Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Grim Picture of Polar Ice-Sheet Loss

Soulskill posted about a year and a half ago | from the i-blame-the-ice-cube-miners dept.

Earth 412

ananyo writes "A global team of researchers has come up with the most accurate estimate yet for melting of the polar ice sheets, ending decades of uncertainty about whether the sheets will melt further or actually gain mass in the face of climate change. The ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica are melting at an ever-quickening pace. Since 1992, they have contributed 11 millimeters — or one-fifth — of the total global sea-level rise, say the researchers. The two polar regions are now losing mass three times faster than they were 20 years ago, with Greenland alone now shedding ice at about five times the rate observed in the early 1990s. This latest estimate, published this week in Science, draws on up to 32 years of ice-sheet simulations and 20 years of satellite data to give an estimate two to three times more accurate than that in the last IPCC report."

cancel ×

412 comments

Fingers in ears (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42141567)

LALALAALAAA we can't hear you.

Re:Fingers in ears (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42141675)

When shit eventually hits the fan, those fingers will be pointing blame... at someone.

Re:Fingers in ears (1)

alexhs (877055) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142059)

When shit eventually hits the fan, those fingers will be pointing blame... at someone.

The US Army Corps of Engineers [businessweek.com] maybe ?

Re:Fingers in ears (1)

Pirulo (621010) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142079)

yep, they know how to teach nature a lesson

Re:Fingers in ears (0, Troll)

cayenne8 (626475) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142069)

OOOoh.....a whole 11 mm???

.....scary.

Re:Fingers in ears (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42142281)

Did you stop reading there, or are you ignoring the bit about the accelerating melting?

Re:Fingers in ears (0, Troll)

craigminah (1885846) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142143)

Obviously this is George Bush's fault.

This news isn't anything new as there's been plenty of stories about the shrinking ice sheets in Greenland and the Andes in the last decade. The part that's in debate is the cause...is this anthropogenic, cyclical, or a combination of the two? Looking back at data from various sources shows it's cyclical with a trend towards ice melt not being restored by the subsequent winter ice freeze from one year to the next. This results in less ice (derka derka). Nobody can say with certainty what's causing this and it would be futile to try to reverse it; it will all work itself out when humankind goes extinct :)

GW is real (-1, Flamebait)

Das Auge (597142) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142057)

Of course global warming is real. It started at the end of the last ice age. You know, when the polar ice cap extended down into modern-day Illinois.

Re:GW is real (3, Insightful)

agentgonzo (1026204) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142083)

There's a difference between coming out of an ice-age (a natural process over tens of thousands of years) and global warming, where there is a noticeable change in temperature/ice-caps over a period of years/decades.
And it's trolls like you spreading FUD that don't help matters.

Re:GW is real (0)

fredrated (639554) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142187)

Why do you waste your breath?

Re:GW is real (1)

Jetra (2622687) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142217)

Well, according to the Vostok Petit Data, we're about due for another one right about now. So, maybe it's not global warming only, but a number of differing factors that are leading to another Ice Age 20XX

Re:GW is real (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42142327)

You think that accelerating melting of ice is evidence that we are going into another ice age?

Re:GW is real (-1, Flamebait)

Xicor (2738029) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142405)

it is incredibly foolish to believe that humans are responsible for the melting of the polar icecaps. one volcano eruption puts off more CO2 than all of the emmissions that humans have put out since there were humans. how many eruptions are there on average per year? yea... a lot.

Re:GW is real (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42142291)

So where the ice was 100 years ago before global warming started is exactly where "normal" is and where the ice should always have and forever have stayed? How was that determined.

Re:GW is real (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42142469)

I just read the entire linked article, no mention of actual loss or rate changes, just references to "more", "faster", "significant", "alarming", "in the past", "ever-quickening pace". No specific numbers mentioned? Well one number, the rise of sea level, why include that but not a cu ft of ice or something similar? Why would specific numbers be left out?

I like the first paragraph, implying this is the ultimate study and ends all controvesy and uncertanty. That's it guys, no more questioning or studies are required, everything has already been done with this study.

"A global team of researchers has come up with the 'most accurate estimate' yet for melting of the polar ice sheets, ending decades of uncertainty about whether the sheets will melt further or actually gain mass in the face of climate change."

Hey, I'm a believer in global warming and the ice melting but this piece seems to be more politically motivated than science related.

I for one.. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42141593)

I for one look forward to being an island-dwelling overlord...

Re:I for one.. (1)

aliquis (678370) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141853)

IMDB: Waterworld [imdb.com]

Bring it on!

Just one question. Thankfully we don't only build ships of trees these days. That could had been a problem. =P

Re:I for one.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42141955)

I for one look forward to living in my house located on the eventual sunny beaches of Tulsa, Oklahoma!

It's OK (5, Funny)

Lije Baley (88936) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141617)

We have a spare on Mercury.

Oh noes! 11 mm in 20 years! (4, Funny)

hsthompson69 (1674722) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141627)

Everybody raise their houses by 2cm, quick!

Re:Oh noes! 11 mm in 20 years! (2, Insightful)

skids (119237) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141719)

55mm in 20 years, 11mm due to ice loss, a bunch more due to thermal expansion of the oceans which is also AGW-related.

5cm may not sound like much to you, but to someone looking for a 30+ year real estate investment, and observing this trend of accelerating ocean rise, it will effect property valuations for some coastal property. Especially since the expectation is that, unchecked, this measurement will eventually be in meters.

Re:Oh noes! 11 mm in 20 years! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42141897)

doesn't water contract as it gets warmer?

Re:Oh noes! 11 mm in 20 years! (2)

skids (119237) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141977)

Only in a small zone near the freezing point.

Re:Oh noes! 11 mm in 20 years! (3, Informative)

Troyusrex (2446430) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141981)

For 0 to 4 degrees C it contracts but warmer than that it expands. Water Physics_and_chemistry [wikipedia.org]

Re:Oh noes! 11 mm in 20 years! (1)

nedlohs (1335013) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142065)

Depends on the temperature. at 3C yes, at 5C no.

Re:Oh noes! 11 mm in 20 years! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42142105)

H2O contracts as it goes from solid (ice) to liquid (water), so there is a range at which that's true. At average ocean temperatures, increasing the temperature/energy level will expand the volume.

Re:Oh noes! 11 mm in 20 years! (5, Interesting)

Zocalo (252965) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141903)

Got into a discussion about this recently over the recent (and on-going) flooding in the UK. If the sea level and temperatures both rise, then a logical expectation of that would be that more water would evaporate off the oceans into the atmosphere, subsequently returning as rain and snow. That would entail more runoff and a corresponding rise in river levels and increased risk of flooding, particularly given the growing pressure on housing in some areas resulting in flood plains being used for development.

It's not just the people with beachfront properties that need to be worried...

Re:Oh noes! 11 mm in 20 years! (4, Funny)

agentgonzo (1026204) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142099)

but to someone looking for a 30+ year real estate investment, and observing this trend of accelerating ocean rise, it will effect property valuations for some coastal property.

I live about 15 miles inland, so raising seas will actually increase my house value because I'll then be able to sell it as having a sea-view! /sarcasm

Re:Oh noes! 11 mm in 20 years! (4, Insightful)

hsthompson69 (1674722) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142437)

Everything is AGW related - hot spells, cold spells, droughts, floods, riots, earthquakes, locusts, hurricanes, doldrums - that's a cop out.

The fact of the matter here is that 11mm in 20 years, or 55mm in 20 years, is ridiculously small. Seriously, 6 *centimeters* in 20 years. Even with a thirty year horizon, that's not more than 10 *centimeters*.

Quick quiz: how much did ocean levels rise from 1900-2000, and how many acres of real estate were devalued because of it?

As for acceleration, sea level rise is actually *slowing* - there's simply no possible plausible scenario that is going to turn *millimeters* of change into *meters* of change in in 20 years, or even 100 for that matter.

Re:Oh noes! 11 mm in 20 years! (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42141731)

Your poor attempt at humor missed the point that the ice caps are losing mass three to five times faster than they were 20-ish years ago. Less ice at the poles means less sunlight reflected back into space, which means more heat retained on Earth, which means higher temperatures, faster ice melting, compounding the problem further. Not to mention more radically unpredictable weather. But no, go back into your cave, put on your tinfoil hat, and deny that physics are a thing.

then 22. Then 44. Then 88. (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42141755)

Then you'll be bitching about all these foreigners coming in and taking up all the land, eating all the food and making trouble.

why?

Because you're an asshat.

Re:Oh noes! 11 mm in 20 years! (0)

frostfreek (647009) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141779)

Tell that to these guys... [youtube.com]
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvRvGmJAuNc)

Re:Oh noes! 11 mm in 20 years! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42141805)

Windwaker here we come!

Predictions? (2)

lorinc (2470890) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141665)

Given that the article is pay-walled, is there any prediction about ice loss? What are the most recent predictions that have given accurate result in the past?

Grim? (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42141673)

Warm=more food. Works for me.

My prediction for this discussion (4, Insightful)

actiondan (445169) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141681)

I predict:

People who don't believe in AGW/man made climate change will think that this study is just part of the conspiracy

Most people who do believe in AGW/man made climate change will continue to suggest remedies that just will not happen due to economics/human nature

The small amount of actually useful discussion of how we can adapt to a changing climate (no matter what it's cause) will be drowned out in the accusations and counter accusations

Re:My prediction for this discussion (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42141761)

Oh, I know there is some level of global warming caused by mankind but frankly, I don't care. I'd rather live high on the hog now and let the planet go by the wayside than think that there's some reason I should try to stop, or even think that I could stop it in the first place.
 
the universe is doubtlessly flowing with life and even if it's not there's no reason to think the life on this planet is that big of a deal. In Contact they compared us to micro-organisms living on an anthill in Africa. That about sums it up for me.
 
I mean, seriously, why do you care if Earth becomes another Venus?

Re:My prediction for this discussion (5, Insightful)

ratbag (65209) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141811)

I mean, seriously, why do you care if Earth becomes another Venus?

My twin nieces, Ruby and Winnie. My nephews Leo and Max.

Sorry to appeal to emotion, but I find your attitude a little cold, a little remote, a little shitty.

Re:My prediction for this discussion (2)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141971)

Sorry to appeal to emotion, but I find your attitude a little cold, a little remote, a little shitty.

Look on the bright side: with global warming and rising seas, his attitude will get warmer, less remote (as we all huddle together on Island Everest), and a tsunami may wash his shitty attitude away.

Re:My prediction for this discussion (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42141991)

Wow. I really didn't expect so much sentiment for a bunch of meatbags from the Slashtards. Life is not sacred. Give it up. I'm sure you do plenty in your life that is disrespectful and outright hostile to other life. Stop trying to act like you're a saint in this matter.

Re:My prediction for this discussion (1)

Gripp (1969738) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142413)

WTF is wrong with you? Some people on this planet are shitty, yes. But that doesn't mean the entirety of humanity should be wiped out, all because you don't like it. And that sentiment doesn't make me a "saint" either. Merely someone who isn't so egotistical that thinks I should do whatever the **** I feel like simply because other people are assholes. Get over yourself.

Re:My prediction for this discussion (2)

Christian Smith (3497) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142123)

I mean, seriously, why do you care if Earth becomes another Venus?

My twin nieces, Ruby and Winnie. My nephews Leo and Max.

Sorry to appeal to emotion, but I find your attitude a little cold, a little remote, a little shitty.

Like many on /., he has little chance of breeding, so might as well make the most of it if he's not going to propagate his genes.

Re:My prediction for this discussion (1)

arth1 (260657) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141829)

You may not care about others, but do you perhaps care about whether your children and grandchildren suffer from poverty, starvation and illnesses?

I wouldn't mind if the planet went out with a big bang, but I'm no fan of suffering. Except people in white cars who cut in front of me.

Re:My prediction for this discussion (2)

JustOK (667959) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141995)

So you're saying Sheldon Cooper is behind it all?

Re:My prediction for this discussion (2)

skids (119237) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142093)

If everyone slacked off and never worked or studied, we'd live in a world without many of the luxuries we enjoy today.

If every species in the Universe adopted this attutude, that would be a recipe for one giant trailer park of cosmological existence.

Even if we make the (arguably reasonable) assumption that there is nothing unique about our little corner of existence, it is still incumbant upon us not just to enjoy our day to day lives, but to foster an environment that is conducive to more enjoyable lives. We can't control the past, but we do have some influence over the future.

Re:My prediction for this discussion (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42142155)

it is still incumbant upon us not just to enjoy our day to day lives, but to foster an environment that is conducive to more enjoyable lives.
 
Pure bible thumping nonsense.

nice troll (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42142445)

I see the climate change trolls are now attempting to use sarcasm.

Earth won't become another Venus. It's getting a bit warmer and sea levels are rising a little. BFD.

Re:My prediction for this discussion (3, Funny)

Captain Hook (923766) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142453)

the universe is doubtlessly flowing with life and even if it's not there's no reason to think the life on this planet is that big of a deal.

Doctor Manhattan, is that you?

Re:My prediction for this discussion (0)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141809)

1000 years ago Greenland had no ice as well because the Vikings were living on it. we know this because they left a lot of garbage before they left as the ice sheet came back. they were making wine in england 1000 years ago because it was warm enough to grow grapes.

we also know the conditions in coastal areas and cities at the time from writings and environmental evidence

did the major coastal cities sink into the ocean 1000 years ago when it was just as warm as today and Greenland had no ice? what about during the Pax Romana?

Re:My prediction for this discussion (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42141993)

they were making wine in england 1000 years ago because it was warm enough to grow grapes.

Equally plausible is that they had different varieties of grapes back then or they were using inferior varieties of grapes that were surpassed by varieties from warmer regions when transportation and commerce allowed them to import better wine?

I bet people can still grow grapes in England, just like my parents planted two grape vines in Minnesota when they got married. The damn things took 20 years to produce fruit and after that it was some pretty terrible fruit. Still would have fermented just fine though ...

Re:My prediction for this discussion (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42142009)

1000 years ago Greenland had no ice as well because the Vikings were living on it. we know this because they left a lot of garbage before they left as the ice sheet came back. they were making wine in england 1000 years ago because it was warm enough to grow grapes.

we also know the conditions in coastal areas and cities at the time from writings and environmental evidence

did the major coastal cities sink into the ocean 1000 years ago when it was just as warm as today and Greenland had no ice? what about during the Pax Romana?

Weather 100 years from now will be as warm as today + 4 degrees with a chance of runaway greenhouse effect. Wupdiduu!

Re:My prediction for this discussion (5, Insightful)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142371)

Guys, guys.... Engage brain before a) posting and b) modding "informative". 1000 years ago Greenland had a couple of ice-free bays with just enough land for a handful of settlements. Which fared poorly. You do not seriously believe that then whole inland ice of Greenland was gone 1000 years ago?

Re:My prediction for this discussion (5, Interesting)

dkleinsc (563838) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141893)

Here's my non-predicted reaction: We're boned.

Specifically, we aren't going to do what's necessary until it's already too late, because humans do a really bad job of responding to threats that aren't immediate. I won't be surprised if some people manage to adapt and survive, but it's going to be very messy, expensive, and violent (desperate people do not just lay down and die quietly), and there's no way those who survive will have the same standard of living as a typical modern American.

Re:My prediction for this discussion (4, Insightful)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141935)

The small amount of actually useful discussion of how we can adapt to a changing climate (no matter what it's cause) will be drowned out in the accusations and counter accusations

Well, the good news is that the status of the atmosphere, and the survival of the human species, does not depend on discussions on slashdot.

The bad news is that it instead depends on discussions between politicians, lobbyists, and voters.

Re:My prediction for this discussion (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42141945)

Most people who do believe in AGW/man made climate change will continue to suggest remedies that just will not happen due to economics/human nature

The small amount of actually useful discussion of how we can adapt to a changing climate (no matter what it's cause) will be drowned out in the accusations and counter accusations

Oh so you're in the "let's just embrace how fucked we are!" camp? You're like the French of Global Warming.

Re:My prediction for this discussion (1)

M0j0_j0j0 (1250800) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141975)

Humans you know, this planet is full of them!!

Re:My prediction for this discussion (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42141983)

HERE HERE ... Totally agree... When man will be dying of thirst in 30 years from now .. they will realize that climate change in this decade is a reality. No matter what the cause.

Personally -- CO2 is not the cause alone:

Causes : Over population --> which leads to cutting down trees to build houses ---> which leads to lest forestation --> more people to transport --> which leads to more roads --> which leads to more cars --> which leads to more CO2

Not to mention all the barbecues (that generate heat!)

Re:My prediction for this discussion (1)

Danathar (267989) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142037)

How very well stated.

Re:actiondan's Prediction (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42142195)

actiondan is your nickname? Shouldn't it be inactiondan? Or maybe apathydan? Or maybe Idontgiveafuckaboutthefuturedan?

Re:My prediction for this discussion (1)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142221)

I have my solution! Want to hear it?

Just like every good hero, rather than slaying the beast, we defeat it by letting it do what it does, but not matter. So let the ice melt, so long as we can displace the extra water. Build autonomous drills that just crawl the sea floor and start poking holes, giving the water somewhere to go

Re:My prediction for this discussion (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42142279)

What about the people who see geological evidence that the global temperatures (and sea levels) were much higher than they are now some millions of years ago? And that they also were much lower than they are now in other points of geological history? What about people who know that sequence stratigraphy [wikipedia.org] shows us very clearly that the sea levels have changed by about 500m over the past half a billion years, with very well defined cycles [wikipedia.org] with different periods supreimposed to each other? What about people who understand plate tectonics and know that we're at the approximate midpoint between two supercontinents, so the tendency is that the space for seas will decrease and sea levels will increase over the next hundreds of million of years? What about people who know that even a 5th order glatial period (like the last one we had, less than 50 thousand years ago) was enough to change sea levels by more than 100 meters over the space of a few centuries? That's FASTER than the fastest predictions for human-caused global warming, BTW.

If you tried to understand the forces that act on our planet, you'd also understand that anything we can do is to either help a little or slow down a little the forces that the planet sets. We can't make the glaciers melt, that's ridiculous. We could make them melt in 9999 years instead of 10000 (numbers pulled directly out of my ass), or 10001. One thing we know: the sea level is almost at its lowest point ever. We should expect major increases of sea level over the next millions of years, of the order of 500m. The natural tendency now is that the sea levels go UP. It's not a human effect, it's a geological certainty.

PS: Sorry for linking to Wikipedia. It's not a reference, but its references are fine. I don't want to give you an authority argument. I want to give you information enough to look up on the longer term effects, that the media doesn't seem to acknowledge (because "WE ARE KILLING TEH PLANET OMG THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!" sells a bit more papers than "WE BUILT CITIES NEAR THE COAST BUT THE SEA IS COMING BACK UP").

Re:My prediction for this discussion (1)

na1led (1030470) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142285)

Earth has a fever, and humans are the virus.

On the plus side! (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141685)

Well, at least snow and ice definitely don't have some of the highest Albedo values among terrestrial surface coverings, so losing them won't increase absorption of solar radiation at all!

Cue Next phase of Denial (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42141687)

At this point the evidence for warming is so overwhelming that I wonder if the shift to "..but humans aren't causing it!" will be begun en masse soon. I've already started seeing "It's not worth doing anything about!", but they're still a small chunk of the denier population.

It all makes sense now. (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42141705)

The polar ice is white, so it must be evil. Just like the anti-white racism towards humans.

Re:It all makes sense now. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42142343)

Let's see if I've got this straight

Polar ice = white
white = evil
evil = anti-white racism toward humans (as opposed to, say, white bunnies)

!Polar ice = !white
!white = !evil
!evil = !anti-white racism
!anti-white racism = white racism
white racism = !evil
!evil = good
good = white racism

no rapid melting (1, Informative)

kenorland (2691677) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141769)

The study excludes suggestions of rapid melting: "Antarctica is not losing ice as rapidly as suggested by many recent studies. What’s more, snowfall in east Antarctica still seems to be compensating for some — but not all — of the melting elsewhere in Antarctica." It generally just seems to confirm what people had been assuming was happening anyway: a modest amount of melting in response to increasing temperatures. Note that melting from ice sheets only accounts for 20% of total sea level rise.

Re:no rapid melting (1)

aliquis (678370) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141883)

What make up the other 80%?

Plastic garbage? Submarines? Series of tubes?

Re:no rapid melting (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42142003)

water expands as it warms (above a couple degrees C)

I did find that 11mm number excessively precise. I suppose 1cm seems so much smaller though.

Re:no rapid melting (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42142107)

Pumping, using, flushing of Ground Water

Accurate Estimate (1)

tmosley (996283) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141775)

I don't quite understand what the summary is saying here. If it is an estimate, how can they know that it is accurate? Was this estimate a prediction made some time ago, and has since been verified by measurement?

Predictions are about the future, not the past! (2, Insightful)

tp1024 (2409684) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141789)

So, you came up with a model that accurately predicts the past?

What nonesense is that? The accuracy of a model can only be determined by testing it against reality, and not against the data it has been fitted to. You need new data to do that and I'm sorry to tell you that new annual data sets will arrive only at a pace of one per year.

Meanwhile, shut up and look at the models you've made so far and be ashamed of the constant revisions in both directions.

In any other branch of science coming up with the kind of models and inaccuracies that climate science comes up with, scientists would simply say .. well, sorry, we cannot model these processes with any degree of accuracy and be done with it. If you came up with a better model, well, good for you, but now you have to *prove* it is actually better than all the rest so far.

A daily unreality (2)

Coisiche (2000870) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141793)

Problem is that for most people it doesn't gel with their personal experience.

If The Scotsman newspaper runs this news then it's a guarantee that for a couple of days following the article the letters page would be full of "It was snowing here; so much for global warming" and "But I saw ice on the ground this morning" and similar variants.

And yes, I know it's my own fault for reading the letters page in The Scotsman.

Re:A daily unreality (2, Funny)

dkleinsc (563838) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141969)

This is not a new problem. For instance, The Daily Show [thedailyshow.com] described the issue brilliantly almost 2 years ago.

More about this again? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42141823)

Damn...

At last the mystery can be revealed! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42141825)

Ha! With the Greenland's icesheet melting, Google can no longer credibly cover up the secret alien base complex [imgur.com] that could be seen temporarily in GoogleEarth due to a lapse of the Google Censorship Directorate to remove the satellite image evidence.

Re:At last the mystery can be revealed! (1)

JustOK (667959) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142023)

They planned the leak to cover up something else.

32 years of simulations? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42141851)

Why simulations? Can't they just measure?

Re:32 years of simulations? (4, Funny)

skids (119237) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142111)

Genius. I'll break out the 1000-mile wide scale, you lift greenland onto it.

I call foul! (1)

Tarlus (1000874) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141857)

There isn't actually a picture!

From the article last paragraph (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42141925)

It is unclear how these trends, such as ice loss from Greenland, will evolve, says Ian Joughin, one of the paper's co-authors and a satellite expert at the University of Washington in Seattle. “It really remains unclear whether such losses will decline, whether they’ll level off or they’ll accelerate further,” he says.

It's Been Happening.. (2)

CrazyDoode (843836) | about a year and a half ago | (#42141951)

It's been happening for the the last 12K Years, I think it is about time someone took notice.

Thor be praised (1)

Dishwasha (125561) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142025)

I have it on good authority that Techno Viking [youtube.com] is excitedly awaiting the construction of his summer home in northern Greenland.

Waaaaaargh! (1)

Kerstyun (832278) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142045)

Them tree-huggin' marxist's wants to take away my Hummor!!!!!!

Queue the denialists ... (1)

tgd (2822) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142047)

And once queued, we'll cue them one by one.

confused.com (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42142103)

this says one thing and this -> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/28/sea_levels_new_science_climate_change/ says another, I building a boat whatever....

I know what we can do to fight it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42142115)

Let's raise taxes and hand our hard earned money to unaccountable bureaucrats!

Re:I know what we can do to fight it... (0)

fredrated (639554) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142219)

You are a 1 thought pony.

What's Polar Ice? (3, Funny)

Psicopatico (1005433) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142145)

Polar ice is Cartesian ice after a coordinate trasformation.

So wait, they've always been losing ice? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42142183)

If I understand the FUD correctly, the ice sheets/glaciers have been losing ice anyways, and would have lost all their ice eventually, they're just going to lose all the ice sooner than originally thought? Total non-story then.

Stop going on about "Saving the planet" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42142191)

You're not trying to save the planet, you're trying to save a narrow band ecosystem in which humans are most comfortable.
The planet would still be here if we dropped every nuke we had on it, just the humans wouldn't be around to screw up their own ecosystem anymore.

What, what? This doesn't make sense. (1)

scorp1us (235526) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142199)

The ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica are melting at an ever-quickening pace. Since 1992, they have contributed 11 millimeters — or one-fifth — of the total global sea-level rise

The ice sheets in Antarctica are growing. It's the only reliable good news.
One fifth? Where's the other 4/5th coming from?

You gullible cretins (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42142229)

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/11/30/how-the-climate-scumbags-operate-part-1/

Sea Level (3, Insightful)

deimtee (762122) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142247)

Easiest way to fix sea level rises is to dig two channels.
Connect the Caspian Sea and the Dead Sea (and the rest of the Great Rift Valley) to the open ocean and watch the water level drop.

Rock Solid Science (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42142325)

Just to recap --

Most people will agree that the planet has been here somewhere between thousands of years and millions of years, and to come to "most accurate estimate yet for melting of the polar ice sheets" they have used historcial weather data that goes all the way back to......1980.

And the global warming people wonder why the majority of the scientific community thinks they are a joke? Really?

What percent of 4,000,000,000 is 32? (1, Informative)

STRICQ (634164) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142391)

Oh my! 32 years and 20 years of monitoring, the melt is unprecedented! After 4 billion years of existence, the Earth is laughing quite heartily at the experts.

Look on the bright side of life. (2)

mt1955 (698912) | about a year and a half ago | (#42142467)

If the sea level would just rise about 30 more meters or so my house would be on the beach, plus -- and this is a big plus -- no one would ever have to smell New Jersey again.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...