Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Antarctica 2019

Re: Antarctica 2019

Unread postby Plantagenet » Fri 26 Apr 2019, 19:31:44

mmasters wrote:I almost went to Antarctica on the same boat with a supposed group of psychics about 10 years ago (turned out to be a cult). I remember the trip was about 10 grand from Buenos Aires. They complained the sea was really rough in between South America and Antarctica but that it was beautiful when they were there in Antarctica.


I got a better price but other than that it sounds very similar.

Oh, and as far as I know there were no psychics and no cult on my trip.

There were a bunch of birders.....are they a cult?

Cheers!
hall of shame
People who buy new cars and then cry crocodile tears over climate change. The manufacture of a typical new car emits ca. 16 tons of CO2 and a new EV is actually much worse since the battery also has to be manufactured, resulting in a total carbon footprint of ca. 30 tons of CO2
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22665
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Antarctica 2019

Unread postby mmasters » Fri 26 Apr 2019, 20:26:57

Plantagenet wrote:There were a bunch of birders.....are they a cult?

Cheers!

This group I was with for a time was seeking the 4th Reich. That Hitler had commissioned a large underground base in the Antarctic and that's where the last Nazis were. They were going to mentally scan it to see what beings were there. Apparently the 4th Reich was in league with aliens from the Kuiper's Belt, who were working to overthrow the Illuminati and take over the planet for themselves.
User avatar
mmasters
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2148
Joined: Sun 16 Apr 2006, 02:00:00
Location: Mid-Atlantic

Re: Antarctica 2019

Unread postby Plantagenet » Mon 20 May 2019, 17:39:34

About a quarter of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet has become unstable, with thinning up to 134 m occurring in some places.

antarctic-glacier-melt-

Antarctica used to be seen as a unique, isolated place and some thought it might not be affected too much by global warming, but now huge areas of the continent are showing the effects of warming climate.

Cheers!
hall of shame
People who buy new cars and then cry crocodile tears over climate change. The manufacture of a typical new car emits ca. 16 tons of CO2 and a new EV is actually much worse since the battery also has to be manufactured, resulting in a total carbon footprint of ca. 30 tons of CO2
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22665
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Antarctica 2019

Unread postby dohboi » Tue 09 Jul 2019, 08:36:04


Glacial melting in Antarctica may become irreversible

Thwaites glacier is likely to thaw and trigger 50cm sea level rise, US study suggests


...Other Antarctic glaciers were likely to be similarly unstable.

... the ice sheet could be lost in the space of 150 years, even if temperatures stopped rising...


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/ ... reversible
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 18450
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Antarctica 2019

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Thu 18 Jul 2019, 08:41:32

A recent paper that summarizes quite well what is going on regionally in Antarctica and how it is not at odds with historical variations:

Luning, S et al, 2019. The Medieval Climate anomaly in Antarctica. Paleogeography, Paleoclimatology, Paleoecology,doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2019.109251

From the Introduction:

Until recently, the Antarctic Peninsula and West Antarctica were among the most rapidly warming regions on Earth. Between the 1950s and 1990s temperatures on the Antarctic Peninsula increased by more than 0.3 °C/decade (Stenni et al., 2017; Turner et al., 2016; Vaughan et al., 2003), with even higher warming rates reported for Byrd Station in West Antarctica (Bromwich et al., 2013; Bunde et al., 2014; Nicolas and Bromwich, 2014). Since the late 1990s, however, this warming has essentially stalled. Rapid cooling of nearly 0.5 °C per decade occurred on the Antarctic Peninsula (Favier et al., 2017; Fernandoy et al., 2018; Turner et al., 2016). This already impacted the cryosphere in parts of the Antarctic Peninsula, including slow-down of glacier recession, surface mass gains of the peripheral glaciers and a thinning of the active layer of permafrost in the northern Antarctic Peninsula islands (Engel et al., 2018; Oliva et al., 2017; Seehaus et al., 2018). At the same time, temperatures in West Antarctica over the past two decades appear to have plateaued or slightly cooled (Bromwich et al., 2013; Jones et al., 2016; Steig et al., 2009). However, temperature records in West Ant- arctica are few, often discontinuous and show opposing trends from location to location (Shuman and Stearns, 2001) which complicates modern trend analysis in this part of Antarctica. In contrast, East Antarctica has not experienced any significant temperature change since the 1950s (e.g. Yang et al., 2018) and some areas appear to have even cooled during the most recent decades (Clem et al., 2018; Favier et al., 2017; Jones et al., 2016; Marshall et al., 2014; Nicolas and Bromwich, 2014; O'Donnell et al., 2011; Ramesh and Soni, 2018). Cooling and an increase in snowfall in East Antarctica seems to have led to a gain in ice sheet mass and thickening of ice rises over the past 15 years (Goel et al., 2017; Martin-Español et al., 2017; Philippe et al., 2016; Zwally et al., 2015). East Antarctic marine-terminating glaciers show no systematic change over the past 50years (Lovell et al., 2017). Lastly, also the surface layers of the Southern Ocean south of 45°S has predominantly cooled over that past three decades (Armour et al., 2016; Fan et al., 2014; Kusahara et al., 2017; Latif et al., 2017), whilst the subpolar abyssal waters are warming (Sallée, 2018).


From the conclusions:

Main drivers of the multi-centennial scale climate variability appear to be the Southern Annular Mode (SAM) and El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) which are linked to solar activity changes by non- linear dynamics. The MCA forms the final part of a long warm phase that dominated the first millennium CE and ended 1250 CE with the onset of significant cooling in the transition to the Little Ice Age (LIA). Overall timing of the MCA and LIA in Antarctica matches the climate development of the Northern Hemisphere. Natural variability still overwhelms the forced response in the recent Antarctic climate devel- opment, and models appear to not fully represent this natural varia- bility. Multiple evidence points to a significant solar influence on Antarctic climate which may be worth testing in future model scenarios in greater detail.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7092
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: Antarctica 2019

Unread postby clif » Thu 18 Jul 2019, 23:04:09

Sebastian Lüning (1970 ) is a geologist . He was an Africa expert at the oil and gas company RWE Dea and is currently working for Galp Energia . He experienced media reception through the publication of the book The Cold Sun , in which he, together with Fritz Vahrenholt, denies a series of fundamental findings in climate research. a. claims that a change in solar activity rather than human impact would be the main cause of global warming .

Fritz Vahrenholt (born May 8, 1949 in Gelsenkirchen-Buer) is a German politician (SPD), industrialist and a climate change denier. In 2012 Vahrenholt together with geologist Sebastian Lüning published Die kalte Sonne: warum die Klimakatastrophe nicht stattfindet (The Cold Sun: Why the Climate Crisis Isn't Happening), a book asserting that climate change is driven by variations in solar activity. They predict the Earth is entering a cooling phase due to periodic solar cycles, and will cool by 0.2 to 0.3 degrees C by 2035. Other contributors are Nir Shaviv, Werner Weber, Henrik Svensmark and Nicola Scafetta. Numerous scientists, including the Council for Sustainable Development[8][9] , criticised the book and considered its underlying assumptions to be either outdated or highly speculative. The later events showed that in spite of a quite low activity of the sun during the Solar cycle 24, as had been forecasted in principle by Vahrenholt, the result of global cooling forecasted by Vahrenholt did not occur; the earth rather heated up even more.
How cathartic it is to give voice to your fury, to wallow in self-righteousness, in helplessness, in self-serving self-pity.
User avatar
clif
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue 11 Aug 2009, 12:04:10

Re: Antarctica 2019

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Fri 19 Jul 2019, 09:55:26

Sebastian Lüning (1970 ) is a geologist . He was an Africa expert at the oil and gas company RWE Dea and is currently working for Galp Energia .


enough with the desmog blog BS please. Did you read the paper? Apparently not. It is published in a well known peer-reviewed journal which has been in publication since the mid-sixties. If somehow you are arguing this journal supports one side or other of the climate argument perhaps you should take a look at the list of papers that have been published there over the years. Luning is a paleontologist and the actual paper lists his current place of research: Institute for Hydrography, Geoecology and Climate Sciences, Switzerland. Has he worked for oil companies? Of course, he is a paleotologist by training, almost every paleontologist I've ever known at one time or another has worked for an oil company given it is one of the most valuable tools at our disposal for dating sedimentary packages intersected with the well bore. In fact the source of funding for post graduate research (which he has conducted in a number of areas) invariably comes from oil companies who see direct benefits to specific paleontological investigations. His research is entirely based on paleontology and paleoclimatology where it would be hard to argue he does not have expertise. The solar impacts he has written about are based on his work regarding past climates where there are very few who would argue that the sun has not had a large impact. His current research is based on looking at the medieval climate anomaly from various parts of the world and trying to assimilate all of the research that has been done in that area with respect to its paleontologic significance.
The introduction which I have provided a large part of above simply outlies the published understanding of the past few decades of climate studies in Antarctica with regards to temperature and material balance. The actual paper focuses largely on the impact of SAM and ENSO and how it relates to the medieval climate anomaly and the little ice age. His main point in the conclusion is that these modes of natural variability are not fully represented in climate models and would be worth testing in greater detail.
So before you dismiss actual peer-reviewed research based on the view of desmog blog (a blog created by a public relations firm and a convicted money launder) I suggest you actually read the paper.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7092
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: Antarctica 2019

Unread postby Plantagenet » Fri 19 Jul 2019, 11:08:34

Scientists call for pumping ocean water up onto the West Antarctic Sheet to create huge amounts of artificial snow to stabilize the ice sheet and prevent sea level rise

west-antarctic-ice-collapse-ocean-pumping-artificial-snow

It might work...........if the world would actually do it. But it seems highly unlikely to me that the world would ever get organized to do such a thing.

Plus, since it does nothing about CO2 and CH4 emissions, the world would continue to get hotter anyway. Still, I give these scientist credit for thinking outside the box.....

Cheers!
hall of shame
People who buy new cars and then cry crocodile tears over climate change. The manufacture of a typical new car emits ca. 16 tons of CO2 and a new EV is actually much worse since the battery also has to be manufactured, resulting in a total carbon footprint of ca. 30 tons of CO2
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22665
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Antarctica 2019

Unread postby clif » Fri 19 Jul 2019, 13:35:40

rocdoc, nothing I posted was from desmog at all

try to be honest when you falsely criticize.....
How cathartic it is to give voice to your fury, to wallow in self-righteousness, in helplessness, in self-serving self-pity.
User avatar
clif
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue 11 Aug 2009, 12:04:10

Re: Antarctica 2019

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Fri 19 Jul 2019, 15:16:55

rocdoc, nothing I posted was from desmog at all

try to be honest when you falsely criticize.....


well you didn't give a source but whether it is desmog blog or wikipedia (which basically have the same information) they are both maligning a scientist who has done very good research in a field he is an expert in simply because they don't like his views, nothing to do with the actual science.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7092
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: Antarctica 2019

Unread postby clif » Fri 19 Jul 2019, 15:55:14

How cathartic it is to give voice to your fury, to wallow in self-righteousness, in helplessness, in self-serving self-pity.
User avatar
clif
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue 11 Aug 2009, 12:04:10

Re: Antarctica 2019

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Fri 19 Jul 2019, 16:49:23

from that news article:

The amount of ice flowing out of the region has nearly doubled in the last 30 years, losing 35 gigatons of ice per year between 2009-2017 alone.


which amounts to 0.095 mm/yr of sea level rise IF there is no offset by precipitation. As has been pointed out here ad naseum the range of estimates for total surface mass balance for Antarctica (increases-decreases) is anywhere from -60 to -110 GT/yr which amounts to anywhere from 0.16 mm to 0.30 mm/yr of sea level rise. Try finding a way to measure 0.16 mm of sea level rise within mechanical accuracy let alone 0.095 mm.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7092
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: Antarctica 2019

Unread postby clif » Fri 19 Jul 2019, 17:29:20

“That’s a 3 percent contribution that wasn’t there 45 years ago,”
How cathartic it is to give voice to your fury, to wallow in self-righteousness, in helplessness, in self-serving self-pity.
User avatar
clif
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue 11 Aug 2009, 12:04:10

Re: Antarctica 2019

Unread postby Plantagenet » Fri 19 Jul 2019, 17:39:19

from that news article:

The amount of ice flowing out of the region has nearly doubled in the last 30 years, losing 35 gigatons of ice per year between 2009-2017 alone.


which amounts to 0.095 mm/yr of sea level rise IF there is no offset by precipitation. As has been pointed out here ad naseum the range of estimates for total surface mass balance for Antarctica (increases-decreases) is anywhere from -60 to -110 GT/yr which amounts to anywhere from 0.16 mm to 0.30 mm/yr of sea level rise. Try finding a way to measure 0.16 mm of sea level rise within mechanical accuracy let alone 0.095 mm.


Sorry, crockdoc, but you don't understand the glaciological concepts that come into play- at the Thwaites Glacier.

The Thwaites glacier is a tidewater glacier, and the ice margin there is thinning and retreating towards the grounding line. Once the ice margin retreats past the grounding an unstable condition is created, and the remainder of the glacier will be susceptible to very rapid retreat through ice-calving.

We've discussed this at least twice in the past, and both times you were unable to understand the concepts involved even after I provided multiple posts with links and pictures and I described modern examples of this kind of glacier behavior.

I see you still don't get it.

Cheers!
hall of shame
People who buy new cars and then cry crocodile tears over climate change. The manufacture of a typical new car emits ca. 16 tons of CO2 and a new EV is actually much worse since the battery also has to be manufactured, resulting in a total carbon footprint of ca. 30 tons of CO2
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22665
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Antarctica 2019

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Fri 19 Jul 2019, 20:23:43

The Thwaites glacier is a tidewater glacier, and the ice margin there is thinning and retreating towards the grounding line. Once the ice margin retreats past the grounding an unstable condition is created, and the remainder of the glacier will be susceptible to very rapid retreat through ice-calving.


We've discussed this at least twice in the past, and both times you were unable to understand the concepts involved even after I provided multiple posts with links and pictures and I described modern examples of this kind of glacier behavior.


maybe you should go back to those discussions and actually look what was said rather than making crap up. But you do have a fanciful recreation of history.

First off please show us how I am wrong in my statement that the 30 GT/yr of ice loss at Thwaites (current) is somehow greater than 0.095 mm equivalent of sea level rise. I'm sure we will all be interested in your calculation. But as usual you just like to try to change the conversation, something I get very, very tired of.

Bottom line is the current losses from Antarctica are exactly what I said they are. If you have evidence to the contrary please provide it. Anything regarding what will happen in the future is speculation based on models that do not incorporate all of the possible variables (as the paper I just posted indicates). As a consequence, your suggestion it will happen is complete BS...it may or it may not. So get over yourself.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7092
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: Antarctica 2019

Unread postby clif » Fri 19 Jul 2019, 20:50:26

Another pot kettle moment compliments of crocdoc.......
How cathartic it is to give voice to your fury, to wallow in self-righteousness, in helplessness, in self-serving self-pity.
User avatar
clif
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue 11 Aug 2009, 12:04:10

Re: Antarctica 2019

Unread postby Plantagenet » Fri 19 Jul 2019, 21:06:28

First off please show us how I am wrong in my statement that the 30 GT/yr of ice loss at Thwaites (current) is somehow greater than 0.095 mm equivalent of sea level rise. I'm sure we will all be interested in your calculation.


Thats easy. You're frequently wrong and this time is no exception. :lol: :-D :roll: :P 8)

First off the annual current rate of ice loss at Thwaites Glacier is much greater then the 30 GT of ice loss that you mention. The newest data shows that the actual amount of ice loss, when you include ice loss from melting at the base of the glacier and calving at the terminus, is ca. 87 GT a year, or almost 3 times the incorrect number you are wrongly pushing.

Impact of Calving on the Retreat of Thwaites Glacier, West Antarctica

I repeat, these new estimates are far larger then the number you've been pushing, because they include ice loss due to melting at the base of the glacier and calving from the ice terminus. In tidewater glaciers ice loss from these mechanisms is often several times larger then that that due to surface ablation, just as the new data shows for the Thwaites. This is exactly how tidewater glaciers function.

The ice loss from the Thwaites Glacier is raising concerns because it is resulting in thinning and retreat of the ice margin, and there currently is a major multinational research program underway there. If the Thwaites Glacier ice margin retreats much more it will come off the grounding line and a rapid retreat by calving will begin, greatly increasing the rate of ice loss.

OK---thats four times I've explained that to you.

Do you get it now?

Cheers!
hall of shame
People who buy new cars and then cry crocodile tears over climate change. The manufacture of a typical new car emits ca. 16 tons of CO2 and a new EV is actually much worse since the battery also has to be manufactured, resulting in a total carbon footprint of ca. 30 tons of CO2
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22665
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Antarctica 2019

Unread postby clif » Fri 19 Jul 2019, 21:58:32

Image

The glacier "Ok" used to be a glacier but lost its status as such in 2014 when it had shrunk too much. This is a brand new memorial shield in its honour.


Yes crocdoc, I know this is at the Arctic not Antarctic, but the problem in both areas is very similar......losing ice to the heating of the planets biosphere due to AGW
How cathartic it is to give voice to your fury, to wallow in self-righteousness, in helplessness, in self-serving self-pity.
User avatar
clif
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue 11 Aug 2009, 12:04:10

Re: Antarctica 2019

Unread postby dissident » Sat 20 Jul 2019, 10:11:18

A routine denier trick, deny the observations. Deny, deny, deny. Repeat debunked claims. Smear the scientists and shoot the messenger.

RICO laws need to be applied to Exxon, the Koch Brothers and other entities that fund denier slime. Too many paid scum whose task it is to spread tobacco industry style lies about climate change.

Here is an interesting fact. The tobacco industry denier lie campaign successfully obfuscated the smoking-cancer link, that was noticed in the 1950s as a rapid increase in cancer deaths, for about 20 years. As a result, the smoking cancer rates were incorrectly attributed to diet. It is likely that some of this diet research was funded by the tobacco industry, but the main point is that a false alternative theory emerged that would not have if the tobacco industry funded lie campaign was defeated earlier. The fallout of this false diet theory gave us all the low fat hysteria of the 1970s that has directly resulted in an explosion of heart disease and type II diabetes. People were brainwashed starting in the 1970s that eggs were bad since they had lots of cholesterol. This BS has now been overturned but the damage is done. So the clowns in charge of the tobacco industry, in their petty effort to save their defunct business model, resulted in huge costs to society well beyond their own damage. The current climate deniers working for the fossil fuel industry are doing the same thing. They are not saving Exxon, etc., from losing its oil revenue. They are directly acting to kill off humanity.
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5585
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Antarctica 2019

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Sat 20 Jul 2019, 12:42:17

A routine denier trick, deny the observations. Deny, deny, deny. Repeat debunked claims. Smear the scientists and shoot the messenger.


OK...who is the "denier" here? I post a peer-reviewed article that summarizes a number of other peer-reviewed articles all pointing to the fact that there has been little in the way of long term changes in Antarctica. If you disagree with the conclusions of that paper (which was, by the way, based on the authors background in paleoclimatology and observations regarding the MCA and LIA and how that relates to more recent events) then I'm sure you are capable of writing a Discussion to the journal or at least pointing out where they incorrectly referenced someone elses work. Simply saying.....oh I don't believe any of that, you disagree with me so you are a denier is just complete BS. Are you suggesting all the papers quoted are written by deniers? :roll: You claim to be a climate scientist yet you behave like a teenager with no background in science whatsoever. Clean up your act.

First off the annual current rate of ice loss at Thwaites Glacier is much greater then the 30 GT of ice loss that you mention. The newest data shows that the actual amount of ice loss, when you include ice loss from melting at the base of the glacier and calving at the terminus, is ca. 87 GT a year, or almost 3 times the incorrect number you are wrongly pushing.


Jesus wept. Are you completely illiterate? I was responding to the news article that clif posted which referenced a paper that made the statement:

The amount of ice flowing out of the region has nearly doubled in the last 30 years, losing 35 gigatons of ice per year between 2009-2017 alone.


So perhaps you should take your argument up with the authors of that peer-reviewed study? Given they are talking about the average loss per year over that period.

Or maybe you can start to argue with all the scientists who have been working on Antarctic mass balance over the years given that individual losses in one part of Antarctica are irrelevant to the question of sea level rise without taking into context the entire continent.

IMBIE Team (Shepherd, A et al), 2018. Mass balance of the Antarctic Ice Sheet from 1992 to 2017. Nature, v558, pp 219-222.

In this paper they reviewed all of the existing data and came up with statistical estimates for losses and gains in the peninsula, WAIS , EAIS and the total AIS. For the total AIS they arrived at an overall loss of -105 GT/yr +/- 51 GT/yr. What that means is the addition to sea level is 0.29mm/yr (exactly what I have been saying for several years here) and most importantly the error is 0.14 mm/yr which is almost half of the modal estimate telling us the uncertainty runs all the way from 0.15 mm/yr (virtually nothing) to 0.43 mm/yr which falls with almost any instrument error I am aware of.

And in a slightly later independent study Eric Rignot (who is a member of the IMBIE team)

Rignot, E. et al,2019. Four decades of Antarctic Ice Sheet mass balance from 1979-2017. PNAS, 116(4), pp 1095-1103

Noted

The contribution to sea-level rise from Antarctica averaged 3.6 ± 0.5 mm per decade 


Which is in keeping with the 0.29 mm/yr pointed to from the IMBIE team. And that includes an estimate by Rignot that East Anatarctica was losing mass which various studies have disagreed with. So we could take his number as a maximum estimate.

And the paper I pointed to indicates this scenario is not at odds with their understanding of the MCA and LIA paleo evidence.

But apparently, :roll: Rignot, Shepherd, Velicogna, Whitehouse, Scamos and the other twenty or so members of the IMBIE team are all "deniers".
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7092
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

PreviousNext

Return to Environment, Weather & Climate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests