West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) Could Disintegrate Within Decades

[SSDD]

The link humiliates you. And, as I have stated many times now, I will not be answering your demands because you're a fucking TROLL.

And yet you can't seem to bring a single piece of observed, measured evidence that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability to smack me down...you would rather be known as a liar and an idiot than bring a single piece of such data here to shut me up.....

riiiiigggggghhhhhhttttt. You are full of it skidmark...if any such data existed over there in your steaming pile of excrement, you would bring it here...but you don't...you are left impotently trying to pretend that you "just don't want to bring it here" Do you think that plan is fooling anyone but you? You know what they say..you can only think up a deception that is good enough to fool yourself....and we have established that that bar is pretty damned low.

 

[SSDD]

How many people have no looked at "The Physical Science Basis" Shit? Everyone who has done so now KNOWS that you are lying through your teeth. But that doesn't bother you because you are a fucking, good-for-nothing TROLL.

And yet, here you are, and to date have not provided any observations. Sir, that’s you lying on any point afterwards

I have provided hundreds of observations here. I have also repeatedly provided the link to 'The Physical Science Basis' and to numerous other published scientific studies containing empirical and other evidence supporting AGW. YOUR comment is a lie.

You have provided plenty of observations...but none of them favor the AGW hypothesis over natural variability...you just aren't bright enough to understand what constitutes evidence that favors AGW over natural variability...you seem to think that any observed measurement is evidence supporting AGW...it isn't...every time you bring something, it only further proves how easily you are fooled.

 

[SSDD]

How many people have no looked at "The Physical Science Basis" Shit? Everyone who has done so now KNOWS that you are lying through your teeth. But that doesn't bother you because you are a fucking, good-for-nothing TROLL.

And yet, here you are, and to date have not provided any observations. Sir, that’s you lying on any point afterwards

I have provided hundreds of observations here. I have also repeatedly provided the link to 'The Physical Science Basis' and to numerous other published scientific studies containing empirical and other evidence supporting AGW. YOUR comment is a lie.

No, you provided a link and that means jack shit without the pieces you claim would give ypur claim credence . So far you’re a failure

Tell you what. Why don't you do me a big favor and go "The Physical Science Basis" and copy it all to a post here.

From USMB Site Wide Rules and Regulations

• Copyright. Link Each "Copy & Paste" to It's Source. Only paste a small to medium section of the material.

I have already been suspended once for posting no more than the Executive Summary to two chapter of The Physical Science Basis (hereafter "TPSB"). I will not do that again. Additionally, I will not be satisfying ANY demands from SSDD (which you are only repeating because he is your idol and you are a brainless twat) because he is absolutely nothing but a fucking TROLL.

You won't....because you can't...because no such data exists....you are a liar....and you debate like a whiney little girl.

 

[SSDD]

I don't want my children or theirs going through this. Apparently, some of you aren't so concerned.

He "feels" he "thinks" and like you...he doesn't have the first piece of observed, measured data that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability....his bar is as low as yours...and like you, he never wonders why he can't seem to find any of that observed, measured data to shut up the skeptics...

 

[Pilot1]

The world is going to freeze over. Ahhhh!

 

[jc456]

Liar

Fact

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Same Fox article

The study said the amount of energy that has been put into the Earth's oceans over the past 150 years is the equivalent of an atomic bomb explosion every second for 150 years.

According to the government space agency, melting ice in Greenland and Antarctica has increased the global sea level more than a millimeter per year, which is a third of the overall increase.

The study on which this Fox article is based may be read in its entirety at the website of the Proceeding of the National Academy of Science: Four decades of Antarctic Ice Sheet mass balance from 1979–2017

Do you have any idea how small a fucking millimeter is?

There are 25.4 mm in an inch. That will take 25.4 years to raise the sea level by an inch! Oh, the humanity! That's 300 years to raise it a foot, yet you say it will happen overnight!

People might have to start wearing platform shoes!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

So you accept the admiral's claim to be in the 99.9th percentile in mathematics and the rest of his obvious bullshit braggadocio? Not surprised in the least. But he has yet to provide one single meaningful comment regarding the instability of the WAIS. The one comment he made was a suggestion that the PhDs who'd written on this topic failed to take into account the volume of the sub-sea-level basin under the WAIS and claimed that the ocean filling it would actually cause sea level to drop. Do you agree with those contentions?

I never said that you lying sack of shit! I would ask you to quote it but you can't! Admit you lied and slither off.

Apparently, the best part of you ran down your mother's leg!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

How many people have no looked at "The Physical Science Basis" Shit? Everyone who has done so now KNOWS that you are lying through your teeth. But that doesn't bother you because you are a fucking, good-for-nothing TROLL.

And yet, here you are, and to date have not provided any observations. Sir, that’s you lying on any point afterwards

I have provided hundreds of observations here. I have also repeatedly provided the link to 'The Physical Science Basis' and to numerous other published scientific studies containing empirical and other evidence supporting AGW. YOUR comment is a lie.

No, you provided a link and that means jack shit without the pieces you claim would give ypur claim credence . So far you’re a failure

Tell you what. Why don't you do me a big favor and go "The Physical Science Basis" and copy it all to a post here.

From USMB Site Wide Rules and Regulations

• Copyright. Link Each "Copy & Paste" to It's Source. Only paste a small to medium section of the material.

I have already been suspended once for posting no more than the Executive Summary to two chapter of The Physical Science Basis (hereafter "TPSB"). I will not do that again. Additionally, I will not be satisfying ANY demands from SSDD (which you are only repeating because he is your idol and you are a brainless twat) because he is absolutely nothing but a fucking TROLL.

You should be suspended for the inability to carry on a conversation because you are a dumbass!

 

[jc456]

So you accept the admiral's claim to be in the 99.9th percentile in mathematics and the rest of his obvious bullshit braggadocio? Not surprised in the least. But he has yet to provide one single meaningful comment regarding the instability of the WAIS. The one comment he made was a suggestion that the PhDs who'd written on this topic failed to take into account the volume of the sub-sea-level basin under the WAIS and claimed that the ocean filling it would actually cause sea level to drop. Do you agree with those contentions?

I never said that you lying sack of shit! I would ask you to quote it but you can't! Admit you lied and slither off.

Apparently, the best part of you ran down your mother's leg!

It’s what he does over and over

 

[SSDD]

Same Fox article

The study said the amount of energy that has been put into the Earth's oceans over the past 150 years is the equivalent of an atomic bomb explosion every second for 150 years.

Wow....an atomic bomb explosion every second for 150 years? Sounds scary but is it? Or is it just more alarmist handwaving hysterics. Lets look at the numbers...

The global surface area is 5.11e+14 square meters
400,000 atomic bombs per day works out to 0.6 watts per square meter
Should we be afraid of a claimed imbalance of six tenths of a watt per square meter in a system where the incoming radiation from the sun is half a kilowatt per square meter? We can't even measure the radiation to that sort of accuracy...An amount of energy so small, that it isn't even with the bounds of measurement certainty...The error bar for such a claim is plus or minus 113 atomic bombs every second...

Now if you want to see something scary...The earths circular area is 3 * (6E6m)^2 = 1E14m2
The sun's TSI is 1kW=1E3 J/s so the earth gets CA 1E17 J/s on the sunlit side so the sun is bombarding us with about a thousand atomic bombs worth of energy every second.

You people are nothing but alarmists...you try to scare people at every turn...idiot temperature charts shown in terms of anomalies rather than temperature because anomalies look more frightening...trying to scare people with images of an atomic bomb per second when the sun is delivering 1000 times that amount of energy...it is all bullshit designed to fool uneducated people into supporting your scam.

 

[Crick]

First,we have no idea what size atomic bomb he's talking about, and you don't either.

Second, Mr Math Whiz, there are 86,400 seconds in a day, not 400,000

The energy was spread over the oceans, not the "global surface area".

The full sun, directly and indirectly, provides 1,120 W/m^2 at the Earth's equatorial surface.

The problem here has always been with you. On numerous topics, you have attempted to use scale to convince people different effects are of no threat. You ignore numerous realities to do so. The temperature increase of the planet has actually only been 1.5K / 288K or 0.52%. Why would we be worried about an increase of a fraction of a percent change over decades?

Because it represent a real threat.

Why do you make arguments like this?

BECAUSE YOU'RE A TROLL

 

[SSDD]

First,we have no idea what size atomic bomb he's talking about, and you don't either.

He got the idea from hansen who used hiroshima bombs....it wouldn't matter as the sun puts them all to shame in terms of energy every f'ing second.

You are a lying alarmist piece of drek....and you have sunk so low that you are reduced to calling names in big, red, bold, all caps...could you admit your defeat any more clearly?

 

[Crick]

The Little Boy bomb dropped on Hiroshima released 63 TJ of energy. The Fat Man bomb dropped on Nagasaki released 84 TJ of energy. Let's call it 73.5 TJ/bomb.

The ocean absorbs roughly 90% of the suns energy, directly and via greenhouse feedback. The greenhouse effect, as of 2011, put 1.68 Wm^-2 to the Earth's surface. The ocean would receive 90% of that, so just over 1.5 Wm^-2. The world's ocean total 3.610443426e+14 m^2 in area. They thus receive 545,899,046,011,200 watts every second which, of course, equals 545.899 TJ. 545.899 TJ / 73.5 TJ = 7.43 'atom bombs' per second. That comes out 7.43 times as high as the original post because I have only calculated the current rate. The original statement included the past 150 years of lesser heating.

How many of SSDD's fans reading this thread think that a continuous and increasing heating rate currently equivalent to seven-and-a-half atomic bombs PER SECOND agree with him that this is nothing to worry about?

 

[jc456]

The Little Boy bomb dropped on Hiroshima released 63 TJ of energy. The Fat Man bomb dropped on Nagasaki released 84 TJ of energy. Let's call it 73.5 TJ/bomb.

The ocean absorbs roughly 90% of the suns energy, directly and via greenhouse feedback. The greenhouse effect, as of 2011, put 1.68 Wm^-2 to the Earth's surface. The ocean would receive 90% of that, so just over 1.5 Wm^-2. The world's ocean total 3.610443426e+14 m^2 in area. They thus receive 545,899,046,011,200 watts every second which, of course, equals 545.899 TJ. 545.899 TJ / 73.5 TJ = 7.43 'atom bombs' per second. That comes out 7.43 times as high as the original post because I have only calculated the current rate. The original statement included the past 150 years of lesser heating.

How many of SSDD's fans reading this thread think that a continuous and increasing heating rate currently equivalent to seven-and-a-half atomic bombs PER SECOND agree with him that this is nothing to worry about?

now we're talking atomic bombs to scare the populace? LOL. dude you are truly a whackamole. you keep getting your ass whacked and keep doubling down on your stupid. SSDD gave you stats and yet here you are trying to make it even worse. what a humanitarian you are. Hey fellow man look at this shit that's gonna happen to you via the posting of crickster!!

 

[Crick]

The atomic bomb analogy originated with an article on Fox News whizzo. The original article claimed the heating rate over the past 150 years was equivalent to 1 bomb per second. SSDD argued that it was a trivial amount of heating. I countered.

And if a heating rate of 546 TJ/second doesn't scare you, stay away from buses and cliff edges.

 

[Muhammed]

Are you incapable of debating these points or do you choose to avoid it out of laziness or do you simply not care?

Could you at least try to provide an argument that is not squarely based on logical fallacies to support your position ?

 

[mamooth]

Another big calving event on an Antarctic ocean ice shelf.

Iceberg twice the size of New York City is set to break away from Antarctica

Yes, ocean ice shelves have a cycle of expanding and calving. Thing is, the new frontier will be 20 km further back from that of the previous calving event. Each cycle sees the ice going further back.

And yes, that will affect sea level, even though it's floating ice. When freshwater ice floating on denser salt water melts, the volume of meltwater is about 1% more than the displacement. It's a small effect on sea level, but it is there.

 

[SSDD]

Sorry, but that is incorrect. The ice sheet there is thousands of feet thick.

it is a speck compared to the volume of the ocean....like your 4 atomic bombs worth of energy every second in comparison to the suns 1000 atomic bombs worth of energy every second....pure alarmism...nothing more.

 

[SSDD]

The ocean absorbs roughly 90% of the suns energy, directly and via greenhouse feedback.

The oceans don't absorb anything via greenhouse feedback...except, of course in rare temperature versions where the atmosphere is warmer than the ocean. Energy only moves in one direction...