• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Greenland's ice cap

Threegoofs said:
Many glaciers actually seem to be accelerating because of significant melt underneath, which sort of ‘lubricates’ the sheet as it heads downhill.

But sorry for the interruption with rationality. I now return you to your regularly scheduled speculation and denial.
Click to expand...

I post a link to a paper saying that the glacial out flows have slowed and you say that they have speeded up based on stuf you have no clue about.

Who is in denial?
 
Threegoofs said:
Many glaciers actually seem to be accelerating because of significant melt underneath, which sort of ‘lubricates’ the sheet as it heads downhill.

But sorry for the interruption with rationality. I now return you to your regularly scheduled speculation and denial.
Click to expand...

This "lubrication"mantra is still alive, which is amazing since Glacial mass is way too heavy for it and moves like soft plastic due to friction at the bottom part of the glacial mass moving downhill at varying rates.
 
Threegoofs said:
https://www.nature.com/articles/ngeo863
Click to expand...

Your article is now 8 years old, leaving out another cause of melting:

‘Several Thousand’ Hot (60°C) Springs ‘All Over’
Greenland Melt The Ice Sheet From Bottom Up

LINK

14 Glaciologists over two recently published papers show that melting around the glacial margins are in part being caused by numerous hot springs of high temperatures.
 
The Greenland Ice Sheet Has Not Been Complying With The AGW Narrative
Consider these recently-determined scientific conclusions pertaining to the Greenland Ice Sheet.

(a) Greenland was 3 to 5 °C warmer with 40 kilometers less ice area 4,000-10,000 years ago (Mangerud and Svendsen, 2017, Lasher et al., 2017, Kobashi et al., 2017).

(b) There has been no net warming of the Greenland Ice Sheet in the last 80 years (Hanna et al., 2011; Zhao et al., 2016).

(c) Melted ice from the Greenland Ice Sheet has contributed only 1.5 centimeters (0.6 of an inch) to global sea level rise since 1900 (Fettweis et al., 2017), with no (zero) net sea level rise contribution between the 1940s and the early 2000s.

(d) Melted ice from the Greenland Ice Sheet contributed only 0.39 of a centimeter (0.15 of an inch) to global sea levels between 1993 and 2010 (Leeson et al, 2017).

(e) “[T]he interior of the GrIS [Greenland Ice Sheet] is flowing 95% slower now than it was on average during the Holocene.” (MacGregor et al., 2016)

(f) Greenland has been cooling slightly since 2005 (Kobashi et al., 2017).

(g) And now it has been determined that the regional locations where warming and ice-melt has occurred on the Greenland Ice Sheet can be primarily attributed to high geothermal heat flux forcing.

The scientific evidence continues to accumulate supporting the position that the Greenland Ice Sheet has not been following the modeled expectations of the anthropogenic global warming narrative.

LINK
 
Sunsettommy said:
This "lubrication"mantra is still alive, which is amazing since Glacial mass is way too heavy for it and moves like soft plastic due to friction at the bottom part of the glacial mass moving downhill at varying rates.
Click to expand...

Yep, the fact that there is always a stream below a glacier and that the pressure at the bottom will not change or the ice float with a tiny amount of fresh meltwater wandering about does not change the religious arguments from the alarmists.
 
Sunsettommy said:
The Greenland Ice Sheet Has Not Been Complying With The AGW Narrative
Consider these recently-determined scientific conclusions pertaining to the Greenland Ice Sheet.

(a) Greenland was 3 to 5 °C warmer with 40 kilometers less ice area 4,000-10,000 years ago (Mangerud and Svendsen, 2017, Lasher et al., 2017, Kobashi et al., 2017).

(b) There has been no net warming of the Greenland Ice Sheet in the last 80 years (Hanna et al., 2011; Zhao et al., 2016).

(c) Melted ice from the Greenland Ice Sheet has contributed only 1.5 centimeters (0.6 of an inch) to global sea level rise since 1900 (Fettweis et al., 2017), with no (zero) net sea level rise contribution between the 1940s and the early 2000s.

(d) Melted ice from the Greenland Ice Sheet contributed only 0.39 of a centimeter (0.15 of an inch) to global sea levels between 1993 and 2010 (Leeson et al, 2017).

(e) “[T]he interior of the GrIS [Greenland Ice Sheet] is flowing 95% slower now than it was on average during the Holocene.” (MacGregor et al., 2016)

(f) Greenland has been cooling slightly since 2005 (Kobashi et al., 2017).

(g) And now it has been determined that the regional locations where warming and ice-melt has occurred on the Greenland Ice Sheet can be primarily attributed to high geothermal heat flux forcing.

The scientific evidence continues to accumulate supporting the position that the Greenland Ice Sheet has not been following the modeled expectations of the anthropogenic global warming narrative.

LINK
Click to expand...

I have to take issue with ;

(d) Melted ice from the Greenland Ice Sheet contributed only 0.39 of a centimeter (0.15 of an inch) to global sea levels between 1993 and 2010 (Leeson et al, 2017).
Click to expand...

That would be 825 Gt/yr net ice mass loss. That would be 14 Mississippi months worth of out flow from Greenland above the 18 Mississippi months needed to break even from snowfall.

I recon the world would notice that in a big way.
 
Tim the plumber said:
I have to take issue with ;



That would be 825 Gt/yr net ice mass loss. That would be 14 Mississippi months worth of out flow from Greenland above the 18 Mississippi months needed to break even from snowfall.

I recon the world would notice that in a big way.
Click to expand...

Understandable, but it is based on a short time frame of 17 years. There have been such episodes of such loss rates before, while there have been big upward INCREASE rates as well as it has been the last 3 years.

Here is the background on this:

Since 1993, Greenland’s Ice Sheet Melt Has Added Just 0.39 Of A Centimeter To Global Sea Levels

August 7, 2017

Kenneth Richards

Excerpt:

In recent months, two new papers published in The Cryosphere have provided a condensed summary of the ice-melt and sea-level-rise consequences of global warming for the Arctic region.

1. Between 1900 and 2010, the Greenland Ice Sheet (GIS) has melted so extensively and so rapidly that the GIS ice-melt contribution to global sea level rise has amounted to 1.5 centimeters for the entire 110-year period. One-and-a-half centimeters. That’s 0.59 of an inch!

2. It gets worse. Between 1993 and 2010, the contribution to global sea level rise has been a disturbing 0.39 of a centimeter. Almost 4/10ths of a centimeter. That’s 0.15 of an inch!

LINK
 
Sunsettommy said:
Your article is now 8 years old, leaving out another cause of melting:

‘Several Thousand’ Hot (60°C) Springs ‘All Over’
Greenland Melt The Ice Sheet From Bottom Up

LINK

14 Glaciologists over two recently published papers show that melting around the glacial margins are in part being caused by numerous hot springs of high temperatures.
Click to expand...

That is something the warmers are never told by their AGW prophets (profits?) That geothermal activity is also a significant cause, but an inconvenient truth.
 
Tim the plumber said:
I have to take issue with ;



That would be 825 Gt/yr net ice mass loss. That would be 14 Mississippi months worth of out flow from Greenland above the 18 Mississippi months needed to break even from snowfall.

I recon the world would notice that in a big way.
Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not. A 17 year span for 14 Mississippi months would would out to 7% of the Mississippi flow annually.
 
Sunsettommy said:
Understandable, but it is based on a short time frame of 17 years. There have been such episodes of such loss rates before, while there have been big upward INCREASE rates as well as it has been the last 3 years.

Here is the background on this:

Since 1993, Greenland’s Ice Sheet Melt Has Added Just 0.39 Of A Centimeter To Global Sea Levels

August 7, 2017

Kenneth Richards

Excerpt:

In recent months, two new papers published in The Cryosphere have provided a condensed summary of the ice-melt and sea-level-rise consequences of global warming for the Arctic region.

1. Between 1900 and 2010, the Greenland Ice Sheet (GIS) has melted so extensively and so rapidly that the GIS ice-melt contribution to global sea level rise has amounted to 1.5 centimeters for the entire 110-year period. One-and-a-half centimeters. That’s 0.59 of an inch!

2. It gets worse. Between 1993 and 2010, the contribution to global sea level rise has been a disturbing 0.39 of a centimeter. Almost 4/10ths of a centimeter. That’s 0.15 of an inch!

LINK
Click to expand...

I know they, NASA, GRACE etc, say there have been such loss rates.

My point is that there damn well have not because if there ever had the massive many times the size of the Mississippi river flows of water and ice blasting out of Greenland that would have been required to actually get them just have not happened.
 

[h=1]Surprise! Study says some glaciers actually shrank during the last ice age[/h]The simple story says that during the last ice age, temperatures were colder and ice sheets expanded around the planet. That may hold true for most of Europe and North America, but new research from the University of Washington tells a different story in the high-altitude, desert climates of Mongolia. CREDIT Jigjidsurengiin Batbaatar/University of Washington…
Continue reading →
 
Jack Hays said:

[h=1]Surprise! Study says some glaciers actually shrank during the last ice age[/h]The simple story says that during the last ice age, temperatures were colder and ice sheets expanded around the planet. That may hold true for most of Europe and North America, but new research from the University of Washington tells a different story in the high-altitude, desert climates of Mongolia. CREDIT Jigjidsurengiin Batbaatar/University of Washington…
Continue reading →
Click to expand...

Nature is funny that way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom