Slashdot Mirror
Why Antarctica Is Getting Taller (livescience.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Live Science: Bedrock under Antarctica is rising more swiftly than ever recorded -- about 1.6 inches (41 millimeters) upward per year. And thinning ice in Antarctica may be responsible. That's because as ice melts, its weight on the rock below lightens. And over time, when enormous quantities of ice have disappeared, the bedrock rises in response, pushed up by the flow of the viscous mantle below Earth's surface, scientists reported in a new study. These uplifting findings are both bad news and good news for the frozen continent. The good news is that the uplift of supporting bedrock could make the remaining ice sheets more stable. The bad news is that in recent years, the rising earth has probably skewed satellite measurements of ice loss, leading researchers to underestimate the rate of vanishing ice by as much as 10 percent, the scientists reported. The findings were published in the journal Science.
Are you being serious? If you are, then your conclusion is alarmingly contrary to the actual information in the article. Theyâ(TM)ve discovered that their measurements were underestimating ice loss, not overestimating it.
Why do the /. editors feel the need to use bigger numbers? There's no competition to be won on this one, and the normal way to express size in context is 4,1 cm not 41mm
Like the North American continent, Antartica is rising in response to the end of the last ice age. That's not due to AGW in any meaningful way. However, the recent loss of antartic ice may be more severe then measured, and the recent loss of ice is significantly impacted by climate change in the last 100 years, which appears to be strongly affected by human behavior.
Seems like this much mass moving would have an effect on the surrounding plates.
It's currently subducting under the south american plate.
Seems like it could snap off and cause tsunami's along thousands of miles of south american coast line.
It interacts with six other plates in total.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
What by 10%? Their error in estimating ice loss is closer to 50% anyway. So no, nothing has changed dingus.
The cities are full of women, middle-aged widows, husbands, dead, husbands who've spent their lives making fortunes, working and working. And then they die and leave their money to their wives, their silly wives.
And what do the wives do, these useless women? You see them in the hotels, the best hotels, every day by the thousands, drinking the money, eating the money, losing the money at bridge, playing all day and all night, smelling of money, proud of their jewelry but of nothing else, horrible, faded, fat, greedy women...
Are they human or are they fat, wheezing animals, hmm? And what happens to animals when they get too fat and too old?
Water is frozen at -20 C? Yes? Is it also frozen at -18 C? Yes? But it's warmer.
Mostly random stuff.
Bedrock under Antarctica is rising more swiftly than ever recorded -- about 1.6 inches (41 millimeters) upward per year. And thinning ice in Antarctica may be responsible.
Given how my work days lately have seemed longer and longer, I was going to say that Earth is probably rotating more slowly and so assuming a more perfectly spherical shape.
We can test my hypothesis by measuring to see if there is a corresponding subsidence at the equator.
They tend to measure height inversely proportional to temperature. So it all balances out.
Like the North American continent, Antartica is rising in response to the end of the last ice age.
I don't think so. Antarctica is so cold that most moisture condenses and falls as snow over the floating ice pack, and little reaches the interior. Warming temperatures mean that more snow falls further inland, over continental ice, thickening the ice.
TFA only measured the area around the Amundsen Sea in West Antarctica, which is warmer and closer to the coast than the much larger East Antarctic ice sheet.
So now Antarctica wishes it was a baller?
If you lose 1cm of ice above rock, that would allow the rock below to rise MORE than 1cm?
Has nobody considered that rock is way, way heavier than ice? It's just not physically possible!
According to Robert Rhode, a noted climate change PhD - "Even in the event of severe sustained warming, it would take many thousands of years for Eastern Antarctica to be fully deglaciated." - most of the ice is in the east.
nothing to see here - move along
I knew all along it was a scam.
The scam is not the effect of GHGs on global temperature, which is old and well-established theory. It's the hijacking of the issue by apocalyptic radicals pushing a misanthropic agenda. Don't you wonder why any real-world solution, whether it's on the carbon emission side or on the sequestration side, gets automatically rejected?
Don't you wonder why any real-world solution, whether it's on the carbon emission side or on the sequestration side, gets automatically rejected?
Automatically rejected only by the other side.
You seem to be in the clan that thinks people are intelligent, and that given the proper information in an objective way, they'll make a proper, rational decision.
Reality check: They're not, and they won't.
There's only one thing to do with the clueless masses: Manipulate them. Good people do it for the greater good, bad people do it for their own self interest. Only a tiny fraction of the human population is interesting in precise, objective information. Their weight is insignificant compared to the masses. They don't matter.
But there's nothing wrong with the distance measurements. That's the point: the distance measurements are accurate, but the level of the actual ground under the ice changes, so the thickness of the ice is less than the distance measurement implies.
Kill this one first, Obama's death panel!
All this thawing woke him up.
Reading the crap the author spews on Twitter, it's obvious that this article is full of political bias instead of straight up science.
The extrapolations being made from this article are ridiculous. The idea that the small elevation increase will aid in slowing ice movement is simply disproportionate from reality. Ohio is still rebounding from the last ice age, this is a process that occurs over thousand year time spans. We are melting the ice magnitudes of order faster than the rebound can occur.
If we manage to melt all of the ice on Antarctica for centuries, not only will Antarctica rise a mile, but the continents in the norther hemisphere will be sucked inwards so that the volume of the spheroid remains constant. Most of the southern and central US will once again be seabed in 100,000 years. If Antarctica is rising as fast as they say, then the sea floor of the northern Atlantic and Pacific are likely already sinking. Crust cannot rise in one place without compensation elsewhere. The volume of the earth has to remain constant.
Aunt R.D. Caw is getting shorter as she gets older. Still kicks ass at bridge though. She says it's allll in the viscous mantle.
The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
Can I get a copy of the random text generating script you use to post? It will save me a lot of time racking up my -1 scores. I have no problem admitting you consistently manage to get more -1 and faster than I do and I admire you.
There is a big difference between seeing a problem and accepting a solution. Yes, I can see that we have a dry spell this Spring. No, I don't accept the solution of sacrifying a goat.
Hurry Lynnwood, we need some denialists to counter all the science !!
"There's only one thing to do with the clueless masses: Manipulate them. Good people do it for the greater good, bad people do it for their own self interest. Only a tiny fraction of the human population is interesting in precise, objective information. Their weight is insignificant compared to the masses. They don't matter."
You are very close. That tiny fraction is tiny because of manipulation. Everyone manipulates people for the greater good and has convinced themselves that it is in their own self-interest and vice-versa.
...to this single article which focuses on Western Antarctica there are a number of recent scholarly articles, including findings by NASA ( https://principia-scientific.o... ), that show ice growth Eastern Antarctica that offsets the loss in the west for a net gain.
Skew the data by not providing all the facts and you too can go full Chicken Little about anything. *smdh*
That said, the risk of melting ice is rising sea level. Unless the ice completely melts, the raised bedrock mitigates the detrimental effects of melting ice caps.
"That can either make things temporarily more stable or in probability outcomes temporarily more unstable."
Climate Change - bringing false dichotomies and unverifiable claims since Arrehnius first miscalculated the greenhouse effect of CO2. He corrected his mistake in a later paper but the damage had already been done. 200 years later and the effects are still expressed as a possible range from 'Nothing to see here' to 'OMG we're all going to die (and probably should already be dead)".
Sad really.
Hmmm... I was wondering the exact same thing. Scratching my head on this one. Is it April 1st?
the greater good!