The Official Global Warming/Climate Change Thread

[MrFingers 0]

yeah we've been over this before, sea ice melting will not change the sea level. Simple physics - buoyancy principle.

The world's glaciers have been gradually retreating on average since the little ice age ended in the 19th century, but there are plenty of places where they are growing, and many of the changes with glaciers have nothing to do with global warming.

Fact is, 90% of the world's LAND ice is in Antarctica, and that ice mass has actually grown the last 30 years, against a 6000 year trend of melting before that.

[John94538 0]

EDIT: Ok, sea levels aren't rising.. I know that now.

Ocean levels might not rise, according to the  "buoyancy principle" (I've never heard of it), however, temperatures will rise exponentially. In 2057, world temperatures could rise more than 10°, and by 2107 up to 20° more.

The world's seas and watershed areas will become more toxic as more acid rain falls from the heavens and inundates the developed Earth. Thunder and lightning will clash from the sky, burning whole forests and wooded areas. Storms will still happen, only soot and dust will become the new rain. Most gravestones, monuments, and stone buildings will be corroded soon after.

...And yet, sea levels aren't specifically affected by ANY of these scenarios.

[confused04 14]

Originally posted by: MrFingers yeah we've been over this before, sea ice melting will not change the sea level. Simple physics - buoyancy principle.

The world's glaciers have been gradually retreating on average since the little ice age ended in the 19th century, but there are plenty of places where they are growing, and many of the changes with glaciers have nothing to do with global warming.

Fact is, 90% of the world's LAND ice is in Antarctica, and that ice mass has actually grown the last 30 years, against a 6000 year trend of melting before that.quote>

Can you cite the study or studies that can confirm this growing ice mass.  I've read many that have said that not only have tens of thousands of sq. km. have been lost and the melting has accelerated.  I just want to read to see where the gains are as I haven't heard anything of these "gains".

[MrFingers 0]

Originally posted by: John94538 EDIT: Ok, sea levels aren't rising.. I know that now.

Ocean levels might not rise, according to the  "buoyancy principle" (I've never heard of it), however, temperatures will rise exponentially. In 2057, world temperatures could rise more than 10°, and by 2107 up to 20° more.

The world's seas and watershed areas will become more toxic as more acid rain falls from the heavens and inundates the developed Earth. Thunder and lightning will clash from the sky, burning whole forests and wooded areas. Storms will still happen, only soot and dust will become the new rain. Most gravestones, monuments, and stone buildings will be corroded soon after.

...And yet, sea levels aren't specifically affected by ANY of these scenarios.quote>

I think you're infected with Al Gore.

[MrFingers 0]

Originally posted by: confused04

Can you cite the study or studies that can confirm this growing ice mass.  I've read many that have said that not only have tens of thousands of sq. km. have been lost and the melting has accelerated.  I just want to read to see where the gains are as I haven't heard anything of these "gains".quote>

sure;

http://www.iceagenow.com/Growing_Antarctic_Ice_Sheet.htm

http://www.jefflindsay.com/snippets/warming.shtml

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0520-08.htm

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/antarctic_020822.html

http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V9/N45/C2.jsp

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2000/ast27dec_1.htm

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/01/020130074839.htm

http://ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2weekly/2005-04-28/antartic.htm

[John94538 0]

Lol, infected with Al Gore...

I'm just trying to be realistic here!

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 7, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[schm0 27]

Originally posted by: MrFingers yeah we've been over this before, sea ice melting will not change the sea level. Simple physics - buoyancy principle.

The world's glaciers have been gradually retreating on average since the little ice age ended in the 19th century, but there are plenty of places where they are growing, and many of the changes with glaciers have nothing to do with global warming.quote>

I found a nice link for you to peruse. I'll quote some of it here for posterity. It's from a series called "How to talk to a Global Warming skeptic." (Very appropriate, eh?)

Objection: A few glaciers receding today is not proof of global warming. Glaciers have grown and receded differently in many times and places.

Answer: Firstly, it is more than "a few glaciers" that are receding; it is a pervasive, sustained, and accelerating global trend. The National Snow and Ice Data Centre (NSIDC) maintains a chart of global glacier mass balance, and for as far back as their data allows us to look, all but a few years have shown a loss in ice volume of subpolar and mountain glaciers. Further, annual losses are increasing.

SOURCE: GRISTMILL

quote>

Also, sea ice melting will allow warmer sea water to penetrate under land ice, which will release it into the ocean, which will melt, which will allow warmer sea water to penetrate under land ice, which will release it into the ocean, which will melt, which will allow warmer sea water to penetrate under land ice, which will release it into the ocean, which will melt, which will allow warmer sea water to penetrate under land ice, which will release it into the ocean... are you seeing a trend? Sea ice melting will lead to further sea level rise. It's simple physics. Oh, and arctic geology, too.

Fact is, 90% of the world's LAND ice is in Antarctica, and that ice mass has actually grown the last 30 years, against a 6000 year trend of melting before that.quote>

http://www.iceagenow.com/Growing_Antarctic_Ice_Sheet.htm

http://www.jefflindsay.com/snippets/warming.shtml

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0520-08.htm

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/antarctic_020822.html

http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V9/N45/C2.jsp

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2000/ast27dec_1.htm

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/01/020130074839.htm

http://ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2weekly/2005-04-28/antartic.htmquote>

quote>

[topcliff 1]

This is an interesting debate, and I do my part for the Earth. Mainly, . . . I drive a Hybrid. But (I'm not a skeptic), mankind has endured times of extreme cold and heat. If the temperatures for a spring day in Sacramento in 2107 are 94 degrees, mankind will adjust in an environmentally-friendly way. Also, at this rate, just take a look at the Mayan Calendar. Watch out for December 21, 2012. That's when I'll ahve a Driver's License. Enough kidding around! I don't think our world can take much more of this. According to science, this could go two ways: the world could gradually heat up, or it could insta-freeze like the Day After Tomorrow. We can survive the frost because we can wear more clothes and we have fireplaces, don't we? The heat, however, we can't protect ourselves against. There's no way to "unbundle" in the heat, and all of our air conditioning pollutes to some degree. Personally, I'll take the frost. It gives me an excuse to cuddle wit' my girl (If I had one, dammit . . .). TopCliff

[coolotter88 2]

the day after tomorrow is a movie, they blow stuff up just for the hell of it. if we see any day after tomorrow cooling, it would be something like slightly colder, drier climates.

[Boggy1 45]

I came across this piece in My Documents a few minutes ago. I wrote it for a school project on Persuasive Writing, when I was 15 (a couple of months ago). Sorry for the HUGE Wall 'O Text.

A note; some of the points I DO NOT agree with anymore, such as the rising sea levels due to Ice melting. Bear that in mind.

  Hope – Climate Change

            The term ‘climate change’ has become a buzz word in popular culture. The media often use it to catch your attention. Politicians use it to further their campaign. Writers use it to develop doomsday futures. Today, the concept has become one of the most talked about, and debated, subjects for years. There are huge disagreements as to whether climate change is natural, or caused by us.

            But first, have you ever considered how we, as a species, will die? Did you ever think that maybe a meteor would one day slam down into the Earth and wipe us out just like the dinosaurs? Or maybe you believe that bug-eyed monsters from outer space would come and eat us all? Well, if you thought either of those two; you would be wrong.

            In fact, the trouble we are facing may be coming a lot sooner than you think. It may come in your very own lifetime. Why? Because the Human race is in trouble. Deep trouble. In a hundred years or less, we could find ourselves extinct. And not just us, I’m talking about every living species on the planet. Every plant and animal. Nothing will escape. In fact, we could find that the entire planet has turned into a lifeless ball of quasi-molten rock.

            So what exactly will cause this terrible event? First, a science lesson. Surrounding our Earth is an atmosphere. It’s a pretty important thing, as it is full of oxygen and all the other useful things that keep everything alive.

            Our atmosphere comes in several layers, and one of these big layers is called the Greenhouse Layer. It is, as the name suggests, comprised of mainly Greenhouse Gases, such as carbon dioxide, water vapour and methane.

            Heat from the Sun, called solar energy, is hitting our atmosphere constantly. Usually, the energy will pass right through the atmosphere, and hit the surface of the Earth. Solar energy is generally heat and light, and so this hitting of the Earth’s surface will warm it up - this is where we get most of our heat from; without it, the Earth would be freezing cold all year round, and life would be impossible.

            Once the solar energy has hit the Earth’s surface, some of it bounces back upwards, right back through the atmosphere, and off into space. This process is totally normal, and has been happening for countless millions of years. It keeps the planet warm, in fact just warm enough for life to survive, and that is obviously very important.

            Of course, Humans came along and ruined this process. For the past hundred years or so, we have been pumping more and more extra greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, mainly carbon dioxide from all of the power stations and factories, which have been burning fossil fuels such as coal and oil. Similarly, the multitude of vehicles on the road and aeroplanes in the sky has added greatly to the problem, giving off much of the pollution.

            In the United States of America, more than 90% of all their greenhouse gases come from the burning of fossil fuels. At the moment, we are pumping a ridiculous 70 million tons of greenhouse gas into the atmosphere every 24 hours. You can hardly visualise a number that big. CO2 emissions produced have quadrupled since the 1950s. And they don’t show much sign of slowing down either.

            Atmospheric CO2 levels have now almost doubled in the last 100 years. It doesn’t sound like much, but in the scenario I’m about to outline, we could be seeing CO2 levels doubling in a matter of months.

            All of this extra greenhouse gas will find itself in the atmosphere, and it means the greenhouse layer has got thicker. Now, instead of the solar energy bouncing back upwards into space, it finds itself blocked and so is reflected back down onto the Earth’s surface. This of course means that the Earth's surface gradually begins to increase in temperature. 

            The 1990’s was the warmest decade for over one thousand years. This is the direct result of global warming.

            Also back in the 1990’s, scientists and climatologists warned of a grave future where the Earth’s climate is spiralling out of control. But, they were generally ignored by the public. Now, however, climate change is drawing much attention from the media and official bodies, as it seems that the scientists were right. The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) gave an official statement warning about the grave effects of a runaway greenhouse climate shift effect; the thing that might kill us all. They stated that it could “...unleash catastrophic and irreversible changes to key planetary processes that make the world habitable.”

            Even the British Government has now warned the world of the devastating effects a runaway greenhouse climate shift effect could cause. They stated that it may start as soon as the year 2015.

            Due to the increasing temperature of the Earth’s surface, the polar ice caps will start to melt. Unfortunately, trapped inside the ice is methane; billions and billions of tons. When the ice does start to melt, all of this methane is suddenly released up into the atmosphere, and this of course makes the greenhouse layer thicker still.

            Already the arctic ice-sheets have decreased by over 40% in the last couple of decades. That spells bad news for polar bears, but even worse for us, as the pent up gas inside the ice is released up into the atmosphere.

            The solar energy is going to have an even greater job of getting back out into space, and it will ultimately be forced back down to the surface. This means, as more and more solar energy is forced back to the Earth’s surface, the temperature rises higher - and faster.

            What does this do? It melts the ice caps more quickly of course, and that causes a greater temperature rise at a faster rate which causes more of the ice caps to melt which releases more methane...and it goes on like that, but faster and faster.

            This is the dreaded runaway greenhouse effect.

            Now, if you thought that was bad, listen to what comes next. Due to all this melting ice, it means that sea levels are rising. That means dreadful flooding on every coastline on every part of the world, and because even mountain snow is melting, it means that nearly every river and stream is pushing past its banks.

            Entire countries like Holland and Bangladesh - which are both nearly all below sea level - could suddenly be swept underwater. Cities like New York and London will not be able to stop the ever continuing floods, and soon we will find ourselves up to our ankles in water.

            Of course, Governments will try and ease people’s minds. They may even bring forth so-called ‘evidence’ detailing how nothing is wrong. They will try and use the propaganda machine to its fullest potential.

            But people are dying. What's more; they aren’t dying in a far off country on the other side of the globe, they are dying right on the doorsteps.

There is worse to come. As temperatures rise still further, tropical diseases begin to push north. Animals are going extinct left and right; they simply can’t keep up with the out of control climate.

            Nobody has ever seen such drastic changes in such short periods of time. Farmers find that crops are dying, and there is a mass failure of harvests across the globe. Foods become scarce, and now real panic starts to set in, real fear.

            Here’s the thing about the human race; we are great at getting ourselves worked up. When the public smells fear, they themselves will become afraid. Like an ugly monster rearing its head, the primeval instincts begin to kick in. Self-preservation is now top of the list. There are riots. Chaos. Total anarchy. Governments crumble, economies collapse. It’s a new Dark Age. Thankfully, it won’t last for long.

            Temperatures are continuing to rise, not due to us anymore, but due to the huge amounts of methane trapped in ice.

            Sea levels now start to drop, because the heat is rising to such levels that it is beginning to evaporate the Earth’s actual water surface. We see rivers that disappear, and never get refilled, lakes that vanish, and never reappear, entire oceans that are being swept away. Mass drought kicks in. Billions die, and the population of the planet is now spiralling downwards, out of control.

            Worst of all, the rising temperatures will unleash the trillions and countless trillions of tons of methane trapped below the oceans. The whole atmosphere is now simply saturated with greenhouse gases.

            By now life is gone. Nothing but a couple of hardy microbes could survive on this literal hell on Earth. What you have just witnessed is Earth transformed into a new Venus.

                The planet Venus went through exactly what we may be about to go through right now. The average temperature on Venus is 750 degrees Celsius, and the atmosphere is over 90 times thicker than ours at the moment, enough to crush bones. If you were to step onto Venus, you would live for around ten seconds, probably less.

            Scientists speculate that Venus used to look like Earth. It may have had oceans, lush forests, and possibly even life.

            Venus now serves as an omen, for what the Earth may look like a number of years from now. We may very well be going down the route that Venus took.

            Recently, it was reported that the permanent frost in parts of Alaska and Russia were melting altogether, releasing methane. This is great news for archaeologists and palaeontologists; who’ve found fossils and artefacts under the ice; bad news for everyone else, scientists and climatologists in particular.

            So, as you can see, we are already half way down the road to the runaway greenhouse effect, and ultimately a huge climate change. Some say we are there already.

            So, should we abandon all hope? It does seem like a scary situation. And it certainly seems as if there is no light at the end of the tunnel. This event, if it happens, is on such a global and massive scale, that to survive we would either have to alter the basic atmospheric content of the Earth, or build a few hundred spaceships and travel off to a new home. Once you’ve developed either one of those solutions, please, tell me.

            Very recently, the IPCC held its fourth assessment meeting, in Paris. Finally they have included that the threat of global warming is ‘unequivocal’. They have also stated that the probability that global warming and climate change is caused directly by humans is 90%, whereas the chance that it is caused naturally is just below 5%. They have also warned that global temperatures may increase to a maximum of 4°C and sea levels could increase 23 inches! This is very bad news for the human race, and it really means we should clean up our act. But is it already too late? Some scientists say yes. It is estimated we would have to cut emissions by 90% in just over 20 years time, that would cause unparalleled disruption to the world economy, and thus most Government do not find it at all attractive.

            Of course, the Earth is incredibly resilient. It has survived countless disasters and is bound to pull through a lot more. Around 50 million years ago, the North Pole was like the Caribbean Sea, and back in the time of the dinosaurs, the CO2 levels were more than 6 times higher than today, and the Earth survived that too. But of course, we aren’t that resilient. If we do experience a runaway climate shift, something that is looking ever more likely, there is a high chance that we may not survive.

            What can you do? We are the next generation. We will have to deal directly with the consequences of the past’s actions. If you want to be smart, and look after this beautiful planet of ours, then you must, at all costs, try and reduce your carbon footprint, and your personal effect on the climate, however small it will be. Then again, if you want to be dumb, you will ignore the warnings, and carry on with your extravagant lifestyle. We will have to make many sacrifices if we even stand a hope of controlling this problem. But if we all work together, we may be able to pull it off. Maybe. We only have one atmosphere, one planet. All our preverbal eggs are in our preverbal basket. If we screw up now, we will never have another chance, and the human race may find itself extinct.

But let’s not abandon all hope just yet.

[coolotter88 2]

edit the post so you block the emoticons, I think you can turn off emoticons in posts, just check the do not parse emoticons checkbox...I think

let's try

[Boggy1 45]

Oh! yay! Thank you for that coolotter

[+Guest]

You know what sucks about this thread? No body can truly prove anything until its either to late or global climate change never really does anything to us in the long run. We all have our own ideas on this subject. Some think that this little warming period will lead to the end of the world which if that is right than everyone that believes that can laugh in the faces of those who don't but it wont really matter. If the ones who think we are causing the end of the world are right well then no body wins, personally I would like to believe that this is part of the natural cycle of the sun and the earth and everything working together and just like every business or whatever you want to put in for this analogy not everyone gets along the whole time. But eventually it gets fixed, the obnoxious jerk in the cubical next to you gets replaced by some nice guy, or your boss stops yelling at you and the 'heat' so to speak in the office cools down a little. This may not be the best analogy but i just thought of that off the top of my head. Point is.. this could be just a cycle but since we can't PROVE that well then it could just as easily be greenhouse gasses are causing the eventual end of the world, this is just about as hard to argue as which came first the chicken or the egg. Religious people say the chicken came first, god put the chicken there first, while scientific people claim it was the egg, it was from a mutated gene of some other animal. We cant prove that one either.

As for me, i think i am just gonna live my life as best I can and do my part in keeping the environment clean. Wether this will help keep away global climate changing or not it still benefits me and the rest of the world, a clean environment is always a good thing.

[John94538 0]

You've got a point, cologned91. Most of the news lately is from opinions, and some from experiments. But then again, experiments can't 100% prove ideas, unless they would be done immediately when a scenario is happening.

My interpretation is that the world won't end, however life as we know it will - lets say - become worse if global warming continues - for a long period of time by us, that is.

[MrFingers 0]

Originally posted by: schm0

I found a nice link for you to peruse. I'll quote some of it here for posterity. It's from a series called "How to talk to a Global Warming skeptic." (Very appropriate, eh?)

Objection: A few glaciers receding today is not proof of global warming. Glaciers have grown and receded differently in many times and places.

Answer: Firstly, it is more than "a few glaciers" that are receding; it is a pervasive, sustained, and accelerating global trend. The National Snow and Ice Data Centre (NSIDC) maintains a chart of global glacier mass balance, and for as far back as their data allows us to look, all but a few years have shown a loss in ice volume of subpolar and mountain glaciers. Further, annual losses are increasing.

SOURCE: GRISTMILL

quote>

quote>

I don't trust that graph, it takes advantage of the fact that I don't know the relative size of the growth rate and total size.  However, I never said that globally glaciers aren't on average receding, I just said that it is not as simple as that.

Also, sea ice melting will allow warmer sea water to penetrate under land ice, which will release it into the ocean, which will melt, which will allow warmer sea water to penetrate under land ice, which will release it into the ocean, which will melt, which will allow warmer sea water to penetrate under land ice, which will release it into the ocean, which will melt, which will allow warmer sea water to penetrate under land ice, which will release it into the ocean... are you seeing a trend? Sea ice melting will lead to further sea level rise. It's simple physics. Oh, and arctic geology, too.

quote>

sea ice melting allows warmer sea water to penetrate under land ice... hmm, gunna have to walk me through that logic

This has not been disputed. The significance of those articles is the reason for the snowfall.

A couple of pages back, I pointed out that the ice in Antartica is growing because previously it was too cold to snow there. The snow was previously light and moisture would not stick to the surface. With warmer temperatures, the ice mass is increasing in size due to Global Warming.

quote>

I said antarctica's ice mass was growing, I didn't say how, although you are correct, but I don't see how that's relevant.  my point was that the place with 90% of the world's ice is growing, and thus this song and dance about rising sea from melting poles is nonsense.

Furthermore, the amount of snow added to the Antartic is a small fraction of that which is being lost in sea ice and glaciers.

quote>

Sea ice does not change sea levels when it melts.

glaciers account for less than 3% of the world's ice, I highly doubt they are melting 30 times faster than antarctica is growing.

[schm0 27]

Originally posted by: MrFingers

I don't trust that graph, it takes advantage of the fact that I don't know the relative size of the growth rate and total size.  However, I never said that globally glaciers aren't on average receding, I just said that it is not as simple as that.quote>

I don't know how much more reputable of a source you can find... The growth rate is negative after you add it all up, as shown by the graph. As for the total size, it doesn't matter. The graph shows total volume change, and plainly reveals that it is curving downward steeply. It is the beginning of a very long and disturbing parabolic curve.

sea ice melting allows warmer sea water to penetrate under land ice... hmm, gunna have to walk me through that logic quote>

Sure, no problem.

Sea ice is formed during winter or is released from existing land ice due to warmer water penetrating the edge of the ice cap. Obviously, I am not talking about the former but rather the latter. Evidence of this has been seen in the Antarctic with huge chunks of ice breaking off from the ice sheet. Most of this ice was formerly attached to land, but warmer, more saline water at the bottom of the ocean ebbed away at its foundation. The water carves its way underneath, and the ice eventually breaks off due to its mass.

I said antarctica's ice mass was growing, I didn't say how, although you are correct, but I don't see how that's relevant.  my point was that the place with 90% of the world's ice is growing, and thus this song and dance about rising sea from melting poles is nonsense.quote>

From one of your articles posted above, on sciencedaily.com:

One reason for that queasiness is that no one is quite sure what the long-term implications of these changes may be. Tulaczyk noted that if the ice streams continue to slow and stop, the ice shelf that covers the Ross Sea is likely to break up. The removal of the lid of ice that currently covers the Ross Sea could have significant effects on global ocean circulation and the global climate, he said.quote>

Sea ice does not change sea levels when it melts.

glaciers account for less than 3% of the world's ice, I highly doubt they are melting 30 times faster than antarctica is growing.

quote>

You completely dismiss my entire argument and restate your own. Excellent debate.

Please note the arguments above concerning sea ice and how it melts.

Originally posted by: cologned91 You know what sucks about this thread? No body can truly prove anything until its either to late or global climate change never really does anything to us in the long run.quote>

There has been consensus for quite some time. Nothing behind the general theory of Global Warming needs to be proved, to be honest. What "sucks about this thread" is that people are misinformed or have been led to doubt the science behind the theory.

(content edited)

Point is.. this could be just a cycle but since we can't PROVE that well then it could just as easily be greenhouse gasses are causing the eventual end of the world, this is just about as hard to argue as which came first the chicken or the egg. Religious people say the chicken came first, god put the chicken there first, while scientific people claim it was the egg, it was from a mutated gene of some other animal. We cant prove that one either.quote>

Not hard to prove at all. Just read the IPCC report. What is being debated in the world of climate change today are the minutia surrounding smaller variables in the overall scheme of things. (Such as sea ice and its melting and how it affects the global sea level. ) Scientists are not sitting around mulling over whether they think the theory is correct. Instead, they debate the finer details of the argument.

As for me, i think i am just gonna live my life as best I can and do my part in keeping the environment clean. Wether this will help keep away global climate changing or not it still benefits me and the rest of the world, a clean environment is always a good thing.quote>

An excellent stance, my friend. Welcome to the thread.

Originally posted by: John94538 You've got a point, cologned91. Most of the news lately is from opinions, and some from experiments. But then again, experiments can't 100% prove ideas, unless they would be done immediately when a scenario is happening.

quote>

If you don't think experiments can prove a theory, then go outside with a penny and drop it until gravity stops working. The data and science behind the theory of Global Warming is overwhelmingly vast and supportive. You are correct in that there certainly is debate about climate change, but not over the general consensus. (See my above point.)

[MrFingers 0]

Originally posted by: schm0

I don't know how much more reputable of a source you can find... The growth rate is negative after you add it all up, as shown by the graph. As for the total size, it doesn't matter. The graph shows total volume change, and plainly reveals that it is curving downward steeply. It is the beginning of a very long and disturbing parabolic curve.

quote>

Well that's definitely what the author of the graph wants you to think, but telling me there are 300 cubic kilometers of ice disappearing from glaciers each year means nothing unless I have something to compare that number against.  300 cubic kilometers maybe nothing more than a small blip in the total ice in glaciers. 

Sure, no problem.

Sea ice is formed during winter or is released from existing land ice due to warmer water penetrating the edge of the ice cap. Obviously, I am not talking about the former but rather the latter. Evidence of this has been seen in the Antarctic with huge chunks of ice breaking off from the ice sheet. Most of this ice was formerly attached to land, but warmer, more saline water at the bottom of the ocean ebbed away at its foundation. The water carves its way underneath, and the ice eventually breaks off due to its mass.

quote>

how does warm sea water climb up onto the land and start melting the land ice?

I think what you are thinking about is the process by which melting ice on the land produces running water which erodes into the ice until it reaches the ground underneath it and then lubricates the surface between the ice and the land making the ice susceptible to breaking and sliding into the sea.   This has nothing to do with sea ice, it is all about melting land ice.

Seasonal land ice breaks into the sea the whole time, that's why propaganda shots of ice breaking off is just nonsense.  The ice that falls into the sea as icebergs is taken into account obviously when measuring the net growth of the sheet, but again, this has nothing to do with the sea ice.

Melting sea ice does not change the sea level.  I'm sure if you try hard enough, you can find some minor way in which it does, but I promise it will be insignificant.

From one of your articles posted above, on sciencedaily.com:

One reason for that queasiness is that no one is quite sure what the long-term implications of these changes may be. Tulaczyk noted that if the ice streams continue to slow and stop, the ice shelf that covers the Ross Sea is likely to break up. The removal of the lid of ice that currently covers the Ross Sea could have significant effects on global ocean circulation and the global climate, he said.quote>

quote>

I'm sure the loss of an ice shelf will have an effect on the planet.  So what? 

The land ice, the ice that is relevant for sea level changes, in Antarctica is growing.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 7, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[edd17 1]

This reminds me of one of the older plans to combat the increase in CO₂ in the atmosphere by dumping loads of iron in the ocean to promote the growth of phytoplankton, but the amount of CO₂ released by the boat on the journey out to sea was greater then the amount taken out of the atmosphere. I think they want to pump fertiliser out to the middle of the ocean now.

[MrFingers 0]

Originally posted by: edd17 This reminds me of one of the older plans to combat the increase in CO₂ in the atmosphere by dumping loads of iron in the ocean to promote the growth of phytoplankton, but the amount of CO₂ released by the boat on the journey out to sea was greater then the amount taken out of the atmosphere. I think they want to pump fertiliser out to the middle of the ocean now.quote>

I did some maths earlier... 10 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide (humans produce about 15 per year) occupies about 14 million cubic kilometers of air.  that means you have to process about 0.44 cubic kilometers of air a second if you were removing 100% of the CO2 from it.  As you can see, this is a huge number.

[edd17 1]

This diagram shows the imbalance in the release and absorption of CO₂, the actual imbalance is quite small compared to the how much passes through the system.

When comparing the amount that would need to be taken out of the atmosphere to the amount that is taken out by photosynthesis, it would have seemed like a reasonable option.

[schm0 27]

Originally posted by: MrFingers

Well that's definitely what the author of the graph wants you to think, but telling me there are 300 cubic kilometers of ice disappearing from glaciers each year means nothing unless I have something to compare that number against. 300 cubic kilometers maybe nothing more than a small blip in the total ice in glaciers.quote>

Ok, here's the data on the total amount of ice contained within glaciers in the world.

[q"]This analysis is focused on mountain glaciers and smaller ice caps, which have a total area at least 785x10³ km². Although they make up only 4% of the total land ice area, they may have contributed to as much as 30% of sea level change in the 20th century due to rapid ice volume reduction connected with global warming."quote>

[autoVino 26]

I like how we all think that we can predict the future...

No really, I know that there is global warming (because it is quite clearly warmer this summer than 5 years ago), but is it really going to be as bad as some of you are saying?  I say we (I mean this as people in general, no one group specific)  are just over-reacting which hinders us to act about this.  I may be wrong and that global warming is really going to be that bad, but this is just my opinion.

And is it really Corbon dioxide that causes global warming?  I heard many times that gasses such as methane and carbon monoxide are the gasses that heat up the earth. 

[edd17 1]

Carbon dioxide is one of many gasses which contribute to the greenhouse effect but the problem is that so much of it is being released into the atmosphere. How bad its effects will be is open to debate but we can be sure that increasing the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will increase the amount of heat in the atmosphere which will probably alter weather systems to some degree.

The atmosphere, the oceans and all plant and animals can be thought of as a self regulating system, altering the system in some way upset the balance in some way but ultimately the system will adapt to this (playing SimEarth can give a basic idea of how this works).

I don't think that the earth will be transformed into a Venus like planet, but i do think that humanity will suffer as it has to adapt to new climate systems.

[+Guest]

I am not speaking for anyone but myself right here but I don't want the world to end. I'd just assume that the world is gonna be just dandy and tell myself that the climate is fine. Yall are saying "Oh the ice is all melting and we are contributing to our ultimate demise and the sea levels may or may not rise but the temperature is gonna change and affect everything." that may be true.. But I sure as hell dont want it to be! Look at everything us humans have created (yes its true.. we dont destroy EVERYTHING) I don't want this to be the end in the near future. These thoughts (that you could call phobias or i am in denial whichever you prefer) are my way of coping with things that you say were the general point your getting at is "humans are the cause of all this and we are all gonna die because humans are sooo flawed!" Blah.. that is just depressing. I don't know about all you guys that have prove of global warming that is more than likely true WANT the end of the world just so they can be right but i know i dont.

[Easy Bakes 253]

The real problem is there are to many people. And that problem is only getting worse.

[autoVino 26]

Boom and bust population.  Right now is the boom, and global warming could be the bust...

[Easy Bakes 253]

Originally posted by: autoVino Boom and bust population.  Right now is the boom, and global warming could be the bust... quote>

 

I dont think there have been many significant  lowering of populations it always been riseing exponentanly.

Was WW2 are the last time  a significant # of people died with in a few years?

[edd17 1]

The reason that the worlds population is growing so fast is that infant mortality has fallen, but in developing countries they are still having large families as they would have when the extra children were needed as insurance so some would survive. In more developed countries birthrates have fallen and population growth has levelled off. There is always going to be some population growth but the biggest problem is that more people in developing countries are starting to want to live like we do, and there are not enough resources for everyone on the planet to do that.