Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday July 14 2017, @10:45AM   Printer-friendly
from the breaking-up-is-hard-to-do dept.

It's finally adrift. When the Larsen C Ice Shelf calved yesterday [Wednesday], it sent one of the largest icebergs ever recorded slipping into a sea frosted with smaller chunks of ice. It marked the end of a decades-long splintering first seen by satellites in the 1960s. The crack stayed small for years until, in 2014, it began racing across the Antarctic ice.

The massive iceberg holds twice as much water used in the United States every year, according to calculations by Peter Gleick of the Pacific Institute. It weighs about 1.1 trillion tons and measures 2,200 square miles. Its volume is twice that of Lake Erie.

"The iceberg is one of the largest recorded, and its future progress is difficult to predict," said Adrian Luckman of Wales' Swansea University, who led a project tracking the crack since 2015. "It may remain in one piece but is more likely to break into fragments. Some of the ice may remain in the area for decades, while parts of the iceberg may drift north into warmer waters."

By mass, the iceberg accounts for 12 percent of the Larsen C Ice Shelf. It's large enough that maps will have to be redrawn. Larsen C was the fourth-largest ice shelf in the world. Now it's the fifth.

In this particular political moment, the calving of a major iceberg has made headlines around the world. Environmental groups connected the event to climate change and the Trump administration's withdrawal from the Paris climate accords. But scientists have cautioned that the story of the iceberg, which will be known as A68, is more nuanced. Climate signals are not clear enough to attribute the event to rising levels of carbon dioxide, but human activity may have contributed to its calving nonetheless.

https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060057298

Previously:
Larsen C Calves Trillion Ton Iceberg
Larsen C Rift Branches as it Comes Within 5 km of Calving
Delaware-Sized Iceberg Could Break Off of Antarctica at Any Moment


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 14 2017, @12:09PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 14 2017, @12:09PM (#539079)

    https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/ef-gast-data-research-report-062717.pdf [wordpress.com] (not so much about the berg)

    if you don't remember the break-in and tape-alterations -- only caught due to multiple backups elsewhere! -- there have been those who used original measurements before the newer breed who can only use the altered data because grants. .. so anytime we talk about our influence on weather, or conclusions and recommendations derived from altered data it helps to know that one's being played.

    not that these scientists will get any more attention than those documenting how jet-fuel could not have burned hot enough to crash the towers, but hey, at least grab the pdf and check out the people who signed it.

  • (Score: 4, Informative) by jelizondo on Friday July 14 2017, @10:59PM (2 children)

    by jelizondo (653) Subscriber Badge on Friday July 14 2017, @10:59PM (#539386) Journal

    Be careful with your “authors” particularly when one of them [wikipedia.org] signed a declaration that says:

    "We believe Earth and its ecosystems — created by God’s intelligent design and infinite power and sustained by His faithful providence — are robust, resilient, self-regulating, and self-correcting, admirably suited for human flourishing, and displaying His glory. Earth's climate system is no exception."

    He doesn't believe in climate change because of Theological reasons... To me that is enough to disqualify any “scientific” research he does, regardless of his credentials.

    If he is on the side of Science he can't claim God's providence as proof of anything.

    Of course, some people will believe anything said by a person whose name is prefixed with Dr.

    • (Score: 2) by tonyPick on Saturday July 15 2017, @12:30PM (1 child)

      by tonyPick (1237) on Saturday July 15 2017, @12:30PM (#539522) Homepage Journal

      I'll also leave this here:
      http://www.snopes.com/climatology-fraud-global-warming [snopes.com]

      Ultimately, the central argument of this study and its representation by Breitbart and others is one based on a willful misreading of data propelled by a study whose academic rigor has been misrepresented. As such, we rank the claim that climate scientists have created global warming entirely through corrections to raw data as false. While these corrections to raw historical data have shifted over time, the cumulative effect of all corrections applied to the raw data has been to reduce apparent global warming over the industrialized period, not the other way around.

      • (Score: 2) by deimtee on Saturday July 15 2017, @03:58PM

        by deimtee (3272) on Saturday July 15 2017, @03:58PM (#539568) Journal

        Give it a few more years, and something will be obvious:
        - If global warming is false and they are fudging the past data to fake a warming trend then in few years they are going to have the early 1900's as below zero on the equator.
        - If global warming is true and they are not fudging the past data then the warming will be severe and obvious.

        I think the most likely possibility is that global warming is real but less than claimed AND they are fudging the past data.
        The current apparent pause in the warming could be due to lowering the early measurements and inflating the nineties/oughties measurements to make the curve look steeper.

        --
        If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.