This one will be in the media for sure West Antarctic glacier loss appears unstoppable -- ScienceDaily Please be aware though that even if the West Antarctic ice sheet is 'uncorked', its 1.2 meter contribution to sea level would take hundreds to thousands of years to arrive. I read that somewhere else and will provide the link if needed. I do not think that Rignot's group are suggesting that 21st century SLR will exceed the 1.2 m high prediction. FWIW my expectation is closer to 60 cm. The other story that will probably become a story is about El Nino. ENSO could turn strongly positive this year, even though these month-ahead forecasts are not famously reliable. As we have discussed before it would increase global surface T. Whether that sounds like good news or not, ENSO also pushes around areas of increased and decreased rainfall. Leading to winners and losers. Just try to keep a level head in case someone says 'increased T oh that's just El Nino'. Unless they were previously so thoughtful to also say 'decade of flatness because of a couple of La Ninas' It's a cycle built on top of a secular trend, in IMHO.
I also saw this item this morning, and quickly found more articles. But then the evening TV news botched it, saying it could lead to a 10 foot sea level rise by 2100. I haven't yet seen this error repeated elsewhere. Here is the NASA-JPL version, with a twelve-year time lapse sequence from satellite photos: The 'Unstable' West Antarctic Ice Sheet: A Primer
Lets give this study an unwarrated benefit of doubt.Meaning assume its a honest study. Greater Sea levels occured naturally in the previous interglacial without any rise in CO2 . If sea levels rise to match the previous interglacial there would be no proof that it was a result of higher CO2 levels. Its only a match of a previous sea rise not caused by CO2.
A previous interglacial without CO2 rise? Benefit of doubt would indeed be unwarranted there. A host of ice cores are waiting patiently to inform whoever would want to know..
Without the CO2 levels of today. But thats not the point at all. The point being higher sea levels occurred naturally in the past. Temps were higher,sea levels were higher while CO2 was lower.
By the way the report says the ice could melt in 200-500-1000 years.We will most likely be back to a full blown ice age before Antartica melts. Its a done deal so lets clean up the environment instead of wasting resources limiting phoney CO2 scares. Im on a hill in San Francisco so Ill soon have a beachfront property.
Icarus since you have not the capability, ask any 5 year old to look at the ice core graphs and ask the 5 year old what is the likely progression in the near future.
^Ask any five year old what will happen if you add insulation to your house and don't bother to turn down the burner often your furnace! Icarus
Interest of the general public in derision of climate science, and in the science itself, are both similarly short lived. Public interest in climate change unshaken by scandal, but unstirred by science -- ScienceDaily I supposed we might have guessed that, but there is a post doc (and google trends) to assist in the process of connecting dots. So, all you general publicans, you have your own collective short-term attention spans to blame for over-the-top pronouncements from all sides. The cure (unlikely perhaps) is reading and reasoning. I have asked for as much on several occasions. But perhaps we are being told that it is simply outside of human nature. So, y'all get a free pass for touting extremes, or disputing others that you don't fancy. Seems like a heckuva way for the world's most sentient species to act though.
Sea levels in the last two interglacials did indeed go higher, and CO2 was assocciated with these high sea levels. If you were to say it was not a result of man burning fossil fuels in the last two interglacials, that might match the data, but the man created CO2 likely sped it up. IMHO this rise would likely pass the tipping point with or without man.
Relax my friend. It is common to find our species is barely able to understand the age of enlightenment. We are barely 600 years from the Middle Ages and except for some unusual genetic change, it is highly unlikely that the same species that used to hunt and burn witches as well as inquire about the faithful. So many basic scientific and math facts were discovered and documented by the Greeks nearly 3000 years ago yet . . . So I am sanguine about the inevitability of these phenomena: Our species, or at least some members, has figured out what is happening. Call them Casandras Our species is incapable of exploiting this knowledge It is infinitely frustrating to living Casandras In 50 years, it won't matter to us I don't know how to 'break through' the ignorance. I'm fearful that if that puzzle is ever solved, the consequences would be far worse. Bob Wilson
