Multi-metre ice loss on decadal timescale - Hanson

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 10 Sep 2015, 15:08

tpals wrote:
emordnilap wrote:
vtsnowedin wrote: I've used that term before so you might be referring to me. If in the middle of a discussion the capitalization of Nazi becomes the most important thing to you ,you should turn off your computer and go to bed.
It's true, USonians don't get irony.
I got it.

Some.

vtsnowedin · Post by **vtsnowedin** » 10 Sep 2015, 22:00

tpals wrote:
emordnilap wrote:
vtsnowedin wrote: I've used that term before so you might be referring to me. If in the middle of a discussion the capitalization of Nazi becomes the most important thing to you ,you should turn off your computer and go to bed.
It's true, USonians don't get irony.
I got it.

I got the Irony. Just wasn't in a funny mood at the time.

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 10 Sep 2015, 23:08

biffvernon wrote:As you well know, I'm on the doomer end of the spectrum, but I'm not at the looney end.

So, Hanson is at the loony end then?

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 10 Sep 2015, 23:10

tpals wrote:
emordnilap wrote:
vtsnowedin wrote: I've used that term before so you might be referring to me. If in the middle of a discussion the capitalization of Nazi becomes the most important thing to you ,you should turn off your computer and go to bed.
It's true, USonians don't get irony.
I got it.

I obviously didn't!

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 11 Sep 2015, 04:55

Here is an article that predates the Hansen article which also says that ice melt will be much faster than previously thought.

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 11 Sep 2015, 17:06

Another article on the mechanism of ice loss this time from Fox News!! And a more detailed version here.

Post by **clv101** » 11 Sep 2015, 17:35

Yes, the ice is likely to melt faster than the community thought likely a decade ago. However, do realise than Hansen is at one extreme of the scientific spectrum on this issue. It is certainly not the view of the scientific community that Hansen's projections are at all likely, they lie at the absolute limit of plausibility. To suggest otherwise is to move away from an objective scientific interpretation of the available evidence.

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 11 Sep 2015, 20:10

That's just the point Chris. The extremes of scientific thinking are what is occurring in fact. The safe science that the politicians will accept is not what is happening and the politicians need to be shocked out of their complacency.

2 deg C is NOT safe!

2 deg C will flood large parts of the world and some of the most expensive parts and more importantly, the most productive food wise, at that.

2 deg C is 2 deg C too high!

The ice is melting at 1 deg C and we need to be reducing the amount of carbon in the atmosphere not increasing it further. If Hansen can convince our corrupt political class, the Kleptocracy, that they could well suffer in their lifetimes it can only be a good thing and they may well then do something about the problem.

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 11 Sep 2015, 20:37

Science has not said that 2° is safe!

Even the current 0.8° may have put the icecaps out of equilibrium with climate so all the ice is likely to melt. The difficulty is knowing how long it will take. Politicians and engineers are mostly interested in what will happen over the next several decades (those that are interested in anything beyond the next election, anyway).

The science seems to suggest that we should prepare for a couple of metres rise within the life expectancy of major engineering and infrastructure projects, so it would be silly to build new cities close to sea level and we must plan for the evacuation of low lying areas where either the local economy or the local geology are not conducive to sea defences.

Post by **clv101** » 11 Sep 2015, 20:50

kenneal - lagger wrote:That's just the point Chris. The extremes of scientific thinking are what is occurring in fact. The safe science that the politicians will accept is not what is happening and the politicians need to be shocked out of their complacency.

2 deg C is NOT safe!

2 deg C will flood large parts of the world and some of the most expensive parts and more importantly, the most productive food wise, at that.

2 deg C is 2 deg C too high!

The ice is melting at 1 deg C and we need to be reducing the amount of carbon in the atmosphere not increasing it further. If Hansen can convince our corrupt political class, the Kleptocracy, that they could well suffer in their lifetimes it can only be a good thing and they may well then do something about the problem.

I don't quite follow what you're saying.

Science doesn't have much to say about subjective and value laden terms such as 'safe'. You and I both know the 2C business is politics, not science. Do not try and caricature the scientific community as claiming 2C is 'safe'.

My point is that if one wants to make objective, evidence based arguments, claiming the authority of science - don't lean too heavily on Hansen. His position is extreme, it is not likely. To claim anything else is to take a step away from the science. Which of course is your right, many people operate many steps away from the science. Just be aware Hansen's (yet to be accepted) paper is beyond even the outspoken the of scientific community like Jason Box who you linked to above.

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 11 Sep 2015, 22:42

Looks like someone at Google has been having fun with California:

http://www.newsweek.com/google-maps-now ... vel-371464

vtsnowedin · Post by **vtsnowedin** » 12 Sep 2015, 12:26

Regardless of whither 2 deg. C is safe or not it does not appear that there is anything plausible we can do to stop it happening. And the sea level rise however large it may turn out to be will take place over decades. Long before that other pressing problems will come to a head and get resolved in ways that will most probably reduce both the pollution causing the temperature rise and the need for coastal land.
We are heading head long into the explosion of the population bomb which will create shortages of everything from drinking water to caskets, and we will have to face those realities in person long before the tide line moves inland ten miles.

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 12 Sep 2015, 12:30

vtsnowedin wrote:Regardless of whither 2 deg. C is safe or not it does not appear that there is anything plausible we can do to stop it happening.

But we can mitigate the harm. That will be well worth the effort.

vtsnowedin · Post by **vtsnowedin** » 12 Sep 2015, 16:48

biffvernon wrote:
vtsnowedin wrote:Regardless of whither 2 deg. C is safe or not it does not appear that there is anything plausible we can do to stop it happening.
But we can mitigate the harm. That will be well worth the effort.

I would expect low lying areas like Florida or Bangladesh to be diked and drained similar to the Netherlands as long as there are populations needing the farm land. But that is treating the symptoms not curing the disease.

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 12 Sep 2015, 17:13

vtsnowedin wrote: I would expect low lying areas like Florida or Bangladesh to be diked and drained similar to the Netherlands as long as there are populations needing the farm land. But that is treating the symptoms not curing the disease.

Two problems;one for each.

Florida does not have the same geology as the Netherlands. For dikes to keep the sea out you need impermeable material at the surface. Clay does this in the Netherlands, sand does not do this in Florida. Florida will have to be abandoned.

Bangladesh does not have the wealth to build dikes. Much of Banlgadesh will have to be abandoned.