Posted on 09/25/2015 10:52:02 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
From the “department of global roasting” and the UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS, where great ideas like this one are formed at Halloween parties, (yes really, see PR) comes this claim:
UAF model used to estimate Antarctic ice sheet melting
To see how burning up the Earth’s available fossil fuels might affect the Antarctic ice sheet, scientists turned to a computer program developed at the University of Alaska Fairbanks Geophysical Institute. The ice would disappear, they found, and that conclusion is making headlines across the world.
UAF’s Parallel Ice Sheet Model “was the perfect tool to find out whether human emissions are sufficient to render Earth ice free — and unfortunately it turns out that they are,” said Anders Levermann, a researcher at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany. Levermann is an author of a paper recently published in the journal Science Advances.
He and the paper’s other authors figured out that burning all available fossil fuels would release about 10,000 gigatons of carbon into the atmosphere, which could possibly raise the average temperature of the planet by 20 degrees Fahrenheit. One gigaton is one billion tons. More carbon dioxide in the atmosphere raises temperatures because the greenhouse gas traps infrared radiation from sunlight striking the Earth.
The computer program shows that the increased temperatures would melt the Antarctic ice sheet, which is bigger than the United States, has an average thickness of 6,200 feet and contains more than 50 percent of the world’s fresh water. More than half the melting could occur during the first 1,000 years, although the entire study spans 10,000 years. PISM also shows that the melting would push sea levels up by more than 160 feet. Coastlines would retreat, forcing people in places like New York City, London and Paris to move inland.
“The future evolution of the global sea level is mainly determined by the melting of the big ice sheets on Greenland and Antarctica,” Levermann said. “If we want to properly protect our cities, we need to know how these ice sheets evolve. Models like PISM are the only chance we have to understand future sea-level rise.”
Andy Aschwanden, a UAF glaciologist who helped develop PISM, said he uses the computer program to study how climate change could affect Greenland’s ice sheet. He said that more than 50 studies have used PISM, including a soon-to-be-published paper that investigates the future of Alaska’s Juneau Icefield.
“Models are testbeds for all sorts of questions, and PISM is what we call a numerical model.” said Aschwanden. “We take our best understanding of the physical processes of the real world, in this case ice sheets, and frame that in the language of mathematics. Then we teach the computer how to come up with solutions to ‘what if’ questions about the processes that this model represents. We did a lot of work under the hood to make this model work.”
Ed Bueler, a UAF associate professor of mathematics, and GI computer programmer Constantine Khroulev, did much of that work. They built the engine of this model from new mathematical equations. Bueler said PISM is designed to solve what-if scenarios for different-sized ice sheets and glaciers over a time period that extends 100,000 years into the future and the past. It considers such factors as ice thickness and temperature, the weight of the ice and how fast the ice flows as gravity slowly pulls it downhill “like pouring honey onto a pancake.”
“The equations are a way to say precisely how the parts of an ice sheet work and how each of these pieces is connected to all the others,” said Bueler. “Once you have the equations, you can make predictions.”
Most programs that handle such a wide range of scenarios over a large time span rely on mathematics so complex that it may take computers years or decades just to answer one problem. Bueler said PISM is complex enough to be accurate but efficient enough to deliver answers in a timely manner to scientists.
PISM also uses the GI’s high-performance computers to get more accurate answers to the wide variety of scenarios. These computers can outperform an average personal computer in processing calculations.
The PISM team posts the computer program and its updates on the Internet so that scientists can use it freely and provide feedback on the program. Levermann learned about the program after one of his graduate students found it on the Internet and showed it to him in 2008.
“Half a year later, I was flying to Fairbanks to discuss the model with Ed,” said Levermann. “That was my first Halloween party in the U.S. In the two following weeks, my two then-Ph.D.-students, Ricarda Winkelmann and Maria Martin, visited Ed, and he explained the model. That started a wonderful long-term collaboration.”
Winkelmann went on to be the lead author on the recent paper published in Science Advances.
###
Reminds me of an old OUTER LIMITS TV episode where a scientist creates his own world in a closed container and watches everything evolve.
Physicist Howard Hayden's one-letter disproof of global warming claims [pre-Climategate]Dear Administrator Jackson:
I write in regard to the Proposed Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act, Proposed Rule, 74 Fed. Reg. 18,886 (Apr. 24, 2009), the so-called "Endangerment Finding."
It has been often said that the "science is settled" on the issue of CO2 and climate. Let me put this claim to rest with a simple one-letter proof that it is false.
The letter is s, the one that changes model into models. If the science were settled, there would be precisely one model, and it would be in agreement with measurements.
Alternatively, one may ask which one of the twenty-some models settled the science so that all the rest could be discarded along with the research funds that have kept those models alive.
We can take this further. Not a single climate model predicted the current cooling phase. If the science were settled, the model (singular) would have predicted it.
(excerpted from Professor Hayden's letter to Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator Environmental Protection Agency. More at link.)
Is that a fact?
Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide - Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts? By Timothy Ball
No Smoking Hot Spot (The Australian)
Those two articles take Greenhouse Theory at face value and by the criterion set up in the theory itself finds no evidence of warming on the basis of greenhouse effect.
Sky-high hole blown in AGW theory?
"Forbes reports on a peer-reviewed study that uses NASA data to show that the effects of carbon-based warming have been significantly exaggerated. In fact, much of the heat goes out into space rather than stay trapped in the atmosphere, an outcome that started long before AGW alarmists predicted:"
That article explains why no Hot Spot has been found.
The Hidden Flaw in Greenhouse Theory
Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics
Harvard astrophysicist dismisses AGW theory, challenges peers to 'take back climate science'
It Is Impossible For A 100 ppm Increase In Atmospheric CO2 Concentration To Cause Global Warming
Simple Chemistry and the Real Greenhouse Effect.
Those five articles each show that Greenhouse Theory has no basis in reality due to a direct conflict with the known laws of physics. No wonder the smoking gun "hotspot" can't be found.
Claim That Sea Level Is Rising Is a Total Fraud
That article kills any thought of planetary warming from any cause. Think about it. If there is absolutely no sign of an acceleration of sea level rise how could the planet be warming? The rise in sea level in the last 100 years is far less than the average over the last 18,000 years caused by the inter-glacial period we are in.
Make sure you leave enough for my martini shaker. And a margarita or two.
A medium-sized berg should do.
You can have the rest.
I’m working on a computer model that has Eva Longoria showing up with beer later.
The native Americans walked across a land bridge from Asia to North America. That means that the ocean levels have been rising for 20,000 years. Before boats, trains and automobiles. And now all of a sudden it's a crisis and we're all going to die or something.
Just send me a check and I could have save the government millions.
AWESOME! That means Alaska will become habitable year-round. (At least for me anyway...)
Ever since wife and I went there in July 2012 I've wanted to go back! Beautiful state, people are awesome.
LOL!! Computers will tell you anything you program it to tell you. Fools.
Your cartoon is partially correct. The real winner of climate change are the tax and spenders. Emissions gives government the ability to tax all kinds of activities that were previously only taxed once (tax on fuels and vehicles that use them). Government makes far more than scientists in this scam. The UN wants to use it to tax developed nations to redistribute wealth to developing nations (with a healthy cut for themselves of course).
Check out KBVS, where the National Weather Service has been reporting temperatures of 100F-134F for quite some time now.
http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/mesowest/getobext.php?wfo=sew&sid=KBVS&num=72&raw=0
It is the way to go! Ice covered ground is useless.
“According to the new research, livestock’s noxious flatulence accounts for a large portion of the methane gas being released into the atmosphere.
Researchers say cows are producing twice as much methane gas as scientists previously believed.
The states producing the most methane gas were Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas”
http://www.ibtimes.com/cow-farts-have-larger-greenhouse-gas-impact-previously-thought-methane-pushes-climate-change-1487502
_______________________________
“Termites are a significant natural source of methane. During the normal digestion process of a termite, methane is produced. Termites eat cellulose but rely on micro-organisms in their gut to digest it which produces methane during the process. This is responsible for 12% of natural methane emissions.[1]
Each termite produces very small amounts of methane on a daily basis. However, when this is multiplied by the world population of termites, their emissions add up to 23 million tonnes of methane annually.[1]”
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientifictechnological elite. - Eisenhower’s Farewell Address
Up until 30-40 million years ago, when the Himalayas formed (creating a carbon dioxide sink via mega-weathering) and the land bridge connecting South America to Antarctica separated (allowing ocean currents to encircle the continent instead of circulating north to mix and keep air circulating around the land mass inside, creating a cold sink), the world was overwhelmingly tropical.
When the dinosaurs ran around and for most of Earth’s history before that, the world was 10-20°F warmer than today, without ice on the poles, with modern day Alaska more like Oregon’s temperate rain forests today.
It is very easy to argue we are actually COLD compared to Earth’s historical norm.
The Niven-Pournelle book “Fallen Angels” posits exactly that, with energy rationing and abandonment of science seen as salvation even as the glaciers are descending on the US after overtaking Canada.
The great new investment: Arctic beach resorts!
Get back to me when they successfully model the largest green house gas - water vapor.
“I wonder what made the Earth Ice Free before the Ice Age?”
Left over dinosaur emissions?
Actually I do not believe the Earth was ever actually totally Ice free. It has been totally frozen over numerous times, however.
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.