Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Bicycles Can End Bad Weather
- “Gender-responsive climate action”
- Ellen Flees To The UK
- HUD Climate Advisor
- Causes Of Increased Storminess
- Scientist Kamala Harris
- The End Of Polar Bears
- Cats And Hamsters Cause Hurricanes
- Democrats’ Campaign Of Joy
- New BBC Climate Expert
- 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- “the United States has suffered a “precipitous increase” in hurricane strikes”
- Thing Of The Past Returns
- “Impossible Heatwaves”
- Billion Dollar Electric Chargers
- “Not A Mandate”
- Up Is Down
- The Clean Energy Boom
- Climate Change In Spain
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
Recent Comments
- arn on Bicycles Can End Bad Weather
- oeman50 on Bicycles Can End Bad Weather
- D. Boss on Bicycles Can End Bad Weather
- arn on Bicycles Can End Bad Weather
- arn on “Gender-responsive climate action”
- Greg in NZ on Bicycles Can End Bad Weather
- Peter Carroll on Bicycles Can End Bad Weather
- dm on “Gender-responsive climate action”
- Francis Barnett on “Gender-responsive climate action”
- czechlist on “Gender-responsive climate action”
Let’s hypothesize for a moment that GRACE is 100% correct… How is the mass balance change explained by AGW theory? You have these massive ice flows that are pushing out from deep from within the Antarctic interior… And BTW, this whole region is well below 0C. 😉
Are they suggesting that warming SST’s around Antarctic is causing this mass balance loss? What else could it be if AGW is the explanation? But how does that work please? The ice drops off into the ocean. This therefore ’causes’ the snow and ice behind it, all the way deep into the interior, to ‘accelerate’ into the ocean as well…? Huh?
Isn’t this another in a series of issues with GRACE?
I thing their key weasel word here is……. Any guesses?
Think! 😆
You said thing, I saw that, are coming down with Lewandosky syndrome? someone call the nurse.
Are you? there was a “you” there when I posted that. oh noes, I’ve got it too now!
A reminder here: IPCC claimed in their last report that surface mass balance (SMB) would increase and Antarctica would gain ice and snow and this would offset sea level rise significantly. (This is because according to the theory, more CO2, more water vapour, more water vapour, more snowfall over Antarctica.)
Then GRACE came along and the interpretation of that data was that Antarctica was loosing mass balance, although other measurements actually show SMB to be ‘stable’.
The loss of MB in Antarctica cannot be explained, as far as I can see, by AGW. It would indicate some sort of interesting process going on in that region for hundreds, maybe thousands or tens of thousands of years. However, if the MB calculations by GRACE were shown to be correct, this would presumably reduce the expected offset in sea level rise cited by the IPCC.
That’s my interpretation of the situation anyway. If someone has a better one, please correct me.
Wait for it then because it shouldn’t be too long.
When you see over 600 earthquakes in a running seven day period, you may wonder how the tectonic plates are responding. Does the mantle ever have tendencies to shift quickly?
We see rises along planetary mountain ranges and actually measure some of them. We know there are developing and collapsing ridges undersea, but haven’t been on top of them with critical measurements.
We are infants in our understanding of the many geo-physical processes and more so for electromagnetic interactions with molecular and atomic matter…
It’s a no shitter, that we have a long way to go, but I’m told “The Science is Settled”, wouldn’t you know.
I agree
What was discovered was that though gps data it was determined that the contact between the base of the glacial ice and the underlying basement rocks is actually subsiding at the rate of 7 mm/yr rather than rebounding like much of the underlying rocks at the edge or outside of the interior of the glaciers or ice sheets. This was also discovered for the interior of Greenland also. The top of the glaciers is determined from satelitte altimetry. The previous interpretation of the Grace gravity data is clearly wrong. Anybody who has worked woith gravity data knows it to be wildly inaccurate and subject to just about any interpretation one desires. This is just one more nail in the AGW coffin.