Comments for Huge Antarctic ice chunk collapses »
Posted By engineer 1 year, 7 months ago in Science & TechnologyAntarctic ice chunk nine times the size of Manhattan collapses Rest of ice shelf is hanging by a narrow beam of thin ice Larger, more dramatic ice collapses occurred in 2002 and 1995
Read Full Story at cnn.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 103
-
Neutral
engineer1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
A chunk of Antarctic ice about seven times the size of Manhattan suddenly collapsed, putting an even greater portion of glacial ice at risk, scientists said Tuesday.
Satellite images show the runaway disintegration of a 160-square-mile chunk in western Antarctica, which started Feb. 28. It was the edge of the Wilkins ice shelf and has been there for hundreds, maybe 1,500 years.
This is the result of global warming, said British Antarctic Survey scientist David Vaughan.
Because scientists noticed satellite images within hours, they diverted satellite cameras and even flew an airplane over the ongoing collapse for rare pictures and video.
"It's an event we don't get to see very often," said Ted Scambos, lead scientist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colo. "The cracks fill with water and slice off and topple... That gets to be a runaway situation."
Reply-
Neutral
engineer1 year, 7 months ago
-
-
Neutral
Teech1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
How many times does George Bush have to tell you people that global warming is nothing but a hoax based on bad science! How many times do Neocons have to tell you that this is all a huge fabrication of Al Gore to make money selling carbon credits! Listen to your president, ignore all evidence, go shopping, rejoice over our victory in Iraq, go shopping and spend all that money you are getting back in taxes and don't worry! The economy is booming! It has never been better! Vote for McCain to carry on this great Republican legacy.
It's obvious that the Dems have somehow faked some video or something to make you think that the ice is melting. Don't believe them or any of those thousands of stupid scientists who have studied this for years. Bush says it's a hoax, it's a hoax. End of discussion. Would he lie to you?
Reply-
Neutral
eddie1071 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The sky is falling, the sky is falling!
There is no doubt that the earth is growing warmer. The evidence is all around us. But we are exactly where we are supposed to be.
I for one am very thankful that I am in this time of the cycles of Ice ages on this planet where warmth and life is dominant.
I just feel sorry for the ones who will have to make a life in New York City when it is covered in a half a mile thick sheet of ice which has covered NY in every Ice Age.
Reply
-
-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned1 Reply
-
-
Neutral
Endoscopy1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
LOL
The 2000 meter down measuring tools checking temperature and water flow in the oceans show a slight drop in temperature. The Russian scientists measuring the average earth temperature say that the temperature has not only flattened in the last decade but has started down again. A Polish scientist working for NOAA quit and further developed the project he was working on that proves greenhouse gass don't have a greenhouse effect. The Antartic is getting colder an the snow and Ice levels have been growing.
It couldn't be that the weight was too much but global warming in an area where it is getting colder and the ice cap is increasing is the cause.
Don't let the facts get in the way of your beliefs. Just because more and more scientists are saying the theory is wrong shouldn't matter. Keep up the Global warming mantra.
Reply-
Neutral
Klarissa1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
endo - They haven't commented on the ground underneath the glacier being heated by an old volcano.
This would melt the bottom of the glacier, like occurs when you go down a water slide. I acts as a lubricant, the glacier floats along, and if it is a down hill ride, it goes faster and faster.
Reply-
-
Neutral
Klarissa1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Volcano, Not Global Warming Effects, May be Melting an Antarctic Glacier, January 21, 2008
Scientists have discovered a layer of volcanic ash and glass shards in Antarctica, evidence of an old eruption by a still active volcano that researchers believe may be contributing to the thinning of Antarctic glacial ice.
Hugh F.J. Corr and David G. Vaughan, two scientists with the British Antarctic Survey, recently published their discovery of the volcanic layer in the journal Nature Geoscience. The discovery is unique according to Dr. Vaughan. He said "This is the first time we have seen a volcano beneath the ice sheet punch a hole through the ice sheet."
The volcano's heat could possibly be melting and thinning the ice and raising the speed of the Pine Island Glacier in West Antarctica.
Reply-
Neutral
Klarissa1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The thickness of the ice above the layer mean that the scientists could date it to roughly 200 B.C., plus or minus 240 years or so. But the researchers think they can narrow it down more than that. From previous examinations of ice cores, they knew that a volcano had erupted in Antarctica some time around 325 B.C., although they had not known where the eruption had happened. Dr. Vaughan said: "We're fairly confident this is the same eruption."
Source: New York Times
Reply
-
-
-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned
-
-
Neutral
ETproductions1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Where do you have the tip of that endoscope, endy? It's showing you that mankind pumping 7 billion metric tons of CO2 into earth atmosphere does nothing? http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/ggccebro/chapt...
I suppose we are to believe that the cooling you claim in the polar region is why, for the first time in recorded history, the Arctic Ocean is ice free and navigable. http://www.nrdc.org/globalwarming/qthinice.asp
It's little wonder, with the funding that big oil and coal put up for deniers, that you can muster 1 or 2 prostitutes who would are content to sell their souls and the health of the planet for a few shekels.
NASA satellite images from all over the earth show clearly that glacial ice is melting and that the melting is increasing. http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewIm...
Reply-
Neutral
ETproductions1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here's another, more comprehensive set of pictures that dramatically show the alarming retreat of glaciers all over the world. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retreat_of_glacier...
In some places, glaciers "seem" to be growing, spreading over new ground. But this turns out to be due to melting, with the runoff seeping under the glacier and lubricating it so that it slides more rapidly down the mountain into the warmer valleys below.
Reply -
Neutral
eddie1071 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Lol, That was too funny ET!
If for nothing else, I love the dialog that gets posted around here.
I very much agree that we are making an impact on the earth, and it is very much a negative one, but with 3rd world countries trying to emerge, and population explosions all over the world, the earth just doesn't stand a chance.
Even though Americans are by far more cleaner than we have ever been in our brief history, it is not enough to save the rest of the world. What we can do will not even make a small dent in what the rest of the world is doing.
Save the humans, destroy the world. - There is only one way to change that statement, and that is to reverse it. And mankind will never let that happen.
Reply-
Neutral
ETproductions1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yeah, I understand the challenge we face. But it will fix itself if we (all mankind) don't step up and fix it.
If we leave it to nature, rising ocean levels will lead to mass displacements of hundreds of millions of people. Incredible extremes of rainfall will develop, with rainy areas receiving unheard of flooding and more arid zones becoming mass dust bowls. Humans by the billions will be exposed to starvation. Food wars will erupt across the planet. And when the population finally dips low enough again, say 1 billion or so, earth will reach a balance and slowly begin to heal.
Reply-
Neutral
eddie1071 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hey ET, it is a noble thought to try and stop nature, but 3 million years ago the ice ages started, and 13 cycles later, mankind stepped out of the snow from the last ice age.
Our whole "flash in the pan", so to speak has been between 2 ice ages, and the only real way to stop it from coming again, would be to wipe central America off the planet. To re-open up the oceanic currents that kept the planet stable once upon a time.
But with that action, you will also melt all of the ice caps and you will find the planet stabilized in a tropical environment. But who thinks that anything of that nature is even possible?
Reply-
-
Neutral
eddie1071 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Sorry ET, but the damage man has done, is already done. I don't think that what is happening is that far away from what is supposed to be happening. We are experiencing the temperature changes that we are supposed to experiencing right now in cycle of time.
But as far as the damage that mankind does to the earth, are you going to tell the 3rd world countries of the earth, that they cant feed the people of their nation, because they make too much pollution?
A friend of mine said something profound once, Everyone talks about the deer population here is going wild, but how often do you see a deer? Isn't it nice when you do? And how often do you see a human? Where is the population problem REALLY?
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
Isoparm1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You still insist on cherry-picking info., instead of thinking about what is happening. The world's heat-balance is shifting. The most obvious indicator of this change, is whether or no there is a change in global ice mass. If there is an increase of ice mass, then that means that there is a decrease of heat in the atmosphere. If the ice mass is decreasing, as is described in this article, then the opposite is occurring, and atmospheric heat is increasing. This not that hard to figure out. You will never hear Limbaugh or the other talk-show hosts describe this, as they are either way too stupid to understand this, or it's not in their (or their master's) interest to provide clarity.
Reply
-
-
DanmLiberalsComment removed: Retracted by user3 Replies
-
-
Neutral
Klarissa1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Several ice shelves -- Prince Gustav Channel, Larsen Inlet, Larsen A, Larsen B, Wordie, Muller and Jones -- have collapsed in the past three decades, the British Antarctic Survey said.
Larsen B, a 1,254-square-mile ice shelf, comparable in size to the U.S. state of Rhode Island, collapsed in 2002, the group said.
Climate in Antarctica is complicated and more isolated from the rest of the world.
Much of the continent is not warming and some parts are even cooling, Vaughan said.
Reply-
Neutral
crespi1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Who are you protecting, Klarissa?
Exxon, who paid millions to crackpots to "prove" there is no Global Warming?
Or is it the heinous Fundamentalist Christians, who called people Communist, traitor and coward, ON THESE VERY PAGES (and even worse on the old Netscape) if anyone DARED to point out the environmental facts, since I HAVE CHRISTIAN MAGAZINES, PAMPHLETS AND RADIO TRANSCRIPTS GOING BACK TO 1980 DENYING AGAIN AND AGAIN THAT THERE IS EVEN A GLOBAL TEMPERATURE RISE.
The Christians LIED. Many normal people are unsure why and think the Fundamentalist Christians were in cahoots with the malfeasant oil companies.
But WE know better don't we? You wanted HELL ON EARTH to prove Heaven's "greatness." You wanted TRIBULATIONS to prove your hate of the world. You want fear and riots so people will turn to your creepy war-mongering, torturing, thieving GOD and join his neocon minions.
Keep telling us IT'S NOT HAPPENING or IT'S ALL SO NATURAL.
We WILL remember...
Reply-
Neutral
PapaWolf1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
crespi,
I gave you a POS but have 1 favor - do NOT group me & most of the Christians I know into that group. The Christians I know, & the fathers & mothers of our church were more interested in creating Heaven on Earth to draw people to their faith by love & compassion, rather than Hell on Earth to drive people through fear & hate.
Reply-
Neutral
crespi1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Sorry about painting with a broad brush. Many of faith here on propeller are very kind and good.
But the Neocons wrecked American Christianity they way they wrecked the Republican Party.
Now they are oozing into the Democrats.
Moderate Christians SHOULD HAVE STOOD UP when Falwell repeatedly said on MSNBC that the victims of 911 "deserved it."
Or TWENTY-FIVE YEARS earlier when Pat Robertson prayed on television for WWIII. And saying "Bill Clinton murdered Vince Foster with his own hands," and then chuckling and rubbing his hands together with glee for breaking the Ninth Commandment out of hate for political purposes and BEARING FALSE WITNESS against the President of the United States in the name of Christ.
Maybe atheists are God's way of showing Christians not to listen to the Lord of Lies, know what I'm saying?
Reply
-
-
-
Neutral
Isoparm1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Climatic behavior is very complex, which is why I find it amazing that so many people with apparently no science background whatsoever are feeling quite comfortable voicing judgments as to the validity of what is occurring. Would these same people feel quite so qualified voicing opinions, or arguing with a doctor on the merits of this, or that, technique to apply to a pending heart surgery? Who would trust this judgment? The science describing climate behavior is vastly more complex, and the most powerful computers today, are required for most calculated projections.
The climatic interactions in Antarctica are complex, but when ones sees the re-occurrences of ice-shelf collapse as you described, this simplifies a search for a cause. These continent-wide occurrences, eliminates a spot cause (such as a volcano), and only re-enforces evidence of shifting heat balance. The Antarctic is not isolated from the rest of the world. Everything effects everything else.
Reply-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned
-
Neutral
Klarissa1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Volcano, Not Global Warming Effects, May be Melting an Antarctic Glacier, January 21, 2008
,,,,
they knew that a volcano had erupted in Antarctica some time around 325 B.C., although they had not known where the eruption had happened. Dr. Vaughan said: "We're fairly confident this is the same eruption."
Source: New York Times
Reply
-
-
-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned
-
-
-
-
-
ML2007Comment removed: Retracted by user24 Replies
-
Neutral
jovial1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=r_k2Vbhza9o
Reply -
-
-
Neutral
bluenote15221 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Definition of neocon for those that use the term constantly:
Rich Lowry: Historically, 30 years ago it meant a former liberal who became a conservative. The cliche was because "they were mugged by reality," but it was because they saw the empirical failures of liberal welfare, state and foreign policies, and they were therefore less ideological than other conservatives and brought much more of a social science background to their argumentation.
Wikipedia definition:
The term 'Neoconservative' was originally used as a criticism against liberals that had politically 'moved to the right'.
Reply -
-
Neutral
bluenote15221 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Where is the photo of the polar bear stranded on the ice flow that they always use to illustrate global warming. They never mention that he was resting after eating a seal and that polar bears can swim 60-100 miles.
Global Warming is the distraction that a magician uses. While he waves his left hand he removes your wristwatch with his right.
Go back to the mid seventies when Time magazine had many many covers on global cooling. The climate is always warming or cooling. That is called a cycle. A segment of that cycle is being defined as a trend. It is morning and the sun is rising does not mean it will continue to rise. A rooster get's conditioned to think that it creates the sunrise by it's call in the morning. He has no more affect on the sunrise than we have on global warming. Stop paying scientist to give you the results you want and they will become objective. If their next paycheck depends on there being a man made problem that is the conclusion they will try to make.
Reply-
Neutral
Bacalao1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I agree the weather goes through natural cycles all the time. If we happen to accentuate these trends so what. its not like we will ever have a year without a winter. Hey I liked all the warm weather here in Western Arkansas this past winter. It almost reminded me if the winters we had growing up (in Miami, Fla.). Heck, summer all year could be fun. I wouldn't have to breakdown and set up my pool every year, I could leave it up all year. and just think hopefully in a few years I won't have to drive as far to go to the beach.
Reply -
-
Neutral
CRYMTYPHON1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If the conclusions of scientists were based on lobby money, wouldn't most be saying there is no global warming?
Unless you think the tree-huggers have more cash and paychecks to hand out than the oil/auto/plastics industry?
But the field isn't even split. The significant majority of climate scientists say we have man-made global warming; and they can clearly state why they conclude this.
It is the deniers who flail away with distraction. Do not distract us with what someone said in the 70's. Not relevant. We already knew the earth has seen cooling and warming before; because the scientists who are warning us now, told us; and said that man-made global warming was diferent.
Reply -
Neutral
vor1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The words Global Warming should be stricken from the language. They are too often misinterpreted. The correct term is Global Climate Change. There are likely historical markers that could foresee what may happen over the next 100 years unfortunately we have no accurate records dating anywhere far enough back to accurately forecast potential change. Perhaps the humans currently occupying this planet have been spared the true extremes. I am definitely not sure I would want to be here in another hundred years. If man doesn't destroy himself by then the climate may do the job for him. It want have anything to do with Revelation either. Just nature closing up shop on mankind. Then there will be no one to ruminate about how superior human beings are to their surroundings. We know the mighty cockroach will survive. As for Man, don't bet on it.
Reply-
Neutral
Obaku1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There is plenty of data on the climate going back thousands of years. Hundreds of thousands of years.
Tree rings.
Ice cores.
Migration of Homo erectus.
The rise and fall of many species.
True, the longer the time span, the less detail there is in the data.
Reply-
Neutral
vor1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You are exactly correct. Samples from Greenland in particular show that was once a lush green land. There was a particularly interesting and detailed book called Winds of Change I read a year or so ago regarding this subject matter. I was referring to specific data, there is plenty of subjective thought but nothing concrete. The problem is we can't detect a true repetitive pattern. We are in for a change but I think these dire predictions of rapid change (within this generation) are overstated. We will see just the fringes. But certainly future generations are in for a different world.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
mishandledComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
Neutral
quackpot1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It is rather naive to think that there is only one "cause" that affects the earth's weather. The influence of solar activity on the flux of particles from deep space is certainly one factor, but don't think for an instant that it is the only factor.
Reply-
Neutral
djn3nunez31 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Can we say solar activity causes global warming?"
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/09...
Sunspots alter the amount of energy Earth gets from the sun, but not enough to impact global climate change, a new study suggests.
Reply-
Neutral
Klarissa1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
From the same article:
"Sun Not Off the Hook for Warming
The authors and other experts are quick to point out that more complicated solar mechanisms could possibly be driving climate change in ways we don't yet understand.
Climate change carries such high stakes that even more unlikely possibilities may capture scientific attention.
"There are numerous studies that find a correlation [between solar variation and Earth climate]," said Sami Solanki of the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Lindau, Germany.
"I think the main question," the Max Planck Institute's Solanki said, "is, How does the sun [in general] act on climate? What are the processes that are going on in the Earth's atmosphere?""
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
SwampFox-82ndComment removed: Retracted by user4 Replies
-
-
-
-
Neutral
Thrasherguy051 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
this isnt even an interesting topic yet i find myself and all these people commenting about it. The polar ice caps are going to melt, get the hell over it. nothing we can do to stop it. even if there wasnt global warming those things would still be melting.
Reply
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.