|
Post by phydeaux2363 on Aug 27, 2015 22:33:05 GMT
Flea, have you any idea of the scales you are playing with? The mega-wattage of energy the oceans soaked up over the past 15 years dwarfs the thin skim of melt water this austral summer's melt season will produce. Some times it is far better to remain silent and be thought a Fool than to speak up and remove all doubt........ Milankovich cycles? 100,000yr cycles? Why bring that up? ? Wow. I mean wow. This from the guy who has yet to post a single prediction that was even in the ballpark. Whilst we're talking about fools, try this one on and see if it fits, Mr. Wolf--"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain--and most do."
|
|
|
Post by flearider on Aug 27, 2015 22:52:37 GMT
Flea, have you any idea of the scales you are playing with? The mega-wattage of energy the oceans soaked up over the past 15 years dwarfs the thin skim of melt water this austral summer's melt season will produce. Some times it is far better to remain silent and be thought a Fool than to speak up and remove all doubt........ Milankovich cycles? 100,000yr cycles? Why bring that up? ? you believe in what you do .. i'll state what I do .. no need for name calling .. we will see in 7-8 months .. simples isn't it ? I've got my warm gear sorted do you ? btw can you tell me how much heat water can hold ? if they did have so much wouldn't we have even more cloud than we do now ? a theory is just a thought unless written down ..and shared .. ?
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Aug 28, 2015 2:48:39 GMT
Flea, have you any idea of the scales you are playing with? The mega-wattage of energy the oceans soaked up over the past 15 years dwarfs the thin skim of melt water this austral summer's melt season will produce. Some times it is far better to remain silent and be thought a Fool than to speak up and remove all doubt........ Milankovich cycles? 100,000yr cycles? Why bring that up? ? Froze my butt off in Oklahoma today while getting gasoline. 65 degrees and a stout wind after a cold front with a little rain, might as well have been January. Never seen that before in August, (except for last year).... You guys can argue about mega-watts of energy but I am simply noticing it getting cooler. The sun will ultimately decide. Here in mid-Missouri, the mean daily temps for the last 8 days have been more like mid-September. I know, it's only weather .... but??? Hope we get that Indian summer!
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Aug 28, 2015 17:11:59 GMT
www.sciencemag.org/content/349/6251/939.8.fullTHIS WEEK IN SCIENCE CLIMATE SCIENCE How to melt the Antarctic Ice Sheet Kip Hodges Computer simulations suggest that it is possible to entirely eliminate the Antarctic Ice Sheet, Earth's largest reservoir of fresh water. Winkelmann et al. explored the fate of the Antarctic Ice Sheet over 10,000 years into the future, showing that global warming related to massive carbon emissions would not only lead to complete melting of the ice sheet, but a global sea-level rise of more than 50 m. The global demand for energy derived from fossil fuels, if left unchecked, is likely to have devastating impacts on coastal populations and polar ecosystems. Sci. Adv. 10.1126/sciadv.1500589 (2015).
|
|
|
Post by graywolf on Aug 28, 2015 19:20:34 GMT
Pretty simple really? When did we see Antarctica develop ice sheets? What was the CO2 concentration then ( the active carbon cycle)? Well for those who don't question it was 450ppm. 400ppm saw west Antarctica and the final 2/3rds of Greenland go under ( and bury their bits of the then carbon cycle). We sat at around 280ppm from then on......... then we decided to re-engage a long buried portion of an ancient carbon cycle and push up concentrations to over 400ppm....... Mother N. knows what to do next and so we are set to lose west Antarctica and 2/3rds of Greenland. but wait! what lies buried under all that ice? at least 120ppm of CO2 from a hibernating/deep freezed carbon cycle....... over 400ppm plus 120ppm ( eventually) gives us over 520ppm CO2......... Did Antarctica have ice sheets when CO2 was over 450ppm?? What about over 520ppm? .......and what lies under the ice of east Antarctica? Oh Yes! more sleeping carbon cycle........... Bang! and the ice is gone......... ( UK advert humour)
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Aug 28, 2015 19:42:33 GMT
Pretty simple really? When did we see Antarctica develop ice sheets? What was the CO2 concentration then ( the active carbon cycle)? Well for those who don't question it was 450ppm. 400ppm saw west Antarctica and the final 2/3rds of Greenland go under ( and bury their bits of the then carbon cycle). We sat at around 280ppm from then on......... then we decided to re-engage a long buried portion of an ancient carbon cycle and push up concentrations to over 400ppm....... Mother N. knows what to do next and so we are set to lose west Antarctica and 2/3rds of Greenland. but wait! what lies buried under all that ice? at least 120ppm of CO2 from a hibernating/deep freezed carbon cycle....... over 400ppm plus 120ppm ( eventually) gives us over 520ppm CO2......... Did Antarctica have ice sheets when CO2 was over 450ppm?? What about over 520ppm? .......and what lies under the ice of east Antarctica? Oh Yes! more sleeping carbon cycle........... Bang! and the ice is gone......... ( UK advert humour) Yeah, but the more co2 you add, the less effect it's having....inverse exponential effect
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Aug 28, 2015 21:45:34 GMT
That's just the 'sleepy milita'. They're holding out the 'SS Carbon Division' for the real push!
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Aug 29, 2015 3:31:15 GMT
Pretty simple really? When did we see Antarctica develop ice sheets? What was the CO2 concentration then ( the active carbon cycle)? Well for those who don't question it was 450ppm. 400ppm saw west Antarctica and the final 2/3rds of Greenland go under ( and bury their bits of the then carbon cycle). We sat at around 280ppm from then on......... then we decided to re-engage a long buried portion of an ancient carbon cycle and push up concentrations to over 400ppm....... Mother N. knows what to do next and so we are set to lose west Antarctica and 2/3rds of Greenland. but wait! what lies buried under all that ice? at least 120ppm of CO2 from a hibernating/deep freezed carbon cycle....... over 400ppm plus 120ppm ( eventually) gives us over 520ppm CO2......... Did Antarctica have ice sheets when CO2 was over 450ppm?? What about over 520ppm? .......and what lies under the ice of east Antarctica? Oh Yes! more sleeping carbon cycle........... Bang! and the ice is gone......... ( UK advert humour) Graywolf: Glad to see you agree with the predominant paleo view using stoma that CO2 levels during MIS6, THE LAST FULL INTERGLACIAL were considerably higher than present. During that same time 90%+ of the Greenland ice sheet melted off. The WP of Antarctica melted. A whopping 120,000 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by douglavers on Aug 29, 2015 12:21:07 GMT
The Martians are finding some of the comments on this thread a little strange.
For the past three or four years, Antarctic ice extent in winter has been breaking records for the period where Earthlings have been able to measure it properly by satellite. This year, it has reverted to near its 30 year average.
They are talking about a continent where the average ice depth is around 2 km, covers 14,000,000 km², and even in summer is far below freezing.
It is beyond them how anyone can even contemplate the continent melting out in anything like Earth’s current climate environment. Even if average global temperatures increased by 2°, that would be nowhere near sufficient to trigger significant melting.
But then, Earthlings were always prone to flights of fantasy. More realistic Martians think that the risk of reverting to the ice ages which have covered Earth for the major part of the last million years is much more significant.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Aug 29, 2015 12:51:46 GMT
Things have become so good for some that they fantasize what will happen 200 years into the future.
|
|
|
Post by graywolf on Aug 30, 2015 11:00:29 GMT
The problem some folk appear to have is to view 'ice' as a static entity? As Richard Alley is always keen to emphasise it's when the ice gets down to Sea level that the problems start?
He is keen to point out the physical reality of ice's structural integrity.
Ice cliff maximum height before collapse 200m.
Flanking, and being buttressed by, every ocean terminating glacier ( shelf fronted or not) are massive depths of glacial ice. Remove the glacier ( as we are seeing across Greenland and West Antarctica) and you remove the support to the ice beyond.
This type of mechanical collapse allows the 'saddle and Lobe' type melt that helped kick off the final destruction of the U.S. glacial ice sheet at the end of the last ice age.
The sudden collapse of places Like Ross is merely a precursor to the retreat of East Antarctica's drain glaciers but how much Sea level rise would the collapse of the Grounded Ross Bring over decadal time scales?
No point in worrying about tens of metres of sea level rise ( from a near total melt out of the continent) when we face a potential 5m hike over a mere decade, and the Global chaos such rapid change would drive ( every port, lowest bridging point city, oil terminal inundated in a matter of years ) should Ross do what it did 120,000yrs ago?
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Aug 30, 2015 14:40:25 GMT
Graywolf: No matter what mankind does, sea levels will rise and glaciers will melt. That is the cold hard fact.
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Aug 30, 2015 19:13:19 GMT
Or not
|
|
|
Post by flearider on Aug 30, 2015 19:53:23 GMT
have you seen the Antarctic jet stream of late ?? theres 2 very close together intertwining at points dam strange ..
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Aug 31, 2015 1:48:44 GMT
And they appear much stronger than the northern hemisphere. Does look pretty strange.
|
|