Slashdot Mirror
Study Links Rapid Ice Sheet Melting With Distant Volcanic Eruptions (upi.com)
schwit1 quotes UPI:
New research suggests volcanic eruptions can trigger periods of rapid ice sheet melting... "Over a time span of 1,000 years, we found that volcanic eruptions generally correspond with enhanced ice sheet melting within a year or so," Francesco Muschitiello, a postdoctoral researcher at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, said in a news release. The volcanoes of note weren't situated next-door, but thousands of miles from the ice sheet, a reminder of the unexpected global impacts of volcanic activity.
The new research -- detailed this week in the journal Nature Communications -- suggests ash ejected into the atmosphere by erupting volcanoes can be deposited thousands of miles away. When it's deposited on ice sheets, the dark particles cause the ice to absorb more thermal energy and accelerate melting... Some scientists have even suggested melting encouraged by volcanic eruptions could trigger even more eruptions, a positive feedback loop. As glaciers and ice sheets melt, pressure is relieved from the planet's crust, allowing magma to rise to the surface.
The new research -- detailed this week in the journal Nature Communications -- suggests ash ejected into the atmosphere by erupting volcanoes can be deposited thousands of miles away. When it's deposited on ice sheets, the dark particles cause the ice to absorb more thermal energy and accelerate melting... Some scientists have even suggested melting encouraged by volcanic eruptions could trigger even more eruptions, a positive feedback loop. As glaciers and ice sheets melt, pressure is relieved from the planet's crust, allowing magma to rise to the surface.
Rocket science is complex, but we (maybe not you) model it adequately.
Pete and Bogs* may be Bart Simpson's school mates for all I know, but it is clear as hell you do not understand the concept of science, and need to investigate that before you go on to find what science tells you.
*The stuff that forms boggy ground is called peat.
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
Here is proof you're entirely and utterly wrong, repeating BS from the echo chamber of denial:
http://skepticalscience.com/comparing-global-temperature-predictions.html
The last ten years were on average warmer than the previous ten, which were warmer than the previous ten. Where on earth do you get the idea that there hasn't been any warming? The trend agrees well with the models from the 1980s, let alone more recent one
Climate models have been largely correct, not drastically wrong, for the last thirty years. What wasn't modelled well initially was particularly regional detail, and the detailed effects of clouds, aerosols, and land coverage, but all are somewhat improved, but haven't much changed projections on a global scale. If you look at Hansen's projections against BAU emissions (broadly RCP 8.5 from the IPCC), the agreement with current temperatures is good. Year-to-year variations in detail cannot be predicted, as the system is chaotic, but annual variations from models look like the ones seen in practice.
The climate models by 4 of the "non-skeptics" (the only exception is Kellogg) match the data to within 0.25C or thereabouts. The climate models by 5 of the "skeptics" don't match the data at all - even the trend is wrong. Despite being rebased or having a shorter end prediction, their mean error is more than 0.5C.