Antarctica Melting FASTER!

Antarctica Melting FASTER!

www.physorg.com

Published Sunday in Nature Geoscience, the same study shows that the smaller but less stable West Antarctic icesheet is also shedding significant mass.
Scientists worry that rising global temperatures could trigger a rapid disintegration of West Antarctica, which holds enough frozen water to push up the global ocean watermark by about five metres (16 feet).

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
bigpondnews.com
www.bloomberg.com
List of Publications by Author of the Study sited in the articles
Edit to fix link.



[edit on 23/11/09 by atlasastro]

Well considering there has been some lively debate regarding the topic, this
is extremely interesting news.

Covering the period up January 2009, the data was collected by the twin GRACE satellites, which detect mass flows in the ocean and polar regions by measuring changes in Earth's gravity field.
Consistent with earlier findings based on different methods, they found that West Antarctica dumped, on average, about 132 billion tonnes of ice into the sea each year, give or take 26 billion tonnes.

Most people have thought that the Antarctica was relatively stable, but that appears to be in dispute now.
The article is also cautious and fairly expresses concern regarding the margins for error.

The margin or error, they cautioned, is almost as large as the estimate, meaning ice loss could be a little as a few billion tonnes or more than 100.

But it is interesting to note that the findings are consistent with other findings.

I know this will spark a few comments:

The findings suggest that the region may be more sensitive than scientists thought to greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere that were roughly equivalent to present day levels.

www.physorg.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Its all lies all lies the antartica isnt melting........I wonder how long before someone posts a comment like this.......

reply to post by loner007



Its a scam, Al Gore is down there with a bunsen burner trying to melt the Ice.

Maybe they'll find an E-mail that says that, from Hadley.

Its actually earlier in the Land of Denial. So I guess we won't see them for a while, if at all.


[edit on 23/11/09 by atlasastro]

I find it amazing that a new study promoting global warming has been issued right after the release of emails exposing fraud by the scientists.

Here is a news story that is so contradictory in it's own data it is amazing.

www.reuters.com...

Okay so they published this study:

"In the study published in Nature's Geoscience journal, scientists estimated that East Antarctica has been losing ice mass at an average rate of 5 to 109 gigatonnes per year from April 2002 to January 2009, but the rate speeded up from 2006."

they Published it before it was confirmed? So none of this study could be accurate?

"This, if confirmed, could indicate a state change of East Antarctica, which could pose a large impact on global sea levels in the future," Chen said.

"...has been losing ice mass at an average rate of 5 to 109 gigatonnes per year from April 2002 to January 2009..."

Okay is a rate of 5 to 109 gigatonnes a huge gap or what? These scientists cant be anymore accurate than that?

Oh it gets better:

"Previous estimates for East Antarctica projected anywhere between a 4 gigatonne per year loss and a 22 gigatonne per year gain, according to the report"

So which is it a gain or a loss?

"Rising temperatures are thought to be the main cause of melting ice, and world leaders are under pressure to agree on a new climate treaty at an upcoming U.N. summit in Copenhagen to curb global warming"

If global temperature were the cause, and they are saying "thought to be the main cause", so there are more causes and this is only "thought" to be the main one, but the point is wouldn't it be more even of a melt if this was the main cause:

"The key result is that [we] appear to start seeing a large amount of ice loss in East Antarctica, mostly in the long coastal regions (in Wilkes Land and Victoria Land), since 2006," Jianli Chen at the university's centre for space research and one of the study's authors, told Reuters"

So some areas are melting faster than others? HMM and I love the "appear" to be seeing line.

Which brings me to this:

"The scientists used satellite observations of gravity change over the period April 2002 to January 2009 to calculate the rate of the ice loss in East Antarctica's coastal regions"

Okay so they are not tracking the ice melting they are watching a gravity change and using that to say how much ice is melting? This sounds stupid!

Oh it still gets better:

"Climate change will cause a rise of at least 1 meter in sea levels by the end of this century, according to a review of scientific data by environmental group Clean Air-Cool Planet"

"The projection is in sharp contrast to a 2007 study by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which said world sea levels could increase 18-59 centimeters by 2100"

So the United Nations says it will take almost a hundred years to rise 18 to 59 centimeters, but this Clean Air-Cool Planet people know much more and state a 1 meter rise in 10 years. So these two studies are way off from each other in both scale and time frame.

Who is wrong here?

The leaked e-mails show them covering up a cool down and stating they can not explain it. What?

I have read many articles stating that the ice cap reflects the suns heat back up into our atmosphere and warms the planet. These are the scientists own words about the cap reflecting the heat.

Therefore, after the ice cap melts the planet will cool. I am guessing it will refreeze and that this is an ongoing natural occurance. However, the uneven melting makes me think something underneath is melting the ice.

Nasa has sent planes there to map it yet they are not using any of that data they are watchimng for gravity fluctuations? Strange indeed!!

Originally posted by atlasastro
reply to post by loner007

 

Its a scam, Al Gore is down there with a bunsen burner trying to melt the Ice.

Maybe they'll find an E-mail that says that, from Hadley.

Haha.. funny :-)

As much as I don't believe man is completley responsible for Global Warming, I do beleive that Global Warming is happening..

I've tried the flood maps and know I am well above the 16ft line, but it would cut off the coast road bridge where I live on the south coast of the UK and that in itself will make life a lot more bearable and I'd get a better ocean view ;-)

Edit to add word I missed :-)




[edit on 23/11/09 by thoughtsfull]

Mmm... I remember reading something a while back about increased undersea volcanic activity in / arounf Antarctica, but I can't remember specifically where.
That could explain a warming of water and subsequent ice loss greatly, although I'm sure the AGW tribe would dismiss it, or just not factor it into their reports.
After all, natural conditions do not get grants!

What worries me the most is the prospect of all of that frigidly cold water being dumped into the ocean currents. the decrease in temperature would have drastic effects on the weather, and could potentially catapult the earth into the next ice age...



[edit on 23-11-2009 by Ishmaael]

reply to post by atlasastro


Nice find. Definitely reminiscent of what happened before.

reply to post by atlasastro


All they have to do is compare the earths ocean's average water temperature to the first recordings of ocean's average water temperature. That would prove the melting of the ice. If they are the same then the whole planet is heating up. Which would melt the ice and warm waters at the same time. That creates a conundrum. If the ice is melting and the water is warming, why is the whole earth heating up? The Ozone comes in to mind. Or is it all the experiments taking place all other the world causing this? Or just one? There are so many things that it could be. It may be to late before we find out, if we ever do.

Nice thread. S&F
Important thread.

reply to post by Britguy



If you can find proof of that , that could explain the why and how.


Nice.

Originally posted by Conclusion
reply to post by Britguy

 

If you can find proof of that , that could explain the why and how.


Nice.

This is the one I remeber, not sure if it is the same one BritGuy is talking about, it's from 2004..

www.cbsnews.com...

reply to post by thoughtsfull


Are you saying that now is the time to invest in that beach front property? That would be some good inside information worth a lot of money. Maybe enough to intentionally do it, for someone who is insane enough to do it. As we know how greed is a driving force for power and wealth we only need to look at the worldwide corporations who are responsible. If the scenario is true. Since major corporations are in supply of the majority of lawyers a court battle would be long and costly. They can do that very easy. If humans will not look after other humans, we do not have a chance in surviving our own technology.

reply to post by atlasastro


Every 10 to 20,000 years the earth eather gets colder and we have an ice age or it gets warmer. Its a normal cycle. Don't know why everyones screaming about something none of us can do anything about. Its part of the normal phases of planet earth. What I don't like is that some people work up everone else into a frenzy over this and give them figures of worldwide gloom & doom. To pray upon poeples fears. And of course to get the goverments of the world to shell out hundreds of billions of "Carbon Tax" to line there own evil pockets...

Even with the leaked emails, 99% of the people out there won't believe them, because TPTB have had hundreds of years to "Program" the human race to believe what they say is the gospel truth...

pathetic..

But then I live on the beach somewhere....hope you all learned to swim, maybe you'll be able to stay afloat above the chaos of lies perperuated by TPTB...

Originally posted by whattheh
I find it amazing that a new study promoting global warming has been issued right after the release of emails exposing fraud by the scientists.

Are you suggesting that they made it up. I'll find it amazing if you can prove it.

Here is a news story that is so contradictory in it's own data it is amazing.

www.reuters.com...

Where is it contradictory, or is that just how you want to see it?

Okay so they published this study:

"In the study published in Nature's Geoscience journal, scientists estimated that East Antarctica has been losing ice mass at an average rate of 5 to 109 gigatonnes per year from April 2002 to January 2009, but the rate speeded up from 2006."

they Published it before it was confirmed? So none of this study could be accurate?

Did you miss the part in the articles I linked stating that they are very clear about the margins for error. It is an estimate, did you read how they make these estimates. Read it.

The Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment5 (GRACE) offers the opportunity of quantifying polar ice-sheet mass balance from a different perspective6, 7. Here we use an extended record of GRACE data spanning the period April 2002 to January 2009 to quantify the rates of Antarctic ice loss. In agreement with an independent earlier assessment4, we estimate a total loss of 19077 Gt yr-1, with 13226 Gt yr-1 coming from West Antarctica. However, in contrast with previous GRACE estimates, our data suggest that East Antarctica is losing mass, mostly in coastal regions, at a rate of -5752 Gt yr-1, apparently caused by increased ice loss since the year 2006.

www.nature.com...

"This, if confirmed, could indicate a state change of East Antarctica, which could pose a large impact on global sea levels in the future," Chen said.

"...has been losing ice mass at an average rate of 5 to 109 gigatonnes per year from April 2002 to January 2009..."

Okay is a rate of 5 to 109 gigatonnes a huge gap or what? These scientists cant be anymore accurate than that?

That is a brief description of a period and ranges in those periods for a news article. Yes it is a huge gap. Read the study.
www.nature.com...

I am sure they would welcome your criticism and advice. Here is Jianli Chen, who published the Study.www.csr.utexas.edu...

Oh it gets better:

"Previous estimates for East Antarctica projected anywhere between a 4 gigatonne per year loss and a 22 gigatonne per year gain, according to the report"

So which is it a gain or a loss?

Yes, your logic just keeps getting better. Previous Estimates have projected losses and gains. Now the observations from Satellite Data is telling them something New. That is losses. Faster Losses.

"Rising temperatures are thought to be the main cause of melting ice, and world leaders are under pressure to agree on a new climate treaty at an upcoming U.N. summit in Copenhagen to curb global warming"

If global temperature were the cause, and they are saying "thought to be the main cause", so there are more causes and this is only "thought" to be the main one, but the point is wouldn't it be more even of a melt if this was the main cause:

There is more melting. That is what the study is saying. Duh!

"The key result is that [we] appear to start seeing a large amount of ice loss in East Antarctica, mostly in the long coastal regions (in Wilkes Land and Victoria Land), since 2006," Jianli Chen at the university's centre for space research and one of the study's authors, told Reuters"

So some areas are melting faster than others?

Yes. It appears that some areas are meting faster than others, but when they use the word "appear" they really mean: "we are tricking you and we have made the whole thing up but you are too smart for us because you know more than us and are better at the research, understanding data etc.".

HMM and I love the "appear" to be seeing line.

You love the word appear. Cool.

Which brings me to this:

"The scientists used satellite observations of gravity change over the period April 2002 to January 2009 to calculate the rate of the ice loss in East Antarctica's coastal regions"

Okay so they are not tracking the ice melting they are watching a gravity change and using that to say how much ice is melting? This sounds stupid!

So do you, but hey. It is really hard to measure the size and depth of Antarctic land mass so these "stupid" people measure variance in mass to determine the entire sheet of ice. Here is the system used by the researchers:Grace. I am sure though that you probably have much better ways to measure the Ice and prove them wrong of course.

Oh it still gets better:

"Climate change will cause a rise of at least 1 meter in sea levels by the end of this century, according to a review of scientific data by environmental group Clean Air-Cool Planet"

"The projection is in sharp contrast to a 2007 study by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which said world sea levels could increase 18-59 centimeters by 2100"

How is there a contrast, we have two groups that are predicting that seas will rise based on Ice loss.

So the United Nations says it will take almost a hundred years to rise 18 to 59 centimeters, but this Clean Air-Cool Planet people know much more and state a 1 meter rise in 10 years. So these two studies are way off from each other in both scale and time frame.

Yes, the time of the two references are a few years apart.
The new Time frames are based on newer research. Imagine that hey.
They BOTH SAY THE SAME THING.
Seas will rise from melting Ice.
Ho much is what these people are trying to find out.

Who is wrong here?

No one, the Ice is melting.

The leaked e-mails show them covering up a cool down and stating they can not explain it. What?

Show me where they do that. Show the data they manipulated. Show the published work they released that should have had the hidden data represented.

I have read many articles stating that the ice cap reflects the suns heat back up into our atmosphere and warms the planet. These are the scientists own words about the cap reflecting the heat.

So the CAP REFLECTS HEAT.

Therefore, after the ice cap melts the planet will cool.

Using your logic. How will it cool if the CAPS ARE NOT THERE to reflect the heat, the heat will remain in the atmosphere or absorbed by the Ocean because it is unreflected.

I am guessing it will refreeze and that this is an ongoing natural occurance. However, the uneven melting makes me think something underneath is melting the ice.

You are guessing, and thinking. Really. I can see how you do that.

Nasa has sent planes there to map it yet they are not using any of that data they are watchimng for gravity fluctuations? Strange indeed!!

reply to post by thoughtsfull


Very nice find. Hmmmm. Reminds me how Plato said that Atlantis was destroyed by a volcano and sank into the sea. Some people believe that Antarctica is Atlantis, but that is another thread.

reply to post by Conclusion


Yes one of the articles points out earlier warms.
It is interesting.

Could the "West Antarctic icesheet" suddenly break completely off? If so... would that event not initiate a massive world-wide tsunami? Would that qualify as the world-wide 'coastal event' that web-bot predicted to occur last summer?

Originally posted by Eye of Horus
reply to post by atlasastro

 

Every 10 to 20,000 years the earth eather gets colder and we have an ice age or it gets warmer. Its a normal cycle.

I agree that there are cycles. I guess the whole screaming match thing is that many people believe or think that MAN is effecting these changes. Which leads me to this: If we use older cycles and Ice core data that shows cycles etc. etc. Where in those cycles do we see the amount of HUMAN activity that matches our culture now so as to rule out our current level of human activity as not having any effect.

Don't know why everyones screaming about something none of us can do anything about.

Well some people are actually screaming because they will disappear under water.

Its part of the normal phases of planet earth. What I don't like is that some people work up everone else into a frenzy over this and give them figures of worldwide gloom & doom.

I agree that fear and doom and gloom may not be productive. But neither is apathy in regards to the changes taking place wether you believe they are natural or man made.

To pray upon poeples fears. And of course to get the goverments of the world to shell out hundreds of billions of "Carbon Tax" to line there own evil pockets...

This works both ways, many Skeptics will promote a NWO, SCAM, Conspiracy fear campaign on people as well. I have even seen Population control agendas thrown in around the debate. That is about as doom and gloom as you can get IMHO.

Even with the leaked emails, 99% of the people out there won't believe them, because TPTB have had hundreds of years to "Program" the human race to believe what they say is the gospel truth...

Can you tell me, or shoe me what is in there that actually shows a hoax being perpetrated?
Show me the Data they are hiding. The published science and reports that were released that should have had this Data. Can you show me the E-mails from the PTB that dictate this behavior.

pathetic..

But then I live on the beach somewhere....hope you all learned to swim, maybe you'll be able to stay afloat above the chaos of lies perperuated by TPTB...

TPTB are not the only Liars my friend. And yes, I can swim.

Thank you for the thoughtful reply.

Originally posted by Conclusion
reply to post by thoughtsfull

 

Are you saying that now is the time to invest in that beach front property?

That would be some good inside information worth a lot of money. Maybe enough to intentionally do it, for someone who is insane enough to do it. As we know how greed is a driving force for power and wealth we only need to look at the worldwide corporations who are responsible. If the scenario is true.

Since major corporations are in supply of the majority of lawyers a court battle would be long and costly. They can do that very easy.

If humans will not look after other humans, we do not have a chance in surviving our own technology.

I definatly think some people will end up with some nice beach front property.. I'm hoping it's a little over 16ft so I can park the boat at the end of the garden

tho some of the rich snobs in this part of the world won't be happy with all that existing waterfront property being underwater

Given the changes in the world I am sure that Atlantis or at least similar cities existed the last time around...

I do wonder if any Atlanteans beleived in AGW!