Antarctic Ice Discussion

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

1 minute ago, inghams85 said:

You can differ all you want. Your not a acclaimed climate scientist. I'd prefer to listen to evidence provided by experts. You aren't an expert as much as you seem to think you are

There you go with another personal dig, something I haven’t done about you....everyone is entitled to their opinion and who they believe.  I am entitled to beg to differ after reading and listening to other scientists and experts who do not agree

 

BFTP

[Devonian]

Just now, BLAST FROM THE PAST said:

Correct, I agree and maybe they are becoming and have become more active. I’ll rephrase then that I believe with their presence in the location where instability is registered that they are much more likely to be the reason for that instability than manmade CO2.  

 

BFTP

So we have three coincidences.

1, the discovery of the volcanoes,

2, that they (at the same time) become more active and

3, (at the same time) atmosphere CO2 concentration increases by more than 40%

And yet, despite several hundred years of evidence, data and observation (and the predictions that certain laws of physics then provide) that increasing CO2 by 40% (plus other anthro changes) will (very likely) cause atmosphere warming in line with what we see you say the ice is being melted by volcanoes that (just when we discover them) have suddenly got more active?

Like I say, I beg to differ....

[inghams85]

3 minutes ago, BLAST FROM THE PAST said:

There you go with another personal dig, something I haven’t done about you....everyone is entitled to their opinion and who they believe.  I am entitled to beg to differ after reading and listening to other scientists and experts who do not agree

 

BFTP

There are no scientists or experts who do not agree. Just under qualified sensationalist who post fake news. To be taken in by that is rediculous at best

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

7 minutes ago, Devonian said:

So we have three coincidences.

1, the discovery of the volcanoes,

2, that they (at the same time) become more active and

3, (at the same time) atmosphere CO2 concentration increases by more than 40%

And yet, despite several hundred years of evidence, data and observation (and the predictions that certain laws of physics then provide) that increasing CO2 by 40% (plus other anthro changes) will (very likely) cause atmosphere warming in line with what we see you say the ice is being melted by volcanoes that (just when we discover them) have suddenly got more active?

Like I say, I beg to differ....

What , so the prediction was that the ice in that part of Antarctica would melt yet ice extent elsewhere around the continent would show record extent.  Please show me the prediction of that...please

 

BFTP

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

6 minutes ago, inghams85 said:

There are no scientists or experts who do not agree. Just under qualified sensationalist who post fake news. To be taken in by that is rediculous at best

What an absolutely peculiar statement

 

BFTP

[inghams85]

Just now, BLAST FROM THE PAST said:

What an absolutely peculiar statement

 

BFTP

Name me one "scientist" with a peer reviewed paper proving AGW doesn't exist? There aren't any because AGW is proven and is widely accepted and has been for years hence worldwide government's spending billions to augment it. Just accept it and do your bit to help the planet instead of causing everybody more issues

[Methuselah]

This current 'disagreement' reminds of the old trick question: What was the world's largest Island before Australia was discovered?

But major continental rifting operates over timescales measured in millions of years, not decades, so I'd be very surprised if anything sudden has happened recently. I'm not saying it's impossible, just highly unlikely.

[Methuselah]

6 minutes ago, BLAST FROM THE PAST said:

What , so the prediction was that the ice in that part of Antarctica would melt yet ice extent elsewhere around the continent would show record extent.  Please show me the prediction of that...please

BFTP

The prediction that the first effect of GW would be increased snowfall over Antarctica...

[Devonian]

11 minutes ago, BLAST FROM THE PAST said:

What , so the prediction was that the ice in that part of Antarctica would melt yet ice extent elsewhere around the continent would show record extent.  Please show me the prediction of that...please

 

BFTP

??? Besides, Antarctic sea ice has been below normal in extent this year...

How did your volcanoes melt the Larsen A and B ice shelfs?

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

20 minutes ago, Devonian said:

??? Besides, Antarctic sea ice has been below normal in extent this year...

How did your volcanoes melt the Larsen A and B ice shelfs?

 

Larsen A and B of West Antarctica?

A MASSIVE subterranean heat source – identical to that triggering Hawaii’s volcano - has been discovered under the West Antarctic Ice Shelf – a glacial area often cited by environmentalists as a ‘climate change’ disaster waiting to happen.

A mantle plume – the same geothermal phenomena powering the current Mount Kilauea volcano in Hawaii - is a stream of hot rock rising up through the Earth’s mantle and spreading beneath the crust like a mushroom .

The mantle plume theory was developed in the 1970s to address apparently inexplicable geothermal activity thousands of miles far from the boundary of a tectonic plate.

Scientists believe a mantle plume exists underneath Antarctica’s Marie Byrd Land explaining the well-documented instability and weakness of the ice sheet today.

One study was published in the Journal of Geophysical Research4 and backed by a detailed NASA study that adds evidence that there is a geothermal heat source beneath the Antarctica region.

Researchers Helene Seroussi and Erik Ivins of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory created a model of the areas of melting and freezing under the ice in the region.

NASA’s model showed showed a measure of heat around 180 milliwatts per square meter. At Yellowstone Park – famed for its hot springs and geothermal geysers – the temperature is only a little higher at 200 milliwatts per square meter.

Another recent scientific study showed thinning and melting of Marie Byrd Land is not a new – post industrial – phenomenon.

The West Antarctic Ice Sheet has thinned by more than 700 meters near the coast throughout the past 10,000 years.

 

BFTP

Edited November 1, 2018 by BLAST FROM THE PAST

[Methuselah]

Thanks for that, Fred...So it's a plume and not a rift; but plumes will also have been releasing heat for millions of years, so are hardly a recent thing, at least in human terms.

IMO, a massive uptick in volcanism is very unlikely to be a viable alternative to CO2, in terms of global warming. If it were, I think we might have noticed.

[Optimus Prime]

Antarctica would be the last place on earth to feel the affects of anthropogenic GW...

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

4 minutes ago, Ed Stone said:

Thanks for that, Fred...So it's a plume and not a rift; but plumes will also have been releasing heat for millions of years, so are hardly a recent thing, at least in human terms.

IMO, a massive uptick in volcanism is very unlikely to be a viable alternative to CO2, in terms of global warming. If it were, I think we might have noticed.

Aye Pete one location will not prove or disprove either view....but it opens more debate rather than close it.  Catch you later mate, onto the 18z

 

BFTP

[Mapantz]

 

1 hour ago, BLAST FROM THE PAST said:

There you go with another personal dig, something I haven’t done about you....everyone is entitled to their opinion

I'm not seeing a personal dig here, BFTP? If you're not a climate scientist or expert in the subject, then it's a fair comment.

Keep it friendly folks - I know it's difficult on these subjects..

[BornFromTheVoid]

1 hour ago, BLAST FROM THE PAST said:

What , so the prediction was that the ice in that part of Antarctica would melt yet ice extent elsewhere around the continent would show record extent.  Please show me the prediction of that...please

 

BFTP

Lets try a little thought experiment.

Antarctica is a continent surrounded by oceans. West Antarctica has temperatures closer to 0 in summer than in East Antarctica. So, for West Antarctica consider...
What happens to ice when the air temperatures go above 0C?
What happens to snowfall when the air temperature (keeping it simple) flips from below 0C to above 0C?

Now consider East Antarctica...
What happens to the ice when the temperature goes from -20 to -10C?
What happens to snowfall amounts when the temperature goes from -20 to -10C?

Then consider the southern ocean. What happens to the marine terminating glaciers when that warms? What happens, given that the ice load has pushed much of the land below sea level, when the ocean eats into the ice enough to reach the continent?

Greenland is like a miniature version of this in action. In Winter, temperatures have warmed but are still way below 0C, so the warmer air means that it can hold more moisture and produce more snowfall. Yay, extra snow and the ice sheet grows! Only in summer, we're more frequently seeing temperatures capable of producing surface melt. That surface melt is seeping down through cracks and moulins and providing lubrication at the base of the ice sheet and glaciers, speeding up their flow rates. And then the seas around Greenland are warming up too, eating into the ice at the edges. All this means that the extra snow in winter (like east Antarctica in summer) isn't enough to compensate for the summer air and ocean induced losses (like west Antarctica in summer).

[tablet]

4 hours ago, BornFromTheVoid said:

Who disagreed with there being volcanoes in West Antarctica? It's been known for a while know that volcanism occurs in Antarctica and under the ice sheet.

The main issue with the volcanoes is when people claim they are to blame for the changes we see. It's like blaming the rising ocean heat content on undersea volcanoes.
Just because we make a new discovery, doesn't mean that something is actually new. Volcanism has likely been going on under the Antarctic ice sheet for millions of years, thus it doesn't make sense to blame it for current rates of mass loss.

so , just because there is actual physical evidence , to support the theory of volcanic action under the Pine Island Glaciers  , that doesn't mean there is seawater coming into contact with volcanic action in western Antarctica ?

it actually proves that there is a large ( by the amount of Helium-3) volcanic heat source coming in contact with the sea under the glaciers of western Antarctica , in fact it's the only natural way to get Helium-3 into seawater

[Devonian]

1 hour ago, BLAST FROM THE PAST said:

 

Larsen A and B of West Antarctica?

...

BFTP

No, Larsen A and B of the Antarctic peninsula...

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

28 minutes ago, Devonian said:

No, Larsen A and B of the Antarctic peninsula...

Which is WEST Antarctica 

 

BFTP

[tablet]

Antarctica , is it really warming up to any extent ?

you may notice that the warmer water is around western Antarctic , where the Helium-3 was found in samples taken in 2014

the sources of these graphs are :

Jones Et Al., 2016

https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate3103

Fan Et Al., 2014

http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/staff/cdeser/docs/fan.antarctic_seaice_trends.grl14.pdf

Purich Et Al., 2018

https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0092.1

Jones Et Al., 2016

https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate3103

 

[Devonian]

8 hours ago, BLAST FROM THE PAST said:

Which is WEST Antarctica 

 

BFTP

So, your claim is the whole of the west of Antarctica is being warmed by vast volcanic activity that has all just started just recently? Gerroff with you .

Humm, though, to be fair, your theory would explain why Hawaii has a nice climate!

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

59 minutes ago, Devonian said:

So, your claim is the whole of the west of Antarctica is being warmed by vast volcanic activity that has all just started just recently? Gerroff with you .

Humm, though, to be fair, your theory would explain why Hawaii has a nice climate!

Recently discovered not recently started. And it seems to be NASA’s theory .......don’t they have scientists?  

 

BFTP

Edited November 2, 2018 by BLAST FROM THE PAST

[BornFromTheVoid]

1 hour ago, BLAST FROM THE PAST said:

Recently discovered not recently started. And it seems to be NASA’s theory .......don’t they have scientists?  

 

BFTP

That's make believe. It's not NASAs theory. The volcanoes might partially explain the extra flow rate of some glaciers, little more.

The level of misunderstanding in this thread is reaching Trump like standards.

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

33 minutes ago, BornFromTheVoid said:

That's make believe. It's not NASAs theory. The volcanoes might partially explain the extra flow rate of some glaciers, little more.

The level of misunderstanding in this thread is reaching Trump like standards.

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=6996

BFTP

[BornFromTheVoid]

10 minutes ago, BLAST FROM THE PAST said:

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=6996

BFTP

They're not causing a warming trend or mass loss trends. They're contributing to the flow rate, as I mentioned.

From the article:

"Although the heat source isn't a new or increasing threat to the West Antarctic ice sheet, it may help explain why the ice sheet collapsed rapidly in an earlier era of rapid climate change, and why it is so unstable today.

The stability of an ice sheet is closely related to how much water lubricates it from below, allowing glaciers to slide more easily."

[Methuselah]

Many folks simply love being told what they want to hear, it seems...Irrespective of whether it's backed up by science or is a heap of vacuous twaddle; and the fossil-fuel industry loves telling them that all in the world is rosy. And it makes them $billions!