Slashdot Mirror
Once-Shrinking Greenland Glacier Is Now Growing, NASA Study Shows (nbcnews.com)
kenh shares a report from NBC News: A major Greenland glacier that was one of the fastest shrinking ice and snow masses on Earth is growing again, a new NASA study finds. The Jakobshavn (YA-cob-shawv-en) glacier around 2012 was retreating about 1.8 miles (3 kilometers) and thinning nearly 130 feet (almost 40 meters) annually. But it started growing again at about the same rate in the past two years, according to a study in Monday's Nature Geoscience. Study authors and outside scientists think this is temporary.
A natural cyclical cooling of North Atlantic waters likely caused the glacier to reverse course, said study lead author Ala Khazendar, a NASA glaciologist on the Oceans Melting Greenland (OMG) project. Khazendar and colleagues say this coincides with a flip of the North Atlantic Oscillation -- a natural and temporary cooling and warming of parts of the ocean that is like a distant cousin to El Nino in the Pacific. The water in Disko Bay, where Jakobshavn hits the ocean, is about 3.6 degrees cooler than a few years ago, study authors said. While this is "good news" on a temporary basis, this is bad news on the long term because it tells scientists that ocean temperature is a bigger player in glacier retreats and advances than previously thought, said NASA climate scientist Josh Willis, a study co-author. Over the decades the water has been and will be warming from man-made climate change, he said, noting that about 90 percent of the heat trapped by greenhouse gases goes into the oceans.
A natural cyclical cooling of North Atlantic waters likely caused the glacier to reverse course, said study lead author Ala Khazendar, a NASA glaciologist on the Oceans Melting Greenland (OMG) project. Khazendar and colleagues say this coincides with a flip of the North Atlantic Oscillation -- a natural and temporary cooling and warming of parts of the ocean that is like a distant cousin to El Nino in the Pacific. The water in Disko Bay, where Jakobshavn hits the ocean, is about 3.6 degrees cooler than a few years ago, study authors said. While this is "good news" on a temporary basis, this is bad news on the long term because it tells scientists that ocean temperature is a bigger player in glacier retreats and advances than previously thought, said NASA climate scientist Josh Willis, a study co-author. Over the decades the water has been and will be warming from man-made climate change, he said, noting that about 90 percent of the heat trapped by greenhouse gases goes into the oceans.
I takes more faith to believe in Climate Change theories than to believe in God.
Area is one measure. Density is another we can't readily perform under the surface, hence the hollowed out Greenland and other glaciers, arctic ice melting unforseen from below. We can't stop it now, but we have to begin.
Climate change will kill us all!
Your God is a lie, agreed. Climate change is obvious, basic science you can measure. There's no comparison, you're a moron. Ironically... you will burn in Hell, liar. Kind of a twist there.
For some evidence of global warming. It's been decades now, and everything they've shown us as evidence has turned out not to be the case.
I wonder if in fifty years they'll be going on about global warming, even when it still isn't happening?
(YA-cobs-HA-ven)
Sig?
You mean the Jim Bridenstine led NASA?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/19/science/jim-bridenstine-nasa.html
Why do you always want to fight the badly needed population correction? Just let it happen. Look around. There are WAY too many Humans. This problem will solve itself.
Avenatti is going to jail (along with Jussie Smollett's lawyer, his co-conspirator). Global warming is turning around. Mueller report has nothing in it. ISIS is destroyed. Dems run a bunch of clowns in the primaries. Liberal media has completely self-destructed. And so on and so forth. If things go like this, Trump is getting a Reagan-style landslide in 2020.
Perhaps the Gulf current is slowing down because of the polar cap ice loss, restoring temporarily the cold climate in polar region? This could become an (dampened) oscillation, or a series of hickups. It would also mean that we would have severe weather systems in the lower latitudes on Atlantic during the lows of the stream strength, coincident with harsh winters in Europe and rebounds of polar ice. But, since we know that more warmth is getting into system, eventually the net effect will be on the loss of ice side.
Another aspect of land ice variation may be increased seismic activity, due to forces and movements changing direction. More wiggling allows easier overcoming of friction.
"A natural cyclical cooling" aka. winter.
So why would you believe those models on everything else when they can't even 'predict' WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED!
Must! Save! The! Planet!
and easy - only racist? How is it attempts to of user ba5e for of America (GNAA)
This is a disaster. My world falls apart. So first the Mueller report does not find sufficient evidence against Trump and now you say that even climate change is not real? What's going to be next? Mass shootings having nothing to do with gun law?
Doesn't that sound normal that the glacier grows from Sept to March?
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
If only climate scientist could actually look back further then their artificial predictable time capsule. They could get a better viewpoint of how the Earth's climate has evolved in many cycles over many thousands of years. Instead they try and cram a hundred or so years of our ability to even measure climate and say they know what will happen. That's not science, that's a very bad guess.
What is the most abundent and effective green house gas? Water vapor.
Is there any climate model that has been able to accurately predict even a few years into the future within the margin of error? No.
Did NASA say;
"
The deep ocean may have been able to "hide" excess heat trapped in the Earth system by greenhouse gases, contributing to the warming âoepauseâ in the last decade..." ? Yes.
Does solar activity have a large effect on Earth temperature? Yes, look up "solar minimum temperature".
These are just the first of many critical questions that lead any independent thinker to question the consensus of mainstream science. Generally I will trust an "Expert" in a field only if they have a proven record of results. I don't trust a doctor who kills his patients, no matter where he graduated from. I don't trust a climate scientist who has been wrong in his alarmist predictions over and over again and seems to think giving the government more money is going to change the earths climate.
There is no doubt humans are having an effect on the planet and that we need to become more mindful about the destructive effects of consumer culture, but there is much doubt that we understand or can control the climate and global temperature in any capacity.
The first acid test for a global warming alarmist is, what is the most common green house gas in the atmosphere? It is water vapor, not CO2. Most get it wrong in my anecdotal experience.
Those of us who have been hearing this since 1995 have thirty years experience of seeing the climate change alarmists get it wrong, so please kids, forgive our skepticism.
Something that seems to prove their theory?
DEFINITIVELY AGW!
But, something like a growing glacier? Which contradicts it?
"A natural cycle."
It's a fucking religion at this point.
Just like being anti-Trump.
Most people don't dispute that climate is changing.
The problem is, the models for this shit are so shoddy and inflexible.
So when people point out the problems in the models, they get labeled a "climate denier".
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
A slight increase in ocean temp leads to more water in the atmosphere, which creates more snow, which increases the albedo of the planet, which lowers temperatures.
While I agree we should continue to be less consequential, no one has been able to convince me that we need to short circuit free market solutions with global rule that will fail so surely as OPEC members cheat every single time.
Nothing evolves faster than the word of god in the minds of men who think themselves divinely inspired.
Chemtrails work.
How can you question obvious things! When I was a kid I remember that snow piles at my front door ware above my head and in the last 20 years I have not seen so high anymore!
Newsflash: Climate is more dynamic than you previously thought.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huKY5DzrcLI
Wouldn't it be nice if everyone who has been worrying about glaciers worried about herbicides instead?
I recall a National Geographic article covering the massive volcanic eruptions in 1999 due to the Gakkel Ridge in the Arctic Ocean. Maybe these eruptions have slowed down and the water is cooling off. It seems these pictures have been removed from the National Geographic website, I wonder why...
"Endeavour to persevere"
Are we sure its nothing stupid like its attached/anchored some way and is "shrinking"/"growing" with the tides?
God, climate change; it's all lies
"Study authors and outside scientists think this is temporary." Could you put a timescale on that? After all, many scientists believe that the Earth is temporary.
Glaciers growing again?
Ocean cooler than predicted by a lot?
How can we possibly spin this news as bad... oh I've got it, claim that obviously that since the water temperature also lowered it must mean that water temperature and glacial retreat are strongly linked!
What's that you say the water would have to get warm again to cause a problem? Shh!!
Important life lesson for people: If someone claims everything is bad, they are often wrong about everything.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Let me see if I understand this correctly:
- shrinking glacier: inarguable proof that the globe is warming
- growing glacier: not proof that the globe is cooling because we believe it'll probably change in the future, sometime, anyway.
Is that about how it works?
-Styopa
For this reason, God sends them a powerful delusion(operation of wandering)(planet) so that they will believe the lie.
Mystery Red of the Great American Eclipse
It has blood on it!
ABCNews: Eclipse makes pendulum wander
Losing my religion
Sun researchers find strange eclipse reading
"YOU WANT US BACK IN THE STONE AGE!!!?!!!!?!"
"You are tring to take all our money and give it to Africa!!!!!!"
"You're trying to stop Africa becoming wealthy!!!!" (see how well your "ideas" mesh here...?)
"This is a left wing scam to create a NEW WORLD ORDER!!!!"
and so on and so forth, interminably and incessantly without any addition of the higher functions of a human brain.
You do not. Dare not. Care not.
And that the denier "models" are ignored when they fail their predictions, as if they never existed. Meanwhile Hansen's 1988 paper using an early 80s model was almost spot on in its predictions for the succeeding 20 odd years: if the model gave a climate sensitivity of 3.4C per doubling CO2e and the actual record over that time gave a climate sensitivity of 3.2C per doubling.
Pretty damn accurate.
Now, tell me ANY denier prediction that EVER came true. There isn't one.
Yet somehow you pretend that AGW is falsified if you have heard that the models failed form denier blogrolls (never having looked yourself) and that the opponents of it are correct, despite every single prediction having failed (which will never be reported on those denier blogrolls you frequent).
Well, this is certainly news.
So it would be incorrect to claim it is growing because you have just turned that claim into nonsense. No different than saying "the sun is rising" during the morning. What does the growth say about, say, climate? Well you have to look at where it has been historically. Which is a lot bigger. Denier idiots like yourself don't know or care, however.
Al said that all the poles would be melted and that we'd all be underwater by now! Glub Glub. What climate truth has he gotten right? Zzzzzip! So they were all lies then? Yep.
Here's a video from last year talking about what fraud NASA and NOAA do on the poles. So it's no surprise except to the self-proclaimed smart people here on Slashdot.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fK03WG4t30U
Expect more fake narrative, tho, because some people just want to believe in their fake climate religion!
About the same rate? OK, so what WAS the rate of replenishment? TFA never bothers to say. Why is our time being wasted with this zero-information tripe?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Nobody is angry, it's just that claims that are factually incorrect are not something to be promoted. Unless you're an idealogue and need that fake narrative pushed. Are you an idealogue, or do you just follow denier blogrolls?
We don't look only for extreme hot measurements, nor do we disregard extreme cold ones, only deniers ignore weather that does not fit their presumptions. This year was warmer than average. Even in the USA where it was colder than for many years, it was still warmer several years ago.
Not merely nothingburger, IT DOES NOT EXIST. Data is not corrupt, BEST proved that.
Denier idiots all say he said that, but nothing of the sort happened.
Associated Press, 1989:
Title : "U.N. Predicts Disaster if Global Warming Not Checked"
- "A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000."
- "The most conservative scientific estimate that the Earth’s temperature will rise 1 to 7 degrees in the next 30 years, said Brown."
- "He said even the most conservative scientists already tell us there’s nothing we can do now to stop a ... change of about 3 degrees."
https://www.apnews.com/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0?fbclid=IwAR3crWlTmpR7EM5HVMq1u2a5grpjGjBenYYA0gy9g6SOpA7riAFnxwoYj8I
It's now been 30 yrs and NASA says the temp has only increased like .8 degrees.
Must! Save! The! Planet!
How is your home powered? How do you get to work? Do you use anything synthetic? How about that computer you are using right now? Where do you get your food? How is it brought to your town? Compost yourself please, its the only way.
All the GCMs that include ice dynamics for the poles do it and have done it. GISS. Go look at the website. Ice increases due to several things, such as breakup for sea ice, snow increase and even melting (seen butter melt?). They all show that the ice will wax and wane. Every. Single One. Go to the GISS page and look.
Oh, and since you want to be an ignorant asshole about it, how about you proving the claim that NO model predicts it happening. Every single one you'll need to post and every single model run. Otherwise the claim fails to a black swan fallacy, shithead.
The claim was made out of the arsehole since that is where the head of deniers resides permanently. It was claimed merely out of belief that it must be so because the faith requires that the AGW science be utterly wrong, otherwise the faith in the capitalist system will be damaged, and that is an anathema to fuckwits like you.
1988 James Hansen New York will be Under Water in 20-30 years
https://www.salon.com/2001/10/...
1989 UN we have 12 years to save the planet
https://www.apnews.com/bd45c37...
1989 New York Times NOAA (No warming trend over the past 100 years )
https://www.nytimes.com/1989/0...
2000 Snowfalls are a thing of the past
https://wattsupwiththat.com/wp...
2005 UN we will have 50 million climate refugees by 2010
http://www.spiegel.de/internat...
2009 James Hansen, Obama Has 4 years to save the planet
https://www.theguardian.com/en...
2018 UN Only 12 years left to save the planet
https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/07...
2019 Greenland Glacier Reverses Decline.
It was one paper in the 70s. One. Reported by Time, a magazine nothing to do with science. In the 70s there were over 900 papers on the climate of that current time, and of them only 7 were talking about MAYBE there was a cooling. Even that paper Time cited and you heard from denier blogrolls only, said that the current trend was cooling (due to sulphates, atmospheric pollution from industry), but that there was also warming from CO2, and the paper said that they did not know which would win out in the end.
So to claim you were "taught" about global cooling is just complete and utter bullshit. You were taught about the ice ages, maybe only taught about ONE, but you were NOT taught about global cooling, you lying twat.
When science runs counter to their personal bullshit, they scream that it is a conspiracy. When science temporarily confirms their own bias, then they scream "I told you so!"
Honestly, we should probably force deniers and anti-science types onto a reservation. It's really for their own good.
All in good time. For now, having too much fun watching snowflakes melt.
Weird that global temps have coincidentally also gone down the last 2 years(fairly under reported oddly enough). Will be fun to see where we are at in another decade.
If there's one thing about fanatics, the vast majority are loathsome no matter what they are fanatical about. Fanatics and believers are the opposite of rational people. They make up their mind and then behave the exact same way. The problem with the "Don't bother me with anything that might show my beliefs are incorrect!" attitude is often even the *best* scientific beliefs have been wrong.
Worse, the tactics of fanatics are often harmful for actually dealing with the problems fanatics are fanatical about.
Here's a few examples:
Nukes are bad! Nuclear power is bad! NO MORE NUKES. So guess what? We end up using the old nuclear power plants for longer when provably safer ones are available. Net effect - LESS SAFETY!
Plastics bad, plastics bad - NO MORE PLASTICS! - So some try to ban all plastics, except there are some places where plastics make lots of sense. Net effect, plenty of people I know find the recycling rules confusing and don't recycle much at all. Here's a concrete example - Often the recycling number on plastics here in the U.S. are freaking tiny. They can be damn hard to read. Rather than screaming at people for not recycling, it would be way better to get companies to print the recycling number way bigger so it was easier to read!
Stop global warming! Ban fossil fuels! Won't happen anytime soon. Interestingly enough, many of the climate change fanatics are the same fanatics who raved about nuclear power. So we ended up building MORE FOSSIL FUEL PLANTS! GOOD JOB!
In contrast, non-fanatics can have rational discussions and make real plans about ways to address things that have a way better chance of having a concrete effect on improving the situation. It's much easier to reduce greenhouse gases if there's already a pathway to a solution that the public has come to understand (and not fear) and supports.
There's a pile of things we could address if only those having tantrums would behave like rational adults. I'm strongly convinced that most people don't want to turn the planet into a total hell hole. The best way to get people to do a lot of something is to introduce it rationally.
Many articles speak of glaciers melting at bottom. Some have cavities over 100 meters wide due to ice melting & water out flows. No article I have read explains how warming above would cause melting below, nor mention effects of thermal conduction from hot planet core to surface.
Could movements of magma be causing glacier advances & retreats? Have changes of mountain interior temperatures been monitored and trended per glacier changes?
So there is that........
I want to see gamma rays, I want to hear X rays, I want to smell dark matter. Do you see the absurdity of what I am?
Must be a conspiracy on truth.
"that doesn't magically solve other environmental problems like air and water quality, pollution disposal, habitat loss, and species extinction": If we discover that global warming is predominately a natural thing, rather than a man-made thing, that could well *help* solve these other problems, in the following two ways.
First, if global warming is natural, then it might be a random (or even cyclic) effect. In either of these is true, then warming is not with us forever. Many would consider that to be good.
Second, if it's natural, then perhaps we should stop trying to solve it, because our solutions--which by hypothesis are not based on the real cause--won't help. And we can turn our time, effort and money to solving problems that we actually are causing, and which we can solve.
For example, suppose coral bleaching--to the extent that it's worse now than it once was--might be due to any number of other human causes: over fishing, pollution from land sources, pollution from ships and boats, damage by tourists (touching coral, using harmful sun screen, dragging anchors), and so forth.
Similarly for habitat loss, which IMHO surely has much more to do with farming, logging, mining etc. than with warming. All these are things that we can (if we have the will, and if all our effort isn't going to combating something else) fix.
My sense is that there has been a huge amount of progress in the last half century (yes, I'm older than that) in addressing pollution: air pollution from automobiles (leaving out VW-gate...), air pollution from steel mills, water pollution in the Great Lakes (I grew up near Lake Michigan), and in many other areas. We can continue to work on eliminating such sources of pollution, or we can try to address global warming; we'll have less success if we try to do both. (You'll notice I'm not treating carbon dioxide as a pollutant.)
Consensus is not science. Science is never settled.
On the other hand, it's pretty well accepted that the Earth goes around the Sun now.
And it's unlikely to need revisiting.
Similarly, we know that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and so that increasing the concentration of it will increase the greenhouse effect.
It's not rocket science. The problem is only that the fossil fuel industry has put a lot of PR money into establishing misinformation about this.
Maybe people who are concerned about the climate changing shouldn't have used glaciers shrinking as an example of climate change. Now, morons can easily shoot down claims of climate change.
People on both sides are too stupid to tolerate. *sigh*
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
Quick! Bring out the flame throwers!
We have to maintain our funding stream!