|
Fangz posted:Have people checked out It's an excellent general resource, but it's difficult to translate its lessons to most media that casual people use- I sometimes try it on the forums here, or on facebook, to mixed results.
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2017 04:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 11:55 |
|
|
Fangz posted:Have people checked out BattleMoose posted:Only seen it now, wish I had known about it sooner. Seems to make sense to me. It's in the OP.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2017 04:54
|
|
|
I might not have ever read the OP....
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
In loving wonderful news, Antarctic sea ice extent has now reached a new record low. Even better - there are still potentially weeks left of melt season. Antarctic sea ice area is still not quite the lowest ever recorded, but it is rapidly approaching the top. Four days of loss like yesterday will put it in second place, though 1993 has a more distant minimum. It would take another 13 days of similar loss after those 4 days to reach first place in minimum sea ice area, which might not happen. The reason for the discrepancy between the two measurements is because patches that remain are more compact, but also more contiguous. Extent calculates based on sections that are 15% or more covered (3 sections at 75%, 50%, and 25% = 3 sections), while area takes the percent covered of a section into consideration in its calculation (3 sections at 85%, 50%, and 25% = 1.5 sections). Arctic sea ice area continues to remain lowest, while extent has been flirting with dropping to second lowest. It's crossed over and back a bit, and it's likely to drop to second-lowest again as temperatures decline in some areas of the Arctic per forecast. Don't worry, things are just great:
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 05:17
|
|
|
Is there an under/over on when Larsen C is going?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:27
|
|
|
two months
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 21:03
|
|
|
Evil_Greven posted:In loving wonderful news, Antarctic sea ice extent has now reached a new record low. Even better - there are still potentially weeks left of melt season. You're gonna need a bigger Y Axis.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 21:50
|
|
|
We're probably going to see Arctic ice extent go up a bunch over the next week as it's finally getting some historically normal cold weather. Unfortunately (of course, because there can't be any unalloyed good news anymore,) winds are looking to push a lot of the thickest ice out the Fram and Bering areas, and there isn't enough time left in the freezing season for new ice growth to mean much (it's going to melt quickly.) It seems to me as if there are two unknowns: one, the actual state of the ice (a satellite can say it's 2m thick, but there is a big difference between 2m of solid ice and 2m of loose crunched together weak ice, especially when it comes to melting), and two, whether the summer is cloudy and cool or if there is a lot of sun. It's a bit up in the air, as it were. Worth keeping in mind that the Arctic going ice-free in and of itself isn't catastrophic (unless there are crazy ocean current changes as a result,) but it would mean that only Greenland would be left to soak up all that heat, increasing that melt and therefore sea level rise. It's very interesting to keep an eye on because it's such a complex system in the midst of unprecedentedly rapid change.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
Mozi posted:We're probably going to see Arctic ice extent go up a bunch over the next week as it's finally getting some historically normal cold weather. Unfortunately (of course, because there can't be any unalloyed good news anymore,) winds are looking to push a lot of the thickest ice out the Fram and Bering areas, and there isn't enough time left in the freezing season for new ice growth to mean much (it's going to melt quickly.) It seems to me as if there are two unknowns: one, the actual state of the ice (a satellite can say it's 2m thick, but there is a big difference between 2m of solid ice and 2m of loose crunched together weak ice, especially when it comes to melting), and two, whether the summer is cloudy and cool or if there is a lot of sun. It's a bit up in the air, as it were. Worth keeping in mind that the Arctic going ice-free in and of itself isn't catastrophic (unless there are crazy ocean current changes as a result,) but it would mean that only Greenland would be left to soak up all that heat, increasing that melt and therefore sea level rise.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 22:15
|
|
|
And as that water warms, aside from catastrophic impact to the associated marine ecosystems, it'll warm those delicious delicious methane deposits. Pop.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 23:48
|
|
|
also, water expands once when it gets heated to 4C.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 00:35
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Won't a lack of ice also increase the amount of heat absorbed in the Arctic? Ice reflects about 2.5 times as much radiation as ocean water IIRC. Yes, absolutely. My point was the first effect that would really, undeniably impact people outside of the region is the sea level rise brought on by increased Greenland melt. Could be wrong though! Mozi fucked around with this message at 14:02 on Feb 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 13:59
|
|
|
Hey, I'm betting a denier guy on how bad things are gonna be in the future. 15cm of sea level rise and 0.8degrees celsius from 2015 to 2027 seem reasonable?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 05:07
|
|
|
Eh never mind, he only wants to bet on something super crazy happening like 4 degrees in 15 years because anything else could just be statistical noise and not caused by humans. There's no winning over this guy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 05:26
|
|
|
Sea level rose by 6 cm in the 19th century and 19 cm in the 20th so that would be quite the acceleration.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 05:27
|
|
|
Heh yeah, I would probably still lose the bet, was really straining to find something he would take
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 05:34
|
|
|
unnoticed posted:Heh yeah, I would probably still lose the bet, was really straining to find something he would take Larcen C, or an ice free arctic summer?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 08:38
|
|
|
you're being trolled sorry
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 08:49
|
|
|
I know the guy, he's totally serious. Unironically believes Scott Pruitt is finally going to get politics out of science.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:00
|
|
|
It's 70 degrees in Detroit today, vs the 2000-2012 average high of 36. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
unnoticed posted:I know the guy, he's totally serious. Unironically believes Scott Pruitt is finally going to get politics out of science.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 21:29
|
|
|
Not sure about endangered species but he does say he's anti-pollution in general. Supports disclosing fracking chemicals for example. Yet he thinks human caused climate change is a hoax for a bunch of reasons.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2017 00:23
|
|
|
Mozi posted:Yes, absolutely. My point was the first effect that would really, undeniably impact people outside of the region is the sea level rise brought on by increased Greenland melt. Could be wrong though! A seasonally ice free Arctic is just so full of unknowns. Jet stream, polar vortex, Atlantic circulation patterns, the effect on Greenland. How fast does the Arctic transition from a seasonally ice free Arctic to a permanently ice free ocean? From arid to marine climate? It's a lot of I don't know, and most of those unknowns likely fall in a range between bad and real loving bad. But, yeah melting is almost certain to increase in Greeenland. It's already accelerating at an exponential pace. I think the jet stream disruption is going to be the quickest felt change.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2017 00:45
|
|
|
unnoticed posted:Not sure about endangered species but he does say he's anti-pollution in general. Supports disclosing fracking chemicals for example. I have a suspicion that there may be a single root cause reason behind that bunch of reasons.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2017 00:49
|
|
|
Chem trails, mind controlling chemicals and conspiracy theories. Yep, mental illness. Anyways, yeah, the jet stream and most processes that determine climate are a result of differentials and gradients; be them temperature, salinity and pressure. Melting of the polar ice caps will greatly decrease relative differences which will greatly undermine the strength of global processes which will largely result in greater temperature extremes. This will particularly cause desertification of middle of the continents. So expect dust bowls in the midwest of North America, central Asia, central Africa, etc. Ocean systems will carry moisture in to the continent, hit a mountain range and basically peter out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
Your acquaintance is insane. Document his or her stances in an email to yourself and read that before considering talking about anything more complex than arithmetic or football with him/her in the future.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2017 01:28
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:Chem trails, mind controlling chemicals and conspiracy theories. Yep, mental illness.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2017 04:48
|
|
|
unnoticed posted:Not sure about endangered species but he does say he's anti-pollution in general. Supports disclosing fracking chemicals for example. What in the world motivates you to argue with a madman?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2017 07:58
|
|
|
TildeATH posted:What in the world motivates you to argue with a madman?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2017 07:59
|
|
|
coyo7e posted:perhaps you forgot to finish the rest of your sentence but Don't ever speak to anyone who thinks anthropogenic climate change is a hoax. If someone says that, ask them to confirm, and then never speak to them again. It's like talking to the crazy guy on the subway train, it will never lead to anything but your own death.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2017 08:01
|
|
|
Air conditioner is broke so what
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2017 08:04
|
|
|
Brother Friendship posted:Air conditioner is broke so what 
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2017 08:11
|
|
|
Haha yeah I keep getting sucked into Facebook arguments with this guy and they never go anywhere. Will try to avoid in the future. The more I engage, the more Facebook thinks I want to see what he's sharing from Patriot Nation or some random denier blog or whatever and then there are more terrible opinions on my newsfeed that I get sucked into responding to.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2017 08:32
|
|
|
unnoticed posted:Haha yeah I keep getting sucked into Facebook arguments with this guy and they never go anywhere. Will try to avoid in the future. https://twitter.com/SteveKopack/status/833109003160924160?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2017 09:23
|
|
|
NASA satellite spots mile-long iceberg breaking off of Antarctic glacierquote:A massive, 1-mile-long chunk of ice has broken off Antarctica’s fast-changing Pine Island Glacier, and NASA satellites captured the dramatic event as the icy surface cracked and ripped apart.  Don't worry, this isn't Larcen C. This is a totally different giant iceberg calving event!
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2017 10:51
|
|
|
Hello, climate change thread, what's your take on this? Should I be a bit more hopeful or stay desperate?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2017 12:18
|
|
|
Smoke_Max posted:Hello, climate change thread, what's your take on this? Should I be a bit more hopeful or stay desperate? We know that CCS exists but the problem is that it doesn't make money. So you need political will to mandate it be used, and lol good luck with that in the USA. Also mass manufacturing has made carbon-neutral energy sources price competitive with carbon power + CCS so many utilities would choose to just build that instead.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2017 13:35
|
|
|
So it's springtime in Chicago, only about 12+ weeks early. I'm wondering if there's a sciency meteorological resource out there that discusses what's behind this phenomenon and other extreme events that are becoming more common. Not so much the long term science, but the short term, 'this is what's happening right now' stuff. I came across the almanac listing for 2/18 and yesterday was hottest on record (70°F), with the coldest record set in 2015 (-8°F).
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2017 15:55
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC3VTgIPoGU One of the largest ever glacier calving incidents recorded on film.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2017 19:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 11:55 |
|
|
That chunk off of pine island glacier is land ice correct? It wasn't already floating on the water?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 00:32
|
|