[Scape]

The last and largest ice shelf in Canada is on the verge of breaking up

[sasquatch2]

Ice shelves are an alarmist favourite. They are big, make great pictures and stuff.
Their behaviour can be misrepresented so many ways they are the motherload of fabricated proof.
Things that effect ice shelves other than GW.
Increased snow fall inland, forcing them further out---calving.
Changed wind patterns.
Closer study---

Quote:

The Ward Hunt shelf's characteristic corrugated surface, described by Mueller "like a giant Ruffles potato chip,"

That sounds like cracks are an integral ingredient in that shelf's makeup.

[Scape]

Are you high? The ice is over 30,000 years old! I don't care if it ruffled, sweet and sour or B-B-Q the dam thing is breaking up.

[sasquatch2]

Scape

Quote:

Are you high? The ice is over 30,000 years old! I don't care if it ruffled, sweet and sour or B-B-Q the dam thing is breaking up.

Quote:

The Ward Hunt shelf's characteristic corrugated surface, described by Mueller "like a giant Ruffles potato chip," is now fractured by dozens of deep cracks in the 3,000-year-old, 40-metre thick ice.

No need to be rude! perhaps you read with too much haste seeking something that was not there. That age puts it post ice Age BTW.

[Scape]

Did not realize you were such a fragile fellow or that you even cared. Learn something new every day I suppose. Sorry I missed a zero.

What I take away from this is:

1) Something ancient is collapsing, not something recent.
2) The last of it's type and composition is breaking up only Greenland and Anarctica remain but the great white North has become considerably darker.
3) Northern Rangers have never seen anything of this scale before. This has been ongoing since the 1930's but the pace is accelerating rapidly. This suggests an exponential cascade. Something has recently become a force multiplier and since there has not been any anomalous developments in the North we have to look south for the culprit.

[N_Fiddledog]

One thing's for sure. This summer's arctic melt is going to be fascinating stuff to watch for both sides of the climate debate.

Will we get another melt similar to last summer's 30 year record? The warmers are crossing their fingers, hoping, and proclaiming.

The skeptics are thinking maybe not, but it's too early to tell. There's reason to suspect this summer's melt might be a little different. Last summer's melt was a collection of climate pressures beyond simple warming. For example there were these weird winds blowing south. They grabbed broken ice and floated them south. This created a situation where bracing of existing ice was no longer present. Apparently this also affected stuff like land glaciers which were previously braced by ocean ice, so you saw these big calving events there as well. I read that somewhere. Sorry, lost the link.

So will these same freaky winds be present this year? Who's giving odds?

Another thing is the shift in Arctic Ocean circulation NASA noticed last year.

A study published in Geophysical Research Letters by NASA scientists shows that weakening of the Arctic Oscillation results from a cyclical process rather than climate change. The results suggest not all the large changes seen in Arctic climate in recent years are a result of long-term trends associated with global warming.

There's a reason that one's important to skeptics. They point to thirty year shifts in Ocean Oscillations - warm to cold. It's happened in at least the last 2 cycles so far. If it happens again we're entering another cold shift right now. This will affect the Arctic melt.

The Ocean's Role in Seasonal and Long Term Climate

As far as the Ward Hunt ice shelf collapse goes there's no doubt if it does collapse the alarmists will be declaring a spectacular victory for their side proving CO2 forces warming to a level catastrophe is imminent, but is it really?

I'm with Sasquatch on this one. You're really over-simplifying if you're thinking of an ice shelf as warming and falling into the ocean.

For example in spite of the loud proclamations the recent Wilkins shelf collapse was a result of warming, the actual evidence appears to suggest that's not the case there.

The Wilkins Ice Shelf Con Job

Warming can matter of course. In spite of the fact Larsens B was predisposed to collapse by existing fissures in the ice much as Ward Hunt appears to be nobody denies the influence of warmth in that particular sliver of the antarctic as a contributing factor. It is however possible to show a possible solar influence to the warming contribution in that case.

A Structural Glaciological Analysis of the 2002 Larsen B Ice Shelf Collapse

So will Ward Hunt go this Summer? Maybe, maybe not. If it does though it will not in any way prove CO2 is forcing a climate catastrophe.

[Scape]

Nice. Didn't bother reading any of your links though. As for the C02 bit, not convinced. I think if anything C02 is simply a symptom of a larger problem, unrestrained population growth. Simply put mankind has grown exponentially in the last century like a cancer. That has had an impact and perhaps this is one of them. Mother Earth is about to remind us who really is the boss.

[PluggyRug]

Scape wrote:

Nice. Didn't bother reading any of your links though. As for the C02 bit, not convinced. I think if anything C02 is simply a symptom of a larger problem, unrestrained population growth. Simply put mankind has grown exponentially in the last century like a cancer. That has had an impact and perhaps this is one of them. Mother Earth is about to remind us who really is the boss.

Thats a view I have always had. Mother nature will one day turn and slap mankind in the face, big time.

[N_Fiddledog]

Scape wrote:

Nice. Didn't bother reading any of your links though. As for the C02 bit, not convinced. I think if anything C02 is simply a symptom of a larger problem, unrestrained population growth. Simply put mankind has grown exponentially in the last century like a cancer. That has had an impact and perhaps this is one of them. Mother Earth is about to remind us who really is the boss.

As far as the C02 thing goes, here's one of the main problems skeptics have with that. There isn't actually enough warmth potential in the CO2 present, or projected to create the climate effect the catastrophists are predicting. Not even the IPCC thinks so. To get there they have to hypothesize some sort of positive feedback from other factors such as atmospheric moisture. There's no actual evidence of these positive feedbacks performing the way they say they will, it's just this other thing alarmists theorize on to support their theory of catastrophic warming.

Here's a graph showing you how the IPCC is relying more and more on the theory of feedback as the evidence comes in showing the actual warming effect from CO2 to create a catastrophe isn't there.



Here's another link you can take my word on if you like. It explains the problems with the feedback hypothesis.

The Keystone Issue of Global Warming

[sasquatch2]

There is no doubt that humans have really infested this planet but the money wasted on the Bali conference on global governance could have been better spent cleaning up that massive raft of garbage in the Pacific.

[Scape]

sasquatch2 wrote:

There is no doubt that humans have really infested this planet but the money wasted on the Bali conference on global governance could have been better spent cleaning up that massive raft of garbage in the Pacific.

Agreed.

[Donny_Brasco]

N_Fiddledog wrote:

Here's another link you can take my word on if you like. It explains the problems with the feedback hypothesis.

The Keystone Issue of Global Warming

You may be right...I agree.

However the costs of you being WRONG far outweigh the savings to each of us if you are right. I'll take a little economic downturn over a global catastrophe and the decimation human race any day.

I'm hoping you are right but I'm still not buying that H1 I had my eye on.

[sasquatch2]

That "Black Swan" argument is the last resort of the alarmists....shame on you for even considering an HI. They handle and look like shit. You would look real in a "vette'.

[Donny_Brasco]

sasquatch2 wrote:

That "Black Swan" argument is the last resort of the alarmists....shame on you for even considering an HI. They handle and look like shit. You would look real in a "vette'.

If you say global warming is a farce then anything I say should be irrellivent - expecially if I think there is a chance you may be right. But I'm not willing to wait and see who is most correct and I'm not willing to bet my grandchildren's (yet to be born) future that you are.

Even if you are wrong and global catastrophy does strike, you'll be sitting there saying that its a "natural cycle", so relax and let us re-cyclers, conservationists and tree huggers make your world a little greener.

Just smile and wave when you pass us in your vette burning a gallon a mile and when your out of site (just to be polite) you can throw your burger wrappers out the window.

[sasquatch2]

It is not rational to go off on a tangent on an serious agenda based on the declarations of faith of a bunch of snake-oil salesmen.
Their science doesn't exist...
Their "consensus" is a figment of the media's imagination.
Any weather/climate changes are as natural as out seasons.

If you want to worry about a "what-if" Google "The Yellowstone Supervolcano".