• 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!

Major paper shows massive loss of Antarctic ice over the last few decades.

Threegoofs said:
Her credentials look fine. But she’s not saying volcanoes are a significant player in ice melt.

Seems like you can find someone...

So far, you have someone stating that there indeed are volcanoes.

And you have someone stating that volcanoes are hot.

I dont see anyone saying that they are playing a substantial role in melting.
Click to expand...

Keep your head under the covers until the monsters go away.
 
Threegoofs said:
Yeah...

Hey- have you seen ANYTHING (outside of denier blog posts) tat actually thinks volcanoes are the main reason for Antarctic melt?

I mean.. just a statement by a scientist. SOMEWHERE. Not an article out of context- but an actual statement. ANYWHERE.

Can you let us know?
Click to expand...

A Massive Heat Source Was Just Discovered Under Antarctica, Driving Ice Melt And Volcanism - Forbes
Forbes › sites › trevornace › 2017/11/08


Nov 8, 2017 · Recent discoveries have revealed just how volcanic Antarctica really is, despite being hidden underneath massive ice sheets. However, up until now, there remained significant debate as to ...

. . . Interestingly, the team found one location where the heat flow required jumped to 150-180 milliwatts underneath Antarctica. This area is the presumed source of the massive mantle upwelling and heat source. The Marie Byrd Land mantle plume appears to be the primary driver of volcanic activity in Antarctica. Geologists believe the mantle plume formed 50 to 110 million years ago when Antarctica was not covered in ice. Since then, the mantle plume has continually worked to heat up Antarctica, continually working to melt the overlying ice.

Trevor Nace is a PhD geologist, founder of Science Trends, Forbes contributor, and explorer. Follow his journey @trevornace.
 
Antarctic ice isn't melting.

In 2014, Antarctic stations reported a maximum ice extent that broke all records since record keeping began.
In 2015, a minimum was reported...among the lowest ever recorded.
In 2018, there is more ice this year than last year. The year 2016 and 2017 both recorded more ice than 2015, though not as high as that record breaker in 2014.

In 1911, Amundsen and Scott reached the South pole. In 1956 the navy built a permanent station there. That station included a 100 ft radio tower. By 1975, the station was completely buried in ice, and the radio tower stuck out of the snow about 2 ft.
In 2014, more ice than had ever been recorded was recorded at this station. Satellites also showed a greater ice extent into the sea then ever that year.

The Antarctic ice extent swings rather widely from year to year.

Like pointing at every hurricane or tornado as 'proof' of 'global warming', the Church of Global Warming is fixated on predicting disaster scenarios.
 
Into the Night said:
Antarctic ice isn't melting.

In 2014, Antarctic stations reported a maximum ice extent that broke all records since record keeping began.
In 2015, a minimum was reported...among the lowest ever recorded.
In 2018, there is more ice this year than last year. The year 2016 and 2017 both recorded more ice than 2015, though not as high as that record breaker in 2014.

In 1911, Amundsen and Scott reached the South pole. In 1956 the navy built a permanent station there. That station included a 100 ft radio tower. By 1975, the station was completely buried in ice, and the radio tower stuck out of the snow about 2 ft.
In 2014, more ice than had ever been recorded was recorded at this station. Satellites also showed a greater ice extent into the sea then ever that year.

The Antarctic ice extent swings rather widely from year to year.

Like pointing at every hurricane or tornado as 'proof' of 'global warming', the Church of Global Warming is fixated on predicting disaster scenarios.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the clarification!

It’s refreshing to hear the knowledge of anonymous DP posters proving an extensive study published in a top scientific journal done by some of the best glaciologists in the world.

You sure know stuff! And the ‘Church of Global Warming?’ ... sick burn, man.
 
Threegoofs said:
Do you also think the authors don’t know simple math?
Click to expand...

It's a common misconception among AGW deniers that their ability to use a pocket calculator makes their opinions on climate science as worthy of consideration as those of people who have spent a lifetime working in the field.
 
Surface Detail said:
It's a common misconception among AGW deniers that their ability to use a pocket calculator makes their opinions on climate science as worthy of consideration as those of people who have spent a lifetime working in the field.
Click to expand...

This thread is actually pretty hilarious.
 
Surface Detail said:
It's a common misconception among AGW deniers that their ability to use a pocket calculator makes their opinions on climate science as worthy of consideration as those of people who have spent a lifetime working in the field.
Click to expand...

It's a common misconception among warmists that people who spend a liftetime working in the field are incapable of error.
 
Jack Hays said:
Already found three. Your denial is not an argument.
Click to expand...

Now you're just being cruel.
Yesterday he suggested at #40 that I hadn't posted "a substantial comment" after I posted one at #11 and he did his usual "what do you know" routine several times in response afterward.
You know, like he always does and like he's been doing with you multiple times.
What a character.
Takes all kinds I guess.
 
KLATTU said:
It's a common misconception among warmists that people who spend a liftetime working in the field are incapable of error.
Click to expand...

The joke to all of this is that the error is from the BBC's author trying to sound alarming,
and not reporting accurately what the Nature Paper said.
Here is what the nature paper said,
Here we combine satellite observations of its changing volume, flow and gravitational attraction with
modelling of its surface mass balance to show that it lost 2,720 ± 1,390 billion tonnes of ice between 1992 and 2017,
which corresponds to an increase in mean sea level of 7.6 ± 3.9 millimetres (errors are one standard deviation).
Click to expand...
No great science or mathematics but a increase in sea level of 7.6 mm over 25 years is .304mm per year.
This is what the BBC reported.
This is pushing up global sea levels by 0.6mm annually
Click to expand...
This is more common that most think, the actual papers says one thing, but what is reported is the most extreme version,
or simply in error, but mostly to the alarmist perspective.
 
longview said:
This is more common that most think, the actual papers says one thing, but what is reported is the most extreme version,
or simply in error, but mostly to the alarmist perspective.
Click to expand...

Nice try.

Reasonable sounding, amusingly wrong.

Because the whole Denial thing died, making fools of the lot of you, you now try other tactics.

But one thing hasn't changed.
 
late said:
Nice try.

Reasonable sounding, amusingly wrong.

Because the whole Denial thing died, making fools of the lot of you, you now try other tactics.

But one thing hasn't changed.
Click to expand...
Are you saying that the BBC article and the Nature paper say the same thing?
 
longview said:
Are you saying that the BBC article and the Nature paper say the same thing?
Click to expand...

Moscow Rules: delay, distract,deny.

Which speaks to motive.
 
Last edited:
late said:
Moscow Rules: delay, distract,deny.

Which speaks to motive.
Click to expand...
So do the article and the paper show the same level of added sea level rise?
 
Phys251 said:
Excuses and denialism incoming. Remember, Threegoofs, their ignorance is more valuable than scientists' expertise. /s
Click to expand...

Did you bother to do any math on it?

The loss is miniscule and mostly in one small area.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom