ADVERTISEMENT

Q: What weighs 2,240,000,000,000,000 pounds and is no longer connected to Antarctica?

Op2 said:
I think I have it right. It said 1.12 trillion tons and a ton is 2,000 pounds. So that would be 2.24 thousand trillion pounds.
Click to expand...
Agree with pounds. Didn't read the article and assumed tons. Should know better than to question your facts.
 
What most on the right refuse (or just can't) realize is that this is a symptom of increased ocean temperatures causing ice masses to break off, which in turn cause larger ice masses to break off at unnatural paces. This all combines to prevent natural reformation of the ice shelf, which adds to the demise of ice mass. So basically, it's like a domino effect. The end result of which will be substantial ocean level rise that will destroy many well known cities in time.

But piss on science if it means I lose my money, the right says.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wvu84fan
Boomboom521 said:
What most on the right refuse (or just can't) realize is that this is a symptom of increased ocean temperatures causing ice masses to break off, which in turn cause larger ice masses to break off at unnatural paces. This all combines to prevent natural reformation of the ice shelf, which adds to the demise of ice mass. So basically, it's like a domino effect. The end result of which will be substantial ocean level rise that will destroy many well known cities in time.

But piss on science if it means I lose my money, the right says.
Click to expand...
Get used to it....it's called "climate change"........Did you know we had ice ages or that the Sahara Desert was once a very lush and green place?
 
Boomboom521 said:
What most on the right refuse (or just can't) realize is that this is a symptom of increased ocean temperatures causing ice masses to break off, which in turn cause larger ice masses to break off at unnatural paces. This all combines to prevent natural reformation of the ice shelf, which adds to the demise of ice mass. So basically, it's like a domino effect. The end result of which will be substantial ocean level rise that will destroy many well known cities in time.

But piss on science if it means I lose my money, the right says.
Click to expand...
You sanctimonious ass. From that article:

" Researchers said they were not immediately aware the calving is linked to human-induced climate change. Since the ice shelf was already in the ocean and held a relatively small amount of land ice, the freed iceberg's potential melting was not expected to have an immediate effect on the sea level."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Airport
Boomboom521 said:
I think they would have seen the iceberg that was THE SIZE OF FREAKING DELAWARE
Click to expand...
How much is below water? Usually a large percentage is below. One of the amazing things about an iceberg, is that it develops it's own ecosystem under the berg. Truly amazing.
 
DvlDog4WVU said:
You sanctimonious ass. From that article:

" Researchers said they were not immediately aware the calving is linked to human-induced climate change. Since the ice shelf was already in the ocean and held a relatively small amount of land ice, the freed iceberg's potential melting was not expected to have an immediate effect on the sea level."
Click to expand...
Melt water has increased substantially, and the instability of the ice shelf is absolutely a byproduct of warming. Sea levels WILL rise if the domino effect continues, one large ice break, leads to another, leads to another.....that's what "domino effect" means. And yes, this rise will be catastrophic. Don't worry, your precious money won't be effected....your grandkids and great grandkids will have to deal with it.
 
DvlDog4WVU said:
You sanctimonious ass. From that article:

" Researchers said they were not immediately aware the calving is linked to human-induced climate change. Since the ice shelf was already in the ocean and held a relatively small amount of land ice, the freed iceberg's potential melting was not expected to have an immediate effect on the sea level."
Click to expand...
Calving is a natural process. The size and frequency is what is effected by warming. Just like warming is a natural process, that is effected by human CO2 admissions. Chicken sh1t right always hiding behind technicalities, and never really facing truth head on.
 
Boomboom521 said:
Melt water has increased substantially, and the instability of the ice shelf is absolutely a byproduct of warming. Sea levels WILL rise if the domino effect continues, one large ice break, leads to another, leads to another.....that's what "domino effect" means. And yes, this rise will be catastrophic. Don't worry, your precious money won't be effected....your grandkids and great grandkids will have to deal with it.
Click to expand...
Actually, the ice melting cools the water, thus cooling the earth. Probably will have another ice age. Has as much of a chance of being correct as your theory.
 
michael-moore.jpg
 
Boomboom521 said:
Calving is a natural process. The size and frequency is what is effected by warming. Just like warming is a natural process, that is effected by human CO2 admissions. Chicken sh1t right always hiding behind technicalities, and never really facing truth head on.
Click to expand...
What technicality? I added nothing of my own from the article. They claimed "researchers" weren't aware of a tie between this and manmade global climate change. Moreover, this specific occurrence has been in process since 02. As for the sea level rise of this specific berg, they said majority of it was already under water so there wouldn't be a real impact.

You get all pissy pants'd on me and I only quoted the article that was linked after your sky is falling bullshit.
 
DvlDog4WVU said:
What technicality? I added nothing of my own from the article. They claimed "researchers" weren't aware of a tie between this and manmade global climate change. Moreover, this specific occurrence has been in process since 02. As for the sea level rise of this specific berg, they said majority of it was already under water so there wouldn't be a real impact.

You get all pissy pants'd on me and I only quoted the article that was linked after your sky is falling bullshit.
Click to expand...
I said cities underwater, not sky is falling, and I said it happens further down the line than most. And this occurance is absolutely a result of warming.....yes, yes MAN MADE CLIMATE CHANGE WARMING. The process of calving is natural, but not at this rate and size....warming is natural, but not at this rate.
 
Boomboom521 said:
I said cities underwater, not sky is falling, and I said it happens further down the line than most. And this occurance is absolutely a result of warming.....yes, yes MAN MADE CLIMATE CHANGE WARMING. The process of calving is natural, but not at this rate and size....warming is natural, but not at this rate.
Click to expand...

I can't wait until Raleigh is underwater. Then I'll finally have beachfront property.
 
Boomboom521 said:
I said cities underwater, not sky is falling, and I said it happens further down the line than most. And this occurance is absolutely a result of warming.....yes, yes MAN MADE CLIMATE CHANGE WARMING. The process of calving is natural, but not at this rate and size....warming is natural, but not at this rate.
Click to expand...

I think that's something that people don't get. They say "The climate is always changing? So what?" Yeah, it's always changing and if humans weren't here it would still be changing but the question is, is it changing over and above what it would be changing without humans? As I understand it it's changing much more quickly now than it has historically.
 
Boomboom521 said:
I said cities underwater, not sky is falling, and I said it happens further down the line than most. And this occurance is absolutely a result of warming.....yes, yes MAN MADE CLIMATE CHANGE WARMING. The process of calving is natural, but not at this rate and size....warming is natural, but not at this rate.
Click to expand...
Then your argument is with the researchers who were interviewed by NBC, the bastion of conservative misinformation that it is, not me.
 
Op2 said:
A: An iceberg the size of Delaware.

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/environment/iceberg-about-size-delaware-breaks-antarctica-n782096
Since the models of when it was going to break off couldn't predict exactly when it was going to break off I guess that means it didn't break off.
Click to expand...
I'll try again and please correct me if I'm wrong. The South Pole has been cranking out ice at higher rates the last few years and expeditions have been curtailed even during the southern summer. Where is ice supposed to go when it reaches warmer water, the Moon? No, H2O is confined to this planet's hydrologic cycle. Meanwhile arctic expeditions have been cancelled due to ice during our current northern summer. I saw where a record low was set in Greenland a few days ago and put it, for now, in the 'there's a record broken every day' file. If ice is being forced into warm waters then those water should cool no matter how negligible the cooling. Call me an Equilibriumnist. I don't mind being wrong, but don't come at me with bad models and a degree in Social Science.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eerdoc
Boomboom521 said:
What most on the right refuse (or just can't) realize is that this is a symptom of increased ocean temperatures causing ice masses to break off, which in turn cause larger ice masses to break off at unnatural paces. This all combines to prevent natural reformation of the ice shelf, which adds to the demise of ice mass. So basically, it's like a domino effect. The end result of which will be substantial ocean level rise that will destroy many well known cities in time.

But piss on science if it means I lose my money, the right says.
Click to expand...
And your PhD was in what scientific discipline?
 
Op2 said:
the question is, is it changing over and above what it would be changing without humans?
Click to expand...
That is indeed a question that no one knows absolutely. THE question is how much money are you willing to spend attempting to prove one way or the other? Paris accord would be an installment only. If man does impact it, to what degree? If you can impact it, can you control the impact? Would you be willing to spend 50% of the world economy to make a one degree impact?

These are the questions that I have. With the fact being unknown, I can sleep at night without participating in Paris Accord and those that follow. Damned if I could sleep at knight with the realization that my government is pissing away all that tax money while the impact remains unknown.
 
PriddyBoy said:
I'll try again and please correct me if I'm wrong. The South Pole has been cranking out ice at higher rates the last few years and expeditions have been curtailed even during the southern summer. Where is ice supposed to go when it reaches warmer water, the Moon? No, H2O is confined to this planet's hydrologic cycle. Meanwhile arctic expeditions have been cancelled due to ice during our current northern summer. I saw where a record low was set in Greenland a few days ago and put it, for now, in the 'there's a record broken every day' file. If ice is being forced into warm waters then those water should cool no matter how negligible the cooling. Call me an Equilibriumnist. I don't mind being wrong, but don't come at me with bad models and a degree in Social Science.
Click to expand...

Re. the dangers of the ice in summer down there, according to what I read the danger for the ships was there were icebergs in the water that in the past had been part of the ice shelf but had broken look. So ice in the water where ships are isn't an indication there's more ice than before but rather that ice is slowly melting.

If ice breaks off and floats into warm water then it cools that warm water a bit but OTOH the place where the ice was previously is now warmer because it's no longer filled with ice.

I agree people degrees in the social sciences aren't the ones to figure this stuff out. For sure. People with expertise in this field are the ones to do it. And they have been doing it.
 
TarHeelEer said:
I can't wait until Raleigh is underwater. Then I'll finally have beachfront property.
Click to expand...
And you will have become dust centuries earlier. suggest you buy property at Emerald Isle or TopSail and enjoy that whiz exists rather than believe erroneous computer models that have nearly no chance of accurately predicting the outcome you reference.
 
mneilmont said:
That is indeed a question that no one knows absolutely. THE question is how much money are you willing to spend attempting to prove one way or the other? Paris accord would be an installment only. If man does impact it, to what degree? If you can impact it, can you control the impact? Would you be willing to spend 50% of the world economy to make a one degree impact?

These are the questions that I have. With the fact being unknown, I can sleep at night without participating in Paris Accord and those that follow. Damned if I could sleep at knight with the realization that my government is pissing away all that tax money while the impact remains unknown.
Click to expand...

The people that study it think they know the answer. There is a range of opinions on exactly how much but OTOH there is consensus that it's happening.
 
Op2 said:
The people that study it think they know the answer. There is a range of opinions on exactly how much but OTOH there is consensus that it's happening.
Click to expand...
And you are willing to spend how much of our economy to prove that vast array of theories? Those participating countries have that amount they pledged, or are they going to borrow it from us and us in turn borrow from China. What are they going to do with the Paris money? More research or construct something that retards - WHAT? There are some things that the US simply cannot afford. I have gambled a little bit in my life, but never for stakes like you are talking.
 
Op2 said:
according to what I read the danger for the ships was there were icebergs in the water that in the past had been part of the ice shelf but had broken
Click to expand...
So that's why expeditions had to be rescued because they were locked in ice? If only the Titanic were so lucky to only get locked by a berg.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

WVU82

How To Destroy the American Legal System

Replies
1
Views
194
Off-Topic Discussion Board
atlkvb
atlkvb
Keenan Cummings

WVSPORTS.COM Observations: West Virginia basketball at Oklahoma

Replies
19
Views
834
The Blue Lot
Thumper
Thumper
Keenan Cummings

WVSPORTS.COM West Virginia head coach Neal Brown press conference summary

Replies
0
Views
309
Mountaineer Message Board
Keenan Cummings
Keenan Cummings
Keenan Cummings

WVSPORTS.COM West Virginia head coach Neal Brown press conference summary

Replies
4
Views
621
The Blue Lot
Walter Brennaneer
W
eer2000

Five Thoughts: Pitt 80 WVU 63. The Exhibition Season (but help is on the way)

Replies
20
Views
739
The Blue Lot
pressvirginia
pressvirginia
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back