• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Antarctica Conumdrum

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Paratus said:
The comments about the differences between laser altimetery and gravitational measurements come from Robin Bell at Columbia and Gavin Schmidt at NASA.

They suggest a potential area for further study which you yourself said should happen. So why are your panties in a bunch?
Click to expand...
Panties in a bunch? You challenged my point with a dubious source and I defended my point. Antarctica is not contributing to sea level rise as the scientific "consensus" previously believed...this is a myth.
 
JSt0rm said:
How about we just have a cleaner environment for all. I recently read a comment from someone on a news site that went something liek this:

"who cares about tigers? We have no use for them and they are dangerous. We do need wood though."


we are doomed.
Click to expand...

We are doomed when the idiots rights (politicians and CEO's) exceed the rights of others. When some are more equal than others, it leads to bad things.

As long as the guy saying, "who cares about tigers? We have no use for them and they are dangerous. We do need wood though", Is able to be held to equal standards as we hold others, we'll be fine. The idiots and corrupt don't win out in an equal and just system.

Main problem the USA, and other nations have, is problems with lack of equality and lack of truth. This allows deceptions and corruptions to breed and excel.


The Nasa study gives us more information, and surprising information, but what does it really mean? Complex system, what to fix, and how to fix it best. We know man contributes to global warming. The corruption and idiocy in America threatens to apply the wrong remedy (to many problems) if we don't have proper models to develop correct conclusions and solutions.
 
Last edited:
Paratus said:
The comments about the differences between laser altimetery and gravitational measurements come from Robin Bell at Columbia and Gavin Schmidt at NASA.

They suggest a potential area for further study which you yourself said should happen. So why are your panties in a bunch?
Click to expand...

It's not worth trying to be logical sometimes.

Let em rage.
 
K7SN said:
That is just one of the Earth self-correcting mechanisms that are understudied when we concentrate so much on the current warm phase of Climate Change and not the relative significance of anthropogenic inducted climate change factors. I was having fun and learning while debating with you in a previous thread; want to challenge my conclusion and continue in our polite debate.
Click to expand...

The earths climate isn't self correcting at least not in a way that is optimized for our existence, nor to our forcings.

Some natural forcings increase warming feedback and other increase cooling feedback. In this case the sealevel feedback is going to lose per the author and probably already has according to other climate scientists.



Doc Savage Fan said:
The statement from the lead author of the study carries zero weight with him...he apparently prefers to get his climate science "facts" from an astronomer who blogs for Slate.
Click to expand...

As I already said, the study will be incorporated into the body of work on climate change. Hardly me saying it carries 0 weight. Your comment that this blows open some myths carries zero weight with me. If it somehow showed conclusively the earth was cooling then I would agree. It however shows the same thing all the other studies have shown. Increasing rate of ice loss from Antartica. Or if you want to be pedantic a decreasing rate of total ice increase soon to be a negative rate of ice increase. Other reputable scientists including NASA say this is probably already the case.


buckshot24 said:
We can have a cleaner environment to go visit the millions who potentially will lose their lives by restricting the usage of fossil fuel energy.
Click to expand...

The solution as i see it and posted elsewhere on this site is to increase energy usage in the third world but decrease fossil fuel usage. Population growth goes negative at first world rates of energy usage. The costs of alternative energy has plummeted and even China is reducing coal consumption.
 
Last edited:
Paratus said:
The solution as i see it and posted elsewhere on this site is to increase energy usage in the third world but decrease fossil fuel usage. Population growth goes negative at first world rates of energy usage. The costs of alternative energy has plummeted and even China is reducing coal consumption.
Click to expand...
What is your source of energy then? People are dying today, in the third world, for lack of energy.
 
buckshot24 said:
What is your source of energy then? People are dying today, in the third world, for lack of energy.
Click to expand...

Short term small Natural Gas turbines in place of coal then phase out.
Short to long term Solar and Wind
Medium to long term modular nuclear

Most of the third world doesn't currently have the infrastructure for large fossil fuel plants anyway.
 
Paratus said:
Short term small Natural Gas turbines in place of coal then phase out.
Short to long term Solar and Wind
Medium to long term modular nuclear

Most of the third world doesn't currently have the infrastructure for large fossil fuel plants anyway.
Click to expand...
Does natural gas produce less CO2? And do you think less people have access to cheap energy because of this global warming scare?
 
Attic said:
We are doomed when the idiots rights (politicians and CEO's) exceed the rights of others. When some are more equal than others, it leads to bad things.

As long as the guy saying, "who cares about tigers? We have no use for them and they are dangerous. We do need wood though", Is able to be held to equal standards as we hold others, we'll be fine. The idiots and corrupt don't win out in an equal and just system.

Main problem the USA, and other nations have, is problems with lack of equality and lack of truth. This allows deceptions and corruptions to breed and excel.


The Nasa study gives us more information, and surprising information, but what does it really mean? Complex system, what to fix, and how to fix it best. We know man contributes to global warming. The corruption and idiocy in America threatens to apply the wrong remedy (to many problems) if we don't have proper models to develop correct conclusions and solutions.
Click to expand...


Im pretty sure if we wanted to really do something about it we should of done it in the 90's. in 2070 the tundra will start leaking methane and then its game over. I'm no scientist but I think they are saying this is happening.

The problem is the people who were able to do something in the 1990s dont care about 2070. People today in 2015 dont care about 2070. Your grand kids will give major fucks about 2070 though. Too bad for them.
 
what crazy is in 100 years historians will be reading these threads and its gonna make us look like collective baby idiots.

Except for me of course because they are reading this right now and shaking their head. 🙂
 
JEDIYoda said:
as opposed to your vested interest to not be wrong......
Click to expand...


My vested interest in following the science? I havent actually made any statements (except the thawing of the tundra by 2070 will release methane) so I dont feel I have any skin in the right wrong global warming game. Sorry.
 
buckshot24 said:
Does natural gas produce less CO2? And do you think less people have access to cheap energy because of this global warming scare?
Click to expand...

Per unit energy? Yes it does.
  • Coal 2.1 lbs of CO2 per kwh
  • Natural Gas 1.2 lbs CO2 per kwh

If we are taking cheap energy are you including the external costs of fossil fuels or are you ignoring them?

The fact you call it the "global warming scare" makes me think not.
 
Paratus said:
Per unit energy? Yes it does.
  • Coal 2.1 lbs of CO2 per kwh
  • Natural Gas 1.2 lbs CO2 per kwh

If we are taking cheap energy are you including the external costs of fossil fuels or are you ignoring them?

The fact you call it the "global warming scare" makes me think not.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the first answer but you didn't answer the second. You can ignore "cheap" if you want.
 
buckshot24 said:
Thanks for the first answer but you didn't answer the second. You can ignore "cheap" if you want.
Click to expand...

Not sure what you are getting at.

MMGW is an externalized cost of fossil fuels. If you include it in the price of the fuel it makes it more expensive. If you don't you pass the cost on to whomever is randomly affected by it.

With MMGW that cost will less if addressed now and significantly more if we wait till later. Either way the third and the first world will pay.

If you're specifically asking why energy is scarce and expensive in the thrid world there are many, internal, external, historical, and geo-political reasons why that's so.
 
JSt0rm said:
Im pretty sure if we wanted to really do something about it we should of done it in the 90's. in 2070 the tundra will start leaking methane and then its game over. I'm no scientist but I think they are saying this is happening.
Click to expand...

It is, but don't google "flaming tundra" at work.
 
feralkid said:
It is, but don't google "flaming tundra" at work.
Click to expand...

The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert, Part II, "The Flaming Tundra"

Coming soon to a theater near you.

*Edit* Sorry, maybe trying too hard on that one.
 
Last edited:
Paratus said:
The earths climate isn't self correcting at least not in a way that is optimized for our existence, nor to our forcings.
Click to expand...

I agree; the earth does what it wants and man is more insignificant than our ego's want to accept. I contend we are still in a stable chaotic state which is self-correcting; call it the Pleistocene state. I still believe the odds of us having an ice age are far greater than the odds of an epoch changing shift where we approach temperatures similar to the end of the Eocene some 35 million years ago. I suspect that anthropogenic inducted climate change factors are insufficient to induce a paradigmatic change in future climates; it will take something else to get us to a new epoch.
Paratus said:
Some natural forcings increase warming feedback and other increase cooling feedback. In this case the sealevel feedback is going to lose per the author and probably already has according to other climate scientists.
Click to expand...

Yes - even if my hunches are correct and we are on the verge of general cooling period of 15 to 20 thousand years - the oceans will continue to rise this century. yes no matter what happens in the short terms; Greenland will continue to melt, glaciation will continue to dwindle and the oceans will continue to rise well into the 22nd century; perhaps longer than that.

Paratus said:
As I already said, the study will be incorporated into the body of work on climate change...
Click to expand...
I maintain the body of work has big little explored holes where research is needed.

Paratus said:
The solution as i see it and posted elsewhere on this site is to increase energy usage in the third world but decrease fossil fuel usage. Population growth goes negative at first world rates of energy usage. The costs of alternative energy has plummeted and even China is reducing coal consumption.
Click to expand...

The above is a great solution but like India it won't happen for decades. The only real fear is if we don't reduce banked carbon quickly enough we could force a paradigmatic shift in the size of our current chaotic state; the likelihood increases with each drop of oil, lump of coal, or banked natural gas we use. Man evolved in a series of ice ages; the earth could continue to a dramatically higher temperature averages and create a new epoch where man won't be able to survive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top