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: 5
13
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 06:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

The Zachariae Isstrom glacier in northeast Greenland entered a "phase of accelerated retreat" in 2012 and is now losing its mass at a rate of 5 billion tons per year, according to a new study published in the journal Science.



More real-time evidence of man made climate change and global warming. This isn't a model. This is happening NOW. Though I'm sure there will people who will come in and angrily tell me that there is nothing to see here. Global Warming CAN'T be real, after all there was that fake controversy a while back where a bunch of scientists were manipulating data. Right? Yea, well how do you manipulate this?


Just wondering; have you done the math? Do you have any idea just how much water 5 billion tons is? Seriously man, do the math!

It may just change some of your "global warming" notions...


edit on 13-11-2015 by tanka418 because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 07:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: eXia7
Its amazing that environments can change over long periods of time isn't it OP?

Why don't you protest to China about all their pollution, I'm sure they will agree to your demands. I'm sorry man, but everybody hypes up the global warming doom and gloom all the time, and scientists have been caught manipulating statistics to push an agenda. You're going to be hard pressed to sell tickets to the global warming hype train.

No they haven't been manipulating data it just the deniers inability to understand how measurement works.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 07:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
*sigh...*

Quite.......

I am at a loss to understand how so much evidence can be ignored. It's not like it's just a thermometer in the ground. I would love to know how all the flora and fauna has been persuaded to cooperate with this GW conspiracy by moving polewards.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 07:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

The Zachariae Isstrom glacier in northeast Greenland entered a "phase of accelerated retreat" in 2012 and is now losing its mass at a rate of 5 billion tons per year, according to a new study published in the journal Science.



More real-time evidence of man made climate change and global warming. This isn't a model. This is happening NOW. Though I'm sure there will people who will come in and angrily tell me that there is nothing to see here. Global Warming CAN'T be real, after all there was that fake controversy a while back where a bunch of scientists were manipulating data. Right? Yea, well how do you manipulate this?


Just wondering; have you done the math? Do you have any idea just how much water 5 billion tons is? Seriously man, do the math!

It may just change some of your "global warming" notions...


Go on then you show us (you can use a calculator) :



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 11:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: yorkshirelad

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

The Zachariae Isstrom glacier in northeast Greenland entered a "phase of accelerated retreat" in 2012 and is now losing its mass at a rate of 5 billion tons per year, according to a new study published in the journal Science.



More real-time evidence of man made climate change and global warming. This isn't a model. This is happening NOW. Though I'm sure there will people who will come in and angrily tell me that there is nothing to see here. Global Warming CAN'T be real, after all there was that fake controversy a while back where a bunch of scientists were manipulating data. Right? Yea, well how do you manipulate this?


Just wondering; have you done the math? Do you have any idea just how much water 5 billion tons is? Seriously man, do the math!

It may just change some of your "global warming" notions...


Go on then you show us (you can use a calculator) :


***********


No they haven't been manipulating data it just the deniers inability to understand how measurement works.


It appears that you have a much better understanding of measurement than I; How about you calculate that...

If, on the other hand, you can not; just say so, and I will...



posted on Nov, 14 2015 @ 01:24 AM
link   
a reply to: tanka418

Spend some time in the Florida Keys and then get back to the board.

I can promise you that you will no longer think the rising sea is a myth.

The burden of proof is on you here. Pretty much all the experts concur the sea is rising and will cause significant problems.
edit on 14-11-2015 by jrod because: err

edit on 14-11-2015 by jrod because: a



posted on Nov, 14 2015 @ 09:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: tanka418

Spend some time in the Florida Keys and then get back to the board.

I can promise you that you will no longer think the rising sea is a myth.

The burden of proof is on you here. Pretty much all the experts concur the sea is rising and will cause significant problems.


You really should do your due diligence, in this case it may actually serve you well!

I did not say the "rising sea" was a myth!

I questioned whether any of y'all actually had any ideahow large 5 billion tons of water was...apparently you have no idea what so ever~

So...I'm still asking; do any of you have any sort of a notion just how large 5 billion tons of water is?

Seriously; is it 1/3 of all the water on earth
is it larger than Greenland?
is it smaller than Australia?
Could it possible cover North America?

Problem is; none of you know, you just accept the word of some unknown "scientist", and NEVER check on his "math". Yet you find it perfectly plausible to attack me as a "non-believer" when I question your unknown scientist's results.

So...here's the deal; you do the math yourselves...I promise its not all that hard, and then you can see, first hand, how truly believable your "scientist" really is.



posted on Nov, 14 2015 @ 09:38 AM
link   
a reply to: tanka418
None of us know?

5 billion tons is 5 trillion kg.
Water is 1kg/L.
A Litre is 0.001 cubic meters.
A millimeter is 0.001m.
Thus, 1mm x 1m x 1m is equal to a litre.
The surface area of the oceans is ~360 million square kilometers.
A square km is equivalent to 1 million m^2, so the surface area of the oceans is roughly 360 trillion m^2.
5 trillion litres of water over ~360 million km^2 would thus raise sea levels by around 0.0138... mm/yr from a single glacier.

There are many glaciers in the world, and the average sea level rise is 0.27mm/yr - this single glacier would be 5% of that.
edit on 9Sat, 14 Nov 2015 09:40:45 -0600America/ChicagovAmerica/Chicago11 by Greven because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2015 @ 08:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Greven
a reply to: tanka418
None of us know?

5 billion tons is 5 trillion kg.
Water is 1kg/L.
A Litre is 0.001 cubic meters.
A millimeter is 0.001m.
Thus, 1mm x 1m x 1m is equal to a litre.
The surface area of the oceans is ~360 million square kilometers.
A square km is equivalent to 1 million m^2, so the surface area of the oceans is roughly 360 trillion m^2.
5 trillion litres of water over ~360 million km^2 would thus raise sea levels by around 0.0138... mm/yr from a single glacier.

There are many glaciers in the world, and the average sea level rise is 0.27mm/yr - this single glacier would be 5% of that.


Thank you. That wasn't too hard was it?

0.27 mm . . . that is less than the height of a pixel on your monitor!...it is approximately 0.010 inches, or about 1/100 inch.



posted on Nov, 15 2015 @ 09:14 AM
link   
Yet we are already having apparent problems from an encroaching sea.

You can cast doubt on the melting glaciers role in the rising seas, but real world observations tell us we have a problem with rising waters.



posted on Nov, 15 2015 @ 09:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
Yet we are already having apparent problems from an encroaching sea.

You can cast doubt on the melting glaciers role in the rising seas, but real world observations tell us we have a problem with rising waters.


Yes indeed there are rising waters, but...how much of that problem is global vs local?

I live in North Texas...recently we experienced a drought...most of the reservoirs were virtually dry, with some exceptions where the water was contaminated, no longer usable...the real issue wasn't the lack of rain/water, but was actually one of management.

In the final analysis; there wasn't really "so much" of a drought as there was a lack of intelligent planning.

Logically, with the oceans rising all of a tenth (1/10) of an inch annually, your rising ocean levels cannot be an issue for several decades...unless, of course, there is local lack of intelligent management...which is probably the reality.



posted on Nov, 15 2015 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: jrod

And yet in the Maldives....ground zero for sea level rise....including 2015 data...

notrickszone.com...




In his report, Puls writes that even TOPEX and JASON 1+2 show no acceleration. “The acceleration calculated by the models and constantly reported by the media does not exist!”

Puls adds:

It is obvious to see that sea level rise has slowed down significantly. In view of the relatively short time frame in which the measurements have been made, it should not be speculated on whether the deceleration in the rise is a trend change or if it is only noise. What is certain is that there is neither a ‘dramatic’ rise, nor an ‘acceleration’. Conclusion: Climate models that project an acceleration over the last 20 years are wrong.”

-


Tired of control Freaks



posted on Nov, 15 2015 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks




And yet in the Maldives....ground zero for sea level rise....including 2015 data...

That article says nothing about the Maldives. It talks about satellite data showing global averages. It says that the rise has slowed a small amount over a ten year period. That article is dated 2012. How does it include 2015 data?

Want 2015 data? Here it is:
sealevel.colorado.edu...
It does, indeed show some changes in the rate of rise. Seems to have steepened again in the years since that analysis.

edit on 11/15/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2015 @ 02:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

I am sorry - that graph is too messy to read and the accuracy is plus or minus 0.04 mm. I don't see how you get that it "seems" to have steepened with that kind of inaccuracy.

I am particularly suspicious of the latest data which appears to show an increase of approximately 10 mm is less than 1 year (about 3 times the stated average of 3.3 mm per year)

I am also very very suspicious of graphs with lines of best fit. Those lines can be adjusted to present data in a very confusing manner. Do you have the raw data.

Tired of Control Freaks



posted on Nov, 15 2015 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

Forget the graphs.

If you want to see real world evidence of rising seas, spend some time in the Maldives, or the Florida Keys, or any low lying island.

It does appear the sea is encroaching. Arguing of millimeters seems to me that all you want to do is cast doubt over what is an apparent real world, real time global problem.



posted on Nov, 15 2015 @ 02:54 PM
link   
a reply to: tanka418

I have been spending time in the Florida Keys and a fresh breeze with a new or full moon prompts coastal flood advisories.

This is indeed a problem and it appears the sea is indeed rising and already causing problems.

I used to doubt the notion of the sea rising significantly, however what I have witnesses first hand has forced me to consider my position.

PS,
North Texas is far from the ocean and the local weather pattern is not relevant to the discussion of rising seas, this is primarily a coastal issue. Correct me if I'm wrong, but something like 80% of the population lives near the coast.


edit on 15-11-2015 by jrod because: typo

edit on 15-11-2015 by jrod because: ps



posted on Nov, 15 2015 @ 03:11 PM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

I am sorry - that graph is too messy to read and the accuracy is plus or minus 0.04 mm.
The accuracy of the trendline. Not the accuracy of the graph. The trend, since 1993 is somewhere between 2.9 and 3.7 mm/yr.


I am also very very suspicious of graphs with lines of best fit. Those lines can be adjusted to present data in a very confusing manner.
Isn't that what Klaus-Eckart did? You know, the guy in the article you posted. The one you said had data through 2015.


Do you have the raw data.
Did you bother looking?
sealevel.colorado.edu...
edit on 11/15/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)

edit on 11/15/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2015 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Thank you - I was unable to see anything but the graph.

First of all - I was correct - in 2015, the measurements all of sudden jump up by 10 or more mm. This far exeeds the trend value and affects the line of best fit.

What happened to the measurement in just 6 months?

Tired of Control Freaks



posted on Nov, 15 2015 @ 04:52 PM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks




First of all - I was correct - in 2015, the measurements all of sudden jump up by 10 or more mm. This far exeeds the trend value and affects the line of best fit.


Correct about what? Do you know what an '"average" means? You don't see the trend in the data? It's really quite obvious, even without the trendline. Even with the drop in 2010, global average sea levels have been rising at an average rate of 2.9 to 3.7 mm/year since 1992. You tried to use that same data to claim that is not the case, remember? I thought you considered trendlines meaningful. Or is that only if they are cherry picked to support your view?

And yet in the Maldives....ground zero for sea level rise....including 2015 data...

When you actually do include 2015 data, the trend is clear.

edit on 11/15/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2015 @ 08:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Phage

In 2015, the measurements jump up by 10 mm or more. What happened. This is certainly an error. That would certainly affect the average and the trend line. We need to remember that even satellite data needs to be adjusted. How did the first six months of 2015 get adjusted so that it increased by more three times the average. Strange how that happened just before COP21

to go back in history and compare satellite date with coast line data is incorrect and misleading. We already know that the coast line data is inaccurate for various reasons, so for all we know there was a dip in ocean levels from which we are only now recovering.

Tired of Control Freaks




top topics



 
13
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join