Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Glacier melted long before climate change


  • Please log in to reply
53 replies to this topic

#1    UM-Bot

UM-Bot

    News, media and articles

  • 6,196 posts
  • Joined:21 Mar 2001
  • Gender:Male

  • Beep Boop

Posted 23 February 2014 - 11:00 AM

Scientists have argued that the Pine Island Glacier was melting just as quickly over 8,000 years ago.

Quote

The glacier has long been considered to be the perfect example of how carbon emissions have been affecting the environment, but now experts at the British Antarctic Survey have revealed that the glacier had been melting at a similar rate several thousand years ago, long before mankind had been capable of having any impact on the world's climate.

Read More: http://www.unexplain...-climate-change

This is an official comment thread for a main site news story, article or video.
Please keep comments civil and on topic.
Thank you.

#2    Leonardo

Leonardo

    Awake

  • Member
  • 15,477 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

  • Hell is a guilty conscience

Posted 23 February 2014 - 12:07 PM

The article exposes one of the misunderstandings of the human impact on climate change. There is no argument in the scientific community that the Earth's climate has natural fluctuations according to various cycles, and that previous eras were warmer globally than the current global temperature. That new mechanisms for some phenomena - such as rate of ice sheet/glacier melting - are also being discovered does not mitigate this.

What the scientific community is trying to ascertain is how much impact the 'human-factor' has on the rate of the current warming trend - not that it is responsible for all of it - and whether it will influence this trend resulting in an extreme climate event (warming or cooling), unlike the Holocene warming. That [we are responsible for all of it] is the misconception articles such as the one in the OP promote.

Edited by Leonardo, 23 February 2014 - 12:08 PM.

In the book of life, the answers aren't in the back. - Charlie Brown

"It is a profound and necessary truth that the deep things in science are not found because they are useful; they are found because it was possible to find them."  - J. Robert Oppenheimer; Scientific Director; The Manhattan Project

"talking bull**** is not a victimless crime" - Marina Hyde, author.

#3    danielost

danielost

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 29,994 posts
  • Joined:26 Nov 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:the only known inhabited planet in the universe

Posted 23 February 2014 - 12:52 PM

My guess about ten percent.  No where high enough to affect it by cutting pollution.  This cutting pollution has other benefits, like breathing.

I am a Mormon.  If I don't use Mormons believe, those my beliefs only.
I do not go to church haven't for thirty years.
There are other Mormons on this site. So if I have misspoken about the beliefs. I welcome their input.
I am not perfect and never will be. I do strive to be true to myself. I do my best to stay true to the Mormon faith. Thanks for caring and if you don't peace be with you.

#4    Doug1o29

Doug1o29

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,382 posts
  • Joined:01 Aug 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:oklahoma

Posted 23 February 2014 - 02:44 PM

In case nobody noticed:  the previous melting occurred 8000 years ago - during the Altithermal warm period.  Do you think ice might melt during a warm period?  Duh!
This study found exactly what we would expect them to find.
Doug

If I have seen farther than other men, it is because I stood on the shoulders of giants. --Bernard de Chartres
The beginning of knowledge is the realization that one doesn't and cannot know everything.
Science is the father of knowledge, but opinion breeds ignorance. --Hippocrates
Ignorance is not an opinion. --Adam Scott

#5    danielost

danielost

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 29,994 posts
  • Joined:26 Nov 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:the only known inhabited planet in the universe

Posted 23 February 2014 - 03:37 PM

It still proves that climate change happens without our help. What ever excuse you want to use.

I am a Mormon.  If I don't use Mormons believe, those my beliefs only.
I do not go to church haven't for thirty years.
There are other Mormons on this site. So if I have misspoken about the beliefs. I welcome their input.
I am not perfect and never will be. I do strive to be true to myself. I do my best to stay true to the Mormon faith. Thanks for caring and if you don't peace be with you.

#6    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,440 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 23 February 2014 - 03:39 PM

View Postdanielost, on 23 February 2014 - 03:37 PM, said:

It still proves that climate change happens without our help. What ever excuse you want to use.
Nice of you to state the obvious - now what exactly was your point regarding current climate change ?

Br Cornelius

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#7    danielost

danielost

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 29,994 posts
  • Joined:26 Nov 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:the only known inhabited planet in the universe

Posted 23 February 2014 - 03:43 PM

That we have little to do with it.

I am a Mormon.  If I don't use Mormons believe, those my beliefs only.
I do not go to church haven't for thirty years.
There are other Mormons on this site. So if I have misspoken about the beliefs. I welcome their input.
I am not perfect and never will be. I do strive to be true to myself. I do my best to stay true to the Mormon faith. Thanks for caring and if you don't peace be with you.

#8    qxcontinuum

qxcontinuum

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,624 posts
  • Joined:28 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:in between

  • The age of stupid is upon us. Scientific conclusions are drawn from missing data, resuming to suppositions and guessing.

Posted 23 February 2014 - 03:52 PM

Remember even back a few million years ago the entire planet including poles were all having a tropical climate. I find this astonishing and not entirely credible facts but is what science says.


#9    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,440 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 23 February 2014 - 03:57 PM

View Postdanielost, on 23 February 2014 - 03:43 PM, said:

That we have little to do with it.
An opinion for which you have no evidence.
Opinions are worth nothing if devoid of evidence.

Br Cornelius

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#10    Doug1o29

Doug1o29

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,382 posts
  • Joined:01 Aug 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:oklahoma

Posted 23 February 2014 - 05:05 PM

View Postdanielost, on 23 February 2014 - 03:43 PM, said:

That we have little to do with it.
Perhaps the reason that climate change is lost on the deniers is that it is a highly statistical discipline.  People aren't impressed by and don't understand averages, non-linear regression and other commonly-used tools of climate study.  Thus, no amount of throwing data at them is going to convince them.  Am I right, Daniel?

I use statistical models to ask "what if" questions of my tree ring data.  In effect, I talk to it.  First model how CO2 and temperature are affecting tree growth.  Then eliminate the temperature term, in effect asking the data:  what if CO2 increased, but temperature didn't?  Then switch with the CO2 term:  what if temperature rose but CO2 didn't?  Then eliminate both of them:  what if neither temperature nor CO2 increased?  Multiply one by the other to create a new term:  what if changes in one are affecting the other?  The data will tell you.  The process is called "partial analysis of variance" because you are separating the variability within the data into its component "parts."  The entire process has the "feel" of holding a conversation with your data.

My data is saying that CO2 is having a major effect, larger than temperature.  Now:  what is causing the observed increase in CO2?  Find that and you've found the cause of global warming.  And we have found it - human activities, mainly burning of fossil fuels, destruction of forests and land clearing for agriculture and throw in a little methane from thawing permafrost and undersea deposits.  Those have been quantified.  There is more than twice as much being released by these activities as is accumulating in the atmosphere.


The bottom line here is that what is going to happen is going to happen, whether deniers like it or not.  You can't shout it away; you can't argue that it isn't happening, especially when you have no data to argue with.  And that's the deniers' big problem:  they have nothing to back up their side of the argument.

At this point, the Arctic Ocean is going to melt off and we can't stop it.  It will be substantially ice-free by 2040.  We are already seeing the increased snowfall and an increase in storm severity that that is expected to produce.  Climate change is already here.  And there's more to come.
Doug

If I have seen farther than other men, it is because I stood on the shoulders of giants. --Bernard de Chartres
The beginning of knowledge is the realization that one doesn't and cannot know everything.
Science is the father of knowledge, but opinion breeds ignorance. --Hippocrates
Ignorance is not an opinion. --Adam Scott

#11    Leonardo

Leonardo

    Awake

  • Member
  • 15,477 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

  • Hell is a guilty conscience

Posted 23 February 2014 - 06:03 PM

View Postdanielost, on 23 February 2014 - 03:43 PM, said:

That we have little to do with it.

Well, to determine that you'd have to show that the current warming trend fits in with a natural cycle indicated by past warming events. It's no good simply knowing that natural warming events/cycles happen, and then passing off the current warming as "part of a natural cycle" - you have to show it fits with a natural cycle.

And not only that, you'd have to show the rate of warming is within the natural variance of those cycles.

Essentially, the AGW sceptics have the ability to show the current warming is entirely natural. So why haven't they?

Why is all the data collected to date suggestive that the current warming is not entirely natural, and does not fit into a natural cycle of warming/cooling?

Edited by Leonardo, 23 February 2014 - 06:04 PM.

In the book of life, the answers aren't in the back. - Charlie Brown

"It is a profound and necessary truth that the deep things in science are not found because they are useful; they are found because it was possible to find them."  - J. Robert Oppenheimer; Scientific Director; The Manhattan Project

"talking bull**** is not a victimless crime" - Marina Hyde, author.

#12    danielost

danielost

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 29,994 posts
  • Joined:26 Nov 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:the only known inhabited planet in the universe

Posted 23 February 2014 - 08:01 PM

That is what the op and the two temp. Reports indicate.  You know the two reports that said there was no warming over last fifteen or twenty years depending on the report.

We are still warming up from the last ice age.

I am a Mormon.  If I don't use Mormons believe, those my beliefs only.
I do not go to church haven't for thirty years.
There are other Mormons on this site. So if I have misspoken about the beliefs. I welcome their input.
I am not perfect and never will be. I do strive to be true to myself. I do my best to stay true to the Mormon faith. Thanks for caring and if you don't peace be with you.

#13    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,440 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 23 February 2014 - 08:42 PM

View Postdanielost, on 23 February 2014 - 08:01 PM, said:

That is what the op and the two temp. Reports indicate.  You know the two reports that said there was no warming over last fifteen or twenty years depending on the report.

We are still warming up from the last ice age.
We stopped warming from the last ice age about 8 thousand years ago. The trend since then has been consistently down with a bit of variability. These are basic facts daniel.
Which specific reports say there has been no warming for 15 years ? There has been warming over the last 15 years and it can be detected in the surface temperature record, the ocean heat content record and in the net energy balance at the top of the atmosphere which has been consistently indicating more energy is arriving than is leaving the planet. On top of that the 4 warmest years in the instrumental record have occurred since the supposed pause began in 1998 (a particularly anomalously warm year - which is coincidently the preferred start date for the skeptics pause calculations).

As Leonardo so eloquently put it, if it is natural warming what is the specific natural cycle which is driving it and how does it account for all of the observed warming. No hand waving here - be specific about what you believe is the driver of the warming and quantify its magnitude.

Br Cornelius

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#14    Leonardo

Leonardo

    Awake

  • Member
  • 15,477 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

  • Hell is a guilty conscience

Posted 23 February 2014 - 08:46 PM

View Postdanielost, on 23 February 2014 - 08:01 PM, said:

That is what the op and the two temp. Reports indicate.  You know the two reports that said there was no warming over last fifteen or twenty years depending on the report.

We are still warming up from the last ice age.

We are in an ice age, and have been for the past 2 1/2 million years. During that time, there have been several 'interglacials' (periods of warming) and glacials (periods of cooling.) What you refer to as the "ice age" is only the last period of cooling, which ended approx 12,000 years ago.

We should have already passed the peak of the latest interglacial, and the global temperature should be on its way down - if we are to presume the ice age is still in effect - but we are not. The current 'interglacial peak' has lasted much longer than previous peaks and global temperatures are still rising. Now, there could be a natural explanation for that - and could be that the actual ice age (the Pliocene-Quaternary glaciation) is ending - but, if so, it would be the shortest major ice age ever in known geological history. Of the 5 known major ice ages, the shortest duration was on the order of 40 million years for the Andean-Saharan glaciation.

So, if we exclude that natural explanation for the current extended warming, we are left with the explanation that this extension is partly a result of unnatural (i.e. anthropogenic) influences.

Even if you decide to conclude this warming is still part of some undiscovered natural cycle there is still this to consider:

If that is correct and we bite the bullet, sacrifice some economic growth to put into effect 'green technologies' and it therefore has no effect, all we will have lost is some economic growth. Because we could not have impacted the warming in any case.

But, if AGW is a factor and we ignore it, refuse to act, we will at the very least accelerate the loss of significant areas of productive land and be severely affecting the growth of global civilisation.

If we act, we won't lose anything we wouldn't have lost anyway. If we refuse to act, we might lose a lot which we may yet save.

What is the best choice?

Edited by Leonardo, 23 February 2014 - 08:59 PM.

In the book of life, the answers aren't in the back. - Charlie Brown

"It is a profound and necessary truth that the deep things in science are not found because they are useful; they are found because it was possible to find them."  - J. Robert Oppenheimer; Scientific Director; The Manhattan Project

"talking bull**** is not a victimless crime" - Marina Hyde, author.

#15    Doug1o29

Doug1o29

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,382 posts
  • Joined:01 Aug 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:oklahoma

Posted 23 February 2014 - 10:41 PM

View Postdanielost, on 23 February 2014 - 08:01 PM, said:

We are still warming up from the last ice age.
Between about 8000 YBP and about 1907, the long-term temperature trend was DOWN.  The current excursion has only lasted 106 years.  So how do you explain a 7900 year decline in temps if "We are still warming up from the last ice age."
Doug

If I have seen farther than other men, it is because I stood on the shoulders of giants. --Bernard de Chartres
The beginning of knowledge is the realization that one doesn't and cannot know everything.
Science is the father of knowledge, but opinion breeds ignorance. --Hippocrates
Ignorance is not an opinion. --Adam Scott




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users