Quantcast

Whoa There! Some Greenland Glaciers Slowing Down?

~ The Rebel ~ 2012/05/06 09:56:34
Now, Ian Joughin, a glaciologist at the University of Washington, Seattle, and colleagues have used a decade's worth of data from Canadian, German, and Japanese satellites to garner a more complete view of Greenland's glaciers. By tracking the movement of surface features on the flowing ice, the team was able to estimate the speeds for 178 of the island's largest glaciers for the winters of 2000 and 2005, and for 195 of them for the winters of 2006 through 2010. The overall picture of glacial behavior is one of complexity rather than consistency, says Joughin. "Previous studies have suggested that all glaciers have sped up, but that's not quite right," he notes.

In northwestern Greenland, for example, where most of the glaciers move relatively quickly and flow directly into the sea rather than ending on land, average speed jumped by 8% between 2000 and 2005 and rose another 18% from 2005 to 2010. Nevertheless, the researchers report online today in Science, the glaciers in this region showed no uniform pattern of acceleration. About one-third flowed at the same rate throughout the decade, one-fourth slowed during the interval, and about 15% slowed during the first half of the decade and then surged from 2005 to 2010.

Similarly, many of the individual glaciers in southeastern Greenland don't follow the region's overall trend.

Read More: http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2012/05/whoa...

You!
Add Photos & Videos

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • cowboy 2012/05/07 14:13:15
    cowboy
    +1
    Enviromentalism is a money scam. Suckers keep pouring money into a fairy tale.....
  • Franklin 2012/05/06 12:27:23
    Franklin
    +1
    Everything equals “man made global warming” once it is edited in just the right way !
  • cellophane 2012/05/06 12:16:01
    cellophane
    That's an interesting study. But while the movements of individual glaciers are probably of huge interest to a glaciologist, I would think it would be the overall increase or decrease in volume of melt that would be of greatest interest to the climatologist.
  • Franklin cellophane 2012/05/06 12:31:15
    Franklin
    +1
    A climatologist is a person who uses data to support their job in a unproven unprovable political theory falsely called a field of “science” ….they don't give a crap about global totals as those have failed them again and again – so they use spot data peaks to prove predetermined outcomes that will benefit them financially !
  • cellophane Franklin 2012/05/06 14:36:59
    cellophane
    >>>A climatologist is a person who uses data to support their job in a unproven unprovable political theory falsely called a field of “science”<<<

    My! What vitriol! As for me, I cannot understand how anyone can look at the pollution that we dump into this world, and not see that we're destroying ourselves. And if it isn't climate, just how much longer can we continue to pump enormous amounts of CO2 into the air while destroying the rain forests, those mass engines that convert CO2 to O2, without coming to a point where life will not be sustained.

    "Unproven"? "Unprovable"? You do realize that the only way to prove that global warming is real would be to just continue going the way we're going. Of course, if it is real, we will only be able to prove it once we're beyond the point of no return.

    I believe that as we understand the science of climatology today, the problem is very real. Is there something in the earth's "natural defense" mechanism, something that we know nothing about, that would kick in to counterbalance the problem? It's very, very possible. Are we willing to gamble the lives of our children and grandchildren on the possibility that some unknown variable is going to keep this warming from happening?

    I have no compunction in stating that there are those entities who are ...

    >>>A climatologist is a person who uses data to support their job in a unproven unprovable political theory falsely called a field of “science”<<<

    My! What vitriol! As for me, I cannot understand how anyone can look at the pollution that we dump into this world, and not see that we're destroying ourselves. And if it isn't climate, just how much longer can we continue to pump enormous amounts of CO2 into the air while destroying the rain forests, those mass engines that convert CO2 to O2, without coming to a point where life will not be sustained.

    "Unproven"? "Unprovable"? You do realize that the only way to prove that global warming is real would be to just continue going the way we're going. Of course, if it is real, we will only be able to prove it once we're beyond the point of no return.

    I believe that as we understand the science of climatology today, the problem is very real. Is there something in the earth's "natural defense" mechanism, something that we know nothing about, that would kick in to counterbalance the problem? It's very, very possible. Are we willing to gamble the lives of our children and grandchildren on the possibility that some unknown variable is going to keep this warming from happening?

    I have no compunction in stating that there are those entities who are going to use the fear factor about this problem to try to enrich themselves. Shame on them. But the existence of those selfish people is not an indicator by which we can judge the truth of global warming.

    So maybe the latest trend is simply another spike like a thousand other climate spikes in the earth's history. But we ARE going to kill ourselves, whether through global warming or some other natural result of the way we live if we don't stop letting the almighty lucre be our primary focus.
    (more)
  • Franklin cellophane 2012/05/06 15:09:24
    Franklin
    +1
    vitriol ? your an idiot - climate change is a political term not based in science in fact to be a climatologist you must constantly reject facts and real science if it does not fit your agenda . There is no such thing as this "field of study" it was created by the government + funded by the government and serves only the creation of new taxes and fees for the government -
    Tell me child where are we getting this CO2 from that is "new" to the environment ??? Are we importing it from another planet ?
    Just admit you have your head way WAY up your own ass and you need someone to hate ...so why not follow a junk science that lets you point fingers at American industry while doing less than nothing to change your own selfish ways-
  • cellophane Franklin 2012/05/06 19:02:22
    cellophane
    >>>Tell me child where are we getting this CO2 from that is "new" to the environment ???<<<

    You don't make your age public, but allow me to ask: How long has it been since you've been in grade school? We create carbon dioxide. Every time you exhale; every time you light a fire to keep you warm in the evenings; every time you start your gasoline or diesel vehicle; every time your electricity usage fires up the coal burning generator plant; every moment of every day at a hot spring; when a volcano erupts - carbon dioxide is released. How is carbon dioxide eliminated? By soil, by plants, and into the ocean.

    So there are creators and releasers of CO2, and there are collectors and converters of CO2. What's the problem? Well the problem is that we need to have the creators/releasers fairly well balanced with the collectors and converters. But we have increasing numbers of people on the planet which increases the amount of CO2 from our own bodies and from our own combustion. Not only that, but the increasing population is surfacing over the soils for in order to build our own stuff, stripping the world's forests both for land and timber which reduces the ability to trap or use the CO2, and we have the oceans polluted to the point that their "recycling" capability is vastly diminished. "Junk...

    >>><<<



    >>>Tell me child where are we getting this CO2 from that is "new" to the environment ???<<<

    You don't make your age public, but allow me to ask: How long has it been since you've been in grade school? We create carbon dioxide. Every time you exhale; every time you light a fire to keep you warm in the evenings; every time you start your gasoline or diesel vehicle; every time your electricity usage fires up the coal burning generator plant; every moment of every day at a hot spring; when a volcano erupts - carbon dioxide is released. How is carbon dioxide eliminated? By soil, by plants, and into the ocean.

    So there are creators and releasers of CO2, and there are collectors and converters of CO2. What's the problem? Well the problem is that we need to have the creators/releasers fairly well balanced with the collectors and converters. But we have increasing numbers of people on the planet which increases the amount of CO2 from our own bodies and from our own combustion. Not only that, but the increasing population is surfacing over the soils for in order to build our own stuff, stripping the world's forests both for land and timber which reduces the ability to trap or use the CO2, and we have the oceans polluted to the point that their "recycling" capability is vastly diminished. "Junk science"?

    >>>vitriol ? your an idiot....Just admit you have your head way WAY up your own ass and you need someone to hate ...so why not follow a junk science that lets you point fingers at American industry while doing less than nothing to change your own selfish ways-<<<

    You call me names and accuse me of having my head WAY up my own ass, and then you accuse ME of needing someone to hate? Wheee doggy! Alrighty then...

    Okay. let me address it directly. I just went back over my answers, and never once did I blame American industry for global warming. You want to try again?
    (more)
  • YodaHead 2012/05/06 10:31:38
    YodaHead
    Good. Speeding is never clever.
  • Rusty Shackleford 2012/05/06 10:11:00
    Rusty Shackleford
    +1
    I predict that the socialists will simply ignore this data as though it never even existed.
  • Franklin Rusty S... 2012/05/06 12:31:54
    Franklin
    +2
    they will use the parts of it they like - as they always do.
  • ~ The Rebel ~ 2012/05/06 09:57:20
    ~ The Rebel ~
    +1
    Slow flow.Satellite observations of glacial flow in Greenland reveal that many of the island's glaciers have slowed in recent years, a sign that ice loss during the 21st century could be less dire than in the worst-case scenarios.

    http://news.sciencemag.org/sc...

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/10/02 04:44:52

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals