Satellite data shows entire Conger ice shelf has collapsed in Antarctica

[bluesmoke]

There is such an insignificant difference in ice melting into sea water. We went over this before. I pulled out specific gravity data from a reputable chemistry book at one time. We had a video before that used super saturated levels to show there was a change. The numbers with the actual concentrations are involved are as meaningless as there being less gravity atop the empire state building, as at sea level.

When floating ice melts in sea water, there is no discernible difference in the sea level.

Period!

I refuted the claim that melting ice that is above the level of water does not raise that level. That was the point of the debate. It was not a refutation of a claim that such was of no significant effect on the sea level.

 

[Lord of Planar]

I refuted the claim that melting ice that is above the level of water does not raise that level. That was the point of the debate. It was not a refutation of a claim that such was of no significant effect on the sea level.

Then you weren't about to follow the science.

 

[Lord of Planar]

I refuted the claim that melting ice that is above the level of water does not raise that level. That was the point of the debate. It was not a refutation of a claim that such was of no significant effect on the sea level.

Back in that thread I clearly explained why sea ice melting into sea water doesn't have the same effect as the experiment that yielded a 2.6% volume increase. It is so much less because of salinity differences and volume ratios.

Damn I hate repeating myself, but you guys fail to learn!

Here is the tread we already discussed this in:

Antarctica's 'Doomsday Glacier' close to tipping point

You know these people aren't stupid and are capable of the math behind this, right? I contend the photos of the experiment were incomplete, as we were not allowed to see if the ice in the container was floating. In my experiment, the ice was floating in a saturated salt water solution, and...

debatepolitics.com

Try to understand my posts 14, 25, and 89.

 

[bluesmoke]

Then you weren't about to follow the science.

The claim that the melting ice theory was science is false. I was following the science. If you're saying that melting ice does not increase water levels after having been proved wrong, knowing better, then you're at least lying to yourself, convinced of a falsehood.

 

[bluesmoke]

Back in that thread I clearly explained why sea ice melting into sea water doesn't have the same effect as the experiment that yielded a 2.6% volume increase. It is so much less because of salinity differences and volume ratios.

Damn I hate repeating myself, but you guys fail to learn!

Here is the tread we already discussed this in:

Antarctica's 'Doomsday Glacier' close to tipping point

You know these people aren't stupid and are capable of the math behind this, right? I contend the photos of the experiment were incomplete, as we were not allowed to see if the ice in the container was floating. In my experiment, the ice was floating in a saturated salt water solution, and...

debatepolitics.com

Try to understand my posts 14, 25, and 89.

The claim, which I refuted, was: "Floating ice, does not change the sea level when it melts!" I was not questioning the significance. Only the scientific fact. You're falsely attempting to change the fact of the claim to what suits your narrative. Or, quote what I said that attempted to refute the claim of the rise being insignificant.

 

[Lord of Planar]

The claim that the melting ice theory was science is false. I was following the science. If you're saying that melting ice does not increase water levels after having been proved wrong, knowing better, then you're at least lying to yourself, convinced of a falsehood.

Bullshit.

It does increase the level. I have clearly stated this several time. How can you be in error so often?

What is wrong with you as not to understand my words? I only claimed that because of the ratio difference of a saline solution and ice between the experiment, and actual conditions, the rise was insignificant. That the same percentage does not apply as indicated by others.

Why is this so difficult to understand?

 

[Lord of Planar]

The claim, which I refuted, was: "Floating ice, does not change the sea level when it melts!" I was not questioning the significance. Only the scientific fact. You're falsely attempting to change the fact of the claim to what suits your narrative. Or, quote what I said that attempted to refute the claim of the rise being insignificant.

Wow...

You are something else.

Please learn enough science to understand what I said.

 

[Lord of Planar]

The claim that the melting ice theory was science is false. I was following the science. If you're saying that melting ice does not increase water levels after having been proved wrong, knowing better, then you're at least lying to yourself, convinced of a falsehood.

As for your specific wording here.

Floating ice does not increase the water level when it melts, outside of thermal changes of the water.

Floating ice in sea water does increase the sea level.

Brine and fresh water produce two different results.

Fresh water and ice. When the melted ice becomes water, and has the same density as it's environment, like in a glass of water, mountain lake, or whatever... There is no water level change outside of thermal density changes.

Sea water and ice. When ice melts into seawater, there is a density change of the seawater, which will cause an increase in sea level. The effect is related to how much the density changes. In the experiment, the salinity change was dramatic, hence, density change was dramatic, which gave us a dramatic and notable rise in level. In the open ocean, we could melt all the floating sea ice on earth, and the salinity, hence density, has in insignificant change, Therefore, there is an insignificant change in sea level.

 

[bluesmoke]

Bullshit.

It does increase the level. I have clearly stated this several time. How can you be in error so often?

What is wrong with you as not to understand my words? I only claimed that because of the ratio difference of a saline solution and ice between the experiment, and actual conditions, the rise was insignificant. That the same percentage does not apply as indicated by others.

Why is this so difficult to understand?

Dude, you have a problem with comprehension. I never said you claimed melting ice does not increase sea level. The claim was not yours to begin with. I literally refuted that claim. Quote what I said that stated your claim was such as I refuted.

I've not disagreed nor attempted to refute your claim as to the significance of melting ice contribution to sea level rise. Or, quote what I said otherwise.

Quote anything I've said that you refuted.

The above is my reply to your post and the two others.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Dude, you have a problem with comprehension. I never said you claimed melting ice does not increase sea level. The claim was not yours to begin with. I literally refuted that claim. Quote what I said that stated your claim was such as I refuted.

I've not disagreed nor attempted to refute your claim as to the significance of melting ice contribution to sea level rise. Or, quote what I said otherwise.

Quote anything I've said that you refuted.

The above is my reply to your post and the two others.

I think you're confused.

 

[bluesmoke]

I think you're confused.T

You're evading the point and refuse to show evidence, a quote of mine, that proves what you say. What you say is thus unfounded and dismissed for lack of evidence. However, you mis/disinformation is duly noted.

 

[Lord of Planar]

You're evading the point and refuse to show evidence, a quote of mine, that proves what you say. What you say is thus unfounded and dismissed for lack of evidence. However, you mis/disinformation is duly noted.

Maybe I recall it wrong, but I remember you thinking the experiment meant the same percentage increase would affect the ocean too, which it doesn't. If I'm wrong about your position, I'm sorry.

Do you or do you not agree that the experiment vs. the real life ice melting in the ocean only shows effect, and not quantity? That the increase in volume was very significant in the experiment, but insignificant in the real world?

 

[bluesmoke]

Maybe I recall it wrong, but I remember you thinking the experiment meant the same percentage increase would affect the ocean too, which it doesn't. If I'm wrong about your position, I'm sorry.

Do you or do you not agree that the experiment vs. the real life ice melting in the ocean only shows effect, and not quantity? That the increase in volume was very significant in the experiment, but insignificant in the real world?

The experiment does not support any significant increase in sea level due to melting ice. I never said it did. All I said, which is true, was that melting ice does increase water level, as proved by the experiment, and as opposed to the post in question.