• 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!

Large Iceberg Looks Poised to Break Off from Antarctica [W:5]

mbig

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
This is Big.
Perhaps belongs in BN-MSM, but I post it here anyway. It will make Top-Fold, Front Page, News worldwide.
I think it will change the whole debate overnight.
Most of the responses will be from deniers. Some I can guess, some will be beyond imagination.
Some may even hedge/edge to a somewhat/or more AGW position, as we've seen lately in another section, some not.

Large Iceberg Looks Poised to Break Off from Antarctica
A chunk of ice bigger than New York's Long Island is hanging on by a relative thread
By Andrea Thompson, Climate Central on January 6, 2017
Scientific American
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/large-iceberg-looks-poised-to-break-off-from-antarctica/

A rift that has been wending its way across Antarctica’s massive Larsen C ice shelf just made another leap forward, growing by more than 10 miles, scientists monitoring it reported Thursday. Now, a chunk of ice bigger than New York's Long Island is hanging on by a relative thread. When it breaks off—possibly very soon—it could put the ice shelf in a more precarious position that could eventually lead it to disintegrate. That could contributie further to the global sea level rise that is threatening the many populous cities that lie within a few miles of the world’s coasts.

“This event will fundamentally change the landscape of the Antarctic Peninsula,” the scientists at Project MIDAS, an Antarctic research effort that has been watching the rift closely, wrote in update.The rift runs for more than 50 miles from south to north across the ice shelf, which is a vast platform of ice floating atop the ocean. The stability of ice shelves is important because they help buttress the huge glaciers that feed them. When an iceberg calves off an ice shelf, there is less ice to push back on the glaciers, causing them to speed up. In a stable system, the front of the ice shelf eventually moves forward until the whole system is once again in balance.
[......]
Click to expand...
I encourage people to read the whole article before commenting.
I want everyone to get the full look before deciding Alarmist/not-Alarmist.
It's not long, but I am limited to the above size excerpt.


EDIT:
But in my warning about reactions above, I never imagined anything as vacuous/trolling as immediately below!
 
Last edited:
So what?
 
mbig said:
....
EDIT:
But in my warning about reactions above, I never imagined anything as vacuous/trolling as immediately below![/b]
Click to expand...

B.S. It's exactly what you were fishing for.
 
Last edited:
Moderator's Warning:
ALL of you, stop. No accusations of trolling and if you don't like the thread, don't post here.
 
That's huge.

_93282005_rift_figure_narrow_jan2017_large.jpg

Huge Antarctic iceberg poised to break away - BBC News

"Researchers have been tracking the rift in Larsen C for many years, watching it with some trepidation after the collapse of Larsen A ice shelf in 1995 and the sudden break-up of the Larsen B shelf in 2002.
Last year, researchers from the UK's Project Midas reported that the Larsen C rift was growing fast.
But in December the speed of the rift went into overdrive, growing by a further 18km in just a couple of weeks. What will become a massive iceberg now hangs on to the shelf by a thread just 20km long."
 
mbig said:
This is Big.
Perhaps belongs in BN-MSM, but I post it here anyway. It will make Top-Fold, Front Page, News worldwide.
I think it will change the whole debate overnight.
Most of the responses will be from deniers. Some I can guess, some will be beyond imagination.
Some may even hedge/edge to a somewhat/or more AGW position, as we've seen lately in another section, some not.

Large Iceberg Looks Poised to Break Off from Antarctica
A chunk of ice bigger than New York's Long Island is hanging on by a relative thread
By Andrea Thompson, Climate Central on January 6, 2017
Scientific American
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/large-iceberg-looks-poised-to-break-off-from-antarctica/

I encourage people to read the whole article before commenting.
I want everyone to get the full look before deciding Alarmist/not-Alarmist.
It's not long, but I am limited to the above size excerpt.


EDIT:
But in my warning about reactions above, I never imagined anything as vacuous/trolling as immediately below!
Click to expand...

So, the expanding ice gets caught up in ocean currents and wave action and breaks apart..........right?
 
Fletch said:
So what?
Click to expand...

I agree.

So what?

Happens all the time. Just because this one is the size of Delaware?

Whoop-t-do...

No telling how many others even larger broke off before our satellite imagery.
 
Lord of Planar said:
I agree.

So what?

Happens all the time. Just because this one is the size of Delaware?

Whoop-t-do...

No telling how many others even larger broke off before our satellite imagery.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Everything is End-times with Global warming theists.
 
Threegoofs said:
Of course, when we zoom out and look at sea ice as a whole, this is the pattern we see:
View attachment 67212169

As Joe Romm writes, this could be signifying a tipping point for even more ice disappearing. We'll see what happens.

https://thinkprogress.org/this-coul...ping-point-looks-like-c9287e836403#.7gg9dhd2q
Click to expand...
Yawn...

A drop in the bucket of time.

Interesting to see you think of Think Progress as a reliable source...

Why doesn't that surprise me. The data is probably accurate, but I'll bet they spin... spin... spin... the facts.
 
Threegoofs said:
Of course, when we zoom out and look at sea ice as a whole, this is the pattern we see:
View attachment 67212169

As Joe Romm writes, this could be signifying a tipping point for even more ice disappearing. We'll see what happens.

https://thinkprogress.org/this-coul...ping-point-looks-like-c9287e836403#.7gg9dhd2q
Click to expand...
I have a bit of a problem with your source.
The graph shows the total global sea ice as below the 15 million square kilometer bar.
Here is the problem.
Charctic Interactive Sea Ice Graph | Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis
When you add the Arctic and Antarctic numbers together for Jan 8, it comes out to 17.764 million Km2,
Mare that 18% higher than your graphic.
Perhaps they meant January 1, Nope that was 18.274 million Km2.
The sea ice area does appear a little low, but it was a warm El Nino year.
 
longview said:
I have a bit of a problem with your source.
The graph shows the total global sea ice as below the 15 million square kilometer bar.
Here is the problem.
Charctic Interactive Sea Ice Graph | Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis
When you add the Arctic and Antarctic numbers together for Jan 8, it comes out to 17.764 million Km2,
Mare that 18% higher than your graphic.
Perhaps they meant January 1, Nope that was 18.274 million Km2.
The sea ice area does appear a little low, but it was a warm El Nino year.
Click to expand...

You're comparing ice area with ice extent. These are different quantities.
 
Surface Detail said:
You're comparing ice area with ice extent. These are different quantities.
Click to expand...
Perhaps, the article does not go into what they qualify as ice area,
Where as NSICS does say it is ocean with at least 15% sea ice.
 
longview said:
Perhaps, the article does not go into what they qualify as ice area,
Where as NSICS does say it is ocean with at least 15% sea ice.
Click to expand...

Be honest.

Your real problem with the data is that it doesn't say what you want it to say.
 
Threegoofs said:
Be honest.

Your real problem with the data is that it doesn't say what you want it to say.
Click to expand...
So does your article qualify what ice area means?
I know you have used the NSICS to stress your point many times in the past,
what is wrong with their data now?
 
Threegoofs said:
Of course, when we zoom out and look at sea ice as a whole, this is the pattern we see:
View attachment 67212169

As Joe Romm writes, this could be signifying a tipping point for even more ice disappearing. We'll see what happens.

https://thinkprogress.org/this-coul...ping-point-looks-like-c9287e836403#.7gg9dhd2q
Click to expand...

The ice isn't disappearing it's falling into the ocean under it's own weight. Ever consider geothermal effects, currents, and wave action nibbling away at this particular sheet?
 
RetiredUSN said:
The ice isn't disappearing it's falling into the ocean under it's own weight. Ever consider geothermal effects, currents, and wave action nibbling away at this particular sheet?
Click to expand...

They don't care about such scientific variables.

They have their dogma!
 
Surface Detail said:
Somebody wasn't paying attention during physics class.
Click to expand...

Can you say sea level changes with the seasons at the poles?

Do you understand the physics of tides, and how the equatorial tides differ from the polar tides?
 
RetiredUSN said:
The ice isn't disappearing it's falling into the ocean under it's own weight. Ever consider geothermal effects, currents, and wave action nibbling away at this particular sheet?
Click to expand...

Umm... it's not a particular sheet. It's all of the ice.

And it's already in the ocean- that's what makes it 'sea ice'.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Can you say sea level changes with the seasons at the poles?

Do you understand the physics of tides, and how the equatorial tides differ from the polar tides?
Click to expand...

I think so. But I look forward to your explanation as to why this difference should be responsible for sea ice "falling into the ocean under its own weight".
 
Surface Detail said:
Somebody wasn't paying attention during physics class.
Click to expand...

That's all you you have?

I find people like yourself who come off like internet chat room scientists to be very amusing.

You all seem to be great at cutting and pasting cherry picked graphs and charts, but then stumble over your own explanations when it comes to using your own words and mathematical theories. Then, you revert to posting more snippets of words written by your favorite GW alarmists. All the while, acting smug with dissenting opinions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom