Antarctica

[0000]

Hannegan, I noted your question but could you possibly rephrase it because I am not too sure what you are asking me.

Do you mean free from ice on land as well as in the oceans? And by significance do you mean, what would this mean for global climate, or for the regions themselves?

I could hazard a wild guess if I had a clearer idea what question you were asking there.

sorry for the time it's taken me to reply Roger...............As far as the Artic yes I meant Ice free but with The Antartic I more meant no sea ice rather than the entire continent.And re climate yes I was refering to globaly but more specificly the uk..............

[Gray-Wolf]

sorry for the time it's taken me to reply Roger...............As far as the Arctic yes I meant Ice free but with The Antarctic I more meant no sea ice rather than the entire continent.And re climate yes I was referring to globally but more specifically the uk..............

That's the thing Hanners, if you take the sea ice away you would be suggesting some type of warming and so you'd probably be looking at loosing the continental ice shelves as well (which in turn hold back a lot of movement from the glaciers draining the continent.....as the loss of the ice shelves on the peninsula show us) which would lead to serious sea level hikes which would ,in turn, erode back more coastal ice fronts leading to more sea level rises.

If you look at a map of the rocks below the ice you'll see that Antarctica is really 2 islands with the smaller western one containing the peninsula. As we know from northern warming the impact from a warmer ocean extends up to 90 miles inland which would cover much of the west Antarctic island leading to even more ice loss from it's uplands............and so it goes on.

[Gray-Wolf]

Are we still amidst one of the coldest winters down there? Ice levels have now fallen below the average after falling back to average for a couple of weeks. Any ideas?

[bluecon]

Are we still amidst one of the coldest winters down there? Ice levels have now fallen below the average after falling back to average for a couple of weeks. Any ideas?

Where do you get that idea?

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IM...t.365.south.jpg

[Gray-Wolf]

Where do you get that idea?

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IM...t.365.south.jpg

The folk who supply C.T. with their data of course! If you want the info then the horses mouth is the best option (I find)

[bluecon]

The folk who supply C.T. with their data of course! If you want the info then the horses mouth is the best option (I find)

And that small amount of melt is proof that AGW is going to heat the world beyond repair?

[Gray-Wolf]

And that small amount of melt is proof that AGW is going to heat the world beyond repair?

I take it that was rhetorical?

[Gray-Wolf]

Just reminder to folk that;

MODIS Terra and Aqua are now giving us our first images of the Southern pack (prior to the onset of this southern summers melt) and ,to my untutored eye, it looks smashed to bits from ice front straight back to it's 'connection/junction' with Antarctica itself.

Tonight is the 'same' full moon that , I believe, led to the disruption/fragmentation of the southern pack last year which , I firmly believe, led to the strange 'growth' in ice extent as this shattered pack as it then eased outwards/ocean-wards with the help of those 'roaring' Katabatic winds flowing off of Antarctica. Take a front seat this time and watch the southern 'pack' become fully disrupted over a period of 4 days (we are maybe at day 2 now but you can always 'trawl back' 2 days on the MODIS images) and then see if we get a rapid 'growth' in the pack's extent.

[Chris Knight]

This is about as big as it gets for this year:

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

This is about as big as it gets for this year:

Chris

It looks pretty big. Didn't it continue its extent in to SON last year?

BFTP

[Gray-Wolf]

The same thing as happened last year appears to already be happening along the coastal fringes of Antarctica (2 weeks earlier). The glimpses now afforded by Terra and Aqua show coastal strips of 'open water' with the ice beyond the open water deeply fragmented/fissured right up to the oceans edge.

Does anyone know if the Winds blowing off Antarctica (in various sectors) been especially strong this year? If the ice is being driven into warmer, choppier waters then we could see a very 'odd' melt pattern this year with open coastal waters surrounded by a band of large floes ,banded by small bergs being eroded by the southern ocean.

I'll try and post up the best images to illustrate what is occurring (by my observations) as we approach the ice 'max' over the coming weeks.

[Gray-Wolf]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/...80812160619.htm

This seems to make sense. It worries me as to the impact the next major El-Nino will have on the remaining ice shelves around the peninsula and the 'knock on' effects over on the EAIS.

Both recent data and long term studies show that Antarctica is far more 'responsive' to climate chage than we supposed and that the continued 'forcing' in one direction (by global warming inducing a 'premanent' El-Nino 'warmed' effect) we can only expect one result. Our task is to now accurately 'forecast' the time scale of the global inundations so as to best avoid global catastrophe by re-siting key socio-ecconomic areas of the globe to more 'secure' areas (Londons 'Square mile' etc.)

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/...80812160619.htm

This seems to make sense. It worries me as to the impact the next major El-Nino will have on the remaining ice shelves around the peninsula and the 'knock on' effects over on the EAIS.

Both recent data and long term studies show that Antarctica is far more 'responsive' to climate chage than we supposed and that the continued 'forcing' in one direction (by global warming inducing a 'premanent' El-Nino 'warmed' effect) we can only expect one result. Our task is to now accurately 'forecast' the time scale of the global inundations so as to best avoid global catastrophe by re-siting key socio-ecconomic areas of the globe to more 'secure' areas (Londons 'Square mile' etc.)

looks perfectly natural GW and no Antarctica isn't only a part of it. Sorry but your summary does not accurately sum up the findings which are far from certain. What about the 30 year cooling prior to the early 2000s and now further cooling?????

BFTP

[doctormog]

Chris

It looks pretty big. Didn't it continue its extent in to SON last year?

BFTP

Yes, according to CT at least, the current ice levels are already at the climatic (1979-2000) maximum levels, so anythingfurther increase (based on CT data) is above the climatic average maximum.

[Chris Knight]

Chris

It looks pretty big. Didn't it continue its extent in to SON last year?

BFTP

We shall see! The pointy bits fascinate me - any ideas why?

[Gray-Wolf]

We shall see! The pointy bits fascinate me - any ideas why?

There are two 'ice tongues' that push out from the major shelves (Ross and Weddell sea) each year and ,since the melting of the Peninsula, there does appear to be a 'queer symmetry' to the winter freeze up.

[BARRY]

just spotted this coldest day recorded at the Davis research centre on the edge of the Antarctic continent -35.0c Edited August 23, 2008 by BARRY

[Roger J Smith]

There is some serious cold down there:

http://www.uni-koeln.de/math-nat-fak/geome...WWantarctis.gif

[Gray-Wolf]

Yet still we are in another phase of collapse! This time last year I called for maximum only to see 'ice extents' rise (even though we could all see huge rifts/fragmented pack from coast to ice front, had opened up around the continent.

I do encourage folk to have a look at the limited pictures we now get from the MODIS sats (Terra/Aqua) to see just how 'mashed' the pack is again this year.

[The PIT]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/...80812160619.htm

This seems to make sense. It worries me as to the impact the next major El-Nino will have on the remaining ice shelves around the peninsula and the 'knock on' effects over on the EAIS.

Both recent data and long term studies show that Antarctica is far more 'responsive' to climate chage than we supposed and that the continued 'forcing' in one direction (by global warming inducing a 'premanent' El-Nino 'warmed' effect) we can only expect one result. Our task is to now accurately 'forecast' the time scale of the global inundations so as to best avoid global catastrophe by re-siting key socio-ecconomic areas of the globe to more 'secure' areas (Londons 'Square mile' etc.)

More doom and gloom.

You are in need of some cheer up pills.

I wouldn't call London are very secure area too honest as any tragic sea rise would mean a lot of relocation needed.

[Mammatus]

I chauffuer drive B.A.S (British Antarctic Survey) staff/employees to and from Airports/meetings etc.

There aware of my interest in Meteorology/Climate and give me much inside information which is confidential. As much as I'd love to share.

Lets just put it this way. Things really are not very good!

TA

[Gray-Wolf]

I chauffeur drive B.A.S (British Antarctic Survey) staff/employees to and from Airports/meetings etc.

There aware of my interest in Meteorology/Climate and give me much inside information which is confidential. As much as I'd love to share.

Lets just put it this way. Things really are not very good!

TA

It is either me and my makeup or a reflection of reality but I have formed an impression, from both BAS contacts and NOAA/NSIDC contacts, that they 'suspect' far more about the scale of change and it's impacts than they are able to publicly 'declare'.

We, as a species, have never witnessed the scale of changes that we are now seeing. As such we do not know, from records, just how these things 'work'.

We seem to move closer and closer to an understanding of how quickly these things have occurred in the past but they were under purely 'natural forcings' and did not have this 'extra' element that we seem to be contributing.

I think that both the changes that are now being 'measured' for the first time in Antarctica and the recent rapid changes in the Arctic have 'ramped up ' our need to look at the many varied ways that the Cryosphere can collapse and over what time scales (remember an 'ice free arctic' was a thing set to happen in 2100 only 2 years ago......now it may be 2013!).

In doing so the science cannot provide the 100% 'surety' of the models accuracy (as demanded in todays 'sceptical' world and so cannot 'publish' their 'findings') but we do all 'get a flavour' of the most common outcomes from model runs from the post scripts added to each report that comes out from the Agencies.

This is a 'global disaster' ongoing.

We cannot arrest the changes that make this enevitable but we can do our level best to mitigate it's impacts upon humanity and the rest of the planet .To do this we need to have as good an idea of 'how quickly' these changes can be expected to occur and how long we have to react............even if the 'subject matter ' is so very 'gloomy' . The 'cryospheric community' must be engaged in this task and it is no wonder their findings don't make for a 'happy' prognosis.

[jethro]

If there is a global disaster going on and the powers that be know, or suspect this to be the case then wouldn't it make far more sense to stop the "grants to investigate merry-go-round", and instead invest the money into mitigation now?

We're told time and again that the end is nigh, we'll have no polar ice during the summer months, blah, blah, blah and yet we're obsessed with assessing the whys and wherefores. Strikes me that it's a self-serving cycle with little or no actual interest in the human impact; more a case of "give us some more money so we can go back and study it again", to tell you the same story with the odd different paragraph thrown in to justify the expense.

Or could it, might it, just possibly be that there is no global disaster in the offing? Let's face it, the entire Arctic could melt and apart from a tiny degree of thermal expansion, there would be no sea level rise. If Greenland melts, if Antarctica melts then yes, sea level will rise but right now that's not happening, nor showing signs of happening. Periodically glaciers advance, ice shelves break off, they always have, they always will - it's not a measure of global warming, more likely a result of increased snow and ice in the interior push forwards.

With the greatest of respect, someone saying they have insider knowledge, confidential information, means nothing without disclosure and supporting evidence.

[laserguy]

If there is a global disaster going on and the powers that be know, or suspect this to be the case then wouldn't it make far more sense to stop the "grants to investigate merry-go-round", and instead invest the money into mitigation now?

There's no money left as it's all been earmarked for the much more pressing need of the two weeks of running around in 2012.

[Gray-Wolf]

If there is a global disaster going on and the powers that be know, or suspect this to be the case then wouldn't it make far more sense to stop the "grants to investigate merry-go-round", and instead invest the money into mitigation now?

We're told time and again that the end is nigh, we'll have no polar ice during the summer months, blah, blah, blah and yet we're With the greatest of respect, someone saying they have insider knowledge, confidential information, means nothing without disclosure and supporting evidence.

In my more paranoid/clear thinking moments I do find myself pondering whether there really is a global 'us' and 'them'. I know that there are multiple organisations representing world nations but I'm thinking more of the tier above govt.s

If we do face a global disaster would you let the populace know the grim realities or would you choose to manage the disaster instead (and doing the cleanup without facing 1st world 'meltdown' as folk panic at the prospects) and enhance the chance of a 'smooth' transition through the period of mass death/relocation and a rapid 're-boot' to societies remnants?

Whether fantasy or other the loss of 2/3 of the global population would be a meaningful way of avoiding the worst case scenario's we face on a number of fronts (Climate change,feeding 6 billion, peak oil etc.)