97% of Greenland's ice sheet surface melted in mid-July

Originally posted by nixie_nox
That has been debunked by Carnegie Mellon that found that the change in cosmic rays only affect less than 30% of particles, and then, most of those particles are not big enough to affect clouds.

Are you one of those people that discounts all evidence that doesn't support your presupposition and supports lone evidence that does?

This has not been debunked. It was released in 2009 and since then a link has been found. I won't do your home-work for you - go Google it. I doubt you'll believe it since clearly the sun doesn't play a role in the heating of the Earth and its all man-made.

bah - tired of you people...

reply to post by ararisq


You're forgetting the annual deforestation in the Amazon, Africa, South-east Asia etc And there's a lot more land given over to farming today than there was in 1700 - just look at the US and Canada!

Anyway, the increase in atmospheric CO2 due to human activities isn't in doubt

btw on the subject of trees: why aren't there many in Greenland today? A clue: it's the same reason there aren't many in Iceland today. Or on Easter Island..... And it's nothing to do with the weather.

Originally posted by iforget
reply to post by VoidHawk

 

i disagree planning for sustainability is clearly lacking one only needs to look backwards at the obvious devastation we have already wreaked to see

I agree about planning for sustainability. I also think those responsible know precisely what they are doing. I just dont agree about the man made global warming. There are so many ways to combat global warming (if we were the cause) that do not invlove horrendous laws and taxes but I dont see them being implemented, all I see is a big excuse to tax and control the entire human population.
For example, lets convert all the carbon taxes being collected into a mass tree planting project. I dont mean a few here and a few there, I mean lets plant hundreds of millions of them world wide. They would eat the carbon, prevent water from evaporating out of the bare soil, provide materials and jobs etc etc but its not happening, all we are getting is more and more laws and taxes.and as I said earlier, why not make products that last rather than DESIGN them to fail.

Its all a giant scam.

reply to post by PlanetXisHERE

We all know why scientists claim Planet X is bunk - there is a National Security directive which forbids any public discussion of Planet X. With Planet X the government forsees one of two scenarios: A) Planet X's passing will just cause some high-tides and earthquakes and life for the most part will go on as usual - so there is no point in panicking people B) Planet X's passing will cause major tectonic/climactic upheavals on the planet and kill about 95% of the world's population - and warning people now would not change that - so there is no point in panicking people.

There is not a National Security directive regarding PlanetX.....you made that up.

Yet the very same bodies gladly reveal scientific evidence that there could be a catastrophic event happening in Greenland regarding the melting of the ice sheets?....why did they not issue one of your bogus security directives relating to this?

You are very inconsistent in your approach to science and governmental bodies.

Originally posted by Argyll
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE

 

We all know why scientists claim Planet X is bunk - there is a National Security directive which forbids any public discussion of Planet X. With Planet X the government forsees one of two scenarios: A) Planet X's passing will just cause some high-tides and earthquakes and life for the most part will go on as usual - so there is no point in panicking people B) Planet X's passing will cause major tectonic/climactic upheavals on the planet and kill about 95% of the world's population - and warning people now would not change that - so there is no point in panicking people.

There is not a National Security directive regarding PlanetX.....you made that up.

Yet the very same bodies gladly reveal scientific evidence that there could be a catastrophic event happening in Greenland regarding the melting of the ice sheets?....why did they not issue one of your bogus security directives relating to this?

You are very inconsistent in your approach to science and governmental bodies.

Where on this thread did I attribute this unprecedented melting to Planet X? Or is that your theory?

reply to post by PlanetXisHERE


About two years ago there was a discussion here about the black substance all over Greenland's ice. I thought at the time that it was to cause melt to aid in the search for new diamond fields, but it seems that the melt is responsible for this heat. The extra fresh water slows the north Atlantic current allowing the North Atlantic to warm. This forces the Jet stream ever higher towards the arctic and the result is a stagnate air mass over most of the US.

This is an engineered affair! The only real question is why?

reply to post by PlanetXisHERE


You know what's funny? Reading the gays in that gay agenda thread really freaking out.

Some people here either can't or don't know/want to read, I don't know how to otherwise explain people who are replying only by reading the title.

OP gave good info, and yes - this is serious stuff. It is NOT normal for 97% of the ice cap to show signs of melting in a matter of days. I was in Iceland last summer which is warmer than Greenland, and there was nothing on the news about glaciers melting, besides a few volcanoes that shown signs of eruption and caused some ice caps above the volcanoes to melt.

And it last happened 150 years ago... OOOKeee, can someone please show me a satellite footage of the incident? Or did people simply circled around the Greenland's ice cap the whole summer to conduct their research?

You don't need to look at Greenland to realize something is dead wrong with the weather, no matter where you are there are unusual signs of drought and intensive heat waves. Something is up.

And Denmark ends up with a land now worth trillions and trillions of dollar located at the perfect spot on the globe where all the sea traffic will soon take place.

If there really is some abnormally fast melting going on all of a sudden this summer in Greenland, it's obviously the current massive wildfires in Siberia that are the cause.

Soot in normal, not unusual amounts has already been documented as having an effect of comparable magnitude to the 'greenhouse gasses' such as CO2. It's a very basic Earth Science thing; the key ideas are albedo and specific heat. Soot in the atmosphere settles on the ice, making it darker. This leads to the ice absorbing significantly more heat and melting significant faster.

An unusual wildfire event like the current ongoing wildfires in Siberia producing a huge amount of soot suddenly could be expected to cause a sudden, detectable increase in the melt rate, if the soot was settling on the ice in question. It's at the right latitude; Anchorage etc are experiencing plenty of days of noticeably smokey skies.

Whereas if you just want to fall back on CO2 and such, you'd have to come up with something to explain the part about 'why now?'

On the whole, given that the Northern hemisphere has both more and more unusual melting as well as most of the industrial activity on the planet, it seems like this is the new best candidate for the real most significant source of anthropomorphic climate change, at least when it comes to melting ice. But this event isn't necessarily an entirely man-made event, as far as I know; I don't think people know the whole story yet, but it's not like the massive fires in Indonesia in the late 90s which were started by land clearance for palm oil plantations gone horribly wrong.

I would of course think it'd be wise to really review the available data in the first place, as in if there even is a sudden and abnormal large decrease in total ice in Greenland, how abnormal is it really? But if there is a serious and sudden increase in the melt rate of ice in Greenland this summer, this is a pretty safe bet for an explanation.

"Ice cores from Summit show that melting events of this type occur about once every 150 years on average. With the last one happening in 1889, this event is right on time," says Lora Koenig, a Goddard glaciologist and a member of the research team analyzing the satellite data. "But if we continue to observe melting events like this in upcoming years, it will be worrisome."

Nasa Link

I'd like to see Dr. Koenig's data. The math doesn't quite add up to "right on time." 2012 - 1889 = 123 years. That's 18% less than 150 years. I assume her dataset must have a rather wide variance in order to consider this event normal. And presumably these glaciologists have some theory as to the reason these massive, and apparently cyclic, melting events occur.

I, for one, would to like get a bit more information than the standard: "Nothing to see here folks, move along."

Dex

reply to post by PlanetXisHERE


Why is it called Greenland in times past was it more green than it is today.. Is this a natural fluctuation or something to worry about..

It could be natural cycle. We have only tracked glaciers with satellites since 70s.

And just to make sure, solar activity is not warming the planet, its actually making it colder. When Solar wind is at its maximum, less cosmic rays hit the Earth (solar wind blows them out). Cosmic rays make lower level cloud formations, making less precipitation, but whiter and longer lasting clouds, which tends to cool down the climate. As you might know, water droplet needs solid particle to form, solar radiation (higher radiation" tends to form larger water droplets, while Cosmic rays (lower radiation) tends to form small droplets. Small droplets make larger and more permanent clouds.

hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...

Originally posted by SepticSheepHerder
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE

 

You know what's funny? Reading the gays in that gay agenda thread really freaking out.

I feel sorry for someone who takes pleasure in the discomfort of others. Do you have anything to add about the Greenland ice sheet melt?

reply to post by nixie_nox


Right it is not radiance but it most certainly is something strange happening to the Sun's magnetic fields. We are experiencing geomagnetic affects that are causing reactions to the very core of the earth. It is evident to many that it is stirring volcano's and e-quakes. Jupiter's spot has had major changes for the first time in our history, as I recall anyway. Reports of warming on the other planets support a solar or solar system type of affect is being played out in our system. We may be in for a rough ride before this settles back down. I predict nothing but expect anything at this point.

reply to post by Thebel


It is in my opinion a natural cycle, however the imbalance of energy is whats concerning as we live here and have no other choice but to watch events unfold and try and piece the puzzles together.

There seems to be no question as to global warming. Its real!

Man is obvioisly not making things better.... Thats evident!

There is also no debate about the climate changing. We are all globally experiencing it.

What IS in question is what are the factors involved, can we change it, and what will happen next?

We know there is more carbon, so it will indeed heat up when its on the rise.

We know ice caps are melting and the jet stream is waaay off.

We know solar maximum is ramping up, however we have yet to see it in action. Because we are in a " system", what does this mean for our solar max? Time will tell.

reply to post by Justoneman


Could it be as simple as new particles that are highly energized are coming in to our solar system? Energizing the sun and bombarding the earth as well? We have less and less protection these days, so??

Also, does it matter, you think, where we are in the solar system?

Eta... onswipe.com...#!/entry/sprawl-what-our-future-will-look-like-when-earth-hits,5010289f7af68a84dc365395/2

This is a good read from the daily galaxy in regards to co2 and our planet.

Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE

Originally posted by Carseller4
Newsflash:

It's summertime. (Even in Greenland)

Would you like me to break this sentence down for you so you can understand it's implications better?

Greenland’s surface ice cover melted over a larger area than at any time in more than 30 years of satellite observations in period of merely few days this month.

What about past the 30 year mark? we are finally coming out of the ice age!!!!!!!

Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE

Originally posted by Carseller4
Newsflash:

It's summertime. (Even in Greenland)

Would you like me to break this sentence down for you so you can understand it's implications better?

Greenland’s surface ice cover melted over a larger area than at any time in more than 30 years of satellite observations in period of merely few days this month.

What about past the 30 year mark? we are finally coming out of the ice age!!!!!!!

"Ice cores from Summit station [Greenland’s coldest and highest] show that melting events of this type occur about once every 150 years on average. With the last one happening in 1889, this event is right on time,"

Greenland Ice Melt Expected

Appears to be a normal occurrence when you look at a true historical sampling, not the 40-50 year ones done by the Chicken Littles.