Comments:
CharlesAnthony: Good news!
As warm water melts the ice between the glacier's surface and the bedrock, the glacier retreats and the ice on top is more likely to break off. More land!
Prof_Chomsky: "CharlesAnthony" said
Good news!
As warm water melts the ice between the glacier's surface and the bedrock, the glacier retreats and the ice on top is more likely to break off. More land!
Err, actually that ice would lead to 3 feet of sea rise, meaning 1,300 square miles of coastline is lost forever. And the land under the glacier would still remain unusable tundra, it would just lack that giant ice cube stuck to it today
CharlesAnthony: "Prof_Chomsky" said
... meaning 1,300 square miles of coastline is lost forever. How do you know that?
Forever is a long time. Are you a magically divine prophet???
stratos:
Err, actually that ice would lead to 3 feet of sea rise, meaning 1,300 square miles of coastline is lost forever.
I know what you're getting at. Kind of like lost cost line when the Ice age ended. More polar ice = less ocean water = more land mass / cost line
And the land under the glacier would still remain unusable tundra,
Not arguing per say just wondering why it can not be used for something?
BartSimpson: "Records" in Antarctica cover a remarkably short time period and the records of water temps under any ice sheet down there only go back at best two or three decades.
Register to comment on this news link