So you spent time and money on learning something and won't use that knowledge in conversations?
Only want to establish certainty on things you know nothing about?
Multiple NASA Studies Confirm Bedrock Heat Flow Behind Melting Polar Ice, Not...
- Thread starter USFREEDOM911
- Start date
Only want to establish certainty on things you know nothing about?
Because it's the truth.
You're so misguided. Just believe what you want.
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
Oh, don't worry; because liberals will claim that the reason it never happened, is because of the "changes" they've pushed for.
We could enter an ice age tomorrow and they will never admit that they fucked up; because they just climbed on the band wagon for no other reason, then it FELT good.
Figure 1: Lake Hazen with ice clinging to its shore during the summer.
Recent changes to Lake Hazen, the world’s largest high-Arctic lake, are from increased heat flow from the area’s known geological features, and not from global warming as per the many alarmist media reports.
Evidence supporting this is abundant and reliable.
Northeast Canada’s Lake Hazen lies adjacent to the world-class Greenland/Iceland mantle plume (Figure 2).
Mantle plumes are narrow streams of deep inner earth sourced hot rock that spread like a ‘mushroom’ cap beneath the Earth’s surface.
They act to significantly warm overlying rocks, warm and chemically alter overlying oceans, and melt overlying ice masses.
Research by the University of Kansas has confirmed the results of three previous studies all indicating that geothermal heat flow from the Greenland/Iceland mantle plume is the dominant and likely sole cause of anomalous Greenland ice sheet melting. (see here, here, here, and here).
The ground-warming and ice-melting power of this geological feature are estimated to cover 720,000 square miles extending from the northern edge of Ellesmere Island to the eastern shore of Iceland.
Figure 2: Location map of high-Arctic Lake Hazen and surrounding major heat flowing geological features, most notably the massive deep inner earth reaching Greenland/Iceland mantle plume.
Lake Hazen is located within and owes its very existence to a highly faulted portion of the Arctic (see here). Movement along one of these faults, known as the Lake Hazen Thrust, acted to down drop and form an enclosed long linear valley that is home to Lake Hazen.
Other geological indications of high heat flow in the Lake Hazen area include: Surface Lava Flows in northern Ellesmere Island, High Surface Temperatures in southern and northern Ellesmere Island, the Wegener Left Lateral Fault, and the Borup Fiord Pass Sulfur-Rich Hot Spring(Figure 2).
There are a total of four mineral-rich springs located in the Lake Hazen area (see here, here, here, here, and Figure 2). It should be noted that the springs are geothermally sourced from deep, inner-earth geologic features.
Although the temperature of the spring’s water is cool at its surface-discharge points, it is likely that at slightly deeper depths the spring’s water is warmer, the result of deep, inner-earth geothermal heat flow.
The low temperature of the spring’s surface-discharge water is almost certainly related to the cooling effect of overlying surface glacial water.
The unusually hot spring-like mineral and biological content of the spring’s surface water and position of the springs above the faults supports this interpretation.
Discovery of two liquid freshwater lakes beneath 1,500 feet of glacial ice in the Devon Ice Shelf is even more proof that bedrock heat flow is at work in the greater northeast Canadian Arctic region (see here).
These subglacial lakes are likely generated by geothermal heat flow from deep, inner-reaching faults.
The long, linear shape and orientation of the subglacial lakes perfectly match the surface trend of faults that abut the Devon Ice Sheet (Figure 3).
Figure 3: Geological map of Devon Island (left) and subglacial bedrock topographic map of newly discovered freshwater lakes (after Okulitch 1991, see here, here, and here).
Geologists had for many years suggested the well-documented existence of several subglacial liquid freshwater lakes beneath Antarctica’s 7,000 feet of glacial ice was proof of a significant, underlying heat-flowing geological feature.
Recent research by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and others has proven that there is, in fact, a 620,000-square-mile mantle plume beneath Antarctica (see here, here, and here).
Other recent research has shown that this giant mantle plume is responsible for generating a continent-wide and interconnected system of subglacial liquid freshwater lake and streams (Figure 1 below).
Figure 4: Illustration of Antarctica’s massive subglacial liquid freshwater flowing system of interconnected lakes (light blue dots) and streams (medium blue lines). NASA research has proved what most geologists suspected for years, that this subglacial water system is the result of bedrock geothermal heat flow emitted from an underlying deep-earth “mantle plume.”
The discovery of two subglacial lakes in the greater Lake Hazen area may be the ‘tip of the iceberg’ involving the influence of geological heat flow and the vast interconnected system of lakes and streams in other Arctic regions.
In summary, the evidence in this article strongly supports the notion that geologically induced high-heat flow is affecting ice extent and biological systems of the world’s largest high-Arctic lake — not global warming.
http://www.plateclimatology.com/lar...lting-from-geothermal-heat-not-global-warming
The plateclimatology article’s title is a lie. None of the articles they referenced made the claim that they are. From one of their references:
“We give the slight disclaimer that this is just another model — it’s our best statistical model — but we have not reproduced reality,”
cancel2 2022
Canceled
Here is your chance to put your money on the table. I have asked numerous warmists on here and not one is either willing, or indeed able, to answer this question. So then which of the four Representative Concentration Pathways outlined in the IPCC AR5 (2013) do you believe to be the most realistic scenario? Maybe you'll be the first to answer, but I won't hold my breath?
cancel2 2022
Canceled
The rise in CO2 levels has resulted in substantial regreening of the Earth, that's a fact. NASA themselves state that they average sea level rise is around 1.8mm per year or less than 6 inches by the end of the century!!
I learned those subjects because 1) they are part of my degree, and 2) they enable me to better provide patient/family teaching. They are the underpinning of how our bodies function. One semester in chemistry, however, does not make me an chemist, any more than reading Hawking's "A Brief History of Time" makes me a physicist. Learning the names of clouds does not make you a climate scientist or a meteorologist. You are, however, clever at finding pseudo-scientific stuff purporting to back up your claims, like all of your kind.
Always a personal insult. Hate females or something? Never see you deliver the personal attacks to
men in here who've devoted a lot of time and study to this like Havana Moon or lived out their
knowledge in their profession like Sailor or put together an excellent compilation of NASA reporting
like USF911. We all shared good information with you.
Or is it just easier to deliver the personal insult of "all of your kind" to only me in order to
include others "of my kind" I'm in agreement with so you don't have to say it to a man?
So again, believe what you want.
In the Night
Contributor
No one believes IT ISN'T TRUE anymore! NO ONE! Even YOU.
Carter warned us. REAGAN ignored it. Simultaneously BIG OIL (the BIGGEST OIL) wrote their reports. (Their accuracy was beyond anything I would have believed could be predicted with such precision almost 40 years later).
Shell and Exxon's secret 1980s climate change warnings
[FONT=&]Newly found documents from the 1980s show that fossil fuel companies privately predicted the global damage that would be caused by their products.
[/FONT][FONT=&]Benjamin Franta - The Guardian
[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Wed 19 Sep 2018 06.00 EDTLast modified on Wed 19 Sep 2018 19.55 EDT[/FONT]
A Royal Dutch Shell logo. Photograph: Anna Gowthorpe/PA[FONT=&]One day in 1961, an American economist named Daniel Ellsberg stumbled across a piece of paper with apocalyptic implications. Ellsberg, who was advising the US government on its secret nuclear war plans, had discovered a document that contained an official estimate of the death toll in a preemptive “first strike” on China and the Soviet Union: 300 million in those countries, and double that globally.
Ellsberg was troubled that such a plan existed; years later, he tried to leak the details of nuclear annihilation to the public. Although his attempt failed, Ellsberg would become famous instead for leaking what came to be known as the Pentagon Papers – the US government’s secret history of its military intervention in Vietnam.
America’s amoral military planning during the Cold War echoes the hubris exhibited by another cast of characters gambling with the fate of humanity. Recently, secret documents have been unearthed detailing what the energy industry knew about the links between their products and global warming. But, unlike the government’s nuclear plans, what the industry detailed was put into action.
In the 1980s, oil companies like Exxon and Shell carried out internal assessments of the carbon dioxide released by fossil fuels, and forecast the planetary consequences of these emissions. In 1982, for example, Exxon predicted that by about 2060, CO2 levels would reach around 560 parts per million – double the preindustrial level – and that this would push the planet’s average temperatures up by about 2°C over then-current levels (and even more compared to pre-industrial levels).
Exxon’s private prediction of the future growth of carbon dioxide levels (left axis) and global temperature relative to 1982 (right axis). Elsewhere in its report, Exxon noted that the most widely accepted science at the time indicated that doubling carbon dioxide levels would cause a global warming of 3°C. Illustration: 1982 Exxon internal briefing document. Later that decade, in 1988, an internal report by Shell projected similar effects but also found that CO2 could double even earlier, by 2030. Privately, these companies did not dispute the links between their products, global warming, and ecological calamity. On the contrary, their research confirmed the connections.
Shell’s assessment foresaw a one-meter sea-level rise, and noted that warming could also fuel disintegration of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, resulting in a worldwide rise in sea level of “five to six meters.” That would be enough to inundate entire low-lying countries.
Shell’s analysts also warned of the “disappearance of specific ecosystems or habitat destruction,” predicted an increase in “runoff, destructive floods, and inundation of low-lying farmland,” and said that “new sources of freshwater would be required” to compensate for changes in precipitation. Global changes in air temperature would also “drastically change the way people live and work.” All told, Shell concluded, “the changes may be the greatest in recorded history.”
For its part, Exxon warned of “potentially catastrophic events that must be considered.” Like Shell’s experts, Exxon’s scientists predicted devastating sea-level rise, and warned that the American Midwest and other parts of the world could become desert-like. Looking on the bright side, the company expressed its confidence that “this problem is not as significant to mankind as a nuclear holocaust or world famine.”...
[/FONT]https://www.theguardian.com/environ...d-exxons-secret-1980s-climate-change-warnings[FONT=&]
[/FONT]
CO2 has absolutely no capability to warm the Earth. No gas or vapor does. The UK Guardian is a liberal newspaper. It is not a science textbook.
In the Night
Contributor
Because the cable installer with gook wife knows science!!
The Guardian, like you, and like the rest of the Church of Global Warming, denies science, specifically the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.
The 'greenhouse effect' is not possible. No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth.
* You can't create energy out of nothing.
* You can't store or trap heat.
* You can't trap thermal energy. There is always heat.
* You can't heat a warmer surface using a colder gas.
* You can't trap light.
* You can't reduce the radiance of Earth and increase its temperature at the same time.
In the Night
Contributor
It is not possible to store or trap heat (2nd law of thermodynamics).
In the Night
Contributor
It is not possible to store or trap heat. Earth's mantle is hot due to nuclear radiation, not heat. Heat has no temperature. Thermal energy does.
It is not possible to trap thermal energy. There is always heat.
In the Night
Contributor
Permafrost isn't melting. Some areas do melt from time to time, but then they return to permafrost.
I guess you figure that volcanoes don't heat the water. when they erupt.
Science isn't 'reality'. Science is a set of falsifiable theories.
Science isn't a class, a study, or a research. Science is a set of falsifiable theories.
Paradox. In my opinion you studied none of these. Oh, you might have taken some classes in them, but that is not a study.
Science isn't 'experts'. Science isn't a university degree. It isn't a course of study. It does not use consensus. It is not even people at all.
Science is a set of falsifiable theories.
The heat becomes photons. We can use solar tech to capture the photons and make electricity.
It's all in the link.
In the Night
Contributor
Figure 1: Lake Hazen with ice clinging to its shore during the summer.
Recent changes to Lake Hazen, the world’s largest high-Arctic lake, are from increased heat flow from the area’s known geological features, and not from global warming as per the many alarmist media reports.
Evidence supporting this is abundant and reliable.
Northeast Canada’s Lake Hazen lies adjacent to the world-class Greenland/Iceland mantle plume (Figure 2).
Mantle plumes are narrow streams of deep inner earth sourced hot rock that spread like a ‘mushroom’ cap beneath the Earth’s surface.
They act to significantly warm overlying rocks, warm and chemically alter overlying oceans, and melt overlying ice masses.
Research by the University of Kansas has confirmed the results of three previous studies all indicating that geothermal heat flow from the Greenland/Iceland mantle plume is the dominant and likely sole cause of anomalous Greenland ice sheet melting. (see here, here, here, and here).
The ground-warming and ice-melting power of this geological feature are estimated to cover 720,000 square miles extending from the northern edge of Ellesmere Island to the eastern shore of Iceland.
Figure 2: Location map of high-Arctic Lake Hazen and surrounding major heat flowing geological features, most notably the massive deep inner earth reaching Greenland/Iceland mantle plume.
Lake Hazen is located within and owes its very existence to a highly faulted portion of the Arctic (see here). Movement along one of these faults, known as the Lake Hazen Thrust, acted to down drop and form an enclosed long linear valley that is home to Lake Hazen.
Other geological indications of high heat flow in the Lake Hazen area include: Surface Lava Flows in northern Ellesmere Island, High Surface Temperatures in southern and northern Ellesmere Island, the Wegener Left Lateral Fault, and the Borup Fiord Pass Sulfur-Rich Hot Spring(Figure 2).
There are a total of four mineral-rich springs located in the Lake Hazen area (see here, here, here, here, and Figure 2). It should be noted that the springs are geothermally sourced from deep, inner-earth geologic features.
Although the temperature of the spring’s water is cool at its surface-discharge points, it is likely that at slightly deeper depths the spring’s water is warmer, the result of deep, inner-earth geothermal heat flow.
The low temperature of the spring’s surface-discharge water is almost certainly related to the cooling effect of overlying surface glacial water.
The unusually hot spring-like mineral and biological content of the spring’s surface water and position of the springs above the faults supports this interpretation.
Discovery of two liquid freshwater lakes beneath 1,500 feet of glacial ice in the Devon Ice Shelf is even more proof that bedrock heat flow is at work in the greater northeast Canadian Arctic region (see here).
These subglacial lakes are likely generated by geothermal heat flow from deep, inner-reaching faults.
The long, linear shape and orientation of the subglacial lakes perfectly match the surface trend of faults that abut the Devon Ice Sheet (Figure 3).
Figure 3: Geological map of Devon Island (left) and subglacial bedrock topographic map of newly discovered freshwater lakes (after Okulitch 1991, see here, here, and here).
Geologists had for many years suggested the well-documented existence of several subglacial liquid freshwater lakes beneath Antarctica’s 7,000 feet of glacial ice was proof of a significant, underlying heat-flowing geological feature.
Recent research by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and others has proven that there is, in fact, a 620,000-square-mile mantle plume beneath Antarctica (see here, here, and here).
Other recent research has shown that this giant mantle plume is responsible for generating a continent-wide and interconnected system of subglacial liquid freshwater lake and streams (Figure 1 below).
Figure 4: Illustration of Antarctica’s massive subglacial liquid freshwater flowing system of interconnected lakes (light blue dots) and streams (medium blue lines). NASA research has proved what most geologists suspected for years, that this subglacial water system is the result of bedrock geothermal heat flow emitted from an underlying deep-earth “mantle plume.”
The discovery of two subglacial lakes in the greater Lake Hazen area may be the ‘tip of the iceberg’ involving the influence of geological heat flow and the vast interconnected system of lakes and streams in other Arctic regions.
In summary, the evidence in this article strongly supports the notion that geologically induced high-heat flow is affecting ice extent and biological systems of the world’s largest high-Arctic lake — not global warming.
http://www.plateclimatology.com/lar...lting-from-geothermal-heat-not-global-warming
Greenland's ice isn't melting.
In the Night
Contributor
Good for you. You know there is an ocean at the North Pole.
Oceans don't have a crust. Are you talking about the ocean floor? Are you seriously suggesting that an undersea volcano erupting does not heat the water?
There is no such thing as 'climate science'. There are no theories of science about climate. Climate is not a quantifiable value. Science isn't 'training'. It is not any degree, license, or permit. Science isn't 'experts'.
Science is a set of falsifiable theories.
You are ignoring three of them: the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.
Science is not 'experts'. It is not 'training'. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. It is no more, it is no less.
Climate 'scientists' deny science and mathematics.
Science is not a political group. It is not any scientist or group of scientists. Science is a set of falsifiable theories.
There is no such thing. Climate simply is climate, like 'desert climate', or 'tropical climate'. or 'marine climate'. There is no such thing as a global climate.
Lie. Denying science for religious purposes is not a study either.
What warming? It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. That's from mathematics, not science.
* It is not possible to store or trap heat.
* It is not possible to trap thermal energy. There is always heat.
* It is not possible to trap light.
* It is not possible to reduce the radiance of Earth and increase its temperature at the same time.
WRONG. It was a few scientists at Exxon. They've been fired since they weren't doing their job.
We don't burn fossils for fuel. Fossils don't burn. It's much easier to burn something carbon based, such as coal, oil, or natural gas.
In the Night
Contributor
Neither pole is melting. Both poles are equally 'habitable' (we can visit, but we can't live there without continuous supplies from outside). Both poles have a greater winter ice extend in 2018 than the winter ice extent of 2017. In 2004, the Antarctica recorded a record maximum winter ice extent. The highest ever recorded since record keeping began. You can find the data at the National Snow and Ice Data Center, in Boulder, CO. You can also find similar records kept in Norway (at least for the Arctic).
How about actual theories of science?
* You can't create energy out of nothing (1st law of thermodynamics).
* You can't store or trap heat (2nd law of thermodynamics).
* You can't trap thermal energy. There is always heat (2nd law of thermodynamics).
* You can't heat the warmer surface using a colder gas (2nd law of thermodynamics).
* You can't trap light (Planck's Law).
* You can't reduce the radiance of Earth and increase its temperature at the same time (Stefan-Boltzmann law).
No gas or vapor is capable of warming the Earth.
What evidence?
It is not possible to measure the temperature of Earth. There are not enough thermometers.
No gas or vapor is capable of warming the Earth. There is nothing to 'shut down'.
It not only isn't happening, it CAN'T happen at all!
It is unconstitutional for the federal government to establish a state religion, not even the Church of Global Warming. No changes necessary.
WRONG. It is the Church of Global Warming that is getting smaller (and louder as it does so).
The United States is organized as a federated republic. We have constitutions. You are not a dictator. You are not the king. You don't get to force YOUR 'process' upon anyone.
YALIF.
None from 'global warming'. You can't even DEFINE 'global warming' or 'climate change'.
Last edited:
Trump quietly defunded NASA's climate research program. They do not want to fight the science, but to shut it down. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/201...s-nasa-research-verifying-greenhouse-gas-cuts