More proof Antarctic ice shelves not melting at all

page: 1
3

log in

join

posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Having searched for related threads and found none talking about the same news... It appears there is more proof on the subject of The Antarctic not melting after discovering that computer models were infact incorrect. How can NASA and the met office get it so wrong...

See quote below and link to source.



According to a statement from the American Geophysical Union, announcing the new research: It turns out that past studies, which were based on computer models without any direct data for comparison or guidance, overestimate the water temperatures and extent of melting beneath the Fimbul Ice Shelf. This has led to the misconception, Hattermann said, that the ice shelf is losing mass at a faster rate than it is gaining mass, leading to an overall loss of mass. The team’s results show that water temperatures are far lower than computer models predicted ...



www.theregister.co.uk...




posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by spooky1973
Having searched for related threads and found none talking about the same news... It appears there is more proof on the subject of The Antarctic not melting after discovering that computer models were infact incorrect. How can NASA and the met office get it so wrong...

See quote below and link to source.



According to a statement from the American Geophysical Union, announcing the new research: It turns out that past studies, which were based on computer models without any direct data for comparison or guidance, overestimate the water temperatures and extent of melting beneath the Fimbul Ice Shelf. This has led to the misconception, Hattermann said, that the ice shelf is losing mass at a faster rate than it is gaining mass, leading to an overall loss of mass. The team’s results show that water temperatures are far lower than computer models predicted ...



www.theregister.co.uk...


OK, let's try to explain this in a way that you understand it.

Let's say you take a glass of ice water. You measure the temperature of it. You want 15-20 minutes until a great deal of the ice has melted and you measure the temperature again. Guess what, the temperature is still going to be the same because there is still solid ice in the glass. Granted, it's not anywhere close to the amount of ice that was there before, but there's still some ice. That means the temperature of the water is still at the same point but the ice is melting due to the temperature of the room, not the temperature of the water.

Does this mean the ice in the glass isn't really melting? NO, it means there isn't a net change in the temperature of the water. There would have been if there had been no ice in it, it would be approaching room temperature. Until all the ice in the glass is melted, the water is going to remain cold. The ice on the other hand, isn't going to remain frozen, it melts. Every last bit of it.

That's exactly what's happening to the Antartic shelf. Although the temperature of the water isn't changing a great deal at the pole (since there is still ice there), the ice is definitely metling away as is shown in a multitude of satellite images as well as data taken by scientists who are taking samples of the ice.


After ALL the ice melts, then the temperature of the water will start to increase since the ice isn't offsetting the temperature of the water any longer. If you want to measure temperature changes, measure them at the equator, that will show if there's a net change in temperature instead of measuring the temperature in the presence of ice that offsets the temperature as long as there is some ice present.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 04:26 PM
link   
Here's another story on the same person the OP story is on:

www.npolar.no...


– “It came as a surprise to us that warm water from the surface plays such an important role for ice melting in Dronning Maud Land,” says the article’s first author, researcher Tore Hattermann from the Norwegian Polar Institute.


SERIOUSLY???


It came as a surprise to him that the temperature of surface water, heated by the sun, would affect melting of ice???


This guy is supposed to be a scientist???


At least in this story the guy DOES admit that the Antartic shelf IS MELTING, as misrepresented by the author of the story cited by the OP. He is very plain and clear that it IS melting.
edit on 16-10-2012 by PurpleChiten because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 04:31 PM
link   
More proof that the original story that was posted is not accurate using the exact same guy they tried to quote in the first story:

www.sciencenewsforkids.org...


“We are concerned about Antarctica losing mass and causing the oceans to rise,” says Hattermann. “This particular ice shelf is not as bad as ocean models were suggesting but there are other places where it’s really burning.” In other words, he explains: “We found good news in an overall bad news situation.”



DEBUNKED

edit on 16-10-2012 by PurpleChiten because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
More proof that the original story that was posted is not accurate using the exact same guy they tried to quote in the first story:

www.sciencenewsforkids.org...


“We are concerned about Antarctica losing mass and causing the oceans to rise,” says Hattermann. “This particular ice shelf is not as bad as ocean models were suggesting but there are other places where it’s really burning.” In other words, he explains: “We found good news in an overall bad news situation.”



DEBUNKED

edit on 16-10-2012 by PurpleChiten because: (no reason given)


How have you debunked it? Your first sentence says its inaccurate and they have used the same guy in both reports? Thats because they are talking about the same guy and same situation, albeit the reports are dated 2-3 months apart but its the same story. So what you talking about? Your report doesn't give any indication of the results of the research and your cherry picked one and only quote “This particular ice shelf is not as bad as ocean models were suggesting but there are other places where it’s really burning." is not proof and confirmation that 'Antarctica is losing mass and causing the oceans to rise', he said hes concerned about it, course hes concerned, so is everybody, that's why he has done research.

That same person has confirmed computer models from 20 years ago are incorrect as he has just proved that with his new research. The same models that gave the impression Antarctica was losing land mass and sea levels are rising. He has confirmed this is not the case.




Twenty-year-old models which have suggested serious ice loss in the eastern Antarctic have been compared with reality for the first time - and found to be wrong, so much so that it now appears that no ice is being lost at all.


Sounds to me like your version is inaccurate and you don't really know what your talking about. I took the time to read your links and your comments don't make sense....



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 06:53 PM
link   
I'm talking about how the article that was originally posted distorted what was actually done and said by the guy they quoted as shown in the other articles. He didn't at all say what they claimed he was saying.

The article claiming that the shelves aren't melting is a false article that misquoted and distorted the facts to fit their opinion/agenda. The other articles from the same researched debunked the article as it was written.

My statements/questions about him being a "real scientist" were based on the first article, which led me to search for the others and realize the problem wasn't with him, it was with the author of the article that deliberately distorted the facts to fit his personal opinion. He falsified information and tried to support a fallacy that he believed instead of what was clearly shown by the research.

Thus, the original article is debunked by the actual information that he distorted.

The researcher said THAT PARTICULAR shelf wasn't changing as they thought it would, but the other shelfs ARE changing as projected which supports the theory of the melting. That means the statement "Antartic shelves not melting at all" is completely and utterly debunked.

Hope that cleared it up for you, if not, I can try to simplify it further to assist in your undertanding.


edit on 17-10-2012 by PurpleChiten because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 02:22 PM
link   

it was with the author of the article that deliberately distorted the facts to fit his personal opinion. He falsified information


I trust you can provide proof that he deliberately distorted the facts??



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by spooky1973

it was with the author of the article that deliberately distorted the facts to fit his personal opinion. He falsified information


I trust you can provide proof that he deliberately distorted the facts??


Yup! All you have to do is read the article and compare it to the facts and it's pretty darn clear the facts have been distorted. It really isn't that complicated....





top topics
 
3

log in

join