Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Sunday July 19 2015, @02:30PM   Printer-friendly
from the top-spinning-down-on-a-table dept.

Australian Broadcasting Corp reports:

From 1982 to 2005, we measured the location of the North Pole as drifting slowly southwards towards Labrador around six to seven centimetres each year.

But in 2005, the North Pole suddenly, and without any warning, did two new things. First, it chucked a leftie and started heading east, parallel to the Equator. Second, the North Pole more than tripled its speed to about 24-or-so centimetres per year.

Plain and simple, rapid melting of ice on land has driven Earth's North Pole to the east. This solid ice used to be on land, but is now liquid water spread everywhere across the planet.

We've been measuring this change to the land ice with satellites beginning in the early 1990s, right up to our current CryoSat-2, which was launched in 2010. Over the decades, the satellites have taken many tens of millions of height measurements. The most recent analysis tells us that between 2011 and 2014, Greenland and Antarctica between them were losing about 500 billion tonnes of land ice per year — about three-quarters of it from Greenland. This was an increase of two-to-three times over the previous loss rate as measured between 2003 and 2009.


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This discussion has been archived.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: 4, Insightful) by BK on Sunday July 19 2015, @03:33PM

    by BK (4868) on Sunday July 19 2015, @03:33PM (#211082)

    Another climate story, another screwed up moderation tree. Parent's moderation has changed from insightful to troll 2x in the past 10 minutes. "Disagree" clearly isn't enough for some people here.

    Is moderating as troll the comments we disagree with acceptable now?

    I do understand that it's important to let people on the internet know that they are WRONG, but is this the SN way to do it?

    --
    ...but you HAVE heard of me.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Interesting=1, Overrated=1, Total=4
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by maxwell demon on Sunday July 19 2015, @03:42PM

    by maxwell demon (1608) on Sunday July 19 2015, @03:42PM (#211087) Journal

    Well, that post is polemic (at least I cannot imagine that he really expects someone blaming anomalies of outer planets' orbits to global warming). I wouldn't moderate it as troll, but I can see why some would.

    What the post certainly isn't, is insightful. Which also doesn't mean and shouldn't be used for "I agree".

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    • (Score: 2) by BK on Sunday July 19 2015, @03:47PM

      by BK (4868) on Sunday July 19 2015, @03:47PM (#211089)

      Interesting could work here. Or, and this is always the hardest, no moderation at all.

      A score of 2 or 3 is just about right here imo. Unless you have an axe to grind.

      --
      ...but you HAVE heard of me.
      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Sunday July 19 2015, @04:14PM

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday July 19 2015, @04:14PM (#211107) Journal

        HA! You're obviously smarter than the average Soylentil. "no moderation at all". Just like everyone else here, I get a steady diet of mod points. I can't remember the last time I used up my day's supply. When I see a really good comment, I hit it with an insightful, or interesting, or informative. I just skim over most bad posts. And, of course, average posts require no moderation.

        I think some poeple feel obligated to use all their mod points, every day. Which is akin to a local cop feeling obligated to use up his ammunition every day.

        Heck, I don't even use the "agree" or "disagree" mods. I'd rather make a post, and state how and why I agree. That seems a lot more fun to me! Why waste a mod point to agree with someone, when I can tell them?

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @01:40PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @01:40PM (#211407)

          There is an "Agree" mod option? I've never seen that. Only "Disagree".

  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 19 2015, @07:42PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 19 2015, @07:42PM (#211160)

    to let people on the internet know that they are WRONG, but is this the SN way to do it?

    Seems like it worked this time. And proved once again that climate-deniers are just knee-jerk stupid. What more do you want?

  • (Score: 4, Informative) by penguinoid on Monday July 20 2015, @06:57AM

    by penguinoid (5331) on Monday July 20 2015, @06:57AM (#211316)

    You're complaining that someone who first-posted with obviously false information on a controversial topic, while calling his opponents religiously insane, got modded troll? Read down the thread, he has badly confused the (clearly measurable) location of the axial north pole, which would shift due to the (necessary) law of conservation of momentum because of the melting of the (measurable) icecaps -- with his own invented lala land where the topic is Earth's magnetic north pole.

    --
    RIP Slashdot. Killed by greedy bastards.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Nobuddy on Monday July 20 2015, @02:33PM

    by Nobuddy (1626) on Monday July 20 2015, @02:33PM (#211434)

    Its not a matter of disagree. he's absolutely and completely wrong (assumes magnetic north not axial tilt), goes off on a rant based on his wrong perception. Troll is the closest option to this nut.