NASA/GRL/Science - Collapse Of West Antarctic Ice Sheet Appears To Be Under Way, Likely Unstoppable

a reply to: Phage

Heya Phage.. Always a pleasure....

(Source)

That would be the photograph in question. It shows, over the time and by measurements across the years, where one glacier has been. I'm sure many people can take many many meanings from that to indicate many things. It also speaks a bit by itself, and in context to where it's found, IMO.

In fact, you'll find the page I was taking the reference from goes into a great bit of detail on past periods of temperature, ocean levels and more.

Hope that helps clarify the reference.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

You said there were photos showing glaciers in 1850. I'm well aware that glacier retreat can be tracked.

Your source:

Mountain glaciers are excellent monitors of climate change; the worldwide shrinkage of mountain glaciers is thought to be caused by a combination of a temperature increase from the Little Ice Age, which ended in the latter half of the 19th century, and increased greenhouse-gas emissions.

www.usgs.gov...

The thing is, the West Antarctic glaciers aren't retreating, they are slipping into the ocean.

a reply to: Phage

Phage, if you misunderstood me to suggest someone stood atop a ridge in 1850 to take a photograph, I'm sorry. It's not what I said.

Glacier national Park has photos over time that sit on record with the USGS showing 1850, 1937, and onward for positions of major glacier retreat by melt off.

The original photo does show a known position (probably first surveyed without digging for precise sourcing on this thread) for 1850. Subsequent ones show the change and some, with graduated points of change for the years indicated. Photos do exist for much of that.

(1910, 1997)

(1938, 1981)

(1940, 2006)

It's always appreciated...the effort to fact check and make sure folks have something right. It's helpful to avoid assuming people don't have more to share or elaborate on though. As I actually have a great deal more on glacial retreat and melting pre 20th century for the starting points observed in more than just North America.

As far as Antarctica.. Yup.. I'm well aware of the mechanics of the Western ice sheet. Again, my bad if terminology wasn't as clear as needed...and additional suggestions of causation are being found. Some, just this past season on the Ice, in fact. It's become something I follow news from as closely as any US wire feed. Though the thread I linked above and wrote about the whole issue, had indicated it too.

Antarctica is a weird and fascinating place, no doubt.

don't believe the hype

An Honest IPCC Scientist Tackles 'ClimateGate'
youtu.be...


bombers left in Greenland during WW2 were later found to be covered in 50 meters of ice and snow…

speaking of Greenland… ever wonder WHY it is called GREEN land??

originally posted by: Verum1quaere

speaking of Greenland… ever wonder WHY it is called GREEN land??

One Viking in particular, Erik the Red was very good at raiding and pillaging. Although history is somewhat sketchy, it is believed that he discovered Greenland after being sent away from Iceland in exile. This was rumored to have been his punishment for committing murder. He was able to settle in Greenland and survive there for several years. Finally, his exile was ended and he found that he wanted to settle the island more fully. For that, he needed to convince others to come with him. Erik the Red is believed to have lived from circa 950 to 1003CE.

Of course, when you tell someone that they will be travelling with you to a place that is barren, cold and inhospitable you may have trouble convincing even a Viking to come with you. So instead, Erik (according to popular legend) called the island Greenland and instead painted the island as being a wonderful place to settle.

Source: How Greenland Got Its Name

Kinda neat history on that, since you mention it.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: soficrow

Neither of which has anything to do with AGW. We just know what's going to eventually happen.

??? Insurance and re-insurance have been dealing with the clear and present effects -and costs- of climate change for a good while now. No "eventually" about it.

a reply to: Greven

Anyone got a boat ? I seems to be sinking and flooding everywhere. Maybe a house boat, something like what Noah had.only smaller version. If the ice sheet goes it doubt it will flood the water that much, but would give quite a SHOCKWAVE.

a reply to: soficrow

Oh really?

a reply to: raymundoko

Yes, really. The quote I provided cited actual numbers, and referred directly to "climate change" as cause and "climate adaptation" as solution.

Feel free to google "reinsurance + climate change" and see for yourself.




PS. If you want to know the truth about anything, follow the money. In the case of climate change, it's the insurance industry that's taking it up the butt, acting to protect profits and looking for solutions.

You need to re-read your link....I'm not sure you understand what it is saying.

a reply to: soficrow

a reply to: raymundoko

It's you who doesn't understand the article. Insurance and reinsurance companies are partnering with governments to jumpstart cities' and societies' adapting to climate change by encouraging decision-makers to build "climate resilient cities," teaching how - and explaining why it's necessary to do so. This piece is similar but might be easier to grasp:

Building climate resilient cities in the US and Canada

...we need to better prepare our cities to withstand the impacts of severe weather and climate change, even while we strengthen our work to slow and reverse global warming.

...By building public-private partnerships, city leadership and the insurance sector have the power to take the lead in building urban resilience and protecting lives and property.

a reply to: soficrow

You definitely don't understand what you are reading.

I get it, they used key words in a blurb so you're confused.

originally posted by: YouSir
a reply to: Blackmarketeer


Ummm...YAWN...Blah, blah, blah, blah......"Anthropogenic Global Warming doom porn"...Blah, blah blah...

Funny...........that's all my tired eyes could make out in your OP...

Oh...and..."The sky is falling, the oceans are rising, we're all going to....gurgle, gurgle............drown"

Yawn...

YouSir

I stared you because of your admirable enthusiasm.

Let it rain, let it rain..

a reply to: raymundoko

If you want to know the truth about anything, follow the money. In the case of climate change, it's the insurance industry that's taking it up the butt, acting to protect profits and looking for solutions. You clearly do not understand the cited articles, and you obviously are making mistaken assumptions about my viewpoint.

fyi, imho - Climate change results from numerous interacting factors including solar activity, galactic and universal events, as well as human activities. Obviously, we cannot influence our sun's, galaxy's or universe's activities but we can rein in our own tendencies to destroy our planet's ecosystems. Most evidence focuses on how changing climate affects ecosystems, but also suggests a feedback loop between ecosystems and climate.

It takes effort to grasp the subtleties and complexities of such an all-inclusive perspective - even multi-disciplinary teams of highly educated scientists involved in complex systems analysis haven't nailed it yet. So I don't fault you for your lack of comprehension.

a reply to: soficrow

For what it's worth to add here in support, I very distinctly recall my homeowners insurance company telling us to expect rate hikes in the future relating to adjustments for climate change. Particularly following the Katrina disaster and the issue being huge in this area for the Disaster declarations we had to cover the refugees out of Louisiana.

I also recall the 'built in cost" of climate change being a major point of discussion in 06-08 in USA Today and other papers as a warning to us homeowners of what was to come. So..It'd be no surprise to me at all (in fact I just assumed it) to learn they programmed in all those costs a long time ago. Adjusting upward as needed..of course.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

...It'd be no surprise to me at all (in fact I just assumed it) to learn they programmed in all those costs a long time ago.

They did. I've been monitoring this for a good long while. The insurance companies started out pretty much pleading with governments to recognize the situation and "do something" - followed by their raising rates and lately, in certain places/cases denying coverage outright.