PDA

View Full Version : Giant iceberg breaks off Antarctica


mattsmith48
July 12th, 2017, 01:01 PM
One of the biggest icebergs on record has broken away from Antarctica, scientists said on Wednesday, creating an extra hazard for ships around the continent as it breaks up.

The one trillion tonne iceberg, measuring 5,800 square km, calved away from the Larsen C Ice Shelf in Antarctica sometime between July 10 and 12, said scientists at the University of Swansea and the British Antarctic Survey.

The iceberg some 200 square kilometres larger than P.E.I has been close to breaking off for a few months. Throughout the Antarctic winter, scientists monitored the progress of the rift in the ice shelf using the European Space Agency satellites.

"The iceberg is one of the largest recorded and its future progress is difficult to predict," said Adrian Luckman, professor at Swansea University and lead investigator of Project MIDAS, which has been monitoring the ice shelf for years.

"It may remain in one piece but is more likely to break into fragments. Some of the ice may remain in the area for decades, while parts of the iceberg may drift north into warmer waters," he added.

The ice will add to risks for ships now it has broken off. The peninsula is outside major trade routes but the main destination for cruise ships visiting from South America.

In 2009, more than 150 passengers and crew were evacuated after the MV Explorer sank after striking an iceberg off the Antarctic peninsula.

The iceberg, which is likely to be named A68, was already floating before it broke away so there is no immediate impact on sea levels, but the calving has left the Larsen C ice shelf reduced in area by more than 12 per cent.

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/technology/giant-iceberg-breaks-off-antarctica-1.4200787

This is bad right? I think its bad.

ShineintheDark
July 13th, 2017, 06:39 AM
Considering ice shelves that size should definitely not be breaking off, I'd say this is quite the blow to the anti-climate changers.

Just JT
July 13th, 2017, 06:50 AM
I don't think it's good. Is it moving closer to the equator or what?

Dalcourt
July 13th, 2017, 08:12 AM
Oh, Idon't think it's bad it's far away from the US and ice has to melt since it's summer, right?

Joking of course, sure it is bad even though we don't feel any immediate impact. I have seen a news report about it and well...let's say it didn't sound too promising for the future....

PlasmaHam
July 15th, 2017, 05:55 PM
Here is an interesting statement from the scientist who has been leading the research of the recently freed iceberg:Dr Martin O’Leary, a Swansea University glaciologist and member of the MIDAS project team, said of the recent calving:

“Although this is a natural event, and we’re not aware of any link to human-induced climate change, this puts the ice shelf in a very vulnerable position. This is the furthest back that the ice front has been in recorded history. We’re going to be watching very carefully for signs that the rest of the shelf is becoming unstable.”

Professor Adrian Luckman of Swansea University added:

“In the ensuing months and years, the ice shelf could either gradually regrow, or may suffer further calving events which may eventually lead to collapse – opinions in the scientific community are divided. Our models say it will be less stable, but any future collapse remains years or decades away.”
If you read the rest of their site (linked here) (http://www.projectmidas.org/blog/calving/) this sentiment is repeated. They say it is a rare, but natural occurance. And that they have no evidence that global warming had anything to do with it. For people who claim they follow science, why then are you spouting unscientific claims regarding the iceberg break?

We'll talk again after you delay the end of the world for another twenty years like the climate activists have been doing for the last 6 decades

mattsmith48
July 15th, 2017, 08:27 PM
Here is an interesting statement from the scientist who has been leading the research of the recently freed iceberg:
If you read the rest of their site (linked here) (http://www.projectmidas.org/blog/calving/) this sentiment is repeated. They say it is a rare, but natural occurance. And that they have no evidence that global warming had anything to do with it. For people who claim they follow science, why then are you spouting unscientific claims regarding the iceberg break?

We'll talk again after you delay the end of the world for another twenty years like the climate activists have been doing for the last 6 decades

Scientist are split on the whether or not this is related, it is hard and sometimes impossible to know for sure if one particular event like this happened because of climate change. Pieces of ice will naturally break off, climate change may have affected the size or the speed of the break, but we can't know for sure it happened because of it, it would be like saying this one category 5 hurricane happened because of climate change or we just had a major snow storm in North Carolina so climate change is not real. You can say the frequency or strength of hurricanes or the size and speed at which ice is breaking off is increasing because of climate change, but it doesn't mean you can automatically link one event to climate change

PlasmaHam
July 15th, 2017, 08:42 PM
Scientist are split on the whether or not this is related, it is hard and sometimes impossible to know for sure if one particular event like this happened because of climate change. Pieces of ice will naturally break off, climate change may have affected the size or the speed of the break, but we can't know for sure it happened because of it, it would be like saying this one category 5 hurricane happened because of climate change or we just had a major snow storm in North Carolina so climate change is not real. You can say the frequency or strength of hurricanes or the size and speed at which ice is breaking off is increasing because of climate change.
No, no you can't claim weather and climatory patterns are conducive of human-caused, earth-destroying global warming. That isn't science, that is conspiracy theory.

mattsmith48
July 15th, 2017, 08:48 PM
No, no you can't claim weather and climatory patterns are conducive of human-caused, earth-destroying global warming. That isn't science, that is conspiracy theory.


A conspiracy theory is an explanation of an event or situation that invokes a conspiracy without warrant, generally one involving an illegal or harmful act carried out by government or other powerful actors. What I just explained to you is precisely not that. Collecting and analyzing data to eventually come to a conclusion is what scientist do, and is what I explained to you in the last post. if you are just going to deny the answer to your question, don't ask the fucking question in the first place.

By the way, ''Earth-destroying'' is not really the right term, ''life-ending'' would be more accurate. Planet Earth will still be there it will just be impossible for anything to live on its surface.

Flapjack
July 16th, 2017, 02:21 PM
That is hugeeee!!! I wonder how long it would take to melt?? I reallyyy hope it doesn't pose a threat to ships!! It is hard to visualise in your head just how big it is!!

A little message to the climate deniers- Whilst you are right correlation does not cause causation, scientists know how and why greenhouse gases heat up the earth and the rate of temperature change is increasing. What more evidence are you waiting for??

Even if you do believe the evidence is not there... with 97% of climate scientists are convinced of human activity increasing the rate of climate change, surely it is worth trying to solve the problem because you are kinda putting all your eggs in one basket hoping it isn't us. If it is us and we do something, good we can fight climate change, if it turns out it is not us, okay we wasted resources but we're not worse off because of it!!

Also not all 'climate change' is global warming, there is also smog and acid rain that is caused from pollution. That stuff isn't nice so would you at least want to counter that?

lliam
July 17th, 2017, 12:40 AM
This is bad right? I think its bad.


No, that's nature. So it is a natural process.

Since we now know the possible dangers, we can adjust to this.

And if a disaster happens anyway,
... well, that's unfortunate for those who are affected by it.

but honestly: Shit happens every day everywhere. More or less dramatically.

mattsmith48
July 18th, 2017, 08:50 PM
No, that's nature. So it is a natural process.

Since we now know the possible dangers, we can adjust to this.

And if a disaster happens anyway,
... well, that's unfortunate for those who are affected by it.

but honestly: Shit happens every day everywhere. More or less dramatically.

The danger being the rest of the ice shelf starting to break and going into the ocean rising the sea level, that's the bad part.

lliam
July 19th, 2017, 02:10 AM
For years, ah, for lets say, for two generations, folks preach about the effects of global warming.

So we should now be prepared for such phenomena and resulting global catastrophes (according to our terms).

For me, this isn't a bad thing anyway, because I don't have such a personal definition when it comes to natural developments.

Even if the impact on people is simply catastrophic.

Because we can't prevent such a thing anyway. We just have to adapt to the consequences accordingly - to keep the resulting damage as low as possible.

For me, the potential rise of the sea level means only the option that we can once again prove how flexibly and effectively our technological world can react to such natural phenomena.

Also I'm more the optimistic kind of guy.

If spiritually such a catastrophe might give us insight, how little we can control things, and that we are no more or less part of nature than all other species ...

... so if we then learn something more modesty out of it - then that, what you see as bad, would have something good in itself. Or would at least may have it.

Even if this catastrophe forces millions of people having to give up their homes, homelands etc or just will kill billions of humans including other fellow animals.

mattsmith48
July 19th, 2017, 10:12 AM
For years, ah, for lets say, for two generations, folks preach about the effects of global warming.

So we should now be prepared for such phenomena and resulting global catastrophes (according to our terms).

For me, this isn't a bad thing anyway, because I don't have such a personal definition when it comes to natural developments.

Even if the impact on people is simply catastrophic.

Because we can't prevent such a thing anyway. We just have to adapt to the consequences accordingly - to keep the resulting damage as low as possible.

For me, the potential rise of the sea level means only the option that we can once again prove how flexibly and effectively our technological world can react to such natural phenomena.

Also I'm more the optimistic kind of guy.

If spiritually such a catastrophe might give us insight, how little we can control things, and that we are no more or less part of nature than all other species ...

... so if we then learn something more modesty out of it - then that, what you see as bad, would have something good in itself. Or would at least may have it.

Even if this catastrophe forces millions of people having to give up their homes, homelands etc or just will kill billions of humans including other fellow animals.

Fuck preparing our self for these future disasters, we are the last ones who can actually do something to stop climate change and prevent major disasters that we know will happen and all our efforts should go into that.

lliam
July 19th, 2017, 06:30 PM
mattsmith48 ... if i didn't know it better .... i tend to say ... you are so american.


we could, but we can't. e.g. Look at Trump and Paris.


There are always those fools who for foolish reasons make foolish decisions that prevent what we really can do. The most dangerous blocker to do what's really needed is probably to be found in the term "economic interests".

mattsmith48
July 20th, 2017, 11:08 AM
mattsmith48 ... if i didn't know it better .... i tend to say ... you are so american.


we could, but we can't. e.g. Look at Trump and Paris.


There are always those fools who for foolish reasons make foolish decisions that prevent what we really can do. The most dangerous blocker to do what's really needed is probably to be found in the term "economic interests".

So what you are suggesting just sit there keep transforming this planet into a toxic unlivable shithole and just prepare our self for the consequences?

Other countries electing conspiracy theorist and corrupted centrists is not an excuse to not do anything about this and is not different than saying China is worst than us, why should we do anything.

Paris is just a minimum nothing stops countries with some decency to do more.