West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) Could Disintegrate Within Decades

Oy.....

This is the latest bomb throwing stunt in here. In ten years of being in this stupid forum, probably seen 500 of these hysterical topics.....none of this crap has moved the care needle a smidge. But they keep on doing it!!:abgg2q.jpg:.

You know what mental health professionals say!:eusa_dance::eusa_dance:
 
Reassessment of the Potential Sea-Level Rise from a Collapse of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet

Abstract
Theory has suggested that the West Antarctic Ice Sheet may be inherently unstable. Recent observations lend weight to this hypothesis. We reassess the potential contribution to eustatic and regional sea level from a rapid collapse of the ice sheet and find that previous assessments have substantially overestimated its likely primary contribution. We obtain a value for the global, eustatic sea-level rise contribution of about 3.3 meters, with important regional variations. The maximum increase is concentrated along the Pacific and Atlantic seaboard of the United States, where the value is about 25% greater than the global mean, even for the case of a partial collapse.

Good news: These fellows don't think a WAIS collapse would raise sea level as much as others: only 3.3 m (ten feet).
Bad news, the US Atlantic and Pacific sea boards would see 4.125m (13.5 ft)

We need to get China to cut back their emissions TODAY, Crick!
 
http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/advances/5/1/eaau3433.full.pdf
Heterogeneous retreat and ice melt of Thwaites Glacier, West Antarctica

"The glaciers flowing into the Amundsen Sea Embayment, West Antarctica, have undergone acceleration and grounding line retreat over the past few decades that may yield an irreversible mass loss. Using a constellation of satellites, we detect the evolution of ice velocity, ice thinning, and grounding line retreat of Thwaites Glacier from 1992 to 2017. The results reveal a complex pattern of retreat and ice melt, with sectors retreating at 0.8 km/year and floating ice melting at 200 m/year, while others retreat at 0.3 km/year with ice melting 10 times slower. We interpret the results in terms of buoyancy/slope-driven seawater intrusion along preferential channels at tidal frequencies leading to more efficient melt in newly formed cavities. Such complexities in ice-ocean interaction are not currently represented in coupled ice sheet/ocean models."

This is the study that found the Manhattan-sized, thousand foot high cavity under Thwaites Glacier in the WAIS. The full study is available to the public without cost. As noted above, they found retreat rates as high as 0.8km/year (2.2 meters/day). They also found areas where the grounding line was cycling back and forth with the tide, a motion likely to accelerate the disintegration of the leading edge of the ice sheet through fatigue, like bending a piece of metal back and forth till it fails.
 
it could, and it might not. making predictions one will never observed is stupid as eating shit just cause it exists.
 
liberal-playbook-1-ignore-facts-that-hurt-your-position-2-5254180-png.243909
When one can't argue the science.
science? from you? :auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg:
 
Are you incapable of debating these points or do you choose to avoid it out of laziness or do you simply not care?

What points, precisely are you debating?

The process to date has been ...

1. You make a disastrous prognostication.

2. We ridicule your doom-saying.

3. You respond by calling names and pronouncing us climate heretics

4. Rinse, repeat.

For the record, that is in no way a debate.

You claim to value science, but you ignore the scientific method.

Present your data without emotion or political bias for examination. Respond to criticism only with additional data. Present the results of repeatable experiments and make no appeals to authority or supremacy of opinion.

No appeals to emotion or disparaging remarks are allowed, they only devalue your argument.

I'm more than willing to have a climate debate ... but, I'm not willing to entertain for a moment we disrupt our economy, give additional powers to government, or create a tax burden on a single person because of a yet to be explained, certainly not demonstrably proved, hypothesis.
but he isn't willing to have a debate. it's why he does all of what you posted. it's called lying, bait and switch, condescension, you name it, everything but science.
 
Okay.

WGI_AR5_FigSPM-5.jpg


Here we have a measure of the various forcing factors. What is your opinion regarding these data and what is the bases of your opinion?
more made up graphs. dude, you have absolutely no empirical evidence. none, nadda. been asking you for it. show me how CO2 behaves with an experiment. come on dude, why do you always fold?
 
I missed where they argued that the WAIS wasn't at risk of disintegration. In fact, given their arguments that the history of the planet is much warmer than today, I'd say they agree that the disappearance of the ice sheets on Antarctica and Greenland should be expected.
 

Forum List

Back
Top