Latest Antarctic Ice Reports

[Gray-Wolf]

Er, these "pinpricks" help increase ice area.

I'll contact the British Antarctic Survey and tell them not to worry.

You'll get used to that kind of thing Ineritus!!

It does mean that the 'mask' used when plotting ice extent becomes further out of touch with reality as another section viewed as 'land' becomes 'sea'. If you add up the increased 'sea' area that has emerged over the past years then you'll see how inconsequential the 200,000sqkm of 'extra' sea ice really is [being far less in area than the new 'sea area' created from the loss of shelves] but hey!!!, I only tell folk what is happening [and how]. Many of those contributing fail to connect with the global picture and hail low temps at the pole as a positive.........not so, just another manifestation of global warming. The collapse of Antarctica will have more to do with the equatorial oceans than the polar climate [being a mechanical collapse and not a local climatic collapse] and increased sea levels and more violent storms [coupled with the ever increasing circumpolar winds] will be the major players in shelf collapse over the years releasing the massive, land based ice, to their rear.

Ho Hum.....

[Gray-Wolf]

In fact, and quite a good analogy I feel, it would be akin to looking at the volume of a dam wall, compared to the volume of water it holds back, and decrying any loss of mass in the wall as a 'pin-prick' when looked at the volumes combined. These 'pin-pricks' hold the key to the collapse of both East and West Antarctic Ice Sheets.

As you say, lets be reassured by our experts that this is no cause for concern.............

[oldsnowywizard]

well maybe i will ask them to take on board two unbiased amateurs :lol:

seriously i doubt very much that anyone knows the real reason for what is going on here.. it could be..

1. volcanic activity

2. ice melt that has let in the sea, which then undercuts further areas of ice

3. ice melt lubrictaing glaciers.. 1000 years worth of trapped water finally having enough pressure to lift sections of land ice?

4. warmer waters

5. radiation increasing

6. natural cycle

it could be about 50 different things. I and other so called pro ice campaigners on either thread are i believe probably clutching at straws, i dont recall anyone and especially for you GW i will repeat that.. ANYONE claiming that there is a massive increase of mltiyear sea ice... although one could argue that down under there is technically more multiyear sea ice this year as we had less ice loss... i dont claim that this is just from the sea and not from ice moving from the land either.

fact is we have only been able to see whats going on for 20 years via satelites right? thats 20 years out of several billion years worth of feeback mechanisms, cycles, ice ages, warm ages...

im sure some on here would love for both ice caps to melt completely... for what purpose? i told you so? vote for me? beach outside your homes?

i am trying desperately to search for positives.. one being sea ice extent.. good or bad omen? who cares.. its positive news. yes there maybe rose tinted glasses... but as the song goes "always look on the bright side of life"

GW/Inertius its not you vs us.. so lets try and keep things civil please..

[Gray-Wolf]

the spread from the breakup of Watkins is around 14,000sqkm at present.......is this now viewed as sea ice on the plots? If so , how much ice cover has been put on this southern autumn and how much is calved bergs? Things, insofar as ice mask extent plotting, are never what they seem are they?

EDIT; an area of ice the size of Northern Ireland is hardly a 'pin-prick' now is it? Keep it civil and keep it accurate!

Edited March 26, 2008 by Gray-Wolf

[oldsnowywizard]

the spread from the breakup of Watkins is around 14,000sqkm at present.......is this now viewed as sea ice on the plots? If so , how much ice cover has been put on this southern autumn and how much is calved bergs? Things, insofar as ice mask extent plotting, are never what they seem are they?

EDIT; an area of ice the size of Northern Ireland is hardly a 'pin-prick' now is it? Keep it civil and keep it accurate!

the graphical display from CT is here..

Where would Watkins be GW? i dont know if it would be viewed as sea ice or not.. difficult to tell due to the increase in sea ice around the coasts.. i may be wrong but i guess we would be looking for an area of 100% concentration coming into the sea from Watkins?

[Mr Sleet]

the graphical display from CT is here..

Where would Watkins be GW? i dont know if it would be viewed as sea ice or not.. difficult to tell due to the increase in sea ice around the coasts.. i may be wrong but i guess we would be looking for an area of 100% concentration coming into the sea from Watkins?

The Watkins ice shelf has definitely not collapsed. Now the Wilkins ice shelf is another matter, it's on the western side of the peninsula ( I would suggest that possibly very stormy weather has more to do with a small piece breaking off than GW).

Edited March 26, 2008 by Mr Sleet

[jethro]

Any connection?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/...40527235943.htm

http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/press/press_re...ease.php?id=341

[Mr Sleet]

Any connection?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/...40527235943.htm

http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/press/press_re...ease.php?id=341

Hi Jethro. Yes, something else to consider. Also, we have just gone past the full moon, so tidal action combined with stormy seas may be the culprit. Or it could be global warming.

Edited March 26, 2008 by Mr Sleet

[tinybill]

this is on the yarhoo frount page

---------------------------------------

Huge Antarctic Ice Shelf Disintegrating

By Sky News SkyNews - 2 hours 13 minutes agoA massive ice shelf the size of the Isle of Man has started to break away from the Antarctic mainland because of global warming, experts say.

Scientists from the British Antarctic Survey have been closely monitoring the Wilkins Ice Shelf and warn a large section is already disintegrating.

The main part of the shelf is now only supported by a thin strip of ice, hanging between two islands.

The event has happened much earlier than predicted. In 1993, experts warned the shelf would break away in 30 years, if global warming continued.

The collapse of the shelf was triggered on February 28 when an iceberg measuring 25.5 by 1.5 miles broke off its southwestern front.

That movement led to disintegration of the shelf's interior, of which 160 square miles have already disappeared, scientists said.

The Wilkins Ice Shelf is a broad plate of permanent floating ice 1,000 miles south of South America, on the south west Antarctic Peninsula.

"Wilkins is the largest ice shelf on West Antarctica yet to be threatened. This shelf is hanging by a thread," David Vaughan, of the British Antarctic Survey, said.

During the past half century, the western Antarctic Peninsula has experienced the steepest temperature increase on Earth, 0.5C per decade.

With the Antarctic summer drawing to a close, scientists do not expect the ice shelf to further disintegrate in the next several months.

Ice shelf break-up in the Antarctic - more than 5,000 square miles have been lost over the past 50 years - could significantly increase ocean levels around the world.

In 1995 the Larsen A Ice Shelf - 47 miles long and 22 miles wide - disintegrated, fragmenting into icebergs in the Weddell Sea.

According to some calculations based on the present sea level rise of 3mm per year, ocean levels could rise by 1.4m (4.6ft) by the end of the century.

Edited March 26, 2008 by tinybill

[Interitus]

well maybe i will ask them to take on board two unbiased amateurs

seriously i doubt very much that anyone knows the real reason for what is going on here.. it could be..

1. volcanic activity

2. ice melt that has let in the sea, which then undercuts further areas of ice

3. ice melt lubrictaing glaciers.. 1000 years worth of trapped water finally having enough pressure to lift sections of land ice?

4. warmer waters

5. radiation increasing

6. natural cycle

it could be about 50 different things. I and other so called pro ice campaigners on either thread are i believe probably clutching at straws, i dont recall anyone and especially for you GW i will repeat that.. ANYONE claiming that there is a massive increase of mltiyear sea ice... although one could argue that down under there is technically more multiyear sea ice this year as we had less ice loss... i dont claim that this is just from the sea and not from ice moving from the land either.

fact is we have only been able to see whats going on for 20 years via satelites right? thats 20 years out of several billion years worth of feeback mechanisms, cycles, ice ages, warm ages...

im sure some on here would love for both ice caps to melt completely... for what purpose? i told you so? vote for me? beach outside your homes?

i am trying desperately to search for positives.. one being sea ice extent.. good or bad omen? who cares.. its positive news. yes there maybe rose tinted glasses... but as the song goes "always look on the bright side of life"

GW/Inertius its not you vs us.. so lets try and keep things civil please..

You make some good points but let yourself down at the start and towards the end and try to teach a lesson in civility, which is a pity.

I haven't got time for this, oh btw I am not an amateur, thanks.

[oldsnowywizard]

You make some good points but let yourself down at the start and towards the end and try to teach a lesson in civility, which is a pity.

I haven't got time for this, oh btw I am not an amateur, thanks.

you got me.. thats what happens when you write a post in between writing proposals. what is your area of expertise interitus?

maybe we should all start to play nice before getting booted out eh

re wilkins.. so from the sounds of things a large iceberg fell off which started the whole thing... i wonder if this was earthquake related? sounds like the west is an area of volcanic activity.. although im sure its a combination of lots of things.

Edited March 26, 2008 by oldsnowywizard

[Gray-Wolf]

I'd still tend to go with higher sea levels, augmented with tide/storm swells to fracture the juncture between sea and land. As time progresses we will see more and more of the mechanical disintegration of that which holds back the mass of ice to the rear [currently being swelled by increased snowfall on the peninsula] and probably an increase in sea ice area as vast chunks of ice drift off shore....... and yes, wilkins.....took a long time for folk to check things out didn't it?

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

How about break off is a 'massive' 0.004% of ice shed. Wow sea level increase will be, as even accepted by AGW scientists, all of 0mm! Glaciers, particularly when advancing shed ice...most of the time a miniscule 0.004%. When a full 1% chunk comes off let me know...I may sit up then as that would be sizeable.

BFTP

[Gray-Wolf]

How about break off is a 'massive' 0.004% of ice shed. Wow sea level increase will be, as even accepted by AGW scientists, all of 0mm! Glaciers, particularly when advancing shed ice...most of the time a miniscule 0.004%. When a full 1% chunk comes off let me know...I may sit up then as that would be sizeable.

BFTP

....and if 300 glaciers drop 0.25%? still not interested?

Yet another bit of antarctic 'girdle' is undone in the region showing most impact from AGW and with the greatest ice loss measured in Antarctica and 'you're not interested.

Makes me wonder when you'll sit up and take note....

[jethro]

With the best will in the world, I'm struggling to see that this can be directly attributed to AGW. The peninsula has warmed in recent decades, but even so, it is far from representative of the entire continent. It has it's own micro-climate and is subject to "weather" the same as any where else. It's the windiest continent on earth; winds are known as "katabatic winds", when they reach the coast, they produce west-flowing ocean current known as the East Wind Drift as a result of the rotation of the earth, which has an influence far beyond the immediate coastline (coolantartica.com).

As well as the recently discovered under-water volcano in the area, there is Deception Island just to the north of the peninsula. Deception is a massive caldera, generating so much geo-thermal heat it is not only possible to bathe in water hotter than the average bath but has been known, in fairly recent history to heat the water to such an extent that the natural harbour boiled and bubbled all the paint off the hulls of ships. Add into this the Seal Nunataks, a group of 16 volcanic vents, known to be active and emerging from the Larsen shelf. Seems to me that there is an awful lot of possible sources of ocean warming, completely separate from AGW. We know so little about the area, have such a short time-span of records with which to compare today, to yester-year, it would be fool hardy to leap on artificial climate change as the one and only culprit.

I appreciate this may be sign of more to come, I also appreciate that the collapse could lead to a weakening of the area leading to further loss but when the Wordie ice shelf collapsed, the surrounding area was, and is largely unaffected.

http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displ...&aid=221669

[Gray-Wolf]

As I've posted before my major concern is for EAIS and this is now responding to ,whatever forcing, in the same way as the WAIS over the past 25yrs.

The shedding, into the southern oceans, of the 'grounded ice' from the peninsula will continue to speed up sea level rises and though pifflingly small the pressures that such hike places on the contact the ice shelves have with the continent results in clean breaks at the juncture. The freed ice shelf is drifted out into the ocean ,on the very same Katabatic winds you quote, and smashed and melted in very short order by the + temp ocean.

The internal groanings of EAIS and evidence of past rapid movements seaward of the ice sheet make me believe that once the EAIS's surrounding girdle of shelves start to fail [as on the peninsula] then there will be a rapid 'offloading' of the tied up movement in the sheet but also the release of the waters at the base of the sheet [leaving it structurally compromised] allowing for a rapid physical collapse of the 'drainage ' sections of the sheet followed by a domino effect of upland collapse as the structure unfolds.

In the past it would seem that this would happen over 10's of years [and not 1,000's] leading to all the dire impacts on the low lying regions of the world [including all the cities sited at the lowest bridging points of major rivers].

[Mr Sleet]

You make some good points but let yourself down at the start and towards the end and try to teach a lesson in civility, which is a pity.

I haven't got time for this, oh btw I am not an amateur, thanks.

So now you have to tell us what your profession is - I'm all ears

[jethro]

Earthquake on the Pacific-Antarctic Ridge on the 17th March; I'd hazard a guess this had something to do with the Wilkins ice shelf collapse.

http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/neic_pscf.html

http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/neic_pscf_l.html

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Earthquake on the Pacific-Antarctic Ridge on the 17th March; I'd hazard a guess this had something to do with the Wilkins ice shelf collapse.

http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/neic_pscf.html

http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/neic_pscf_l.html

Good find Jethro, much better explanation and likely cause than iminent collapse due to AGW.

BFTP

[Mr Sleet]

Good find Jethro, much better explanation and likely cause than iminent collapse due to AGW.

BFTP

Yes, but it is rather "off message"

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Yes, but it is rather "off message"

Maybe it should be moved to enviro thread...mods? It is a good find though

BFTP

[Interitus]

Interesting, but unfortunately completely off message in this instance - the earthquake is over 2500 miles away from the ice shelf.

Moreover, the current collapse of Wilkins predates the earthquake - "Satellite images processed at the US National Snow and Ice Data Center revealed that the retreat began on February 28"

http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/press/press_re...ease.php?id=376

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Interesting, but unfortunately completely off message in this instance - the earthquake is over 2500 miles away from the ice shelf.

Moreover, the current collapse of Wilkins predates the earthquake - "Satellite images processed at the US National Snow and Ice Data Center revealed that the retreat began on February 28"

http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/press/press_re...ease.php?id=376

Ah well it has refrozen down there and it isn't going anywhere for a while. 2500miles....point taken 5.6 is nowhere near enough one would think to affect that far away.

Anyone fancy betting against a recors ice maxima this year in the antarctic? Runaway AGW should prevent it....anyone

BFTP

Edited March 28, 2008 by BLAST FROM THE PAST

[The PIT]

I reckon it's Aliens cutting the ice up. IF you look at the video on the link provided by Interitus you can almost perfectly cut blocks. Too regular to be natural. You've heard it here first. Aliens.

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

Ted Scambos of the University of Colorado says,

"We believe the Wilkins has been in place for at least a few hundred years. But warm air and exposure to ocean waves are causing a break-up."

So it wasn't in place before then?