Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Is this a sign? and of what?
#1
A study has found that the Antarctic Ice has been melting at a faster rate than normal for some time and that it's made the glaciers unstable as they're being undercut and breaking off faster , all due to rising ocean temps.

Constant monitoring has uncovered a recent unexpected result.  it appears to have stopped melting.

https://www.siliconrepublic.com/innovation/antarctica-glacier-melt-cryosat
Reply
#2
It's a sign that the warming planet isn't doing it evenly, which is entirely as expected.
Love is... that one person whose freshly-warm toilet seat you don't find disgusting.
Reply
#3
I stumbled across that one on my own, but the kneejerk response from the 'other side' would be "see!!! told yas the ice age cometh!" ... so I won't post it. No doubt it'll turn up in email in a week or so anyway. [Image: yellow-laughing-smiley-emoticon.gif]

There's a big plus in all this climate argument, it gives me a reason to hope to live long enough to see one side or other actually 'win' it. No chance though, it's gonna take longer than most of us have left I think.
Reply
#4
(06-11-2018, 04:35 PM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  There's a big plus in all this climate argument, it gives me a reason to hope to live long enough to see one side or other actually 'win' it.  No chance though, it's gonna take longer than most of us have left I think.

Nothing to win - the battle is over.

Facts & evidence won. The climate is warming and humans are to blame.

The only question to be answered is the number of people to be killed and the amount of damage it causes.

Respectively, I'll go for billions and trillions.
Love is... that one person whose freshly-warm toilet seat you don't find disgusting.
Reply
#5
Nah, I don't buy that completely.  Not all of the stuff from the 'skeptics' is bullshit, and not all of the stuff from the convinced is above a degree of suspicion.

I'm not betting either way on the actual 100% cause factor.  I'll accept a percentage of AGW in it but just can't accept that it's the one and only cause.  Nor can I accept that taxing CO2 will 'stop' it changing.  

I know it's unfashionable to not be 100% for or against something these days but bugger that! 

There's always more than 2 sides of issues,  always complex factors that are brushed over, or just plain missed, or ignored because they don't fit a theory.  
I'm suspending judgement of the definitive cause factor.  Also on some of those "record" temps taken from places that were never contributing data at all until very recently.  

The hottest parts of OZ weren't exactly places where large populations or weather stations were placed 100 years back.  So as verifiable records indicate that some of the hottest years and longest most severe droughts occurred in the 1880s-1900 it stands to reason that real record temps out there were never recorded at all.

Just little nitpicky stuff really I suppose, but that's how I roll.

My naturally suspicious nature calls into question any solutions that appear too simple, and especially those that involve taxing air to fix.
Reply
#6
(06-11-2018, 06:34 PM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  There's always more than 2 sides of issues,  always complex factors that are brushed over, or just plain missed, or ignored because they don't fit a theory.  

So, we should listen to anti-vaxers, 9/11 cconspiracists and astrologers?

Some things are black & white.

(06-11-2018, 06:34 PM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  Also on some of those "record" temps taken from places that were never contributing data at all until very recently.  

Records are largely irrelevant - it's the average that matters, and that has increased and is still increasing. More quickly than ever, as it happens.
Love is... that one person whose freshly-warm toilet seat you don't find disgusting.
Reply
#7
Average over what time span?  The climate is changing constantly, the average a few million years ago wasn't what it has been over the last few centuries.  What was average back in the medieval warming period was different to later averages even as recently as the 18th century, when the Thames froze over and the locals skated on it every winter.

Doesn't it seem reasonable that the average has changed with the climate over the millenia?  If you meant it's getting hotter faster, in some places more than others, then okay, but the way it's implied that it's never happened before just pisses me off a bit.

 Faster?  okay, by did it ever change that fast in the past 'cos there's a graph around on several university sites that shows the peaks and troughs of climate change over millions of years and the peaks all appear to rise relatively fast compared to the cooling periods.

But  I found a luverly anomaly in that pattern that isn't 'scientific' but enough to trigger my skepticism of graphs in general.   bwaahahaha.

There's a mummified mammoth on Europe somewhere that was zapped dead while still chewing it's last mouthful of grass.  Not a mark on it but it was in a glacier so the educated scientific guess is that it was frozen in situ by a dip in the jet stream when the climate was cooling fast.    Yep, frozen solid in the middle of dinner is a pretty fast climate change.

That mummified Scandi,  Yertzi or something? didn't have time to rot either, he was in ice for a couple of thousand years and then thawed out in this round of warming climate.  The ice wasn't there when he went for a stroll and someone shot an arrow into him,  but it snowed and covered him, and didn't thaw and didn't stop so it got cold pretty fast.

I've got a head full of these little bits of trivia that I read years ago, most from science mags at the time, and maybe some have been disproven long ago but they're still in there saying "yeah but, yeah but, remember this?" ...  and that's why I can't be as convinced as you are about the causes of climate changes. (plural) I make no claim to be right, just not entirely convinced that you are either.

I don't mind 'em cleaning the joint up, and if they were taxing us on plastic and throw away consumerism then the production emissions would drop as we stopped buying junk.  But nobody would make a profit out of that so they had to devise a way to keep selling stuff and taxing us for it anyway ... hence ETS.

Taxing us for CO2 emissions, when CO2 levels too have been higher a long time in the past,  too long ago to blame humans for it,  pisses me off largely.  It's a rort.

Can't pretend otherwise than I still don't entirely buy AGW  as sole cause, as presented by those making billions from Greentech industries.  (It turned over 82 billion last year and rising)
We're not really arguing the science so much as how the science is being used as a marketing tool. ... or maybe just I am.


And no, I have no reservations about the benefits of vaccination,  astrologers are for entertainment value only, but not all conspiracy theories are wrong.   (just most of them)  .. but astrology and conspiracy theories aren't being presented by scientists as proof of anything more than human gullibility so you're comparing apples with oranges.
Reply
#8
Re the 'averages' and the speed of climate change and 'records' etc etc.  Maybe OZ is not the best place to use as a benchmark.  Our climate has been a cycle of extremes forever.  ... stress 'cycle'.

Here's just two time periods from a bigger chart of average rainfall over a century or more.

7 years of of 41%  above average rainfall, causing massive flooding,  followed immediately by 7 years of 46% below average rainfall causing arguably the worst drought evva.

So bad it was given it's own name,   The Federation Drought,  due to the time it occurred.  1896-1903.
That poem wasn't wrong about the sunburnt country, ... "a land ...  of drought and flooding rain." 

https://data.longpaddock.qld.gov.au/static/products/pdf/WetDryDroughtPoster.pdf



[Image: 7317968rainfall_chart.PNG]


I imagine the media would have to be medicated if they had that contrast happen so suddenly in the present day.

Whaddaya reckon??   pretty fast 'change'??  Angel Cool  ... I know it's written off as all part of the process but looking at these kind of charts makes it hard to take all these .0001 degree C rises as 'records'.
It may give a hint of why I'm harder to convince than most that we are rocketing headlong into impending doom.
I don't buy that it's going to be as fast as predicted, that bit's just to keep the public worried enough to keep paying for windmills to chase it all away .. being facetious, .. sorry... not really. Blush
Reply
#9
(06-12-2018, 05:36 AM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  Average over what time span?
Year on year, across the whole planet.
Some places will be colder than they used to as a result of a warmer planet, which is why individual statistics are meaningless. 
You can see the graphs any time you like.
Love is... that one person whose freshly-warm toilet seat you don't find disgusting.
Reply
#10
It's media who needs to look at them a bit closer.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)