Antarctica Melting 3x Faster Than We Thought

[andnowweknow]

none of those previous climate fluctuations had billions of people living below sea level.

And?

 

[lifelessheap]

I'd like to say something serious about environmental stewardship and making a difference, but frankly, I think we're all doomed. The intellectual rot in America is too far gone. Donald Trump and the rightwing in this country are doing irreversible damage to the U.S., and the world.

We're all fucked. Love your families while you still can.

LOL. We are all going to be fine.

 

[JonnyRingo84]

And?

your claims that it will be a "mild inconvenience" might be a bit premature.

 

[andnowweknow]

your claims that it will be a "mild inconvenience" might be a bit premature.

I juxtaposed my point with alternative scenarios. It wasn't some statement in a vacuum.

My general point is the tenor of the conversation falsely revolves around the idea that we're entitled to or should expect an unchanging and ever-presently accommodating environment.

Things are pretty damn good climate wise.

 

[JonnyRingo84]

I juxtaposed my point with alternative scenarios. It wasn't some statement in a vacuum.

right. you brought up examples of more dramatic climate, in time periods where it could impact virtually no one.

My general point is the tenor of the conversation falsely revolves around the idea that we're entitled to or should expect an unchanging and ever-presently accommodating environment.

this is make-believe. you imagined that i think we live in such a world.

if the climate was changing, and it was clear that man had 0 impact, and nothing we could do about it, then your points would be valid. it is likely that we've played some role in this recent change, though, and plausible that we could do something about it. regardless, embracing more efficient energy sources is win win win win win.

 

[gatchaman]

none of those previous climate fluctuations had billions of people living below sea level.

Excuse my interjection, but @andnowweknow is limiting himself to things that have actually happened, while you are free to Chicken Little to the full extent of your imagination (Won't somebody please think of the apples!).

The iceberg information is the opposite side of the coin to the snowball dropped on the floor of Congress. The iceberg does not prove anthropogenic global warming and the snowball does not disporve it. You get no points for post-hoc attributions of events. You get points only for correct predictions.

I can understand the skittishness of warmists given their track record (Won't somebody please think of the polar bears!)

 

[JonnyRingo84]

while you are free to Chicken Little to the full extent of your imagination (Won't somebody please think of the apples!).

what?

The iceberg information is the opposite side of the coin to the snowball dropped on the floor of Congress. The iceberg does not prove anthropogenic global warming and the snowball does not disporve it.

what?

I can understand the skittishness of warmists given their track record (Won't somebody please think of the polar bears!)

ok.

 

[gatchaman]

what?



what?



ok.

There are not billions of people living below sea level. You have imagined this future (just as you have previously imagined the extinction of apples), as Chicken Little imagined the sky to be falling.

The iceberg information and the snowball are things that have happened in the past. Whether you are talking about ice melting or coral reef destruction or ocean acidification, you get points for predicting these events but not for attributing past events to global warming.

A prediction on your part would be providing a date (in our lifetime) when billions will be living below sea level. But you won't because it is safer for you in your imaginary world.

 

[JonnyRingo84]

There are not billions of people living below sea level. You have imagined this future (just as you have previously imagined the extinction of apples), as Chicken Little imagined the sky to be falling.

ok. at sea level.

did i claim apples would go extinct due to climate change?

The iceberg information and the snowball are things that have happened in the past. Whether you are talking about ice melting or coral reef destruction or ocean acidification, you get points for predicting these events but not for attributing past events to global warming.

alright.

A prediction on your part would be providing a date (in our lifetime) when billions will be living below sea level. But you won't because it is safer for you in your imaginary world.

below sea level is not what i meant to write.

 

[gatchaman]

ok. at sea level.

did i claim apples would go extinct due to climate change?



alright.



below sea level is not what i meant to write.

Won't someone think of the people at sea level?! Won't someone think of the apples?! I imagine a future in which twice as many angels will be able to dance on the head of a pin; who cares?

Sometimes, I think that people would just prefer to repeat their propaganda rather than remember and learn from previous posts.

http://forums.sherdog.com/threads/‘...-top-physicist.3523181/page-11#post-129690443

"lol dude....

no one is worried about you burning alive due to climate change. here are the major threats, and it doesnt take that much of a temp change to cause this. its already happening:

1. when climate changes quickly, plants and animals cannot adapt. that place where you buy apples from now, may not grow apples any longer. we've ALREADY had to pull seeds out of the so-called "dooms day" vault in antarctica.

2. sea level rise. ask people in miama FLA how many are "skeptics" of climate change. hard to be a skeptic when your city floods while its not even raining."

 

[IGIT]

I'd like to say something serious about environmental stewardship and making a difference, but frankly, I think we're all doomed. The intellectual rot in America is too far gone. Donald Trump and the rightwing in this country are doing irreversible damage to the U.S., and the world.

We're all fucked. Love your families while you still can.

heya President HomerThompson,

i think you're spot on in your apathy for this topic, and you're being very realistic.

i don't exactly blame it entirely on the right wing, though they do get to shoulder much of the "credit" for promoting ignorance (and actual hatred) when it comes to this topic.

i just think...ya know...its counter productive to tell people what can and might happen if we continue to treat the planet like its some kind of globe shaped landfill.

you and i (and just about everyone on this forum) will be gone when the ravages of our occupancy come to real fruition - but i wish i could see it. the mass deforestation...the endless miles of dead coral reefs...an acidified ocean that yields no life...the coastal cities, gone.

*ponders*

see, at that point, it won't matter whether folks believe in science or not. their lot will be so fucked up, they are more likely going to be looking for people to blame...

...and the culprits will all be dead.

i agree things are pretty hopeless...BUT...i also think that since we agree that there is no stopping our slide, we might as well enjoy ourselves.

clear cut some rain forest to harvest some rare hardwood and make end tables...litter with abandon (though not on one's own property, because that would be slovenly)...buy an F-150 and drive, drive, drive!, go slaughter the last tiger so you can sell its paws and testicles to the Chinese. stuff like that. just go for it!

i mean, we might as well. that's how i've decided to live my life, at any rate.

- IGIT

 

[HomerThompson]

heya President HomerThompson,

i think you're spot on in your apathy for this topic, and you're being very realistic.

i don't exactly blame it entirely on the right wing, though they do get to shoulder much of the "credit" for promoting ignorance (and actual hatred) when it comes to this topic.

i just think...ya know...its counter productive to tell people what can and might happen if we continue to treat the planet like its some kind of globe shaped landfill.

you and i (and just about everyone on this forum) will be gone when the ravages of our occupancy come to real fruition - but i wish i could see it. the mass deforestation...the endless miles of dead coral reefs...an acidified ocean that yields no life...the coastal cities, gone.

*ponders*

see, at that point, it won't matter whether folks believe in science or not. they're lot will be so fucked up, they're more likely going to be looking for people to blame...

...and the culprits will all be dead.

i agree things are pretty hopeless...BUT...i also think that since we agree that there is no stopping our slide, we might as well enjoy ourselves.

clear cut some rain forest to harvest some rare hardwood and make end tables...litter with abandon (though not on one's own property, because that would be slovenly)...buy an F-150 and drive, drive, drive!, go slaughter the last tiger so you can sell its paws and testicles to the Chinese. stuff like that. just go for it!

i mean, we might as well. that's how i've decided to live my life, at any rate.

- IGIT

I loved this post, but...

*their

 

[Fawlty]

I loved this post, but...

*their

fucking savage

 

[Fawlty]

heya President HomerThompson,

i think you're spot on in your apathy for this topic, and you're being very realistic.

i don't exactly blame it entirely on the right wing, though they do get to shoulder much of the "credit" for promoting ignorance (and actual hatred) when it comes to this topic.

i just think...ya know...its counter productive to tell people what can and might happen if we continue to treat the planet like its some kind of globe shaped landfill.

you and i (and just about everyone on this forum) will be gone when the ravages of our occupancy come to real fruition - but i wish i could see it. the mass deforestation...the endless miles of dead coral reefs...an acidified ocean that yields no life...the coastal cities, gone.

*ponders*

see, at that point, it won't matter whether folks believe in science or not. their lot will be so fucked up, they're more likely going to be looking for people to blame...

...and the culprits will all be dead.

i agree things are pretty hopeless...BUT...i also think that since we agree that there is no stopping our slide, we might as well enjoy ourselves.

clear cut some rain forest to harvest some rare hardwood and make end tables...litter with abandon (though not on one's own property, because that would be slovenly)...buy an F-150 and drive, drive, drive!, go slaughter the last tiger so you can sell its paws and testicles to the Chinese. stuff like that. just go for it!

i mean, we might as well. that's how i've decided to live my life, at any rate.

- IGIT

I won't go that far but I might look into finding myself a nice cheap beach spot with a friendly senorita in about 10 years.

 

[IGIT]

I loved this post, but...

*their

ahoy President HT!

aye, thanks for spotting that. i hate when i've got incorrect usage or sloppy grammar - it bugs me, and i eventually (usually) get around to fixing it.

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

I won't go that far but I might look into finding myself a nice cheap beach spot with a friendly senorita in about 10 years.

heya Fawlty,

i think Homer is right on this one, and he's being very pragmatic.

i'm a little curious to see how serious China is about curbing the filth they pour into the skies, but all in all, i think all that stuff is academic.

he's right. we should be good to the people we love, since that is the "here and now"...but we should also have fun, and not worry too much about the environment.

it's gonna be someone else's problem, and they'll scramble to deal with it, much in the same way that a senior citizen suddenly gets religion and changes their dietary habits....after they've had a quadruple bypass.

that's what the future inhabitants will need. some kind of seismic shock, not this gradual death by a thousand cuts. i trust that, in time, they'll receive this paradigm shifting blow - and i hope things work out for them.

- IGIT

 

[Khabibs Tiramisu]

I'm torn as to who i should believe, scientists who have spent majority of their lives studying climate change and have come to the conclusion that climate change is a cause for concern, or a bunch of sherdoggers who are fond of saying words like "cuck". Hmmmmmmmm.

 

[Voodoo_Child906]

Excuse my interjection, but The iceberg does not prove anthropogenic global warming and the snowball does not disporve it. You get no points for post-hoc attributions of events. You get points only for correct predictions.

I can understand the skittishness of warmists given their track record (Won't somebody please think of the polar bears!)

This is interesting, what would "prove" AGW to you?

 

[gatchaman]

This is interesting, what would "prove" AGW to you?

My understanding of the anthropomorphic global warming theory is that human burning of fossil fuels is increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide and causing unprecedented increases in temperature by a greenhouse effect.

My understanding of Milankovitch cycles is that the Earth's temperature is affected by its relationship with the sun in about a 100,000 year cycle. All of human civilization has existed in a 10,000 to 20,000 year interglacial warm period of this 100,000 cycle. The melting of polar ice looks less impressive on a background of the entirety of Canada being under snow and ice year round during the 80,000-90,000 cold period (evidenced by such glacial river valleys in places I have lived such as Edmonton and Toronto).

So unprecedented warming has to be examined on a background of what is usual for the stage we are at in the Milankovitch cycle. So where do we get carbon dioxide and temperature data for Milankovitch cycles? From ice cores (and also sediment layers). Technically, you could also look at tree ring data that has been correlated with ice core data, but you cannot look at surface temperature data (or even satellite temperature data) because these data do not go back very far and do not correlate with proxies such as tree ring data (the so called "divergence problem"). The problem of the hockey stick graph is that it was tacking on modern temperature data of the past 100 years to a 1000 years of proxy data, an apples to oranges comparison (The blade of the graph disappears with proxy data used all through).

Here's the thing: There is ice core data that goes back a long way and that also extends into the industrial age. It's called the Law Dome ice core. People even use the carbon dioxide data from this very core to show an unprecendented increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide.
https://www.bas.ac.uk/data/our-data/publication/ice-cores-and-climate-change/

Spoiler

https://www.bas.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/002.jpg

But what has not been published to my knowledge is the temperature data from that same ice core (as has been done for other ice cores, such as the Volstok ice core, from which we derive Milankovitch cycles also known as real climate science).

Spoiler

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...pg/1280px-Vostok_420ky_4curves_insolation.jpg

In the spoiler image above, you can see that the temperature proxy from ice cores is called delta-18O, and you can read about how it is derived here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Δ18O
https://globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange1/current/labs/Lab10_Vostok/Vostok.htm

So I think the most compelling evidence for an unprecedented increase in global temperature is to be found in the delta-18O of the Law Dome ice core. If the carbon dioxide data is good enough from that ice core then surely the best temperature data to correlate with this carbon dioxide data must come from the same ice core.

What do you think?

 

[andnowweknow]

right. you brought up examples of more dramatic climate, in time periods where it could impact virtually no one.



this is make-believe. you imagined that i think we live in such a world.

if the climate was changing, and it was clear that man had 0 impact, and nothing we could do about it, then your points would be valid. it is likely that we've played some role in this recent change, though, and plausible that we could do something about it. regardless, embracing more efficient energy sources is win win win win win.

First, there is nothing that's going to magically happen to prevent sea level rise outside some revolutionary open source clean free energy model or a dynamic natural cooling event.

Regarding the underlined above, we don't have much data on human population size in the past outside of vague guesswork. We do now know that due to impossibly difficult to imagine climatic events that jerked the planet out of the last ice age around 9600 BC that we lost about half the amount of mammal species living on earth that weighed over 125 lbs. We don't know for sure how these events affected humans outside small details like the collapse of the Clovis culture, but it doesn't take much of a leap to realize we probably had major population collapses at this same time given what we know about the extinction of so many other animals during this time who had been fine and prosperous for millions of years prior.

Look into meltwater pulse 1a and 1b. What we are going through in modern time is an inconvenience. Yes, it sucks for people with no resources who live on the coasts of the world...to say the least.