Greenland Ice Melt: See if this don't scare you!, page 2
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times


reply posted on 26-6-2006 @ 09:55 AM by Nygdan
Originally posted by WithoutEqual
Can anyone even give me an average temp for every year for the past 1000 years

Its even on wikipedia
upload.wikimedia.org...


that's what it'll take to convince me.

Convince you of what? That global temperature is increasing? Everyone is agreement on this, even the bush administration is in general agreement on this.

That article seems to be more sensationalism on the subject, trying to scare people, but, to a certain degree, the science supports being scared.

swimmer
Most of the Ice is under the water anyway

That is true of icebergs in the water, but not of ice sheets and glaciers on the land.

orionthehunter
I heard recently that sea levels would rise 21 feet if the ice on Greenland melts

Lets keep in mind that that ice simply isn't going to melt all at once or on anything like a human timescale.
This isn't to say that disasters can't occur, but its meaningless to say, as the article does, that there's 21 feet of sea level rise there.

pavil
I remember either reading or hearing recently about the Antarctic Melt compared to the amount of new snow laid down and it was pretty much a net even exchange.

I doubt that, antarctica is, essentially, a desert, there is very little precipiation. I'd be surprised if that was the case, would be neat to see if it was.

zorgon
you suddenly see that this is NORMAL for the region

Thats true for the earthquakes, but the current temperature increase isn't normal.


reply posted on 26-6-2006 @ 01:06 PM by masqua
Great find, Loam.

To add some credence to what your article is saying... as well as some consideration towards those quakes in the Arctic' here's an interesting story. While I don't know (yet) if they are related to glacial slippage, there are connections being made in this March 2006 article...

www.countercurrents.org...

The rise in the number of glacial earthquakes over the past four years lends further weight to the idea that Greenland's glaciers and its ice sheet are beginning to move and melt on a scale not seen for perhaps thousands of years.

The annual number of glacial earthquakes recorded in Greenland between 1993 and 2002 was between six and 15. In 2003 seismologists recorded 20 glacial earthquakes. In 2004 they monitored 24 and for the first 10 months of 2005 they recorded 32.

The latest seismic study, published today in the journal Science, found that in a single area of north-western Greenland scientists recorded just one quake between 1993 and 1999. But they monitored more than two dozen quakes between 2000 and 2005.

-snip-

"Some of Greenland's glaciers - as large as Manhattan and as tall as the Empire State Building - can move 10 metres in less than a minute, a jolt that is sufficient to generate moderate seismic waves," Professor Ekstrom said.

-snip-

As the glacial meltwater seeps down it lubricates the bases of the "outlet" glaciers of the Greenland ice sheet, causing them to slip down surrounding valleys towards the sea, explained Meredith Nettles of Columbia University.

"Our results suggest that these major outlet glaciers can respond to changes in climate conditions much more quickly than we had thought," Dr Nettles said.

-snip-

The seismologists also found that the glacial earthquakes of Greenland occurred mainly during the summer months, indicating that the movements were indeed associated with rapidly melting ice - normal "tectonic" earthquakes show no such seasonality. Of the 136 glacial quakes analysed by the scientists, more than a third occurred during July and August.


A scary thought.

As the tides, the warming Arctic and the heating of the surface beneath the glaciers all are taken into consideration, it seems (to me) quite possible that a huge amount of glacial ice could suddenly descend into the ocean whether it is near the North or South Poles. Such an event could spell immediate tsunami of gigantic proportions as well as a rising mean sea level.

We need to focus on places like NYC, London, Amsterdam (etc.) and how to lessen the impact of tsunami and rising sea level on such places.
.



[edit on 26-6-2006 by masqua]



reply posted on 26-6-2006 @ 01:55 PM by Telayliean
Along with everything else that has been mentioned on this particular subject, I read this today on CNN.com:

edition.cnn.com...
OSLO, Norway (AP) -- It sounds like something from a science fiction film -- a doomsday vault carved into a frozen mountainside on a secluded Arctic island ready to serve as a Noah's Ark for seeds in case of a global catastrophe.

But Norway's ambitious project is on its way to becoming reality. Construction began Monday on the Svalbard Global Seed Vault, designed to house as many as 3 million of the world's crop seeds.


This really made me think that we are probably not being told all that is known about global warming and the dangers we are facing. I have said for years that it actually "felt" hotter to me, but thought I was just part of getting older. I believe its much more than that now. MODS, please forgive me if I posted this incorrectly. I'm a learning newbie.

source added, quote shortened.

[edit on 6-26-2006 by worldwatcher]


reply posted on 26-6-2006 @ 02:01 PM by masqua
Here's the link to the above post.

If you have a difficulty with posting links, please U2U me or any of the moderators which are listed at the top of this page.

Interesting segway in this story, though.


reply posted on 26-6-2006 @ 03:05 PM by enaught
Bad grammar scares me, not sensational doomsday senarios.

The doomsday scenarios attributed to global warming are no more significant than the predictions made about y2k. Sure the earth's temperature is rising, but so what? I enjoy the ingenuity of humankind, especially my own, and we will overcome whatever obstacles stand in our way. Beubonic plagues, world wars, influenzas and tsunamis have not been enough to hault human advancement, so I doubt whether the probable prospect of rising sea levels will be any different.

Please don't be swept up by these predictions of impening doom; there is still much to learn and much to discuss.

Originally posted by Xeven
I find it laughable that people who swear there is no global warming would rather wait and see?


Why? It is a theory, and is very debatable. I think most of the debate hinges on the doomsday scenarios that can occur as a result of global warming.

Originally posted by XevenWe should start massive R&D into alternative fuels and enviroment reaserch instead of spending billions on a war that wont matter if the earth burns its O2 atmosphere away and all humans cease to exist.


It would be nice, but defense industry is a business, and a big business which has been around for a very long time. From the earliest recorded time in human civilization, government regulated defense industries have always been the largest cauldrons for advances in math, science and engineering, yet as of late most governments are pushing towards non-military research, but still a big business none the less.

Originally posted by XevenThe time to Panic is now and not when the earth is near dead.




[edit on 26-6-2006 by enaught]
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>    ^^TOP^^



Lake Vostok Antarctica: breakthrough imminent.
  Posted 8 days ago with 175 member flags
Sky Sounds 1/25/2012 Atlanta, GA Personal Video/Audio
  Posted 16 days ago with 146 member flags
Strange sounds warn us of incoming, and very soon...
  Posted 4 days ago with 133 member flags
Volcano in Iceland Erupting Alongside The Aurora Borealis (pics)
  Posted 5 days ago with 121 member flags
6 of the oldest trees from around the world.
  Posted 9 days ago with 108 member flags
West Coast USA: Pay Attention, Cascadia May Be Ready to Rupture
  Posted 6 days ago with 87 member flags
CONFIRMED: Global Warming \'Ended 15 Years Ago\'
  Posted 12 days ago with 75 member flags
Pictures from the Aurora lightshow
  Posted 17 days ago with 73 member flags