>>This data has been extensively studied in the past, but the new research was designed to sort out which changes in ice sheet elevation could be attributed to glacial ice loss, and which ones were due to shorter-term changes caused by the weather.

>>According to the team, the data shows that since 1992, the pattern of glacier thinning has spread across 24 percent of West Antarctica. In some places, the ice has thinned by as much as 122 m (400 ft), and in areas like Pine Island Glacier and Thwaites Glacier, ice loss is happening five times faster now than it was in the 1990s.<<

>>This new study is just the latest brushstroke on the increasingly-detailed picture scientists are painting of Antarctica’s grim future. Giant icebergs seem to be breaking off the mainland with alarming regularity, and ice loss rates appear to have tripled since 2012.<<

https://newatlas.com/antarctica-glacier-ice-unstable/59730/

PermeateFree said:

>>This data has been extensively studied in the past, but the new research was designed to sort out which changes in ice sheet elevation could be attributed to glacial ice loss, and which ones were due to shorter-term changes caused by the weather.

>>According to the team, the data shows that since 1992, the pattern of glacier thinning has spread across 24 percent of West Antarctica. In some places, the ice has thinned by as much as 122 m (400 ft), and in areas like Pine Island Glacier and Thwaites Glacier, ice loss is happening five times faster now than it was in the 1990s.<<

>>This new study is just the latest brushstroke on the increasingly-detailed picture scientists are painting of Antarctica’s grim future. Giant icebergs seem to be breaking off the mainland with alarming regularity, and ice loss rates appear to have tripled since 2012.<<

https://newatlas.com/antarctica-glacier-ice-unstable/59730/

Do they icebergs drift off into open ocean or do they refreeze

Cymek said:

PermeateFree said:

>>This data has been extensively studied in the past, but the new research was designed to sort out which changes in ice sheet elevation could be attributed to glacial ice loss, and which ones were due to shorter-term changes caused by the weather.

>>According to the team, the data shows that since 1992, the pattern of glacier thinning has spread across 24 percent of West Antarctica. In some places, the ice has thinned by as much as 122 m (400 ft), and in areas like Pine Island Glacier and Thwaites Glacier, ice loss is happening five times faster now than it was in the 1990s.<<

>>This new study is just the latest brushstroke on the increasingly-detailed picture scientists are painting of Antarctica’s grim future. Giant icebergs seem to be breaking off the mainland with alarming regularity, and ice loss rates appear to have tripled since 2012.<<

https://newatlas.com/antarctica-glacier-ice-unstable/59730/

Do they icebergs drift off into open ocean or do they refreeze

Well they melt into the ocean in one way or another, thus leading to increased sealevels

I wonder if we have the capability yet to tow these icebergs were needed without the profit or cost factor being a concern and its done because people can use all the fresh water.

Resists temptation to post.

mollwollfumble said:

Resists temptation to post.

Please do so if you have something to add other than wild opinion.

PermeateFree said:

mollwollfumble said:

Resists temptation to post.

Please do so if you have something to add other than wild opinion.

Well, I do not have anything other than wild opinion. Wild opinion is as follows.

“It takes into account data gathered between 1992 and 2017 by several generations of satellites, including ERS-1, ERS-2, Envisat and CryoSat, all of which use radar altimeters to measure the height of the ice sheet. This data has been extensively studied in the past.”

Yes, I’m one of the people who has studied it. I came to the conclusion that the satellite radar altimeter data on Antarctica simply isn’t accurate enough to draw any valid conclusions, it’s accurate enough for Greenland, but not for Antarctica.

There are two other space-bourne measurement systems that are more accurate than the ones mentioned. They are the space shuttle imagery dataset, and some Japanese satellite measurements. The space shuttle ice surface altitude data is more accurate, but also more flakey in that for large flat ice sheets it cannot be relied on.

The JAXA measurements have the problem of being commercial in confidence, and are only available at literally huge expense, we’re talking many millions of dollars to get enough data to draw valid conclusions. In addition, it is limited to relatively low latitudes, near the edges of Antarctica rather than over the bulk of the ice sheet.

I eagerly await results from the satellite that will definitively solve all our questions about the altitude of Antarctic landforms. This is ICESat-2. It’s been up there observing Antarctica for 8 months and 5 days. But we’ll have to wait about another two and a half years for published results. I, for one, am on tenterhooks eagerly awaiting the results.

mollwollfumble said:

PermeateFree said:

mollwollfumble said:

Resists temptation to post.

Please do so if you have something to add other than wild opinion.

Well, I do not have anything other than wild opinion. Wild opinion is as follows.

“It takes into account data gathered between 1992 and 2017 by several generations of satellites, including ERS-1, ERS-2, Envisat and CryoSat, all of which use radar altimeters to measure the height of the ice sheet. This data has been extensively studied in the past.”

Yes, I’m one of the people who has studied it. I came to the conclusion that the satellite radar altimeter data on Antarctica simply isn’t accurate enough to draw any valid conclusions, it’s accurate enough for Greenland, but not for Antarctica.

There are two other space-bourne measurement systems that are more accurate than the ones mentioned. They are the space shuttle imagery dataset, and some Japanese satellite measurements. The space shuttle ice surface altitude data is more accurate, but also more flakey in that for large flat ice sheets it cannot be relied on.

The JAXA measurements have the problem of being commercial in confidence, and are only available at literally huge expense, we’re talking many millions of dollars to get enough data to draw valid conclusions. In addition, it is limited to relatively low latitudes, near the edges of Antarctica rather than over the bulk of the ice sheet.

I eagerly await results from the satellite that will definitively solve all our questions about the altitude of Antarctic landforms. This is ICESat-2. It’s been up there observing Antarctica for 8 months and 5 days. But we’ll have to wait about another two and a half years for published results. I, for one, am on tenterhooks eagerly awaiting the results.

From the article:

>>This new study is just the latest brushstroke on the increasingly-detailed picture scientists are painting of Antarctica’s grim future. Giant icebergs seem to be breaking off the mainland with alarming regularity, and ice loss rates appear to have tripled since 2012.<<

From the Geophysical Research Letters.

>>Trends in Antarctic Ice Sheet Elevation and Mass

This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1029/2019GL082182

Abstract

Fluctuations in Antarctic Ice Sheet elevation and mass occur over a variety of timescales, owing to changes in snowfall and ice flow. Here, we disentangle these signals by combining 25 years of satellite radar altimeter observations and a regional climate model. From these measurements, patterns of change that are strongly associated with glaciological events emerge. While the majority of the ice sheet has remained stable, 24% of West Antarctica is now in a state of dynamical imbalance. Thinning of the Pine Island and Thwaites glacier basins reaches 122 m in places, and their rates of ice loss are now five times greater than at the start of our survey. By partitioning elevation changes into areas of snow and ice variability, we estimate that East and West Antarctica have contributed ‐1.1±0.4 and +5.7±0.8 mm to global sea level between 1992 and 2017.<<

I don’t know……..these stupid scientists who study this stuff can get it so wrong, they must be incredibly dumb! All they need do is email “The Answer” aka mollwollfumble and it will all revealed. Just think of the money they would save when their meager efforts no longer required…….You might even be able to retrain them to do something useful.

PermeateFree said:

mollwollfumble said:

PermeateFree said:

Please do so if you have something to add other than wild opinion.

Well, I do not have anything other than wild opinion. Wild opinion is as follows.

“It takes into account data gathered between 1992 and 2017 by several generations of satellites, including ERS-1, ERS-2, Envisat and CryoSat, all of which use radar altimeters to measure the height of the ice sheet. This data has been extensively studied in the past.”

Yes, I’m one of the people who has studied it. I came to the conclusion that the satellite radar altimeter data on Antarctica simply isn’t accurate enough to draw any valid conclusions, it’s accurate enough for Greenland, but not for Antarctica.

There are two other space-bourne measurement systems that are more accurate than the ones mentioned. They are the space shuttle imagery dataset, and some Japanese satellite measurements. The space shuttle ice surface altitude data is more accurate, but also more flakey in that for large flat ice sheets it cannot be relied on.

The JAXA measurements have the problem of being commercial in confidence, and are only available at literally huge expense, we’re talking many millions of dollars to get enough data to draw valid conclusions. In addition, it is limited to relatively low latitudes, near the edges of Antarctica rather than over the bulk of the ice sheet.

I eagerly await results from the satellite that will definitively solve all our questions about the altitude of Antarctic landforms. This is ICESat-2. It’s been up there observing Antarctica for 8 months and 5 days. But we’ll have to wait about another two and a half years for published results. I, for one, am on tenterhooks eagerly awaiting the results.

From the article:

>>This new study is just the latest brushstroke on the increasingly-detailed picture scientists are painting of Antarctica’s grim future. Giant icebergs seem to be breaking off the mainland with alarming regularity, and ice loss rates appear to have tripled since 2012.<<

From the Geophysical Research Letters.

>>Trends in Antarctic Ice Sheet Elevation and Mass

This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1029/2019GL082182

Abstract

Fluctuations in Antarctic Ice Sheet elevation and mass occur over a variety of timescales, owing to changes in snowfall and ice flow. Here, we disentangle these signals by combining 25 years of satellite radar altimeter observations and a regional climate model. From these measurements, patterns of change that are strongly associated with glaciological events emerge. While the majority of the ice sheet has remained stable, 24% of West Antarctica is now in a state of dynamical imbalance. Thinning of the Pine Island and Thwaites glacier basins reaches 122 m in places, and their rates of ice loss are now five times greater than at the start of our survey. By partitioning elevation changes into areas of snow and ice variability, we estimate that East and West Antarctica have contributed ‐1.1±0.4 and +5.7±0.8 mm to global sea level between 1992 and 2017.<<

I don’t know……..these stupid scientists who study this stuff can get it so wrong, they must be incredibly dumb! All they need do is email “The Answer” aka mollwollfumble and it will all revealed. Just think of the money they would save when their meager efforts no longer required…….You might even be able to retrain them to do something useful.

> “the majority of the ice sheet has remained stable”

There you go, there’s your headline for you. You didn’t need me after all.

Or perhaps the headline should have been “The melting of Antarctica has contributed 4.6 +- 1.2 mm to the global sea level over a quarter century.”

To put that even more in perspective, that’s a sea level rise of 1 metre in four and a half thousand years.

It’s the hype I object to, not the facts.

I repeat. Wait for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICESat-2. It’s a complete game-changer.

mollwollfumble said:

PermeateFree said:

mollwollfumble said:

Well, I do not have anything other than wild opinion. Wild opinion is as follows.

“It takes into account data gathered between 1992 and 2017 by several generations of satellites, including ERS-1, ERS-2, Envisat and CryoSat, all of which use radar altimeters to measure the height of the ice sheet. This data has been extensively studied in the past.”

Yes, I’m one of the people who has studied it. I came to the conclusion that the satellite radar altimeter data on Antarctica simply isn’t accurate enough to draw any valid conclusions, it’s accurate enough for Greenland, but not for Antarctica.

There are two other space-bourne measurement systems that are more accurate than the ones mentioned. They are the space shuttle imagery dataset, and some Japanese satellite measurements. The space shuttle ice surface altitude data is more accurate, but also more flakey in that for large flat ice sheets it cannot be relied on.

The JAXA measurements have the problem of being commercial in confidence, and are only available at literally huge expense, we’re talking many millions of dollars to get enough data to draw valid conclusions. In addition, it is limited to relatively low latitudes, near the edges of Antarctica rather than over the bulk of the ice sheet.

I eagerly await results from the satellite that will definitively solve all our questions about the altitude of Antarctic landforms. This is ICESat-2. It’s been up there observing Antarctica for 8 months and 5 days. But we’ll have to wait about another two and a half years for published results. I, for one, am on tenterhooks eagerly awaiting the results.

From the article:

>>This new study is just the latest brushstroke on the increasingly-detailed picture scientists are painting of Antarctica’s grim future. Giant icebergs seem to be breaking off the mainland with alarming regularity, and ice loss rates appear to have tripled since 2012.<<

From the Geophysical Research Letters.

>>Trends in Antarctic Ice Sheet Elevation and Mass

This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1029/2019GL082182

Abstract

Fluctuations in Antarctic Ice Sheet elevation and mass occur over a variety of timescales, owing to changes in snowfall and ice flow. Here, we disentangle these signals by combining 25 years of satellite radar altimeter observations and a regional climate model. From these measurements, patterns of change that are strongly associated with glaciological events emerge. While the majority of the ice sheet has remained stable, 24% of West Antarctica is now in a state of dynamical imbalance. Thinning of the Pine Island and Thwaites glacier basins reaches 122 m in places, and their rates of ice loss are now five times greater than at the start of our survey. By partitioning elevation changes into areas of snow and ice variability, we estimate that East and West Antarctica have contributed ‐1.1±0.4 and +5.7±0.8 mm to global sea level between 1992 and 2017.<<

I don’t know……..these stupid scientists who study this stuff can get it so wrong, they must be incredibly dumb! All they need do is email “The Answer” aka mollwollfumble and it will all revealed. Just think of the money they would save when their meager efforts no longer required…….You might even be able to retrain them to do something useful.

> “the majority of the ice sheet has remained stable”

There you go, there’s your headline for you. You didn’t need me after all.

Or perhaps the headline should have been “The melting of Antarctica has contributed 4.6 +- 1.2 mm to the global sea level over a quarter century.”

To put that even more in perspective, that’s a sea level rise of 1 metre in four and a half thousand years.

It’s the hype I object to, not the facts.

I repeat. Wait for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICESat-2. It’s a complete game-changer.

The title of this tread and what this article is about is WESTERN ANTARCTICA! I posted another thread some time ago about ice loss throughout Antarctica from BELOW the ice. And your calculations are for sealevel rise for WEST ANTARCTICA only, not the Northern Hemisphere, nor the rest of Antarctica. For someone who claims to be a scientist WITH expertise of ice melt, you seem to be remarkably ill-informed to the extent that you are spreading misinformation.

It is NOT hype but scientific research that you really object, especially that it conflicts with your very out of date understanding. Global Warming is gathering pace at an increasing rate and if you really want to contribute, then you need to keep up to date with new research as it can, and has changed our understanding of the increasing urgency of this matter.