14 replies to this topic

[Still Waters]

www.dailymail.co.uk said:

An iceberg the size of Dorset has broken off from Antarctica and could disrupt weather patterns for years to come.

The iceberg, which measures 50 miles by 25 miles, snapped off the Mertz Glacier, a 100-mile long tongue of ice earlier this month.

It was dislodged by an older, 60-mile-long iceberg called B9B, which broke off the glacier in 1987.

The two icebergs, which have a combined weight of 1,000billion tons, are now floating 90 miles off Antarctica's northern coast.

Experts are now concerned that the iceberg - which contains enough fresh water to supply a fifth of the world's population for a year - could block the formation of cold, salty water, known as 'bottom water', which drives the ocean's circulation system.

Any changes to currents would affect weather patterns around the world. Britain would become far colder without the mild sea water brought from the south west by the North Atlantic drift.

Read more...

[stevoid2005]

Oh crap more snow lol hopefully not hey.

[danielost]

good thing we have global warming.  maybe the warming will counter the cold.

[J.B.]

It wouldn't. Most of the warming in the North comes from the South, actually. What they're worried about is the cutting off of the Atlantic Conveyor Belt.

[danielost]

J.B., on 02 March 2010 - 01:25 AM, said:

It wouldn't. Most of the warming in the North comes from the South, actually. What they're worried about is the cutting off of the Atlantic Conveyor Belt.

which if you read some of my posts on the subject i refer to the same problem, only at the gulf stream end of it.  but it doesnt matter where you cut the conveyor belt as long as it gets cut.  even if it is in the pacific.

Edited by danielost, 02 March 2010 - 01:33 AM.

[J.B.]

I recall those posts. Yes, cut off the conveyor and we get cold up here in the North.

[danielost]

what mattshark and others fail to realize or state is that during the last 10,000 years earths weather has been stable.  that doesnt mean it doesnt warm up or cool off.  it just means that it stays with in a certain range.  which is supposed to have helped our civ. to be established and grow.

[J.B.]

They're not really ignoring the fact, they're saying that we're now "destabilizing" the climate and forcing it beyond that range. The only thing they're uncertain of is how fast the forcing will go.

[danielost]

J.B., on 02 March 2010 - 06:12 PM, said:

They're not really ignoring the fact, they're saying that we're now "destabilizing" the climate and forcing it beyond that range. The only thing they're uncertain of is how fast the forcing will go.

but they cant produce any evidence of it.  and they tell us that the climate history doesnt count.

[Mattshark]

danielost, on 03 March 2010 - 04:32 PM, said:

but they cant produce any evidence of it.  and they tell us that the climate history doesnt count.

That is totally untrue, just because you ignore it Daniel, doesn't mean it isn't there.

[J.B.]

Papers /are/ evidence, unless you can absolutely disprove every claim in them.

[danielost]

Mattshark, on 03 March 2010 - 04:46 PM, said:

That is totally untrue, just because you ignore it Daniel, doesn't mean it isn't there.

no sir i didnot ignore your evidence in fact i used it against you. at which point you stated that it didnt count because history of climate change didnt count.

[J.B.]

The history of climate change most certainly /does/ count. The only reason we even have a suitable climate at all is because early life forms transformed the atmosphere from something that would kill us all instantly into what we know today, over millions of years. What we're facing now does have precedent, even up to the possibility of us as living organisms completely overthrowing the original system.

[DONTEATUS]

Has anyone thought of putting an Margarita machine on that Ice berg? It would make quite the Destination Trip and Party Place?

[Mattshark]

danielost, on 04 March 2010 - 12:46 AM, said:

no sir i didnot ignore your evidence in fact i used it against you. at which point you stated that it didnt count because history of climate change didnt count.

Did I now? Please evidence this or retract it, again.......

Edited by Mattshark, 04 March 2010 - 03:08 PM.