On average in the summer, about half of the surface of Greenland’s ice sheet naturally melts. At high elevations, most of that melt water quickly refreezes in place. Near the coast, some of the melt water is retained by the ice sheet and the rest is lost to the ocean. But this year the extent of ice melting at or near the surface jumped dramatically. According to satellite data, an estimated 97 percent of the ice sheet surface thawed at some point in mid-July.
Researchers have not yet determined whether this extensive melt event will affect the overall volume of ice loss this summer and contribute to sea level rise.
kjb434 giving me a small chuckle until I realize he probably votes, says:
7/25/2012 at 10:59 am
bobo,
historically, being on the consensus side in science is a losing proposition. /// Yeah, thats fun to roll over in one’s mind. At first, there is a consensus the earth is flat. So==basically I agree that “the first ideas” that were generally accepted have proven to be wrong. But were those first ideas those of science? You know–tested with a theory with opposing views welcomed to present their evidence? Did “SCIENCE” ever generally agree the earth was flat? I’m not a science historian (wifey has her PHD in that subject, but not me). ……. yes, science did exist back when the earth was flat. Individuals and schools using observation and theory/math. Very much the minority in a general society that accepted the word of the bible or continuing superstitions.
….. OK…. thru rolling the rhetorical over in my mind. …. “science” has been the mainstay in analysis only for the past 300 years or so. The consensus that existed pre science were not of science. Pretty easy to see.
Also, I find it funny that climate scientist never refute claims made against their data and models. They don’t even enter debates. /// “Never?” More of your absolutist nonsense. What are the annual IPCC reports that are issued except responses to criticism? Lots of massaging of the model has gone on in response to criticism. Revealing stupidity to say otherwise.
The ones that do the refuting are stooges like yourself, politicians that need climate change to be real for power, and journalists. /// Discussions of power and tax rememdies are not discussions about the Science. A common conflation of issues. Even Orchi has promised to stop doing that. You should too.
Also, I wouldn’t run to Wikipedia. I would suggest you actually read the Wikipedia article and it’s references then site the real source. Citing Wikipedia is for amateurs. /// Blowhards without their own sources denigrate the Mighty Wiki. Wiki–good to provide “some” objectivity. Certainly stands up against no links at all such as yourself.
Finally, you being a man of science, can you explain how Mars is experiencing the exact same warming patterns the earth is? /// Coincidence? Exact same = sounds more like the product of ignorance. Mars has a very thin atmosphere with no water vapor. Not the same thing at all. Very stupid statement.
Are the lunar rovers emitting CO2 ruining that planet? // No.
Mar’s experiences the same warming trends as Earth as documented by NASA’s Goddard Institute. /// Link?==and I’ll bet $ to a**holes the link itself will say there is only an analogy on 1 or 2 points and complete differences on 50 points negating the coincidences. Prove me wrong.
Maybe our warming trends is due to that little fireball we call the sun. And there is more substantive data to support that theory than anything climate scientist are presenting. /// Not on your bald assertion is that true. All kinds of solar and orbital patterns are in the model. You actually don’t know what you are talking about at all. NAME one trend that is not included in the model: ……. chirp …… chirp …… chirp.
Knuckle dragging science denying talking points with no links is all you’ve got.
Sad really.
Amateurs like you can have the truth laid out right in front of you and never accept it. I’ll leave you in your delusional state.
Reply
Honestly I really don’t understand why so many people would disregard this fact or outright not even bother believing it in the first place. That is just too cynical in my opinion.
The melting is happening, it’s been happening for years. How this affects us and the ocean ranges from rising sea levels to the change in currents thus the change in ocean environments, which is imo more dangerous than anyone on this planet has ever realized. If the later happens, and it will imo, we won’t have a solution and will not have a solution for many years. And even then it’ll take decades for changes to take effect.
Please stop living in this “…the world was created 3000 years ago…” crap and wake up. For the sake of humanity be reasonable, that’s all I can hope for.
Ah nevermind, after going back to read the comments it has become clear why some people can’t get over “facts.” I use the term correctly without realizing that there are cynical people out there. Cast one doubt to a fact and they become viral to the point of denying everything. I assume suggesting a class in Quantum anything would be irrelevant here as well because it is already a lie in their head to begin with.
Science does indeed have strong opposition, strong indeed 😮
http://summitcamp.org/status/webcam/
I suppose they did a good job of prediction, and sited themselves on the 3% that survived?
Propose a “solution” that results in greater urban sprawl and more Americans driving 4x4s.
If you can’t do that, you’re wasting time discussing something irrelevant to anything important.
The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consul Ifft, at Bergen, Norway.
Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers, he declared, all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met with as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm.
Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared. Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts, which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.
Published in 1922.
Whats your point?
That all this is cyclical.
This melting of glaciers in Greenland and the rest of the world has happened (several times) even before the industrial revolution.
What caused it then? If current theories are focusing on man-made CO2 and our industrial developments, how do these theories explain the previous glacial thaws?
The snow cap on Mt. Kilimanjaro is often shown as an example of the impact of man, yet there are photographs and document of it having less and more snow coverage in modern history.
These simple realizations that destroy the theories being put for today for the climate change can’t handle these realities.