean has remained unaffected by climate change and global warming due to deep, old water that is continually pulled to the surface.
A new University of Washington study reveals why the Antarctic Ocean might be one of the last places to experience the effects of global warming and human-driven climate change.
Over the years, the water surrounding Antarctica has stayed roughly the same temperature even as the rest of the planet continues to warm, a fact often pointed out by climate change deniers.
Now, a new study uses observations and climate models to suggest that the reason for this inconsistency is due to the unique currents around Antarctica that continually pull deep, old water up to the surface. This ancient water hasn’t touched the Earth’s surface since before the machine age, meaning it has been hidden from human-driven climate change.
“With rising carbon dioxide you would expect more warming at both poles, but we only see it at one of the poles, so something else must be going on,” said Kyle Armour of the University of Washington and lead author of the study. “We show that it’s for really simple reasons, and ocean currents are the hero here.”
Read more: Antarctic Ocean Climate Change Mystery Could Be Explained By Deep, Old Water : Science/Health : Headlines & Global News
 
When Gondwana broke up, the Australian plate began it's movement northward, whereas the Antarctic plate began it movement southward. Eventually they became just the right distance from one another that currents locked Antarctic in a protective watery current of cold. As they continue their dance away from one another, eventually those currents will/are changing. It's incrementally slow and taking place in geological time as opposed to historical time. However, it's easy to see in light of that why we are seeing Antarctic warming.

Add in the movement of the plates are ramping up Antarctica's volcanic activity and it's not a bad guess that we may be seeing a more seasonal Antarctica in the future, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with AGW.
 
Well, that explains that, then. I assume "skeptics" will no longer cite Antarctic ice as evidence that AGW isn't real.
 
There are people who say the planet isn't really getting warmer at all.
Who? There are people who specify no warming within a boundary condition,
but I do not think anyone has said it is not warming at all.
Although the air temp in the antarctic has not change much since 1880, at least
according to the GISS.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/ZonAnn.Ts+dSST.txt
64-90S 1880 .35 C
64-90S 2015 -.29 C
To be fair it bounces around quite a bit, but doesn't look like it is actually warming.
 
There are people who say the planet isn't really getting warmer at all.

Currently it is not. Or at least it has not warmed up by any measurable degree (more than the error range) since 1998.

It is warmer than it was in 1979.
 
Well, that explains that, then. I assume "skeptics" will no longer cite Antarctic ice as evidence that AGW isn't real.

After the umpteenth million time, you still haven't learned.

We know AGW is real.

We just don't see it as anything alarming.

OI well. Guess you want to remain the forum Jester...
 
After the umpteenth million time, you still haven't learned.

We know AGW is real.

We just don't see it as anything alarming.

OI well. Guess you want to remain the forum Jester...

So, to be clear, you are denying the fact that people on this forum often say mankind can't change the climate.
 
So, to be clear, you are denying the fact that people on this forum often say mankind can't change the climate.

LOL...

Changing the goalpost. Do you understand the differences? I don't think you do.

Who here, says we have no warming effect, that I haven't chastised myself?
 
LOL...

Changing the goalpost. Do you understand the differences? I don't think you do.

Who here, says we have no warming effect, that I haven't chastised myself?

"Mankind can't change climate"

"AGW isn't real."

You'll first have to explain to me the difference in those "goalposts."
 
"Mankind can't change climate"

"AGW isn't real."

You'll first have to explain to me the difference in those "goalposts."

Again, We are not saying AGW is not real. Who is saying that AGW isn't real, that I myself haven't chastised?

We are not saying the climate isn't changing. Why are yo a chronic liar?

You are not intellectually equipped to handle the conversation in progress, so you change it.

I have better things to do.

Go back to posts 3 and 8, and maybe you'll recognize how much of a pest you are being, rather than contributing to any reasonable debate.
 
Back
Top Bottom