It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Arctic Ice Melt "has the momentum of a runaway train."

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on May, 5 2013 @ 08:30 PM

Originally posted by pheonix358

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by pheonix358

Read the articles in the Op.

Change at this rate has only happened once, and that is when there was a massive impact of a comet or something that large.

Call it natural if you want, but this isn't going to be anything like humanity has ever faced.

This is like a major eruption at Yellowstone, except it will be a lot slower.

This should explain it for you.


Thanks for bringing some long term outlook to it. It's also ignored or glossed over that while arctic ice is changing and seeing reduction, antarctic ice is growing and thickening. Interesting balance nature seems to find for itself.

What really gets me, and as your chart does show there ...Earth has a history of billions of years, by what science can determine. So when "record breaking" this and that is declared, I think the next question always has to be, record breaking to what time frame? Since humans kept records which still exist to view or as geologic and natural record indicates? The two can often be very different things.

posted on May, 5 2013 @ 08:32 PM
The NDAA, the FEMA camps, the gun grabbing it all makes sense now.

They've known about this, and have been preparing right before our eyes.
When food, and water become all, but non existent they'll be mass civil unrest.

This is bad, very bad.

posted on May, 5 2013 @ 08:33 PM
reply to post by poet1b

i remember watching a tv show about certain chunks of ice that are so cold that on the inside there is still water that is below freezing temps, kinda like liquid nitrogen, and if those chunks of ice were to break or melt, the water would get out and whole world would flood fast.
edit on 5-5-2013 by xXthealienghostXx because: accidently clicked reply :3

posted on May, 5 2013 @ 08:35 PM
So - if this is to be the case - that methane will flood the earth and cause our breaths to become dying gasps..

You don't think that humans would create some sort of apparatus to wear - or create bio-domes and filter the air?

Do you really think this will be the end all of us?

I don't. But, hey, I'm an optimist.

So where are the best places for humanity to prepare to go to should methane become the planet killer? For those left without the masks they'll sell for a hundred bucks and those who can't afford a ticket into a dome?


posted on May, 5 2013 @ 08:46 PM
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Well, on a time frame, current methane level break all records all the way back to the end of the dinosaur age.

Is that far enough?

posted on May, 5 2013 @ 08:48 PM

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by pheonix358

Your graph is outdated.

It is now warmer than it has been for over a million years, possibly longer.

Soils frozen for millions of years are now unfrozen.

But hey, believe what you want to believe.

Those are just words.

Could you please show some scientific data or a source or anything to back up your claims. Otherwise what you have said is just your opinion. Please, anything? DO you have anything at all?


posted on May, 5 2013 @ 08:54 PM
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Human records of climate do not go back very far at all. A few hundred years of accurate records perhaps. What we get from ice cores and tree rings helps us go back much further as that chart shows. Tree rings go back about 2000 years.

This is a drop in the ocean.

When talking about Antarctica, a word of caution! It is not all happy go lucky. Some of the information we are getting only applies to a very small area of the continent. Perhaps you may like to have a sqizz at that BBC Frozen Planet (number 7) to get a more rounded view. It is only an hour and puts many things in perspective.

Things are getting worse since it was produced.


posted on May, 5 2013 @ 08:58 PM
reply to post by pheonix358

Once again, try reading my opening post.

All the scientific evidence is presented, and the quotes are right there from the links.

posted on May, 5 2013 @ 09:00 PM
reply to post by WanderingThe3rd

Ok, I"ll bite once more.

How is making the Huge landmasses of Siberia and Canada more viable for habitation a bad thing if Man-Made global warming is occurring? The overall net gain of habitable land will increase.

We will not die as a species because of ANY global warming save the Sun going ballistic on us.

Lets revisit this thread in 2015 and see how good that prediction is...........

posted on May, 5 2013 @ 09:01 PM
reply to post by CirqueDeTruth

I have been asking that myself.

Alaska or Canada maybe?

Some place north with good soil 200 feet or more above sea level.

edit on 5-5-2013 by poet1b because: Missing word

posted on May, 5 2013 @ 09:04 PM

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by VoidHawk

Um, the flooding isn't supposed to happen until the Antarctic glaciers melt, on the other side of the planet from the Arctic Ocean.

Ocean rises where expected in a hundred years, but we could start seeing a serious rise in sea levels within a decade.
edit on 5-5-2013 by poet1b because: Auto correct hassles

but somehow the antarctic glacires never saw the climate models and are growing to compensate for the zero sum

Scientists solve the mystery of why global warming and melting has INCREASED ice around Antarctica

of course global warming makes
less ice
more ice

posted on May, 5 2013 @ 09:06 PM
reply to post by pheonix358

Actually, I was agreeing with you.. lol

I am curious, since we're on the topic of ice flows, thickness and rates of change. Is Australia more active on those topics for Antarctica than other nations? The reason I ask is that living right next to it, it seems Australia would have a more direct interest in it?

I hear you about conditions on the Ice. It's been something of a side interest of mine for years. It is an ENORMOUS continent with what we can only really guess laying beneath. British surveys along some of the ridges indicate very clear and well defined features beneath as well, suggesting little to no movement and more of a freeze in place for much of it. That does make for interesting possibilities.

Anyway... The thread seems to be in the direction of 'It's all over, nothing we can do, we're all dead'...and I just don't buy those theories. Heck, it wasn't a couple days ago I had my own thread about the snow in Missouri and areas of Northern Arkansas when I found NASA reports showing a whole 0.9 Celsius rise in temp, globally, since 1880 ..and oddly, no expected rise in temps in the last 10 or so years as the models had said there should be.

The whole global system is a bit too complex, in my opinion, to keep popping numbers into models and expecting the result to be solid and reliable enough to base major policy and future planning on. Just my thoughts by the mix-mash of science conflicting at the moment.

posted on May, 5 2013 @ 09:13 PM
reply to post by poet1b

I am sorry. Your 'sources' are nothing more that MSM online 'news'. We know they they are not reliable. I am speaking of claims you make such as 'Millions of years." There is no scientific data that goes back that far. None.

The subject is a very serious one that is bad enough with paid science making dubious claims for Al Gore and the like who are trying to make a killing from Global Warming / Global cooling and now climate change. It is a difficult area to get sensible reliable data without hanging on to sensationalism. I applaud you for this thread, but please, try to stick to facts.

It is serious enough without sensationalistic claims.


posted on May, 5 2013 @ 09:16 PM
reply to post by Danbones

Sea ice around Antarctica is increasing because the glaciers on Antarctica are melting into the ocean, as you own link points out.

And the Southern Ocean is warming rapidly and it's current is increasing in speed.

posted on May, 5 2013 @ 09:22 PM
I know that during the time of Rome (during its peak if I remember correctly) England was know for it wine...

Climate fluctuates and varies and is very dynamic. We have measured but a small amount. I am sure "man" contributes to the change but would argue as to the actual degree of change or amount of change has anything to do with our activities.

I certainly see (and have seen) "climate change" over my lifetime. The weather is far more wild in fluctuation and intensity since the 1970s and especially over the last decade or so. But I base that on the few areas I have personal experience with- I also do not think the models represent anything accurate since the program is using data that might be flawed to begin with. I also think there is some truth to be found in the models.

Simply. I know what is going to happen about as much as anyone. For years both the "mainstream" and the "nay'sayers" have been wrong about so many issues it isnt funny.

But if you ask me...Mini Ice Age is coming in the next 20 years after an intense warming . The warming is a precursor to a natural Ice Age. No. I am not going to argue and debate since its pointless- We will have to all wait and seee what happens.

posted on May, 5 2013 @ 09:24 PM
reply to post by pheonix358

You haven't even bothered to look at the information.

Your graph has no link, and you don't dare bother to look at mine.

Those are not MSN links, and those articles provide links to the scientific reports.

I understand, you know it all, you don't need to read what the scientists have found.

posted on May, 5 2013 @ 09:26 PM
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

I didn't say we are all going to die.

Those who adapt will most likely survive.

The descendents of the dinosaurs are still here.

posted on May, 5 2013 @ 09:30 PM

Originally posted by poet1b
Compared to what is happening In the Arctic as we speak, everything else is meaningless.

Precisely. It's always "worse than they thought". Of all the "doom" talk, this is what scares me. S & F.

posted on May, 5 2013 @ 09:36 PM
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

I have been studying polar ice melt since 1995. Unfortunately, a flood in 1995 caused me to lose my data and in one of those freaky things my backup hard drive failed as well.

The first thing that has happened is the amount of studies that came out in the last decade from paid off science. It became harder and harder to get hold of meaningful data. To make things much worse a great deal of the pre 2000 data has been removed from the web. Lots of it! That graph is one of the only ones available and you may note it is only valid to 1950. The ones I used to have up till 2000 were scary.

Global temperatures were above the level of the switch of two previous ice ages. In the mid 90s eminent scientists including those working in Antarctica were already saying that the next ice age was not that far away. Those reports and in fact the data from ice cores has vanished from the view of the general populous.

The question is: If the Governments knew that the next ice age was around the corner, would they tell you. Even a mini ice age will decimate the worlds population due to starvation on a scale never before seen.

When you add in strange things like the Chinese building empty cities in Africa you have to ask the questions.


posted on May, 5 2013 @ 09:53 PM
So it has been millions of years since methane was this high?

Here's a link that says Co2 hasn't been this high (and sustained) in 15 million years: - Last Time Carbon Dioxide Levels Were This High: 15 Million Years Ago, Scientists Report...

Of course, this hints that Co2 has been this high before, but it wasn't sustained. It does state that Co2 levels above 300 have not been seen for at least 800,000 years or more.
edit on 5-5-2013 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in