It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Rapidly Melting Glacier Will Raise Sea Levels 'For Decades To Come'

page: 2
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 09:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t




You believe these things? Why does belief matter? What about objective evidence that tells you otherwise? Why does your beliefs trump this data?

My belief is based on the available data as a whole not just cherry picked data used by those with an agenda.
Many predictions and assertions about global warming are based on computer models which time and again have been shown to be limited and wrong , many research grants depend on the propagation of the man made global warming myth.

If you look at the bigger picture you can see warming and cooling has been occurring long before we could take the blame.


The last five million years of climate change is shown in the next graph based on work by Lisiecki and Raymo in 2005 [2] . It shows our planet has a dynamic temperature history, and over the last three million years, we have had a continuous series of ice ages (now about 90,000 years each) and interglacial warm periods (about 10,000 years each). There are 13 (count ‘em) ice ages on a 100,000 year cycle (from 1.25 million years ago to the present, and 33 ice ages on a 41,000 year cycle (between 2.6 million and 1.25 million years ago). Since Earth is on a multi-million-year cooling trend, we are currently lucky to be living during an interglacial warm period, but we are at the end of our normal 10,000 year warm interglacial period.
joannenova.com.au...




posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 10:09 AM
link   
I think there is more to climate change than just earth based weather patterns.
Solar radiation increases could change everything and we could wind up like Mars with an incredibly thin atmosphere and no Starbucks.
Our knowledge of the Sun is very limited.

However I do predict that if infact there is global warming....the deniers will cry "why didn't anyone warn us"



edit on 13-11-2015 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-11-2015 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 10:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Krazysh0t

There are geological studies that show the Earths temperature has fluctuated over the last 5 million years as we come to the end of the last ice age , technically we are still in an ice age and some scientist believe the next one is approaching and we are currently in an inter-glacial period which could account for the fluctuations.

I believe the bulk of what we consider as global warming is out of our control and caused by the cycles of the planet , I also believe it is being used as a tool by governments of the world to raise taxes and that much of the science behind it is flawed , I don't think the sky is falling in.
As for the Zachariae Isstrom glacier we will have to wait and see but I wouldn't be surprised if in a few years it's discovered to be growing again or at least stopped shrinking.


That, and the continents are slowly moving causing a lot of ice areas of the world to melt.
Antarctica was never entombed in ice back in the day, it was lush and tropical, it's only like that because the waters surrounding it.
When it moves it's way back up near Africa all that ice will melt. But not for a long time.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 10:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Krazysh0t
My belief is based on the available data as a whole not just cherry picked data used by those with an agenda.
Many predictions and assertions about global warming are based on computer models which time and again have been shown to be limited and wrong , many research grants depend on the propagation of the man made global warming myth.


This assertion is completely untrue though... How reliable are climate models?


So all models are first tested in a process called Hindcasting. The models used to predict future global warming can accurately map past climate changes. If they get the past right, there is no reason to think their predictions would be wrong. Testing models against the existing instrumental record suggested CO2 must cause global warming, because the models could not simulate what had already happened unless the extra CO2 was added to the model. All other known forcings are adequate in explaining temperature variations prior to the rise in temperature over the last thirty years, while none of them are capable of explaining the rise in the past thirty years. CO2 does explain that rise, and explains it completely without any need for additional, as yet unknown forcings.

Where models have been running for sufficient time, they have also been proved to make accurate predictions. For example, the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo allowed modellers to test the accuracy of models by feeding in the data about the eruption. The models successfully predicted the climatic response after the eruption. Models also correctly predicted other effects subsequently confirmed by observation, including greater warming in the Arctic and over land, greater warming at night, and stratospheric cooling.


You are just repeating a right wing fallacy here by saying that the models are always false. It's just wrong. Please update your information to reflect this.


If you look at the bigger picture you can see warming and cooling has been occurring long before we could take the blame.


The last five million years of climate change is shown in the next graph based on work by Lisiecki and Raymo in 2005 [2] . It shows our planet has a dynamic temperature history, and over the last three million years, we have had a continuous series of ice ages (now about 90,000 years each) and interglacial warm periods (about 10,000 years each). There are 13 (count ‘em) ice ages on a 100,000 year cycle (from 1.25 million years ago to the present, and 33 ice ages on a 41,000 year cycle (between 2.6 million and 1.25 million years ago). Since Earth is on a multi-million-year cooling trend, we are currently lucky to be living during an interglacial warm period, but we are at the end of our normal 10,000 year warm interglacial period.
joannenova.com.au...




No one is denying that climate hasn't changed in the past... Especially not Global Warming proponents. The POINT is that the climate is changing NOW much differently than it has in the past. We can detail a direct correlation between human CO2 output and the rising temperatures.

You know it's a wonder. Everyone acknowledges that if you dump poisons into a river, it'll kill all the fish. Or you dump some other pollution somewhere, it'll destroy an ecosystem. We all acknowledge that aerosol cans contributed to a hole in the Ozone layer. Yet SOMEHOW people don't want to believe that humans can have an effect on the climate too... Such arrogance.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 10:46 AM
link   
a reply to: strongfp

Continents move like an inch a century. Their movements have little to no effect on the melting ice caps. You just made this reasoning up on the spot didn't you?
edit on 13-11-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 11:09 AM
link   
This...
www.teaparty.org... nge-notions-upside



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 11:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: strongfp

Continents move like an inch a century. Their movements have little to no effect on the melting ice caps. You just made this reasoning up on the spot didn't you?


Actually eurasia and North America are moving away from one another at a rate of 2 cm a year, and the Indian plate moved from pretty much where Madagascar is to where it is now I less than a few million years. They move a lot faster than you think.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: cavtrooper7

This article is a lie. First off, let's start with the title:
"New Studies Flip Climate-Change Notions Upside Down"

New studies? Which new studies are these? The article doesn't actually reference any.

At one point it references Climategate:

In the 2009 “climategate scandal”, e-mails and documents from IPCC-affiliated scientists were leaked that indicated they had manipulated data and reports to jibe with the AGW theory. References were made to “hiding the decline” through the use of “tricks”.


Case closed: "Climategate" was manufactured

Then the article starts talking about global cooling and that pause that conservatives like to go on about. Except this is the case.
2015 Likely to Be Hottest Year Ever Recorded
2014 Officially Hottest Year on Record
NOAA: 2013 Was Tied For The Fourth-Hottest Year On Record
NOAA: 2012 Hottest & 2nd-Most Extreme Year On Record

Wow. It's almost like there is a trend or something of each year being hotter than the last. Where is this cooling that the article is talking about?

So to sum up, your post from the Tea Party website is pure propaganda. You know it would behoove you not to link sources from political websites, they are going to be guaranteed to be propaganda.
edit on 13-11-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 11:24 AM
link   
a reply to: strongfp

That still doesn't mean that the continents are moving quick enough to effect the climate like we are seeing it.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 12:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: strongfp

That still doesn't mean that the continents are moving quick enough to effect the climate like we are seeing it.


Sure it is. Considering entire lakes dry up in less than a few thousand years, mountain ranges creating their own weather systems, and earth quakes destroying entire ecosystems one major geological event can be the deciding factor.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 12:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: strongfp

That still doesn't mean that the continents are moving quick enough to effect the climate like we are seeing it.


Sure it is. Considering entire lakes dry up in less than a few thousand years, mountain ranges creating their own weather systems, and earth quakes destroying entire ecosystems one major geological event can be the deciding factor.


A few thousand years? It's only been 100 years since we noticed that we were affecting the climate with human produced greenhouse gases.

Though in the end, I still don't believe you. You are going to have to post some data and scientific studies to back up your claim that we can attribute much of the changing climate to continental drift.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 12:58 PM
link   
a reply to: strongfp

Yosimite goes boom?



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 01:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

If it is truly melting and there are none that are freezing or expanding and many other factors then possible the levels could rise but it seems as if any melting is somehow being offset.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t






It's only been 100 years since we noticed that we were affecting the climate with human produced greenhouse gases.


I do not know who the we is but it is not us.

We still do not know if the levels are harming the environment.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 01:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: Krazysh0t






It's only been 100 years since we noticed that we were affecting the climate with human produced greenhouse gases.


I do not know who the we is but it is not us.

We still do not know if the levels are harming the environment.


"We" in this case would be people who are properly informed on the science. Not random internet posters who think they know more than scientists do.
edit on 13-11-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Does it really matter whether current observed warming, especially in the Arctic, is all down to human, natural variation or hobgoblins?

Surely the issue here is that a large glacier is melting and if it continues to do so it has long term implications for humanity - with so many people living in coastal cities which are already under threat by changing sea levels and the destruction of natural flood barriers?



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 01:07 PM
link   
a reply to: AndyMayhew

You know, this is a good point too. Regardless of what is causing it to melt, it IS melting. Yet no one seems to be concerned about that.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 01:08 PM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

Wait !! ... what ??!! ...
no Starbucks ??!!

Ok, now we have to get serious people.
edit on 13-11-2015 by smirkley because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: Krazysh0t

If it is truly melting and there are none that are freezing or expanding and many other factors then possible the levels could rise but it seems as if any melting is somehow being offset.



I'm pretty sure that if a glacier is melting in Greenland, there aren't too many places left on the planet where icebergs could accumulate to replace that lost ice. You can't just rationalize this away so you can go back to sleep. It takes data and information to do that.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 01:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

O I c
since I use a computer that means I can not do sciences.

As long as you are sure I am about to get flooded then by all means bring on the water.

what do you say to all those sciencers that do not agree that I flood is coming? I suppose the whole random person on a computer excuse may work to silence them.







 
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join