Entire Antarctic Shelf splitting away from Continent.

Started by RiversideGator, December 19, 2007, 04:53:26 PM

RiversideGator

An apt description for the theories of the GW crowd, lunican.  Thanks.

Doctor_K

Quote from: Lunican on January 08, 2009, 01:28:19 PM
I guess no one has heard the phrase, "You're on thin ice."

Of course I have.  I'm just wondering why some people are summarily ruling out the possibility that increase in area can
possibly entail increase in volume.
"Imagination is more important than knowledge. For while knowledge defines all we currently know and understand, imagination points to all we might yet discover and create."  -- Albert Einstein

Charleston native


BridgeTroll

I do not doubt the accuracy of the ICESAT measurements.  What I will dispute is what the numbers mean.  They have been measuring ice extent and thickness since 2002.  By my calculations this is a mere 7 years.  All this should really tell anyone is that ice seems to cover the northern polar region for times as long as 7 years...

Navy submarines do measure ice thickness while completing whatever mission they may be on but unless their specific mission is (ice thickness measuring)... they do not.
In a boat at sea one of the men began to bore a hole in the bottom of the boat. On being remonstrating with, he answered, "I am only boring under my own seat." "Yes," said his companions, "but when the sea rushes in we shall all be drowned with you."

Charleston native

BridgeTroll, from what I understand of sub ops, if they measure ice thickness, they're only doing it in their vicinity and not for the entire ice cap. The Navy is not going to have one of their subs doing a specific mission on ice thickness as well, so you are correct.

Excellent point about the ICESAT, and it parallels the question I was asking earlier: what has ever been considered the norm or standard for the ice thickness? With only 7 years of observation, we hardly have any data to determine that.

BridgeTroll

As a former SME on anti-submarine warfare I can assure you the Navy and submariners specifically have extensive historical knowledge of under ice conditions.  Melting ice affects ocean salinity which affects sound propagation.  The ice above them also affects sound propagation.  As a matter of safety subs are always interested in knowing where the ice is thinnest in the event they need to surface.  The navy has sent submarines into the arctic on oceanographic research missions specifically.  Submarines are always collecting oceanographic parameters as that is the environment they are in.
In a boat at sea one of the men began to bore a hole in the bottom of the boat. On being remonstrating with, he answered, "I am only boring under my own seat." "Yes," said his companions, "but when the sea rushes in we shall all be drowned with you."

gatorback

Charleston are you seriously arguing the data from satellites because they are so far away? Ha.  And that we don't use subs to measure ice thickness.  LOL. This site uploads data daily.  Notice the trend.  I don't think aliens are so bored to be messing around with the data transmitted from our satellites.   



'As a sinner I am truly conscious of having often offended my Creator and I beg him to forgive me, but as a Queen and Sovereign, I am aware of no fault or offence for which I have to render account to anyone here below.'   Mary, queen of Scots to her jailer, Sir Amyas Paulet; October 1586

RiversideGator

Maybe it is weather like this which is causing the ice levels to increase.  More extreme cold, this time in Alaska:

QuoteExtreme Alaska cold grounds planes, disables cars

By STEVE QUINN, Associated Press

JUNEAU, Alaska â€" Ted Johnson planned on using a set of logs to a build a cabin in Alaska's interior. Instead he'll burn some of them to stay warm.

Extreme temperatures â€" in Johnson's case about 60 below zero â€" call for extreme measures in a statewide cold snap so frigid that temperatures have grounded planes, disabled cars, frozen water pipes and even canceled several championship cross country ski races.

Alaskans are accustomed to subzero temperatures but the prolonged conditions have folks wondering what's going on with winter less than a month old.

National Weather Service meteorologist Andy Brown said high pressure over much of central Alaska has been keeping other weather patterns from moving through. New conditions get pushed north or south while the affected area faces daily extremes.

"When it first started almost two weeks ago, it wasn't anything abnormal," Brown said. "About once or twice every year, we get a good cold snap. But, in this case, you can call this an extreme event. This is rare. It doesn't happen every year."

Temperatures sit well below zero in the state's various regions, often without a wisp of wind pushing down the mercury further.

Johnson lives in Stevens Village, where residents have endured close to two weeks of temperatures pushing 60 below zero.

The cold has kept planes grounded, Johnson said. Food and fuel aren't coming in and they're starting to run low in the village, about 90 miles northwest of Fairbanks.

Johnson, whose home has no heater or running water, said he ventures outside only to get more logs for burning and to fetch water from a community facility. He's been saving the wood to build a cabin as a second home, but that will have to wait a few years now because the heat takes precedence.

"I've never seen it this cold for this long," he said. "I remember it 70 below one time, but not for a week and a half."

In Anchorage, Alaska's largest city, residents are used to lows of about 10-degree temperatures in January â€" not 19 below zero, which is what folks awoke to Wednesday morning.

Temperatures finally settled to about 10 below at midday, but that was cold enough to cancel races in the U.S. Cross Country Ski Championships.


Skiers won't compete unless it's warmer than 4 below zero, but the numbers have ranged between 10 below and 15 below.

That has led to four days of canceled or postponed competition with organizers hoping to get a set of races under way on Thursday, the event's final day.

Meanwhile, in Juneau, the state's capital is enjoying balmy weather by comparison with lows in the single digits.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090108/ap_on_re_us/alaska_extreme_cold

Charleston native

Quote from: gatorback on January 08, 2009, 04:19:19 PM
Charleston are you seriously arguing the data from satellites because they are so far away? Ha.  And that we don't use subs to measure ice thickness.  LOL. This site uploads data daily.  Notice the trend.  I don't think aliens are so bored to be messing around with the data transmitted from our satellites.
You were arguing about ice volume, and yet you post a chart that shows AREA?! LOL. That is just too funny, gator. You just proved my point. How do satellites measure ice depth? Do they even measure it?

My point is that nobody has even mentioned how these satellites supposedly measure ice thickness. The scientists were strictly using their ICESAT data to make their idiotic conclusion, and unless the satellite is sending out X-rays or sonar (both highly unlikely) it is not going to accurately ascertain ice thickness.

BridgeTroll

In a boat at sea one of the men began to bore a hole in the bottom of the boat. On being remonstrating with, he answered, "I am only boring under my own seat." "Yes," said his companions, "but when the sea rushes in we shall all be drowned with you."

Charleston native

Again, how does this measure volume? Light is reflected back to the satellite from the ice surface. How is this used to measure ice under the surface?

gatorback

'As a sinner I am truly conscious of having often offended my Creator and I beg him to forgive me, but as a Queen and Sovereign, I am aware of no fault or offence for which I have to render account to anyone here below.'   Mary, queen of Scots to her jailer, Sir Amyas Paulet; October 1586

Charleston native

That's fine.

Keep in mind that the scientists staked the claim about lower ice volume, but they didn't offer numbers. So provide all the technical data you want, I still remain unconvinced.

RiversideGator

You are aware that the flooded cities were flooded prior to the industrial age and have no connection with the GW theory, arent you?

civil42806

Yeah I don't really get the whole issue of old drowned cities, since they were put underwater way before the industrial era.  Sort of shows that there was no stable climate and sea levels vaired widely over time.