Remember me
▼ Content

Climate change: Rain melting Greenland ice sheet 'even in winter'


Climate change: Rain melting Greenland ice sheet 'even in winter'08-03-2019 14:17
Tai Hai Chen
★★★★☆
(1016)
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47485847
08-03-2019 21:26
Into the Night
★★★★★
(7678)
Tai Hai Chen wrote:
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47485847


Don't think so.

Much of the ice sheet is around 10,000ft in elevation, and the ice sheet sits at around 65 deg N, to 72 deg N, and temperatures typical of the area is -20 deg F or less.

Fake news.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 08-03-2019 21:27
09-03-2019 22:16
Wake
★★★★★
(4024)
Tai Hai Chen wrote:
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47485847


In 2017 the Greenland Ice Sheet grew 50% more than usual. In 2018 it grew about normally. 2019 is only beginning and we are getting fearful reports about rainy weather?

Apparently we can now judge "global warming" by effects of a single season.
10-03-2019 00:41
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3537)
Wake wrote:
Tai Hai Chen wrote:
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47485847


In 2017 the Greenland Ice Sheet grew 50% more than usual. In 2018 it grew about normally. 2019 is only beginning and we are getting fearful reports about rainy weather?

Apparently we can now judge "global warming" by effects of a single season.


Wake, there's no way anyone can make any sort of usably accurate assessment of the amount of change in the ice mass of the Greenland ice sheet.

What we CAN do is conclude that the ice is constantly building based on observations of everything abandoned on the ice sheet becoming buried under additional meters of ice each year. Of course there is calving which reduces the ice mass. No one can accurately measure either the building or the calving so nobody knows the net year to year.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
10-03-2019 17:34
Wake
★★★★★
(4024)
IBdaMann wrote:
Wake wrote:
Tai Hai Chen wrote:
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47485847


In 2017 the Greenland Ice Sheet grew 50% more than usual. In 2018 it grew about normally. 2019 is only beginning and we are getting fearful reports about rainy weather?

Apparently we can now judge "global warming" by effects of a single season.


Wake, there's no way anyone can make any sort of usably accurate assessment of the amount of change in the ice mass of the Greenland ice sheet.

What we CAN do is conclude that the ice is constantly building based on observations of everything abandoned on the ice sheet becoming buried under additional meters of ice each year. Of course there is calving which reduces the ice mass. No one can accurately measure either the building or the calving so nobody knows the net year to year.


Satellite photography can map the extent of the ice sheet and satellite radar can measure the depth. These can now be so carefully focused that they can tell differences between about 10 meter square patch. The military can read depths almost to the inch and on one square meter.

The real capabilities of our military are quite astonishing. We know where ever nuclear submarine in the world is and at what depth. We have a method of destroying them right where they are without resorting to nuclear weapons and essentially turning those subs to dust.
10-03-2019 18:18
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3537)
Wake wrote:
Satellite photography can map the extent of the ice sheet and satellite radar can measure the depth. These can now be so carefully focused that they can tell differences between about 10 meter square patch. The military can read depths almost to the inch and on one square meter.

Please don't take this the wrong way but you have to be somewhat gullible to believe this. No, there are no satellites accurately measuring polar ice depth with their onboard radars.

What military do you believe has satellites that do this?


Wake wrote: The real capabilities of our military are quite astonishing. We know where ever nuclear submarine in the world is and at what depth.

... because our submarines tail them.

Wake wrote:
We have a method of destroying them right where they are without resorting to nuclear weapons and essentially turning those subs to dust.

We call that method "a torpedo."


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
10-03-2019 18:51
HarveyH55
★★★☆☆
(603)
Radar works best on the surface. They use sonar for underwater, because radar is crap for solids and liquids. Maybe they've made some great improvements in ground penetrating radar, since last I peeked at a screen, but it was pretty crappy to look at, hard to tell anything. everything reflects a little of the signal, lot of background noise. Even when they found something unusual or interesting, they had to dig to see if it was what they hoped to find. Pipes and cables are pretty easy, since they run long was, and have a consistent response. More than a little doubtful about it being scaled up, to do acres. If it took months to map a continent, then some of that ice would have melted, or grown before completing. Not sure how well they could get volume measurements either, least not better than guessing, which is good enough for the IPCC...
10-03-2019 20:21
Into the Night
★★★★★
(7678)
Wake wrote:
Tai Hai Chen wrote:
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47485847


In 2017 the Greenland Ice Sheet grew 50% more than usual. In 2018 it grew about normally. 2019 is only beginning and we are getting fearful reports about rainy weather?

Apparently we can now judge "global warming" by effects of a single season.


And how was this measured, Wake?


The Parrot Killer
10-03-2019 20:31
Into the Night
★★★★★
(7678)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Radar works best on the surface.

It depends on the application. Radar altimeters, for example, are quite common.
HarveyH55 wrote:
They use sonar for underwater, because radar is crap for solids and liquids.

If you choose the correct frequency, you can use radar to map storm intensity. That frequency reflects off water. ATC radar has this capability, but usually keep it turned off so the screen isn't cluttered up with clouds and storms. Some aircraft are equipped with weather radar as well. It's the kind of map you see when you look at the 'radar' map from a weather site. It is actually radar.

It's also what it a lousy system for viewing things underwater or under ice. By moving the frequency away from water resonance, you can see somewhat into such things, but it's still a pretty murky view.

Sonar is still the better choice.

HarveyH55 wrote:
More than a little doubtful about it being scaled up, to do acres. If it took months to map a continent, then some of that ice would have melted, or grown before completing. Not sure how well they could get volume measurements either, least not better than guessing, which is good enough for the IPCC...

Heh. The IPCC doesn't even bother with measurements at all. They just make it up as they go along.


The Parrot Killer
11-03-2019 18:46
Wake
★★★★★
(4024)
IBdaMann wrote:
Wake wrote:
Satellite photography can map the extent of the ice sheet and satellite radar can measure the depth. These can now be so carefully focused that they can tell differences between about 10 meter square patch. The military can read depths almost to the inch and on one square meter.

Please don't take this the wrong way but you have to be somewhat gullible to believe this. No, there are no satellites accurately measuring polar ice depth with their onboard radars.

What military do you believe has satellites that do this?


Wake wrote: The real capabilities of our military are quite astonishing. We know where ever nuclear submarine in the world is and at what depth.

... because our submarines tail them.

Wake wrote:
We have a method of destroying them right where they are without resorting to nuclear weapons and essentially turning those subs to dust.

We call that method "a torpedo."


I informed you of what is going on. You may chose to believe it or not. This certainly doesn't affect me in any manner.
11-03-2019 19:43
Into the Night
★★★★★
(7678)
Wake wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Wake wrote:
Satellite photography can map the extent of the ice sheet and satellite radar can measure the depth. These can now be so carefully focused that they can tell differences between about 10 meter square patch. The military can read depths almost to the inch and on one square meter.

Please don't take this the wrong way but you have to be somewhat gullible to believe this. No, there are no satellites accurately measuring polar ice depth with their onboard radars.

What military do you believe has satellites that do this?


Wake wrote: The real capabilities of our military are quite astonishing. We know where ever nuclear submarine in the world is and at what depth.

... because our submarines tail them.

Wake wrote:
We have a method of destroying them right where they are without resorting to nuclear weapons and essentially turning those subs to dust.

We call that method "a torpedo."


I informed you of what is going on. You may chose to believe it or not. This certainly doesn't affect me in any manner.


It obviously does, Wake, since you decided to post about it.

Feel that anger building yet?


The Parrot Killer




Join the debate Climate change: Rain melting Greenland ice sheet 'even in winter':

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
2019 Arctic sea ice wintertime extent is seventh lowest005-05-2019 13:50
Arctic's melting permafrost will cost nearly $70 trillion, study finds101-05-2019 21:12
Cause of global warming: melting glaciers.626-04-2019 05:16
Greenland Is Falling Apart024-04-2019 20:49
Does increase in Arctic sea ice indicate global cooling trend?025-03-2019 17:27
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact