Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
ExpandMyMind

World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown

83 posts in this topic

Antarctic is up to several km above the sea level. It is a vast continent, and most of the ice there is in constant movement, freezing at the polar area and then slowly sliding down into the ocean and forming icebergs. If it melts the sea level may change in dozens of metres.

so the land mass of antarctica is several km above sea level? i thought the land mass was mainly under sea level, under the ice, therefore most of the ice would already be part of the volume of the oceans.

i guess i must have gotten myself mixed up somewhere along the line. if so, apologies to siara and daniel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so the land mass of antarctica is several km above sea level? i thought the land mass was mainly under sea level, under the ice, therefore most of the ice would already be part of the volume of the oceans.

i guess i must have gotten myself mixed up somewhere along the line. if so, apologies to siara and daniel.

:lol: but the land mass under the sea level is usually called "sea bottom"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol: but the land mass under the sea level is usually called "sea bottom"

i was thinking of antarctica as britain was during the last ice age, with masses of ice weighing down the land mass that is now britain. i'm still not sure how the melting of ice which is largely already under water could add to the volume of the ocean.

but like i said before, i must be missing something really obvious. :wacko: lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i was thinking of antarctica as britain was during the last ice age, with masses of ice weighing down the land mass that is now britain. i'm still not sure how the melting of ice which is largely already under water could add to the volume of the ocean.

but like i said before, i must be missing something really obvious. :wacko: lol

This would clarify:

Terrain: about 98% thick continental ice sheet and 2% barren rock, with average elevations between 2,000 and 4,000 meters; mountain ranges up to nearly 5,000 meters; ice-free coastal areas include parts of southern Victoria Land, Wilkes Land, the Antarctic Peninsula area, and parts of Ross Island on McMurdo Sound; glaciers form ice shelves along about half of the coastline, and floating ice shelves constitute 11% of the area of the continent
http://www.indexmundi.com/antarctica/terrain.html

These 11% of floating ice shelves won't affect the sea level - but the rest is not in water, but above the ground. As soon as this ice is not immersed yet, it is not displacing water but if it even slides into the sea without melting, we would have a great deluge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that land would take thousands of years to rise and siara wasn't talking about the ice being under sea level, but the land mass of antarctica, which of course is under sea level.

antarctica is not anymore below sea lvl than greenland is. antarctica has mountians and valleys and rivers(ice) and even volcanos which seem to be waking up.

as far as the land rising. it will rise as fast as the ice on it melts. since it is the ice that is wieghing it down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glaciers melt at different rates depending on how sheltered they are. Also they take a long time to "react" to warmer conditions. Infact the estimates from the NSF are that it would take somewhere between 10,000 and 100,000 years for antarctica to respond to the global warming we are feeling now. Yet a small mountain glacier would feel the effects somewhere between 100-1,000 years.

Edited by Professor GlenBoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glacier scientist: I knew data hadn't been verified

The scientist behind the bogus claim in a Nobel Prize-winning UN report that Himalayan glaciers will have melted by 2035 last night admitted it was included purely to put political pressure on world leaders.

Dr Murari Lal also said he was well aware the statement, in the 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), did not rest on peer-reviewed scientific research.

In an interview with The Mail on Sunday, Dr Lal, the co-ordinating lead author of the report’s chapter on Asia, said: ‘It related to several countries in this region and their water sources. We thought that if we can highlight it, it will impact policy-makers and politicians and encourage them to take some concrete action.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1245636/Glacier-scientists-says-knew-data-verified.html#ixzz0dYCZk2K7

i wonder just how much junk science is in there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not this drastically they haven't.

Climate can change quite drastically in a century on its own.

http://www.esd.ornl.gov/projects/qen/transit.html

All that without the help of humans. hmmmm.

Edit.

Some information on Antarctica.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antartica#Geography

And some information on the Himalayas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Himilayas

Edited by Tsukasa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Photoshop.

:lol:

Photoshop? Pfft...

...It's obviously a left wing conspiracy. They took flamethrowers up there, melted everything, just so they can take everybody's money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Climategate: The Wheels Come Off for the IPCC

Back in December 2009, Madhav Khandekar, in a guest posting on the blog of Dr. Roger Pielke, Sr., questioned the IPCC AR4 report’s conclusion that glaciers in the Himalayas — vital to the water supply of the whole Ganges Valley — would disappear by 2035. (This was first reported by PJM on December 1.) The problem was that this really couldn’t be verified in the “peer-reviewed” literature. In fact, as it was investigated, it looked more and more suspicious.

Bad enough.What had been revealed was that the IPCC had put this inflammatory (and physically impossible) date into the IPCC report, even though it hadn’t been peer-reviewed and couldn’t actually be sourced to anything more than an offhand remark in a casual phone interview.

The IPCC’s problem is that it wasn’t the last issue. One of the effects of the Climategate files has been that a lot of complaints that had been dismissed by the scientific world and the world at large as unbelievable and perhaps even a little paranoid turned out to be true. Some of those complaints had to be taken seriously, and the IPCC’s reports had to be re-evaluated.

One question was whether anthropogenic global warming (AGW) was causing more violent storms and more storm damage. This had been received wisdom in the AR4 report; Time connected AGW to the damage from Katrina in 2005, and similar things were reported throughout the mainstream media.

Only it turns out that was no better sourced than “2035″ had been. In fact, as Dr. Roger Pielke, Jr. has documented extensively, the original AR3 and AR4 reports also depended on non-peer-reviewed material to infer that storms were stronger and causing more damage than in the past, thanks in large part to AGW. In fact, as Roger Pielke, Jr. puts it, the treatment of the effect of AGW on storm damage reveals:

[T]he systematic misrepresentation of the science of disasters and climate change in major science assessments. … [T]here is a pattern of behavior taking place in this community that should be of concern to anyone who cares about the integrity of science, regardless of their position on climate policies and politics.

Full article

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[T]he systematic misrepresentation of the science of disasters and climate change in major science assessments. … [T]here is a pattern of behavior taking place in this community that should be of concern to anyone who cares about the integrity of science, regardless of their position on climate policies and politics.

Iams, I was recently quoting here chapters 46-48 of Nietzsche's Antichrist, in which he blames the above on Christianity, proving that the Christian ideology encourages destruction of the historically bred elites and brings to power mediocrity, which originates from the former peasants, slaves and serfs and has no inbuilt necessity to follow pride, honor and decency. Scientists are supposed to be the wisest people of society, modern priests, carriers of Knowledge - but when a former peasant although smart is appointed to be such priest, he simply continues doing what his ancestors were doing for centuries - to serve to those with political power. In some sense we reap what we were sowing :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iams, I was recently quoting here chapters 46-48 of Nietzsche's Antichrist, in which he blames the above on Christianity, proving that the Christian ideology encourages destruction of the historically bred elites and brings to power mediocrity, which originates from the former peasants, slaves and serfs and has no inbuilt necessity to follow pride, honor and decency. Scientists are supposed to be the wisest people of society, modern priests, carriers of Knowledge - but when a former peasant although smart is appointed to be such priest, he simply continues doing what his ancestors were doing for centuries - to serve to those with political power. In some sense we reap what we were sowing :)

:w00t: This is rich! So, the problems with bad science (science being manipulated to yield pre-conceived results) is Christianity?

I would say the problem with bad science is the same problem with all human endeavors: self-centered, self-serving humans. God's grace addresses this problem, it doesn't cause it.

Edited by IamsSon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:w00t: This is rich! So, the problems with bad science is Christianity?

I would say the problem with bad science is the same problem with all human endeavors: self-centered, self-serving humans. God's grace addresses this problem, it doesn't cause it.

At least your church cannot be openly blamed for it, as Nietzsche was saying this already 130 years ago... But it is true that the bar was severely lowered in tertiary education, and many pseudo-scientists originated from this lowering, which have to follow politically-correct ways, being unsure in own scientific capacity. This makes the remaining enthusiasts to be in minority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least your church cannot be openly blamed for it, as Nietzsche was saying this already 130 years ago... But it is true that the bar was severely lowered in tertiary education, and many pseudo-scientists originated from this lowering, which have to follow politically-correct ways, being unsure in own scientific capacity. This makes the remaining enthusiasts to be in minority.

The bar being lowered, and self-deluded, self-centered, self-serving people manipulating science to further their own agendas are evidence that the message of the Bible is true, not that Christianity leads to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bar being lowered, and self-deluded, self-centered, self-serving people manipulating science to further their own agendas are evidence that the message of the Bible is true, not that Christianity leads to this.

What happens cannot stop Science, it simply makes it less efficient. I do not feel advanced enough to establish is the Bible true or not, I know I do not use it in my daily life as there is no need in it. Islam also leads to this, but it is more elitistic than Christianity, and Nietzsche liked it for this. I suggest you to read the book itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What happens cannot stop Science, it simply makes it less efficient. I do not feel advanced enough to establish is the Bible true or not, I know I do not use it in my daily life as there is no need in it. Islam also leads to this, but it is more elitistic than Christianity, and Nietzsche liked it for this. I suggest you to read the book itself.

Nice try, but no cigar. I did not say the manipulation of science in the AGW field would stop science, you're the one who tried to smear Christianity with the slime of this scandal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice try, but no cigar. I did not say the manipulation of science in the AGW field would stop science, you're the one who tried to smear Christianity with the slime of this scandal.

Christianity has no direct involvement! But it is surely responsible for the idea of equality of rights and the climax of this teaching (already stripped of God thing) is Anarchism and Communism. These two are also targeting to build God's Kingdom on earth. Read the book, you must be thrilled holding in the hands a book with such title :) It only takes no more than 2 hours to read it in full.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Christianity has no direct involvement! But it is surely responsible for the idea of equality of rights and the climax of this teaching (already stripped of God thing) is Anarchism and Communism. These two are also targeting to build God's Kingdom on earth. Read the book, you must be thrilled holding in the hands a book with such title :) It only takes no more than 2 hours to read it in full.

Oh, I believe that one of Christianity's lasting effects on Western civilization was the rise of the value of equality, that's not the issue I have with what yuo said. To say that this sense of equality is what led to the AGW fiasco is disingenuous. The scientists involved in this fiasco are not stupid or undereducated, they are simply self-interested people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aaand the hits just keep on comin'!

Glacier scientist: I knew data hadn't been verified

The scientist behind the bogus claim in a Nobel Prize-winning UN report that Himalayan glaciers will have melted by 2035 last night admitted it was included purely to put political pressure on world leaders.Dr Murari Lal also said he was well aware the statement, in the 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), did not rest on peer-reviewed scientific research.

In an interview with The Mail on Sunday, Dr Lal, the co-ordinating lead author of the report’s chapter on Asia, said: ‘It related to several countries in this region and their water sources. We thought that if we can highlight it, it will impact policy-makers and politicians and encourage them to take some concrete action.

‘It had importance for the region, so we thought we should put it in.’

Full article

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I believe that one of Christianity's lasting effects on Western civilization was the rise of the value of equality, that's not the issue I have with what yuo said. To say that this sense of equality is what led to the AGW fiasco is disingenuous. The scientists involved in this fiasco are not stupid or undereducated, they are simply self-interested people.

They are self-interested people BECAUSE they are not originating from the elite (which was destroyed under the influence of Christianity). Read the book! http://www.fns.org.uk/ac.htm

The poisonous doctrine, "equal rights for all," has been propagated as a Christian principle: out of the secret nooks and crannies of bad instinct Christianity has waged a deadly war upon all feelings of reverence and distance between man and man, which is to say, upon the first prerequisite to every step upward, to every development of civilization--out of the ressentiment of the masses it has forged its chief weapons against us, against everything noble, joyous and high spirited on earth, against our happiness on earth . . . To allow "immortality" to every Peter and Paul was the greatest, the most vicious outrage upon noble humanity ever perpetrated.--And let us not underestimate the fatal influence that Christianity has had, even upon politics! Nowadays no one has courage any more for special rights, for the right of dominion, for feelings of honourable pride in himself and his equals--for the pathos of distance. . . Our politics is sick with this lack of courage!--The aristocratic attitude of mind has been undermined by the lie of the equality of souls; and if belief in the "privileges of the majority" makes and will continue to make revolution--it is Christianity, let us not doubt, and Christian valuations, which convert every revolution into a carnival of blood and crime! Christianity is a revolt of all creatures that creep on the ground against everything that is lofty: the gospel of the "lowly" lowers . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are self-interested people BECAUSE they are not originating from the elite (which was destroyed under the influence of Christianity). Read the book! http://www.fns.org.uk/ac.htm

No, they are self-interested because they are human. Look around, you don't need a book to see that.

IPCC%20Scientist%20Fake%20Data%20Used%20To%20Put%20Pressure%20On%20World%20Leaders.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, they are self-interested because they are human. Look around, you don't need a book to see that.

IPCC%20Scientist%20Fake%20Data%20Used%20To%20Put%20Pressure%20On%20World%20Leaders.jpg

You probably do not know the others, it is not many of them, so this is not surprising. Some people would rather die starving than accept money for telling lies. This is the way they are brought up in a family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You probably do not know the others, it is not many of them, so this is not surprising. Some people would rather die starving than accept money for telling lies. This is the way they are brought up in a family.

I believe all humans are to some degree self-interested. Many do not exercise their self-interest in big ways, but we all do, and we certainly all think about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe all humans are to some degree self-interested. Many do not exercise their self-interest in big ways, but we all do, and we certainly all think about it.

It is hard for one person to speak for the others. Some people do not have principles, some do have them - so it is not the money only but their origins which are counted. After all this is based on self-respect, and the elite has it enhanced. In Victorian times they were saying "it takes at least 3 generations to produce a gentleman". People inherently poor are almost always pragmatic, principless, insensitive and cruel, as they first of all other things need MONEY. Christianity of the contrary teaches that wealthy people are spiritually inferior...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is hard for one person to speak for the others. Some people do not have principles, some do have them - so it is not the money only but their origins which are counted.

I did not mention money, I mentioned self-interest, self-centeredness and self-delusion.

After all this is based on self-respect, and the elite has it enhanced. In Victorian times they were saying "it takes at least 3 generations to produce a gentleman".

I disagree. It's not based on self-respect, it's based on self-centerdness.

People inherently poor are almost always pragmatic, principless, insensitive and cruel, as they first of all other things need MONEY. Christianity of the contrary teaches that wealthy people are spiritually inferior...

I disagree. Christianity teaches that all humans are self-centered, whether rich or poor. The rich are no less or no more spiritual, they may, however, worry less about their spiritual/eternal status because their terrestrial status is comfortable enough to lull them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.