Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Arctic "death Spiral" Leaves Climate Scientists Shocked And Worried


Recommended Posts

That's alarming, and also confounding.

 

How DO they "measure" the loss of ice and volume of ice melting? And at what point?

 

Maybe the earth is gradually spinning itself into a minute offset of axis spin.

 

Odd, to start at 1979. You'd think that's when they started record keeping....

 

I agree with these two folks in their comments at the end:

**************************************

Sea Ice has been low, or even non-existant, many times beforeTom Harris September 19th 2012 | 7:19 PMI always get a chuckle out of excited graphs of anything to do with climate that start in 1979. Given that one needs 30 years of meteorological data to have one climate data point, the record cited in this piece is far too short to be meaningful from a climate perspective. Afterall, it was warmer in the Arctic in the 30s--was that a "death spiral" too? If so, then nature seems to recover nicely after such events.

 

Sincerely,

 

Tom Harris

 

Executive Director <br style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC)

 

Canada

 

http://www.climatescienceinternational.org

 

 

 

[/url]PB September 20th 2012 | 7:19 PMPerhaps I missed it - but is there no mention of sea levels. If that much ice melts that fast... wouldn't sea levels rise, causing (abrupt) flooding and disaster?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's more to this, too. With the help of some recently launched satellites, we can now measure sea ice loss from space, and see through the ice to measure its thickness. And the results they've gotten back are the same story you see every week or two if you follow this subject: it's worse than they projected it was going to be. And they were projecting that it was going to be bad.

 

They're talking about the Arctic being ice free in the summer by around 2020. Some say it could be in 4-5 years. Then read about what feedback loops are, what the polar vortex is, and think about what that means. It's frightening shit.

 

So, let's get back to worrying about whether or not the White House threatened Bob Woodward. You know, important stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's more to this, too. With the help of some recently launched satellites, we can now measure sea ice loss from space, and see through the ice to measure its thickness. And the results they've gotten back are the same story you see every week or two if you follow this subject: it's worse than they projected it was going to be. And they were projecting that it was going to be bad.

 

They're talking about the Arctic being ice free in the summer by around 2020. Some say it could be in 4-5 years. Then read about what feedback loops are, what the polar vortex is, and think about what that means. It's frightening shit.

 

So, let's get back to worrying about whether or not the White House threatened Bob Woodward. You know, important stuff.

 

I'm coming around heck. This is cut and dry, this is eye opening. Reguardless of who done it, it happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm coming around heck. This is cut and dry, this is eye opening. Reguardless of who done it, it happening.

 

All kidding aside, I think it is a fact. What can we do about it? Probably not a damn thing. Prepare? Don't live near the coast and hope for the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously, it's best to ascertain what the causes are. It's always best to treat the causes.

 

Outside of killing off millions of acres of virgin rainforest, and china's outrageous pollution of the planet,

 

here is a few suggestions that we can't do anything to stop it. Ocean currents are warmed up by

 

dramatic geological events.

 

As to how to prepare, well...maybe a gigantic freezer making billions of ice cubes to dump into the oceans around

 

the arctic. Seriously, I think the sea levels around Florida are pretty much unchanged. I haven't been to Disney for years, so

 

I don't know for sure. Ask Zombo ?

 

***********************************************

 

Surprise! Underwater volcano off Oregon coast erupts

9 Aug 11 - Leaves a layer of lava more than 12 feet thick and a mile across in some places.

Surprise! Underwater volcano off Oregon coast erupts

 

 

Yet more deep-sea hydrothermal vents 4 Aug 11 - Pumping superheated water into the depths, the vent field lies almost two miles down.

See Yet more deep-sea hydrothermal ventsHydrothermal%20VENTS%20program.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's more to this, too. With the help of some recently launched satellites, we can now measure sea ice loss from space, and see through the ice to measure its thickness. And the results they've gotten back are the same story you see every week or two if you follow this subject: it's worse than they projected it was going to be. And they were projecting that it was going to be bad.

 

They're talking about the Arctic being ice free in the summer by around 2020. Some say it could be in 4-5 years. Then read about what feedback loops are, what the polar vortex is, and think about what that means. It's frightening shit.

 

So, let's get back to worrying about whether or not the White House threatened Bob Woodward. You know, important stuff.

 

Heck, you may want to review the Woodward threat thread and see who in particular is in the driver's seat there...

 

It occurs to me that almost every situation we discuss here is a matter of life and death, take in particular the fiscal cliff and sequestration.

If we exaggerate everything to its ultimate height how can you expect the public to take you seriously when you talk about this?

And I am NOT claiming it isn't true.

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's alarming, and also confounding.

 

How DO they "measure" the loss of ice and volume of ice melting? And at what point?

 

Maybe the earth is gradually spinning itself into a minute offset of axis spin.

 

Odd, to start at 1979. You'd think that's when they started record keeping....

 

I agree with these two folks in their comments at the end:

**************************************

Sea Ice has been low, or even non-existant, many times beforeTom Harris September 19th 2012 | 7:19 PMI always get a chuckle out of excited graphs of anything to do with climate that start in 1979. Given that one needs 30 years of meteorological data to have one climate data point, the record cited in this piece is far too short to be meaningful from a climate perspective. Afterall, it was warmer in the Arctic in the 30s--was that a "death spiral" too? If so, then nature seems to recover nicely after such events.

 

Sincerely,

 

Tom Harris

 

Executive Director <br style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC)

 

Canada

 

http://www.climatescienceinternational.org

 

 

 

[/url]PB September 20th 2012 | 7:19 PMPerhaps I missed it - but is there no mention of sea levels. If that much ice melts that fast... wouldn't sea levels rise, causing (abrupt) flooding and disaster?

 

 

Cal you know I lean towards global events not global warming that is heating the planet. But to play devils advocate, the same argument of "well it's been happening for millions of years (which I tend to believe), and then turn around to say the data collected is not sufficient enough because it's only from 1979? That is the stuff Heck complains about, and rightfully so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I understand that. I tend to look at trends longterm. For instance, obviously to everybody - underwater volcanic eruptions have

 

been happening throughout history. That's how the Hawaiian Islands came into existence.

 

I posted these two reports in my other thread, but since you brought it up - isn't it more likely, to attribute

 

the events of the arctic ice melting, to natural events ? The connection between that ice melting, and global warming

 

seems silly to me. It's fricking way, way, way below freezing in the arctic, air temp wise.

 

I look at this ice melting thing, and supposing that it's accurate - what can we do about ocean floor volcanic eruptions

 

warming up the ocean currents? Nothin. I just didn't elaborate on that previously - had to go.

***********************************************

Surprise! Underwater volcano off Oregon coast erupts

Leaves a layer of lava more than 12 feet thick and a mile across in some places.

Surprise! Underwater volcano off Oregon coast erupts

Yet more deep-sea hydrothermal vents 4 Aug 11 - Pumping superheated water into the depths,

the vent field lies almost two miles down.

See Yet more deep-sea hydrothermal ventsHydrothermal%20VENTS%20program.png

</b>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heck, you may want to review the Woodward threat thread and see who in particular is in the driver's seat there...

 

It occurs to me that almost every situation we discuss here is a matter of life and death, take in particular the fiscal cliff and sequestration.

If we exaggerate everything to its ultimate height how can you expect the public to take you seriously when you talk about this?

And I am NOT claiming it isn't true.

WSS

 

Except that I'm not exaggerating anything. The Arctic really is on course to be ice free in the summer in about a decade or less. And losing ice caps is bad news on a number of levels. That's the science. What do you want me to tell you?

 

And you're also mistaken that I'm saying it's a matter of life and death, as if everyone on the planet drops dead when the ice cap melts. That's not what the science says. That's not what I'm saying. That's what you're saying I'm saying.

 

Sorry, bud, I simply don't think your "threat exaggeration" is a really important topic here. You bring it up all the time, but let's not. One of the problems with dealing with global warming is that it happens slowly but surely, and turning it around now that it's happening is an extremely difficult task.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you misunderstood my point.

It's the idea that the government and the media exaggerate everything to the nth degree.

I used the recent budgetary matters as examples.

I think the public, who you most have to convince, are (is?) becoming worn down by reported crisis after crisis after crisis.

I'm just saying it makes it more difficult to tell them "No really this 1 is true! "

 

I mean there's probably no way we can ever fix the way stories are reported but that's going to pose a problem.

 

Don't make me quote by the time I get to Phoenix...

:-)

 

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's going to be really bad.

 

Of course, sea ice melting doesn't raise ocean levels the same way ice melting in your drink doesn't cause it to overflow. But that's not the only ice melting. Greenland is melting. Norway is melting. Russia is melting. And sea level rise is one of a myriad of bad things that start happening as all of this stuff disappears.

 

The polar vortex governs a large part of the weather patterns for the rest of the planet. Change that, and who fucking knows?

 

But because we're stupid, we're going to find out.

 

PS - Want to read a story about how there's no water in the West this year because we've followed up last year's historic drought with way below average snow pack?

 

Want to read a story about how California's water table is being sucked dry because we're using it faster than it's being replenished, and what that means for all the food that's grown here?

 

Want to read a story about how low Lake Mead is getting, and how Las Vegas is slowly running out of water? Here's a taste of how this works: Vegas gets 90% of its water from Lake Mead. The water is carried through two holes drilled in the rock below the lake's surface, carried out through channels and pipes. The first taps the lake at 1,050 feet, the second is at 1,000 feet. It got down to 1,086 feet last year, close to dropping below the first intake and drying it up, so they had to divert more water into the lake from other sources to fill it back up.

 

This is what's coming, first in the California and Southwest. You also saw a preview of it a couple years ago, when they had to turn off the spigot to California farms in order to keep the river basins high enough so as not to collapse that ecosystem.

 

It's going to be good fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...

There's more to this, too. With the help of some recently launched satellites, we can now measure sea ice loss from space, and see through the ice to measure its thickness. And the results they've gotten back are the same story you see every week or two if you follow this subject: it's worse than they projected it was going to be. And they were projecting that it was going to be bad.

 

They're talking about the Arctic being ice free in the summer by around 2020. Some say it could be in 4-5 years. Then read about what feedback loops are, what the polar vortex is, and think about what that means. It's frightening shit.

 

So, let's get back to worrying about whether or not the White House threatened Bob Woodward. You know, important stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I don't. Not in regards to the debate that has been going on here. Please explain to me how it is with your infinite scientific wisdom.

The "debate?"

Shall We Heart in back to the places where I scoff at you chicken little: types who think we are in dire trouble. Or as a wise man calls it big serious trouble. Since you don't respect anyone else I thought I'd post something from our friend Heck. I would personally call that a pretty dire warning. Outside estimate 17 more years inside estimate 6 or 7 before there is no more polar ice cap. None. So I would say that in a very short time we are looking at disaster. So, science boy, I guess you guys had better get on it. I would suppose you'd need to stop the co2 emissions immediately to meet that deadline.

 

Maybe you think those scientists that provided the information that Heck passed along are crazy. I personally suspect you don't give a fuck or know shit about it but you like those lab coats.

;)

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh.... I was talking about the camel thing. When I hopped into this thread on my phone I was taken to the second page immediately and I saw cals post at the top. I didnt notice the date, my bad.

 

Your post that was a quote of Hecks, yeah I guess that had something to do with what we were talking about. I dont know what study he was talking about and I would have to read it myself. Heck is a smart guy though, and I dont think he was lying.

 

I love the insults, lol. "science boy". Why exactly? Because I agree with the majority of qualified scientists on a scientific matter? Would you rather I just spew back what politicians and lobbyist groups tell me like Cal? Would you rather I just go around saying "whatever, nothing we can do anyway. Why bother" like you and Cysko? Really, I am not sure here.

 

Also, who says I dont respect anyone else? I can tell you that is not true at all. Do I not respect some people on here? Sure. But who cares it is an internet board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...