Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   Step 1: Buy up a bunch of real estate at an elevation of 23 feet above sea level. Step 2: Wait. You already know step 3   (guardian.co.uk) divider line 146
    More: Followup, Greenland ice sheet, Greenland, tipping points, elevations, Arctic sea ice, Penn State University, sea levels, University of Delaware  
•       •       •

32460 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Aug 2010 at 6:34 PM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



146 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-08-10 07:27:03 PM  
Came here for the Seinfeld reference and hot muffintops girls, leaving somewhat satisfied.
 
2010-08-10 07:27:12 PM  
jso2897: Well, obviously, they just make up a bunch of shiat to get more money. We'd be wiser to get our information from people who don't have any financial motives to lie to us.
Like the oil companies.


So true. I wonder how I can get in on the global cash cow which is liberal elitist global warming research. Obviously the scientists just want the funding so they can advance an anti-US, pro-UN agenda. In the process, the researchers become amazingly rich as they take the funding and just manufacture data. I really want a piece of this action, I just need to know where to start.
 
2010-08-10 07:27:55 PM  
dj_bigbird: Wasn't Greenland actually GREEN (ie: with trees, grass and whatnot) a few centuries ago?

I think the Viking real estate agents put "GREENLAND" on burma-shave-style signs in Scandinavia to recruit settlers. Or the mythical medieval warm period actually happened.

I think it was still damn cold there and some Viking real estate tycoon got rich from people who got off the boat in Greenland and realized there wouldn't be another one going back for 20 farking years.
 
2010-08-10 07:28:17 PM  
Meh, whatever. I live in Illinois.
 
2010-08-10 07:29:00 PM  
jonr: Came here for the Seinfeld reference and hot muffintops girls, leaving somewhat satisfied.

Perhaps that's because you're in the wrong thread for those things. Just a guess.
 
2010-08-10 07:30:43 PM  
Animatronik: Which is not to say that there isn't a concern, jsut that I don't believe that they know the seas will rise 23 feet if the temperature increases by 2 degrees.

Average global temperatures went down 9 degrees a few tens of thousands of years ago, and the sea levels went down by over 200 feet.
The glaciers almost made it as far South as St. Louis, MO.
 
2010-08-10 07:33:43 PM  
LiquidTester: jso2897: Well, obviously, they just make up a bunch of shiat to get more money. We'd be wiser to get our information from people who don't have any financial motives to lie to us.
Like the oil companies.

So true. I wonder how I can get in on the global cash cow which is liberal elitist global warming research. Obviously the scientists just want the funding so they can advance an anti-US, pro-UN agenda. In the process, the researchers become amazingly rich as they take the funding and just manufacture data. I really want a piece of this action, I just need to know where to start.


There is, in fact, big money in climatology and virtually all of it is going to global warming research. Which is not to say that is it being misused or that data is being faked, just that you have to be aware of the inherent bias related to funding.

This is a problem in any scientific field. For instance, huge amounts of money were thrown at things like cancer research and nanotechnology before breakthroughs in other more basic areas really justified the expenditure. Meaning that money talks in research like anything else, and too much money in one area doea not always get you the desired result.
 
2010-08-10 07:35:30 PM  
kasper03: So if I take a glass, fill it with ice, then add water and let the ice melt, the water level will rise ?

The ice is ON Greenland not AROUND Greenland. The ice is not in the water. So your comparison is invalid. The water will cause a rise in sea level proportional to it's liquid volume.
 
2010-08-10 07:36:14 PM  
IgG4: Brilliant!

Otisburg?
 
2010-08-10 07:37:41 PM  
untaken_name: jso2897: Well, obviously, they just make up a bunch of shiat to get more money. We'd be wiser to get our information from people who don't have any financial motives to lie to us.
Like the oil companies.

You're acting as though one group of humanity is a shining example of morality while the other is a vast morass of evil. The truth is, people are people, and almost all of them want more money. Blind, slavish devotion to anyone who calls themselves a "scientist" is no better than blind, slavish devotion to someone who calls themselves a "preacher" or "oil executive". They're all trying to get paid. Every one of them.


Well, if you hafta get all serious, Debbie Downer - yeah. But the more the money, the more people are likely to lie to get it. And I kinda suspect that lying for an oil company or a tobacco company pays better than lying for some crappy university's research program.
But then, people , above all, are good at lying to themselves - and they do it for money, ego, paranoia - and you can't necessarily trust a man just because he doesn't have money on the table either.
So, yeah - skepticism is your friend. Especially when checking yourself - because we all tend to get addicted to our point of view - it happens to me, and it happens to you.
As far as the subject under discussion, I really don't think it's all that critical to the overriding fact - we all know what happens to creatures that overpopulate and foul their own nest: they go away, and life, the universe, and everything goes on just fine without them.
If we make the collective decision that that's going to be us, then so be it. This world was fine before we came along, and will be fine after we're gone.
"Global warming" is just something to argue about instead of doing anything.
 
2010-08-10 07:38:01 PM  
give me doughnuts: From the U.S. Geological Survey site: The vast majority, almost 90 percent, of Earth's ice mass is in Antarctica, while the Greenland ice cap contains 10 percent of the total global ice mass. The Greenland ice cap is an interesting part of the water cycle. The ice cap became so large over time (about 600,000 cubic miles (mi3) or 2.5 million cubic kilometers (km3)) because more snow fell than melted. Over the millennia, as the snow got deeper, it compressed and became ice. The ice cap averages about 5,000 feet (1,500 meters) in thickness, but can be as thick as 14,000 feet (4,300 meters). The ice is so heavy that the land below it has been pressed down into the shape of a bowl.

Your "small ice cube" is pretty farking big.


But ice expands as it freezes, and when it melts, it contracts in volume. Considering that the vast majority of the ice of a glacier or icebirg is already below sea level, it would stand to reason that sea levels could actually lower.
 
2010-08-10 07:38:42 PM  
Occam's Nailfile: icebirg iceberg

my bad
 
2010-08-10 07:40:15 PM  
kasper03: So if I take a glass, fill it with ice, then add water and let the ice melt, the water level will rise ?

not really, they found out that even if the entire arctic ice sheet would melt away, the effects would be minimal, since ice is less dense than cold water. however Greenland and Antarctic ice is mostly on land, so all non-coastal ice will contribute ~100% to sea level rise.

other factor to consider is that oceans will also warm up slightly, causing water to expand. Water is at its densest at 4 centigrade
 
2010-08-10 07:40:38 PM  
Occam's Nailfile: But ice expands as it freezes, and when it melts, it contracts in volume. Considering that the vast majority of the ice of a glacier or icebirg is already below sea level, it would stand to reason that sea levels could actually lower.

Iceberg, yes. Glacier, no.
 
2010-08-10 07:42:58 PM  
javaguy78: Can someone please explain to me how a small ice cube melting has enough water contained therein to raise the global water level 23 feet.

Doing some simple math reveals that there simply isn't enough water frozen in glaciers to raise the levels of all the oceans by 23 feet.

If melting ice raised the level of water so, my glass of icewater would gallantly overflow when the ice melts, and that just doesn't happen!


Sure.

The problem isn't the glaciers, which contain very little water, or the Arctic ice caps, which are like ice cubes, already displacing the amount of water they will eventually create.

The problem is the vast amount of water locked in ice in the Greenland ice sheets and the even bigger Antarctic ice cap, which are over LAND, and which therefore are not displacing any water already. When those caps melt, or in the case of glaciers there break away into the ocean, they are ADDING water to the oceans that wasn't there before.

In the case of your water glass, it's as if you had a glass with six ice cubes in it already. If those six cubes melt, it won't raise the water level any--but if you add six MORE ice cubes, then the additional melt water WILL raise the water level. In the same way, when or if the Greenland sheets continue to add runoff and glacier breakaways to the ocean, they are adding water that is not presently in the water. The Greenland main ice sheet is something like 5000 feet deep at its thickest point and covers nearly the entire island; thus, there is some reason for concern if the melt rate were to continue as predicted.

The big IF, of course, is if the melt continues as predicted.
 
2010-08-10 07:44:02 PM  
Occam's Nailfile:
But ice expands as it freezes, and when it melts, it contracts in volume. Considering that the vast majority of the ice of a glacier or icebirg is already below sea level, it would stand to reason that sea levels could actually lower.

only in the arctic sea and coastal regions of Greenland and Antarctica - the rest is above sea, on a rock bed
 
2010-08-10 07:46:11 PM  
Occam's Nailfile: But ice expands as it freezes, and when it melts, it contracts in volume. Considering that the vast majority of the ice of a glacier or icebirg is already below sea level, it would stand to reason that sea levels could actually lower.

Someone may have pointed this out already, but the volume of an iceberg is irrelevant because it floats on water, so it displaces a volume of water of equal mass...so when it melts there is no change in sea level.

The real problem is when the balance between land ice and sea ice changes, but there is no clarity as to what will trigger the catastrophic redistribution of water.
 
2010-08-10 07:52:24 PM  
Animatronik: Occam's Nailfile: But ice expands as it freezes, and when it melts, it contracts in volume. Considering that the vast majority of the ice of a glacier or icebirg is already below sea level, it would stand to reason that sea levels could actually lower.

Someone may have pointed this out already, but the volume of an iceberg is irrelevant because it floats on water, so it displaces a volume of water of equal mass...so when it melts there is no change in sea level.

The real problem is when the balance between land ice and sea ice changes, but there is no clarity as to what will trigger the catastrophic redistribution of water.


Maybe one of my Sat a.m. turds'll do it.
 
2010-08-10 07:53:47 PM  
So global warming is the reason why so many people are under water with their mortgages?
 
2010-08-10 07:58:35 PM  
JohnAnnArbor: olddeegee: 1. Start a new religion

2. Gather lots of converts/followers

3. Prophet

4. Profit

If you buy a teddy bear for $10, name it Mohammed, and sell it for $20, have you made a profit?


Thank you, my first laugh in this tab today!
 
2010-08-10 07:59:45 PM  
Ok, to end the whole "sea ice floating on water" sea level debate, here are the papers which work out the math:

Noerdlinger et al. (2007)
Jenkins and Holland (2007)

Summary: there is a small sea level change when floating ice melts, due to density differences between ice and seawater, but it's very small.
 
2010-08-10 08:00:51 PM  
jso2897: And I kinda suspect that lying for an oil company or a tobacco company pays better than lying for some crappy university's research program.

Yeah, but it's also a lot more work than getting funding to go on whaling expeditions or whatever. There's levels of ambition - and most scientists just have less of it than most lobbyists.

Also, my name's not Debbie Downer. It's David Downer, thank you very much. Still, pretty close. You stalking me or something?


/please note: that is NOT my real name.
 
2010-08-10 08:01:23 PM  
It's the end of the world. Let's colonize vacuum! Or we could just toss the extra water into the Sun to cool it down. When you have so much power and technology, you just don't know what to do anymore!
 
2010-08-10 08:06:27 PM  
give me doughnuts:

Average global temperatures went down 9 degrees a few tens of thousands of years ago,

Less than that, if you're talking degrees Celsius.

and the sea levels went down by over 200 feet.

Even more interesting is what happened the last time the Earth was warmer than it is now, during the last interglacial about 125,000 years ago. It was thought to be 1-2 degrees warmer globally then, and sea levels were probably more than 8 meters higher than today, with a peak rate of more than 0.5 meters/century (here). However, the Earth was in a different phase of its orbital cycle at that time, and it's unclear how that may have altered the temperature sensitivity of major ice sheets. (i.e., we don't know how well that result generalizes to today.)
 
2010-08-10 08:08:14 PM  
Ambitwistor: Even more interesting is what happened the last time the Earth was warmer than it is now

How many carbon credits had to be sold before it cooled back down?

/sorry i know you deserve a better response than this.
//but you didn't get one
 
2010-08-10 08:09:28 PM  
Wouldn't it be easier just to kill your elderly next door neighbor and bury her in her rose garden when her other neighbors are away so they can't see anything and then keep stealing her mail and depositing her social security checks?
 
2010-08-10 08:11:18 PM  
Simple back of hand math:

give me doughnuts cites the USGS, which says greenland is 2.5 million cubic km of ice. According to the wikipedia article on earth, the earth's surface is 510.072 million square km. Multiple by .75 as about 75% of the earth's surface is ocean, currently. Divide the first number by the third to get how deep the ice would be if it covered the entire ocean. I get .006535 kilometers, or 6.535 meters. Ice is less dense than water, though (only .916 as dense), so when it was all water it would only be 6.535 * .916 or very close to 6.00 meters deep.

So, sea levels could rise as much as 6 meters, or 19.68 feet. This is actually an over estimate because a 20 foot deep ocean on top of the earth would actually have a surface area larger than 510.072*.75 million sq km since the spherical surface gets larger as the radius increases. It's also an over estimate because more of the earth would be covered by water as the oceans rise.

So, I can't see where they get 23 feet based on the numbers I have. However, 19.68 feet is still scary as shiat.
 
2010-08-10 08:12:12 PM  
untaken_name: jso2897: And I kinda suspect that lying for an oil company or a tobacco company pays better than lying for some crappy university's research program.

Yeah, but it's also a lot more work than getting funding to go on whaling expeditions or whatever. There's levels of ambition - and most scientists just have less of it than most lobbyists.

Also, my name's not Debbie Downer. It's David Downer, thank you very much. Still, pretty close. You stalking me or something?


/please note: that is NOT my real name.


Well, of course not. I know who you are, and where you live. I always have.
And yeah - like I said - people get addicted to their point of view, and their ego blinds them. And they tend to want to believe whatever would be nicest for them if it were true.
How many people have you seen who scoff at those who unquestioningly swallow the apocalyptic predictions of climate change advocates, immediately turn around and unquestioningly swallow the apocalyptic predictions of economists who predict that any cessation or cutback in the use of fossil fuels would plunge us into a bottomless pit of poverty?
You have two sets of prognosticators, neither of whom can really prove their cases - what if they're BOTH full of shiat?
 
2010-08-10 08:14:31 PM  
Drew musta thought today was White Boy Day AGW Denier Day or something...
 
2010-08-10 08:14:59 PM  
I can get an 8 inch rise in a matter of seconds...

/yeah that's right..
 
2010-08-10 08:16:31 PM  
Just in case no one posted it yet, here's a nifty map (new window) that lets you plug in the amount the sea level will rise and check out what it'll do to your hometown (or anywhere else you like).

San Diego will be very sad with a 7 meter rise (23 feet) in sea level, as will pretty much all of southern Louisiana.
 
2010-08-10 08:18:03 PM  
It isn't just the 7m rise in ocean levels its the distance that level of sea rise will impact shorelines. But then the head up the ass climate warming deniers won't notice the difference until they are underwater.
 
2010-08-10 08:20:28 PM  
SubBass49: Just in case no one posted it yet, here's a nifty map (new window) that lets you plug in the amount the sea level will rise and check out what it'll do to your hometown (or anywhere else you like).

San Diego will be very sad with a 7 meter rise (23 feet) in sea level, as will pretty much all of southern Louisiana.


At 14 meters, Florida looks like it got a circumcision...
 
2010-08-10 08:20:41 PM  
23 feet? Meh. That's a good 12 feet higher than me.

/Edgar Cayce said I'm gonna be fine ...
 
2010-08-10 08:22:39 PM  
jso2897: what if they're BOTH full of shiat?

That's actually pretty much my default starting point for just about every message I hear. I'm man enough to admit when I'm wrong - or at least, I would be if it ever happened.
 
2010-08-10 08:28:05 PM  
untaken_name: jso2897: what if they're BOTH full of shiat?

That's actually pretty much my default starting point for just about every message I hear. I'm man enough to admit when I'm wrong - or at least, I would be if it ever happened.


Yep. About all I have to go by, as far as human predictions, is experience - and that would indicate that best case and worst case scenarios rarely happen - real outcomes usually lie somewhere in between.
 
2010-08-10 08:28:51 PM  
SubBass49: Just in case no one posted it yet, here's a nifty map (new window) that lets you plug in the amount the sea level will rise and check out what it'll do to your hometown (or anywhere else you like).

Interesting. Who puts that out? The Googles, they don't help.
 
2010-08-10 08:34:26 PM  
kasper03: So if I take a glass, fill it with ice, then add water and let the ice melt, the water level will rise ?

img714.imageshack.us

/Quick n dirty.
 
2010-08-10 08:35:11 PM  
whidbey: SubBass49: Just in case no one posted it yet, here's a nifty map (new window) that lets you plug in the amount the sea level will rise and check out what it'll do to your hometown (or anywhere else you like).

Interesting. Who puts that out? The Googles, they don't help.


According to the site, it's based on NASA data. Just looks like a google maps overlay of some sort. Probably some of the tech folks on here would be able to explain it better.
 
2010-08-10 08:39:52 PM  
Ambitwistor: Noerdlinger et al. (2007)
Jenkins and Holland (2007)


When your name is Noerdlinger, I think it's inevitable that you become a scientist someday.

He seems legit. I say we trust him.
 
2010-08-10 08:40:23 PM  
Already working on my Canuckian citizenship and have a prime piece of beachfront property purchased 20 feet up from Hudson Bay. Bring it, biotches.

/Hotel on Park Place, here I come
 
2010-08-10 09:14:08 PM  
OHHH NOOOES THE GLACIERS ARE MELTING IN MELTING SEASON BECAUSE WE ALL DRIVE OUR CAAAARRRSSS!!

NOOOOESSSSS!!!!!11!!eleventy11!!!
 
2010-08-10 09:24:19 PM  
InfamousBLT:

The proximity of the temperature threshold for Greenland ice sheet disintegration, which is what TFA is about, is not based on the trite observation that glaciers melt in melting season.

I guess we shouldn't expect a meteorology major to understand that distinction.
 
2010-08-10 09:52:08 PM  
Newsflash!

Scientists are observing a normal climate cycle on our planet! The earth might just warm up a few degrees over the next century!!

But then it might not!!

Send the scientists GOBS OF MONEY!!!

The earth will still warm up!!

The scientists will still drive fossil fuel cars and fly to their conferences in fossil fuel airplanes. Al Gore still uses about 50 times for fossil fuel energy than I do!!

Newsflash!!

/honestly, if the climate change scientists all quit using fossil fuels, their arguments would carry some weight. But they won't. Cuz its a new religion.
 
2010-08-10 10:27:10 PM  
This text is now purple: Incidentally, Philadelphia's elevation is 23 ft. Those bastards.

Well, that's one thing we have. So does this mean all of New Jersey will be underwater and we get a beach? win/win.
 
2010-08-10 10:45:01 PM  
Greenland shed its largest chunk of ice in nearly half a century last week, and faces an even grimmer future, according to Richard Alley, a geosciences professor at Pennsylvania State


So what happened 50 years ago? Global Warming?
 
2010-08-10 11:02:59 PM  
Record temps and wild fires in Russia (so bad they aren't even trying to export any crops), flooding in the rest of Asia, giant icebergs breaking off into the ocean, oil in the gulf, the South being smothered with heat killing crops...

The world this week is farking up so bad I can hardly keep up on it to enjoy it.

And we still have 3.5 months of hurricane season!
 
2010-08-10 11:11:56 PM  
Dick Cheney wins. farked you all.
 
2010-08-10 11:20:07 PM  
Is Step 3 Otisburg?
 
2010-08-10 11:30:35 PM  
suziequzie: Is Step 3 Otisburg?

I bet a reporter who wears dark rimmed glasses could figure out your last response.
 
Displayed 50 of 146 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report