Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The U.S. has caused more global warming than any other country. Here’s how the Earth will..
WaPo ^ | Jan. 22, 2015 | Chris Mooney

Posted on 01/24/2015 7:07:43 AM PST by PROCON

The U.S. has caused more global warming than any other country. Here’s how the Earth will get its revenge.

Last year, we learned what is probably the worst global warming news yet — that we may have irrevocably destabilized the massive ice sheet of West Antarctica, which contains the equivalent of nearly 11 feet of sea level rise. The rate of West Antarctic ice loss has been ominously increasing, and there are fears that if too much goes, the slow and long-term process of ice sheet disintegration could accelerate.

Humans have a hard time conceiving of the incredible scale of an ice sheet, so the consequences of such a change can be lost upon us. But in a new paper in the Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers — Forensic Engineering, researchers Ted Scambos of the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colo., and John Abraham of the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minn. – summarize what we now know about West Antarctica. That includes a finding that may serve as a wake-up call for Americans in particular.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS: climate; climatechange; climatedisruption; globalwarming; globalwarminghoax; manbearpig; scam; weather
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-119 next last
To: CheneyClone
The lunacy (L) is proportional to the desperation (D) in a non-linear fashion. In mathematical terms L = D**2

Good name for a Global Warming Rock Group:

Desperation Squared

81 posted on 01/24/2015 8:38:21 AM PST by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa

My Sig says it all


82 posted on 01/24/2015 8:41:14 AM PST by freedumb2003 (AGW: Settled Science? If so, there would only be one model and it would agree with measurements)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: EQAndyBuzz

In the US the blue areas are the coasts, so not my problem.


83 posted on 01/24/2015 8:42:05 AM PST by Vince Ferrer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: sphinx

The only answer is global wealth redistribution - equal poverty for all (except for Algore and his billionaire pals!)


84 posted on 01/24/2015 8:52:00 AM PST by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

Wood pulp/paper manufacturing is among the dirtiest industries in the world and one of the largest energy users. It’s well past time for a serious surcharge on heavy users of the dirtiest of paper products - newsprint. Users should be responsible for the air and water contaminants released in the production of newsprint, as well as being responsible for the waste created in disposing of the final product. It’s not hyperbole to notice that the world’s natural resources would benefit from eliminating the production of newsprint.

I wonder what Chris Mooney has to say about it.


85 posted on 01/24/2015 8:53:10 AM PST by Sgt_Schultze (A half-truth is a complete lie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry

That’s the way it happens, the ground settles giving the illusion the sea is rising ....


86 posted on 01/24/2015 9:02:40 AM PST by SkyDancer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

China pumps out far more crap than anyone else.
I guess in liberal global warming minds that all magically becomes rainbows and smurf droppings.


87 posted on 01/24/2015 9:08:20 AM PST by Darksheare (Those who support liberal "Republicans" summarily support every action by same.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sirius Lee

Bookmarking post#30, Global Warming predictions they’d rather you forget about


88 posted on 01/24/2015 9:21:31 AM PST by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: KC_Lion
100%...

89 posted on 01/24/2015 9:28:46 AM PST by Chode (Stand UP and Be Counted, or line up and be numbered - *DTOM* -w- NO Pity for the LAZY - 86-44)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: PROCON
Humans have a hard time conceiving of the incredible scale of an ice sheet, so the consequences of such a change can be lost upon us.

I think Mr. Mooney has a hard time conceiving of the incredible scale of how big the oceans are.

Ocean surface area: ~360M sq km.
Antarctica surface area: ~13M sq km (doubles in winter with sea ice added)

So if we take 26 (assuming biggest spread of ice), divide by 360, you get .0722. If the continent has 11 feet of sea level rise, that means there's 11 / .0722 feet of ice there. 152 feet. But, the west is only about 1/3 of Antarctica, so multiply that by 3. 450 feet of ice, above sea level, in winter with ice at it's max width/length. However, looking at some other studies, the west ice is only about 8.5% of Antarctic ice. So our thickness is now almost 12 times our number, not 3. ~1800 feet deep.

Now we have to assume that this warming is only affecting the ice above sea level, and the west shelf. You have to melt 1800 feet of ice to get that kind of rise in sea levels. But wait. Ice loses about 9% of it's volume when it melts, so let's multiply that number by 1.09. We're up to 1980+ feet. I know the ice is thick, and mountainous in areas, but that's a huge block of ice (avg thickness, above sea level) to have that much ice ready to melt and flood the world.

So, let's figure about sub-sea level ice. This stuff actually lowers the ocean level when it melts. So, for every unit of volume you lose here, you have to have 9% additional ice melting above sea level to just maintain ocean levels.

* Yes, I know these numbers are nowhere near exact, but it gives a small general representation of how much ice is needed to actually raise the oceans by the amount this article claims, all other things being ignored. I probably put more thought into this than the author put into his numbers.

Hey, here's a quick article I found that goes a bit more into numbers than me: WAIS not Collapsing..
90 posted on 01/24/2015 9:48:09 AM PST by Svartalfiar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

Don’t you even dare to bring science into this discussion. It’s an emotional issue that needs to be solved! ;-)


91 posted on 01/24/2015 9:52:35 AM PST by SgtHooper (Anyone who remembers the 60's, wasn't there!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Da Coyote
Please leave science to grownups (which apparently excludes the vast majority of those government grant seeking “climate researchers”.

'Way back in my grad school days, the typical reference to "those government grant seeking" researchers (of all types, not just the ecofreaks) was simply to call them Grant Whores.

Walk through their office door, plop down a fat wad of bills, tell 'em what the "study" should conclude, leave for a two-martini lunch and they'd have a carefully printed and bound bale of BS ready to take on your return flight. Then, they would rush out to "publish" this drivel (usually in a journal-of-something-or-other that was operated by some ex-GH's who had decided to diversify) or maybe even get high enough in the Con to have WaPo print the mess as has occurred here.

They can call it whatever they want, but it's not science, it's not scholarly and it's not even particularly amusing any more. (The lack of amusement is mine, mostly because my degrees just happen to have come from study at the University of Colorado, Boulder.)

AGW (or any alias you happen to like) is a confidence game.

Only difference between these con artists and the one downtown with the "genuine" Rolex watch for sale is that the phoney Rolex might cost you a hundred bucks and these AGW hustlers want trillions.

...plus total control over every person on the planet, if they can push the con that far.

JMHO, it's time to stop laughing at these characters and begin prosecuting them as the frauds they are.

...or maybe just cut to the chase and organize a few baths in tar & feathers, followed by a ride on a rail outta here.

92 posted on 01/24/2015 9:56:49 AM PST by Unrepentant VN Vet (Needs but one foe to breed a war, and those who have not swords can still die upon them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

Mooney is loony. Plus being stupid and incompetent.


93 posted on 01/24/2015 10:09:20 AM PST by mulligan (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON
To: Chris Mooney,

Please Stop photo funny_zps794da6ab.jpg

94 posted on 01/24/2015 10:37:13 AM PST by Col Freeper (FR: A smorgasbord of Conservative Mindfood - dig in and enjoy it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Delta 21
The earth's equipotential surface is not spherical, or even ellipsoidal, near sea level. The picture below depicts the displacement of "sea level" from the best fit ellipsoid in meters. If you don't "agree" with this depiction, you are free to turn in your GPS receiver.

The problem with the West Antarctic ice sheet is its instability. The mass of the ice sheet depresses the mantel below it, so that the bottom is below sea level. As it melts, the mantel will rise, causing the bulk of sheet to be above sea level and slide into the ocean, raising sea level about 10 feet over the next 200-1000 years.

95 posted on 01/24/2015 10:43:23 AM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets (This is known as "bad luck". - Robert A. Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

Since the average annual temp. of the Antarctic is around -45 F, there’s gonna have to be a heck of a lot of warming to melt all that ice.


96 posted on 01/24/2015 10:58:23 AM PST by Hot Tabasco (Man of "non-color" and proud of it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

It is times like these that remind me of that wonderful quote from yet another ‘climate expert’ Steven Schneider: “Each of us must decide between being effective, and being honest.”

If up until now we use /s to indicate sarcasm,  can we all now agree that /sc indicates scambo? 

It also reminds me of many of the socalled ‘experts’ on the IPCC who turn out to be economists...


97 posted on 01/24/2015 11:05:15 AM PST by Ronaldus Magnus III (Do, or do not, there is no try.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Unrepentant VN Vet

Both solutions cost too much... A simple hanging or burning at the stake are both lighter on the taxpayers wallet.


98 posted on 01/24/2015 11:29:53 AM PST by 2CAVTrooper (Scouts Out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: PROCON; All

See how “our guilt” works ! Our goverment’s MSM (ministry of socialist mendacity) feeds its favorite “newspaper of record” gossip collumnist some selective statistic finding which goes unchallanged. Which reports globull catasstrophy citing some obscure on the dole source. That gets confirmed by another on the dole academic. The cause is “our guilt”. And that gets picked up and distributed because It’s Our Fault.


99 posted on 01/24/2015 12:02:51 PM PST by mosesdapoet (Some of my best rebuttals are in FR's along with meaningless venting no one reads.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

The writer needs to do an on-site study of the South Antarctic ice sheet.


100 posted on 01/24/2015 12:05:29 PM PST by Chaguito
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-119 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson