Reservoir found under Greenland's snow. What it means for shrinking glaciers.

[ScienceRocks]

Ol' Flat makes a big deal of what he thinks he knows, then gets bent when it is pointed out that he has the facts totally wrong. He is a knownothing ass. Little knowledge of science, and less of research.

The skeptics are pretty much all about spinning, making things up and exactly that The slow down over the past 10 years has been a break for the skeptics that has helped them greatly.

 

[flacaltenn]

You knew nothing about that point till you read Marcott - the man you've called every form of idiot - explain it to you.

What the hell you talking about BullWinkle?? You have NO IDEA about what I know. But data sampling, filtering and resolution is something I know better than most people. I've had papers invited to 5 signal/image processing conferences all over the world.
And given seminars on designing for data acquisition equipment.

If you're talking about the proxy accuracy issue and GLOBAL averages versus individual study accuracies -- I knew about that BEFORE Marcott even made the news..

Here's what I DONT know...

What's your point of attacking me for bringing you the bad news ?? Are you just hoping that your playmates will Thank-You or Rep you for attacking me personally ??
Are you Sad because your skepticalscience buds have been yanking your chain??

For the record -- I've NEVER personally assaulted Marcott and if I have --- I apologize.. He has shown some class in being honest and forthright about the INTERPRETATIONS of his work. That's rare in this cadre of shysters. I HAVE REPEATEDLY ATTACKED the silly notion of trying to reconstruct Global Averages with only 75 sample points on the globe and trying to merge all those diff. proxies.

Just read GoldiRocks and Matthew piling on. Guess I pissed off ALL of you zealots.. Must have gotten thru the brainwashing this time eh? Shame you juvvies are so bad at defending your position.. Either that -- or skepticalscience must be down for updates..

 

[rdean]

If all the ice in Greenland and Antarctica melted, it would raise sea levels by 200 feet.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Greenland ice sheet stores liquid water year-round

Vast aquifer's potential for storing meltwater an important factor in calculating potential sea-level rise

National Science Foundation-funded researchers at the University of Utah have discovered a previously unknown aquifer in the Greenland ice sheet that holds liquid water all year long in the otherwise perpetually frozen winter landscape. The aquifer is extensive, covering 27,000 square miles.

The reservoir is known as the "perennial firn aquifer" because water persists within the firn--layers of snow and ice that don't melt for at least one season. Researchers believe it figures significantly in understanding the contribution of snowmelt and ice melt to rising sea levels.

The journal Nature Geoscience published the study online Sunday, Dec. 22.

"Of the current sea level rise, the Greenland Ice Sheet is the largest contributor--and it is melting at record levels,” said Rick Forster, the study's lead author and a professor of geography at the University of Utah. "So understanding the aquifer's capacity to store water from year to year is important because it fills a major gap in the overall equation of meltwater runoff and sea levels."

This research is the result of an international collaboration among researchers at the University of Utah; the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland; Byrd Polar Research Center at Ohio State University; the Institute for Marine and Atmospheric research Utrecht, Utrecht University in the Netherlands; the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center; the Center for Remote Sensing of Ice Sheets at the University of Kansas and the Desert Research Institute at the University of Nevada, Reno.

Forster and the Utah team were supported by both the Division of Polar Programs at the National Science Foundation and NASA.

Forster's team has been doing research in southeast Greenland since 2010 to measure snowfall accumulation and how it varies from year to year. The area they study covers 14 percent of southeast Greenland yet receives 32 percent of the entire ice sheet's snowfall, but there has been little data gathered.

In 2010, the team drilled core samples in three locations on the ice for analysis. Team members returned in 2011 to approximately the same area, but at lower elevation. Of the four core samples taken then, two came to the surface with liquid water pouring off the drill while the air temperatures were minus 4 degrees Fahrenheit. The water was found at about 33 feet below the surface at the first hole and at 82 feet in the second hole.

"This discovery was a surprise," Forster says. "Although water discharge from streams in winter had been previously reported, and snow temperature data implied small amounts of water, no one had yet reported observing water in the firn that had persisted through the winter."

The aquifer's 27,000 square miles is larger than the state of West Virginia. It is similar in form to a groundwater aquifer on land that can be used for drinking water.

"Here instead of the water being stored in the airspace between subsurface rock particles, the water is stored in the air space between the ice particles, like the juice in a snow cone," Forster said. "The surprising fact is the juice in this snow cone never freezes, even during the dark Greenland winter. Large amounts of snow fall on the surface late in the summer and quickly insulates the water from the subfreezing air temperatures above, allowing the water to persist all year long."

The Greenland ice sheet covers roughly the same area as the states of California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado and Utah combined. The average thickness of the ice is 5,000 feet.

In 2012, the ice sheet lost volume of 60 cubic miles--a record for melt and runoff.

In the unlikely event that all the water retained in the ice sheet melted, it is estimated that the global sea level would rise about 21 feet, says Forster. Monitoring run-off amounts and how the water is moving is critical to accurately predicting sea-level changes.

Greenland ice sheet stores liquid water year-round

 

[Old Rocks]

Dr. Richard Alley gave a very good lecture at the AGU Conferance this year in which he addressed the dangers of the various ice fields in Greenland and Antarctica. He stated that the ice fields in Greenland are anchored well enough that while we will get a continous rise from them, it is not likely that we will get a sudden surge. However, there is a chance of such happening from an ice field presently held back by an ice shelf in the Antarctic. You have to register now, free, to get the lectures from that meeting, but it is well worth the effort. The world's leading geologists have wonderful lectures on many subjects, on and off this planet.

And, once again, Walleyes was a no show on the podium.

 

[IanC]

You knew nothing about that point till you read Marcott - the man you've called every form of idiot - explain it to you.

so why are you having a hard time understanding even though Marcott explained it?

you cannot mix proxy and instrumental data together and give them both the same characteristics. they are fundamentally different.

 

[IanC]

Ol' Flat makes a big deal of what he thinks he knows, then gets bent when it is pointed out that he has the facts totally wrong. He is a knownothing ass. Little knowledge of science, and less of research.

The skeptics are pretty much all about spinning, making things up and exactly that The slow down over the past 10 years has been a break for the skeptics that has helped them greatly.

Matt- for someone who professes a great love of science you have been wandering into the realm of politics and ad homs a lot lately. I have been more than a little bit dismayed at your change of attitude lately.

surely you have some sort of filter to help you decide what conclusions can be drawn from various types of evidence. proxy data always has to be taken with a large grain of salt, and it only has meaning compared to similar data.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No rise in temperature in the last 15 years scientist directed to cover up their findings
THE END.

 

[IanC]

No rise in temperature in the last 15 years scientist directed to cover up their findings
THE END.

way, way too simplistic. CO2 has an effect on the Earth's radiation equilibrium. the basic theory was built up in the 80's and 90's when temperatures coincidentally backed up their findings. to climate scientists it seemed as if the null hypothesis had been inverted so that CO2 controlled the climate and natural variation was only a bit player, rather than the other way around. when Nature went in the other direction, those climate scientists took up the slack in the system to continue showing CO2 dominance, believing that things would reverse again real soon.

conditions havent reversed, but the scientists have stuck out their necks by fudging results a little and making ever more exaggerated claims. now they are having a hard time backing down because it would involve losing face, and more importantly, science itself would take a huge hit and lose a lot of its respect from the public.

personally I think climate science should just rip off the bandaid and confess that they didnt know as much as they though, and start over with a more realistic theory.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No rise in temperature in the last 15 years scientist directed to cover up their findings
THE END.

way, way too simplistic. CO2 has an effect on the Earth's radiation equilibrium. the basic theory was built up in the 80's and 90's when temperatures coincidentally backed up their findings. to climate scientists it seemed as if the null hypothesis had been inverted so that CO2 controlled the climate and natural variation was only a bit player, rather than the other way around. when Nature went in the other direction, those climate scientists took up the slack in the system to continue showing CO2 dominance, believing that things would reverse again real soon.

conditions havent reversed, but the scientists have stuck out their necks by fudging results a little and making ever more exaggerated claims. now they are having a hard time backing down because it would involve losing face, and more importantly, science itself would take a huge hit and lose a lot of its respect from the public.

personally I think climate science should just rip off the bandaid and confess that they didnt know as much as they though, and start over with a more realistic theory.

Yes it may be simplistic, but it's my summation of what I have already posted in these types of threads.
But I agree if they come clean and be honest more people would support them.

 

[IanC]

fair enough

 

[Abraham3]

you cannot mix proxy and instrumental data together and give them both the same characteristics. they are fundamentally different.

They can and should be butted/appended/joined/blended/merged/whatever if one wishes to show data across a time span for which only proxies are available in one portion and instrumented data are available in another. If you don't do that - if you can't do that, then something is wrong with the treatment of your proxy data.

Marcott's work (and Shakun's before him) was far more concerned with the behavior of the climate in the past. That you and yours (and they are yours) spend all your time attacking his merger tells me that you have nothing real with which to criticize the man.

As I have said, repeatedly, I don't care a great deal about what has happened in the past because it has little to no bearing on what is happening now. Current warming is almost entirely due to anthropogenic GHG emissions. Period. Contentions otherwise are unsupportable bullshit.

 

[Abraham3]

No rise in temperature in the last 15 years scientist directed to cover up their findings
THE END.

Significant warming for last 150 years.
Huge decline in 1941 - did NOT mark end of anthropogenic global warming.
Accusations of vast conspiracy are paranoid NONSENSE.

You are such a fucking bigoted idiot.

 

[Abraham3]

and start over with a more realistic theory.

Have you got even an inkling of a theory that wil explain it all?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No rise in temperature in the last 15 years scientist directed to cover up their findings
THE END.

Significant warming for last 150 years.
Huge decline in 1941 - did NOT mark end of anthropogenic global warming.
Accusations of vast conspiracy are paranoid NONSENSE.

You are such a fucking bigoted idiot.

scientist directed to cover up their findings
THE END.

 

[editec]

Why has no one ever let out so much as a "peep" as to agriculture's contributions to environmental degradation? Anyone?

Here's some reasons, Mr H.


These are just MEGA-GRAIN companies.. there's plenty more where that came from. Like for example all the chemical companies that make fertilizers and pesticides using the product of the OIL companies



Archer Daniels Midland

Bunge Limited

Cargill
CHS Inc.

Gavilon
Green Plains Renewable Energy

Ingredion

MFA Incorporated

POET

Riceland Foods

The Andersons

 

[ScienceRocks]

WE HAVE TO EAT

We sure as hell have a choice how we power our cities.

 

[flacaltenn]

Why has no one ever let out so much as a "peep" as to agriculture's contributions to environmental degradation? Anyone?

Here's some reasons, Mr H.


These are just MEGA-GRAIN companies.. there's plenty more where that came from. Like for example all the chemical companies that make fertilizers and pesticides using the product of the OIL companies



Archer Daniels Midland

Bunge Limited

Cargill
CHS Inc.

Gavilon
Green Plains Renewable Energy

Ingredion

MFA Incorporated

POET

Riceland Foods

The Andersons

The alternative to having a few LARGE fertilizer companies is to adopt the Green Party concept of local and communal biz.. Whereby we get to pollute AND duplicate all the enviro sensitive aspects of fertilizer production in every little nook and cranny of the country.. THAT -- is an enviro nightmare.

What we NEED to do --- is stop FEEDING these giants and let them relearn how to compete and survive WITHOUT massive subsidies and friendly legistlation that protects them from NEWER, more INNOVATIVE companies..

There are economy of scale in farming.. But when brain-dead CongressCritters THINK they are helping Ma and Paw Farmer -- they are KILLING THEM because the subsidies are sucked up and concentrated in that list of yours..

That's how you get 100 farm subsidies checks mailed to every square acre of Manhattan.
It's actuallly INSANE..........

 

[Abraham3]

If you want to kill agribusiness, you need to be willing to see your grocery bill go up by multiples.

Curious what this has to do with the meltwater under the Greenland ice sheet.

If Mr H would like to talk about agribusiness, why doesn't he just start his own thread?

 

[Abraham3]

Another article on the under-ice lake.

Massive Newly Discovered Underground Aquifer in Greenland | TIME.com

Gives an interesting point: Between 1998 and 2005, the Greenland ice sheet melted into the ocean at a rate of 121 billion tons a year. But between 2005 and 2010, the melt rate averaged 229 billion tons a year; almost twice as much. If the world's stopped getting warmer, how does that happen?