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.
What's absurd is that people have to use Anonymous Coward on a tech/science site for fear of being labelled a DENIÈR. Any deviation from the church of Al Gore is punished with name calling and humiliation.
It is utterly insane to compare modeling a rocket, which is complex and all variables can be directly measured and tested in practice, with the climate where it is impossible to test anything - only to come up with models to try and explain what is happening.
Since as stated, the models have all been drastically wrong, the huge problem you face is WHAT is wrong about the models? You cannot change one aspect of the Earths climate twenty years ago to test. You can't even measure a specific subset of the Earth to get a more focused view because changes even very far removed can have impacts on any one region of the world, as moisture and upper air currents travel vast distances, and seasonal differences utterly swamp overall change.
I'll start believing climate science is a real science, when they start acting like scientists. Until then I'm a lot more prone to consider a physicists opinion on the matter, because at least they understand fundamental forces in a way climate scientists do not seem to.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
None of the 'Global Warming!' computer models have come close to predicting the temperature changes (or lack thereof) of the last twenty years or so. In what sense is so-called 'science' whose predictions don't match reality not blatantly, utterly wrong?