Posted on 05/18/2016 5:31:55 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
Paris (AFP) - A rapidly melting glacier atop East Antarctica is on track to lift oceans at least two metres, and could soon pass a "tipping point" of no return, researchers said Wednesday.
To date, scientists have mostly worried about the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets as dangerous drivers of sea level rise.
But the new study, following up on earlier work by the same team, has identified a third major threat to hundreds of millions of people living in coastal areas around the world.
"I predict that before the end of the century the great global cities of our planet near the sea will have two- or three-metre (6.5 - 10 feet) high sea defences all around them," said Martin Siegert, co-director of the Grantham Institute and Department of Earth Science and Engineering at Imperial College London, and the study's senior author.
From the air, the contours of Totten Glacier -- roughly the size of France -- are invisible because the entire Antarctic continent is covered by a seamless, kilometres-thick blanket of snow and ice.
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
Well.... based on the concept that is given in this article, it would seem that the Earth should already be completely flooded due to the volume of water that flows down the rivers and INTO THE SEA.
See #53 and get back to me.
Written by a Marlowe Hood. Could we say that we have been “Hood-Winked” by this writer and his sources. Come back in a 100 years and find out.
Or, at my age, I don’t give a damn, unless it holds back rampaging inland rivers and creeks.
I put ice in a glass. I fill the glass to the top. When the ice melts does the glass overflow?
If there is enough ice so that its weight causes it to rest on the bottom of the glass instead of floating, then when the ice melts the glass will overflow.>>>>I think the ice would also have to be higher ie stacked higher than the sides of the glass. indicating that the volume of the ice is greater than the capacity of the glass and then this would overflow the glass. only ice can be stacked higher than the top of the glas as water would just flow over the top of the glass.
When this BS came around the first time, I showed my g-kids that this couldn’t happen by putting an ice cube on the table.
Being as there is no dam to cause the melt water to pile up it’s not possible for the depth to rise to the predicted levels considering the sq miles of ocean and the relatively small size of the glacier.
Whew...I wonder if they'll figure out that the water level is rising over the next 85 years. Cause if they don't they'll just keep building in the water.
More “Rosland Capital” scare tactics.
But these looney “scientists” skipped class that day.
Whatever happened to that whole “displacement” deal?
Women and children hardest hit.
That doesn't normally happen because there is a balance between the water flowing into the sea and the amount evaporating from the sea.
But if all the ice currently in the world started to melt faster than it could be regenerated, then there would be more water going into the oceans than was coming out.
Liberals operate on emoting. Their masters tell them what to worry about and they worry, even as we enter the coming Ice Age.
And monkeys “may” fly out of my butt.
If a one mile thick piece of ice the size of France melted, it would raise the level of the world's oceans by more than 9 feet.
So, then: I wonder if the author of the text below knows more than those supplying the hype in this article...
Climatic Change
DOI 10.1007/s10584-011-0037-5
Exploring high-end scenarios for local sea level rise to develop flood protection strategies for a low-lying delta—the Netherlands as an example
by Caroline A. Katsman et al, 2011
This paper includes the following statements about SLR contributions from the EAIS this century:
“2. the three marine-based glacier basins in East Antarctica that are showing recent thinning (Pritchard et al. 2009): Totten Glacier, the glacier which feeds Cook Ice Shelf around 150 E, and Denman Glacier (EAIS-g) and
3. the northern Antarctic Peninsula (n-AP), an area that has suffered recent
increases in atmospheric temperature, increased glacier
The severe scenario is based on an emerging collapse of the ASE and EAIS-g as a result of marine ice sheet Climatic Change
EAIS-g SLR contribution by 2100: 0.19m (for discharge as analogous to ASE)
During a collapse, the retreat of the ice and the contribution to sea level rise is not limited by the acceleration of the glaciers taking ice to the oceans, as suggested by the investigations of the upper bound of the AIS contribution to sea level rise by Pfeffer et al. (2008). For a marine ice sheet it is possible for the edge of the ice sheet to migrate inland, into increasingly deep ice, and this could cause a collapse of West Antarctic Ice Sheet at rates that are higher than could be achieved by glacier acceleration alone. It is generally thought that a full-scale collapse would be promoted by the removal of ice shelves that fringe the grounded ice sheet and act to buttress it. On the Antarctic Peninsula, loss of Larsen B Ice Shelf resulted in a speed-up of the glaciers that formerly fed it by factors of two to eight times (Scambos et al. 2004). If we imagine glacier acceleration at the upper end of this range we can come close to the rates of loss that could be described as a collapse. If the loss of ice from the glaciers across ASE increases to eight times the balance value, akin to what was observed after the loss of Larsen B ice shelf, it would result in an additional contribution of 3 mm/yr to sea level rise. If this type of behavior followed an ice-shelf loss, it could, in theory dominate for much of the latter part of the century, giving a total contribution to sea level rise by 2100 on the order of 0.25 m (Table 2). If the marine glacier basins in EAIS-g were to follow the progress of the ASE glaciers, effectively producing a 50% excess in discharge over 30 years (from 2000), and then following exponential growth to 2100, this would imply around 0.19 m global mean sea level contribution in the period 2000–2100. In this severe scenario, the contribution from the n-AP glaciers is unlikely to be a significant fraction of the total. We note that the ice thickness on the n-AP (Pritchard and Vaughan 2007) is poorly surveyed, but is unlikely to contain more than 0.10 m global mean sea level equivalent. The potential contribution from this area is therefore unlikely to be substantially greater than 0.05 m. For the purposes of this scenario, we assume that this 0.05 m is lost by 2100. The total sea level contribution for the severe scenario due to changing ice dynamics is then 0.49 m. To this estimate, we add again the
global mean sea level change of -0.08 m projected in response to an increase in accumulation (IPCC AR4), and arrive at an upper estimate of 0.41 m.
http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?topic=263.0
Those invisible glaciers are the worst! Very sneaky!
“Why should Al Gore be the only one to profit from this foolishness?”
I could stand to profit from this. A 2-meter rise in the sea level would turn my humble little country cottage amidst the sugar cane fields of south central Louisiana into prime beach front property!
... with gators.
Nah...glacier water would be too cold for gators :)
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.