West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) Could Disintegrate Within Decades

[westwall]

Wow, there's that magic "could" again. The real answer is "certainly won't "

Sent from my SM-G892A using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

 

[Crick]

You once again display your ignorance of basic science and the scientific method.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

What? Me worry?

Let's suppose you are right and all of that brown area and green areas melt. The vast, and I say again vast majority of the water will be taken up by filling in that massive area below sea level. Until that happens, the oceans will not rise one millimeter!

 

[Marion Morrison]

What? Me worry?

Let's suppose you are right and all of that brown area and green areas melt. The vast, and I say again vast majority of the water will be taken up by filling in that massive area below sea level. Until that happens, the oceans will not rise one millimeter!

Ice loses volume when it melts.

 

[Crick]

What? Me worry?

Let's suppose you are right and all of that brown area and green areas melt. The vast, and I say again vast majority of the water will be taken up by filling in that massive area below sea level. Until that happens, the oceans will not rise one millimeter!

Sorry, but that is incorrect. The ice sheet there is thousands of feet thick. It is not IN the ocean, it is not being supported by buoyancy. The volume of the ice there is many, many times the volume of the isostatic depression. When sea water pushes under there and that ice crumbles into the sea, the world's oceans will rise by 11-16 feet.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

What? Me worry?

Let's suppose you are right and all of that brown area and green areas melt. The vast, and I say again vast majority of the water will be taken up by filling in that massive area below sea level. Until that happens, the oceans will not rise one millimeter!

Sorry, but that is incorrect. The ice sheet there is thousands of feet thick. It is not IN the ocean, it is not being supported by buoyancy. The volume of the ice there is many, many times the volume of the isostatic depression. When sea water pushes under there and that ice crumbles into the sea, the world's oceans will rise by 11-16 feet.

Really? How deep is that depression ? You have no clue do you? That is such a small percentage of the Earth's surface, where do you come up with 11-16 feet now when you claimed it was much more than that earlier?

 

[Crick]

My comments earlier described the sea level rise that could be expected if ALL of Greenland and ALL of Antarctica were to melt.

The source for the sea level rise I noted above concerned only the melting of the WAIS and came from:
West Antarctic Ice Sheet - Wikipedia

Which was also the source of the following.

It is estimated that the volume of the Antarctic ice sheet is about 25.4 million km3 (6.1 million cu mi), and the WAIS contains just under 10% of this, or 2.2 million km3 (530,000 cu mi).[1] The weight of the ice has caused the underlying rock to sink by between 0.5 and 1 kilometre (0.31 and 0.62 miles)[2] in a process known as isostatic depression.

Under the force of its own weight, the ice sheet deforms and flows. The interior ice flows slowly over rough bedrock. In some circumstances, ice can flow faster in ice streams, separated by slow-flowing ice ridges. The inter-stream ridges are frozen to the bed while the bed beneath the ice streams consists of water-saturated sediments. Many of these sediments were deposited before the ice sheet occupied the region, when much of West Antarctica was covered by the ocean. The rapid ice-stream flow is a non-linear process still not fully understood; streams can start and stop for unclear reasons.

When ice reaches the coast, it either calves or continues to flow outward onto the water. The result is a large, floating ice shelf affixed to the continent.[3]

References

1. ^ Lythe, Matthew B.; Vaughan, David G. (June 2001). "BEDMAP: A new ice thickness and subglacial topographic model of Antarctica". Journal of Geophysical Research. 106 (B6): 11335–11352. Bibcode:2001JGR...10611335L. doi:10.1029/2000JB900449.
2. ^ Anderson, John B. (1999). Antarctic marine geology. Cambridge University Press. p. 59. ISBN 978-0-521-59317-5.
3. ^ Ice Shelves, Antarctic and Southern Ocean CoalitionArchived February 3, 2006, at the Wayback Machine

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I'm still unclear how atmospheric CO2 melts undersea ice

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

West Antarctic Ice Sheet - Wikipedia

Also the source of

It is estimated that the volume of the Antarctic ice sheet is about 25.4 million km3 (6.1 million cu mi), and the WAIS contains just under 10% of this, or 2.2 million km3 (530,000 cu mi).[1] The weight of the ice has caused the underlying rock to sink by between 0.5 and 1 kilometre (0.31 and 0.62 miles)[2] in a process known as isostatic depression.

Under the force of its own weight, the ice sheet deforms and flows. The interior ice flows slowly over rough bedrock. In some circumstances, ice can flow faster in ice streams, separated by slow-flowing ice ridges. The inter-stream ridges are frozen to the bed while the bed beneath the ice streams consists of water-saturated sediments. Many of these sediments were deposited before the ice sheet occupied the region, when much of West Antarctica was covered by the ocean. The rapid ice-stream flow is a non-linear process still not fully understood; streams can start and stop for unclear reasons.[citation needed]

When ice reaches the coast, it either calves or continues to flow outward onto the water. The result is a large, floating ice shelf affixed to the continent.[3]

Great source! Not! Do you know what "citation needed" means? It's a BS flag!



Now, if you would actually read and understand what it says, what are you going to do about it when the impact is nowhere near the gloom and doom projections of nimrods who suck at math?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You once again display your ignorance of basic science and the scientific method.

Scientific method would test temperature variance by eliminating all variables except for the wisp of CO2 your Cult alleges will end all life on Earth; it's called Lab Work.

Got any?

 

[jc456]

It would really be in everyone's best interest if you were to leave this website and go back to school.

That’s a statement a loser makes

 

[jc456]

You once again display your ignorance of basic science and the scientific method.

Says the idot with only models

 

[jc456]

West Antarctic Ice Sheet - Wikipedia

Also the source of

It is estimated that the volume of the Antarctic ice sheet is about 25.4 million km3 (6.1 million cu mi), and the WAIS contains just under 10% of this, or 2.2 million km3 (530,000 cu mi).[1] The weight of the ice has caused the underlying rock to sink by between 0.5 and 1 kilometre (0.31 and 0.62 miles)[2] in a process known as isostatic depression.

Under the force of its own weight, the ice sheet deforms and flows. The interior ice flows slowly over rough bedrock. In some circumstances, ice can flow faster in ice streams, separated by slow-flowing ice ridges. The inter-stream ridges are frozen to the bed while the bed beneath the ice streams consists of water-saturated sediments. Many of these sediments were deposited before the ice sheet occupied the region, when much of West Antarctica was covered by the ocean. The rapid ice-stream flow is a non-linear process still not fully understood; streams can start and stop for unclear reasons.[citation needed]

When ice reaches the coast, it either calves or continues to flow outward onto the water. The result is a large, floating ice shelf affixed to the continent.[3]

Great source! Not! Do you know what "citation needed" means? It's a BS flag!



Now, if you would actually read and understand what it says, what are you going to do about it when the impact is nowhere near the gloom and doom projections of nimrods who suck at math?

Nothing

 

[Pete7469]

I know the entire globe is not like Antarctica but some climatologists say there's climate change but we can't feel it (for now), only their computers can do that. I don't know if this is true or not but I'm not a climatologist. Scientists should know what they say when they talk about climate change.
I only hope they're honest and skilled

That's the problem.

We know the scientists are liars.

Climategate 2.0: New E-Mails Rock The Global Warming Debate

Three themes are emerging from the newly released emails: (1) prominent scientists central to the global warming debate are taking measures to conceal rather than disseminate underlying data and discussions; (2) these scientists view global warming as a political “cause” rather than a balanced scientific inquiry and (3) many of these scientists frankly admit to each other that much of the science is weak and dependent on deliberate manipulation of facts and data.

You can program a computer to tell you (or congressional check writers) that the core of the earth is actually hell, and that we need to invest trillions of dollars in capping deep sea volcanoes to prevent demons from escaping.

Then you program the computers to "show" underwater machines putting concrete domes over fissures but some demons still escape, so you need more money to catch them and send them into the sun on Chinese rockets.

That is literally how ridiculous the climate change scam has become.

 

[Crick]

You start your post with a claim that marks you as a fool among fools. There are tens of thousands of climate scientists on the planet; from a hundred different nations with a hundred different political positions. The idea that they are all together in some massive and perfectly executed conspiracy spanning decades now is either complete idiocy or complete insanity. Take your pick.

 

[jc456]

You start your post with a claim that marks you as a fool among fools. There are tens of thousands of climate scientists on the planet; from a hundred different nations with a hundred different political positions. The idea that they are all together in some massive and perfectly executed conspiracy spanning decades now is either complete idiocy or complete insanity. Take your pick.

Blah, blah, blah, nothing you can prove, idiots. You impress no one

 

[Crick]

West Antarctic Ice Sheet - Wikipedia
Also the source of

It is estimated that the volume of the Antarctic ice sheet is about 25.4 million km3 (6.1 million cu mi), and the WAIS contains just under 10% of this, or 2.2 million km3 (530,000 cu mi).[1] The weight of the ice has caused the underlying rock to sink by between 0.5 and 1 kilometre (0.31 and 0.62 miles)[2] in a process known as isostatic depression.

Under the force of its own weight, the ice sheet deforms and flows. The interior ice flows slowly over rough bedrock. In some circumstances, ice can flow faster in ice streams, separated by slow-flowing ice ridges. The inter-stream ridges are frozen to the bed while the bed beneath the ice streams consists of water-saturated sediments. Many of these sediments were deposited before the ice sheet occupied the region, when much of West Antarctica was covered by the ocean. The rapid ice-stream flow is a non-linear process still not fully understood; streams can start and stop for unclear reasons.[citation needed]

When ice reaches the coast, it either calves or continues to flow outward onto the water. The result is a large, floating ice shelf affixed to the continent.[3]

Great source! Not! Do you know what "citation needed" means? It's a BS flag!

Now, if you would actually read and understand what it says, what are you going to do about it when the impact is nowhere near the gloom and doom projections of nimrods who suck at math?

These were the sources of that information.
References

1. ^ Lythe, Matthew B.; Vaughan, David G. (June 2001). "BEDMAP: A new ice thickness and subglacial topographic model of Antarctica". Journal of Geophysical Research. 106(B6): 11335–11352. Bibcode:2001JGR...10611335L. doi:10.1029/2000JB900449.
2. ^ Anderson, John B. (1999). Antarctic marine geology. Cambridge University Press. p. 59. ISBN 978-0-521-59317-5.
3. ^ Ice Shelves, Antarctic and Southern Ocean CoalitionArchived February 3, 2006, at the Wayback Machine

And if you think your math skills are superior to a couple of PhDs, I have to wonder what you're doing here pretending to be John Wayne?.

The "citation needed" flag applied only to the prior statement describing the flow of ice over the irregular basin - basic glaciology. There are no other citation-needed flags in the entire article. The article contains 27 footnoted references - I only provided those needed to support the excerpt I posted. I suggest you read it before again posting here half-cocked.

I'm also curious on what you base your opinion that an 11 foot increase in sea level (ignoring the effects of other Antarctic melt, of Greenland melt and of glacier and snow melt worldwide) is "...nowhere near the gloom and doom...". Eleven feet of sea level rise would submerge my house and those of many millions of people worldwide. You don't think that worth worrying about Admiral?

 

[Marion Morrison]

What? Me worry?

Let's suppose you are right and all of that brown area and green areas melt. The vast, and I say again vast majority of the water will be taken up by filling in that massive area below sea level. Until that happens, the oceans will not rise one millimeter!

Sorry, but that is incorrect. The ice sheet there is thousands of feet thick. It is not IN the ocean, it is not being supported by buoyancy. The volume of the ice there is many, many times the volume of the isostatic depression. When sea water pushes under there and that ice crumbles into the sea, the world's oceans will rise by 11-16 feet.

Until that happens, fuck off and die, k?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

West Antarctic Ice Sheet - Wikipedia
Also the source of

It is estimated that the volume of the Antarctic ice sheet is about 25.4 million km3 (6.1 million cu mi), and the WAIS contains just under 10% of this, or 2.2 million km3 (530,000 cu mi).[1] The weight of the ice has caused the underlying rock to sink by between 0.5 and 1 kilometre (0.31 and 0.62 miles)[2] in a process known as isostatic depression.

Under the force of its own weight, the ice sheet deforms and flows. The interior ice flows slowly over rough bedrock. In some circumstances, ice can flow faster in ice streams, separated by slow-flowing ice ridges. The inter-stream ridges are frozen to the bed while the bed beneath the ice streams consists of water-saturated sediments. Many of these sediments were deposited before the ice sheet occupied the region, when much of West Antarctica was covered by the ocean. The rapid ice-stream flow is a non-linear process still not fully understood; streams can start and stop for unclear reasons.[citation needed]

When ice reaches the coast, it either calves or continues to flow outward onto the water. The result is a large, floating ice shelf affixed to the continent.[3]

Great source! Not! Do you know what "citation needed" means? It's a BS flag!

Now, if you would actually read and understand what it says, what are you going to do about it when the impact is nowhere near the gloom and doom projections of nimrods who suck at math?

These were the sources of that information.
References

1. ^ Lythe, Matthew B.; Vaughan, David G. (June 2001). "BEDMAP: A new ice thickness and subglacial topographic model of Antarctica". Journal of Geophysical Research. 106(B6): 11335–11352. Bibcode:2001JGR...10611335L. doi:10.1029/2000JB900449.
2. ^ Anderson, John B. (1999). Antarctic marine geology. Cambridge University Press. p. 59. ISBN 978-0-521-59317-5.
3. ^ Ice Shelves, Antarctic and Southern Ocean CoalitionArchived February 3, 2006, at the Wayback Machine

And if you think your math skills are superior to a couple of PhDs, I have to wonder what you're doing here pretending to be John Wayne?.

The "citation needed" flag applied only to the prior statement describing the flow of ice over the irregular basin - basic glaciology. There are no other citation-needed flags in the entire article. The article contains 27 footnoted references - I only provided those needed to support the excerpt I posted. I suggest you read it before again posting here half-cocked.

I'm also curious on what you base your opinion that an 11 foot increase in sea level (ignoring the effects of other Antarctic melt, of Greenland melt and of glacier and snow melt worldwide) is "...nowhere near the gloom and doom...". Eleven feet of sea level rise would submerge my house and those of many millions of people worldwide. You don't think that worth worrying about Admiral?

Yes, my math skills are far superior to most PhDs as a matter of fact.

If you are truly worried about an 11 foot rise in the sea level, I have one very good piece of advice for you: Move!

Since you will never live to see it happen anyway, Ill give you are very good price if it meets my requirements.

Those millions of people will just have to get off their ass and move to higher ground. It isn't going to happen overnight, and I think they will have plenty of time to plan their trip. If global warming is real, Siberia will actually become a nice place to live, and it is virtually empty now!

Canadians and other who are homesick for their ice and snow most of the year can be used to settle Antarctica.

 

[bripat9643]

NOTHING associated with "Global Warming" (or whatever the Leftists want to call it this week) will happen so rapidly that we humans will be unable to timely react. The seas may rise, and some land will be covered with water. Some of Florida, maybe. Some South Pacific islands. But New York City and Boston will somehow be protected, as will Venice, Italy, New Orleans, and so on.

How fucking stupid do you have to be in order to ignore the fact that the Human Race has adapted to a thousand different varieties of "Climate Change" in its history, and still thrived?

Not even that will happen. The worst estimate of the IPCC is 18 inches of sea level rise in 100 years, but their mid-range estimate is 6 inches in 100 years. No one would even notice the difference