Rob W 0 Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Thats the forecast.................. The quayside will be in Northumberland Street......................... Most of E Anglia and S Yorks will disapear and Lahndahn will have bloody great lake in the middle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smooth Operator 10 Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Thats the forecast.................. The quayside will be in Northumberland Street......................... Most of E Anglia and S Yorks will disapear and Lahndahn will have bloody great lake in the middle 96039[/snapback] By when o learned one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaalan 0 Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Thats the forecast.................. The quayside will be in Northumberland Street......................... Most of E Anglia and S Yorks will disapear and Lahndahn will have bloody great lake in the middle 96039[/snapback] By when o learned one. 96040[/snapback] in a million me thinks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 22008 Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Thats the forecast.................. The quayside will be in Northumberland Street......................... Most of E Anglia and S Yorks will disapear and Lahndahn will have bloody great lake in the middle 96039[/snapback] By when o learned one. 96040[/snapback] Rob's immortal so he has a different perception of time to the rest of us. I'm guessing we needn't worry too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smooth Operator 10 Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Thats the forecast.................. The quayside will be in Northumberland Street......................... Most of E Anglia and S Yorks will disapear and Lahndahn will have bloody great lake in the middle 96039[/snapback] By when o learned one. 96040[/snapback] in a million me thinks 96042[/snapback] a million what? Light years, minutes, seconds? rocks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Kirkey 0 Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 On the bright side the Bigg Market's going to disappear. Hopefully concrete rockports are the new craze for charvers when the waters start rising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 On the bright side the Bigg Market's going to disappear. Hopefully concrete rockports are the new craze for charvers when the waters start rising. 96054[/snapback] I don't mind the Bigg Market, they need somewhere to go and it makes them easier to avoid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob W 0 Posted February 17, 2006 Author Share Posted February 17, 2006 rate is estimated to ++5m per 100 years which will still bugger a lot of E Anglia in your life times and me caravan at Newbiggin will be gone in MY lifetime Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 22008 Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 rate is estimated to ++5m per 100 years which will still bugger a lot of E Anglia in your life times and me caravan at Newbiggin will be gone in MY lifetime 96080[/snapback] Where's your source Rob, because tbh this sounds suprisingly like bull shit again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spongebob toonpants 4153 Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 I live 200 yards from the Brighton sea front, so it looks like I will indeed be living in a pineapple under the sea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol 0 Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Greenland's glaciers are sliding towards the sea much faster than previously believed, scientists have told a conference in St Louis, US. It was thought the entire Greenland ice sheet could melt in about 1,000 years, but the latest evidence suggests that could happen much sooner. It implies that sea levels will rise a great deal faster as well. Details of the study, by Nasa and University of Kansas researchers, are also reported in the journal Science. The comprehensive analysis found that the amount of ice dumped into the Atlantic Ocean has doubled in the last five years. If the Greenland ice sheet melted completely, it would raise global sea levels by about 7m. Greenland's contribution to global sea level rise today is two to three times greater than it was in 1996. Sleeping giant "We are concerned because we know that sea levels have been able to rise much faster in the past - 10 times faster. This is a big gorilla. If sea level rise is multiplied by 10 or more, I'm not sure we can deal with that," co-author Eric Rignot, from the US space agency's (Nasa) Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California, told the BBC News website. Previous estimates suggested it would take many hundreds of years for the Greenland ice sheet to melt completely. The new data will cut this timescale, but by how much is uncertain. "It depends on how fast the glaciers can go and how sustainable the acceleration can be," said Dr Rignot. He added: "It takes a long time to build and melt an ice sheet, but glaciers can react quickly to temperature changes." In 1996, Greenland was losing about 100 cubic km per year in mass from its ice sheet. In 2005, this had increased to about 220 cubic km. By comparison, the city of Los Angeles uses about one cubic km of water per year. Rising surface air-temperatures seem to be behind the increases in glacier speed in the southern half of Greenland since 1996; but the northward spread of warmer temperatures may be responsible for a rapid increase in glacier speed further north after 2000. Satellite monitoring Over the past 20 years, the air temperature in south-east Greenland has risen by 3C. Warmer temperatures cause more surface melt water to reach the base of the ice sheet where it meets the rock. This is thought to serve as a lubricant, easing the glaciers' march to the sea. The study's results come from satellites that monitor glacier movement from space. Rignot and colleague Pannir Kanagaratnam, from the University of Kansas, built up a glacier speed map from the data for 2000 and then used measurements from 1996-2005 to determine how glacier velocity had changed in the last decade. The researchers plan to continue their monitoring of the Greenland glaciers using satellite data. The Greenland ice sheet covers 1.7 million sq km and is up to 3km thick. The scientists described their results at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 46088 Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 rate is estimated to ++5m per 100 years which will still bugger a lot of E Anglia in your life times and me caravan at Newbiggin will be gone in MY lifetime 96080[/snapback] Where's your source Rob, because tbh this sounds suprisingly like bull shit again! 96097[/snapback] 5m per 100 years does sound like crap like. It's much quicker than any of the reports I've ever heard on global warming. Maybe Rob's been taken in by a rising sea level email scam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 22008 Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 I live 200 yards from the Brighton sea front, so it looks like I will indeed be living in a pineapple under the sea. 96100[/snapback] Do you presently live in a pineapple like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 46088 Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 I can't read that. Too many numbers. Was he right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 I live 200 yards from the Brighton sea front, so it looks like I will indeed be living in a pineapple under the sea. 96100[/snapback] Do you presently live in a pineapple like? 96104[/snapback] Spongebob Squarepants does. Get with the fucking program Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordieshandy 0 Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 rate is estimated to ++5m per 100 years which will still bugger a lot of E Anglia in your life times and me caravan at Newbiggin will be gone in MY lifetime 96080[/snapback] Where's your source Rob, because tbh this sounds suprisingly like bull shit again! 96097[/snapback] 5m per 100 years does sound like crap like. It's much quicker than any of the reports I've ever heard on global warming. Maybe Rob's been taken in by a rising sea level email scam. 96102[/snapback] Come get your timeshare on higher ground type of affair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catmag 337 Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 I can't read that. Too many numbers. Was he right? 96106[/snapback] "Too many numbers?!" You're a sodding accountant! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spongebob toonpants 4153 Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 (edited) I live 200 yards from the Brighton sea front, so it looks like I will indeed be living in a pineapple under the sea. 96100[/snapback] Do you presently live in a pineapple like? 96104[/snapback] My half brother squarepants does Edited February 17, 2006 by spongebob toonpants Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 22008 Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 I live 200 yards from the Brighton sea front, so it looks like I will indeed be living in a pineapple under the sea. 96100[/snapback] Do you presently live in a pineapple like? 96104[/snapback] Spongebob Squarepants does. Get with the fucking program 96107[/snapback] Yes I know. So either Spongebob is really like his username and already lives in a pineapple under the sea, or he is not infact really Spongebob but lives in a pineapple 200m up the beach from the sea, which will be under the sea when it rises. Or something. Wibble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 22008 Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 I live 200 yards from the Brighton sea front, so it looks like I will indeed be living in a pineapple under the sea. 96100[/snapback] Do you presently live in a pineapple like? 96104[/snapback] My half brother squarepants does 96113[/snapback] There you go! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 I live 200 yards from the Brighton sea front, so it looks like I will indeed be living in a pineapple under the sea. 96100[/snapback] Do you presently live in a pineapple like? 96104[/snapback] My half brother squarepants does 96113[/snapback] In Bikini Bottom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 46088 Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 I can't read that. Too many numbers. Was he right? 96106[/snapback] "Too many numbers?!" You're a sodding accountant! 96109[/snapback] Aye but those are science numbers, not financial numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Under the sea, Under the sea, There'll be no accusations, Just friendly crustaceans Under the Seeeeeeeeeeeeea! The only bad point will be Dennis Hopper incessantly badgering me for my precious soil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob W 0 Posted February 17, 2006 Author Share Posted February 17, 2006 (edited) Looks like a pretty good source to me peons From todays "Indie" Climate change: On the edge Greenland ice cap breaking up at twice the rate it was five years ago, says scientist Bush tried to gag By Jim Hansen Published: 17 February 2006 A satellite study of the Greenland ice cap shows that it is melting far faster than scientists had feared - twice as much ice is going into the sea as it was five years ago. The implications for rising sea levels - and climate change - could be dramatic. Yet, a few weeks ago, when I - a Nasa climate scientist - tried to talk to the media about these issues following a lecture I had given calling for prompt reductions in the emission of greenhouse gases, the Nasa public affairs team - staffed by political appointees from the Bush administration - tried to stop me doing so. I was not happy with that, and I ignored the restrictions. The first line of Nasa's mission is to understand and protect the planet. This new satellite data is a remarkable advance. We are seeing for the first time the detailed behaviour of the ice streams that are draining the Greenland ice sheet. They show that Greenland seems to be losing at least 200 cubic kilometres of ice a year. It is different from even two years ago, when people still said the ice sheet was in balance. Hundreds of cubic kilometres sounds like a lot of ice. But this is just the beginning. Once a sheet starts to disintegrate, it can reach a tipping point beyond which break-up is explosively rapid. The issue is how close we are getting to that tipping point. The summer of 2005 broke all records for melting in Greenland. So we may be on the edge. Our understanding of what is going on is very new. Today's forecasts of sea-level rise use climate models of the ice sheets that say they can only disintegrate over a thousand years or more. But we can now see that the models are almost worthless. They treat the ice sheets like a single block of ice that will slowly melt. But what is happening is much more dynamic. Once the ice starts to melt at the surface, it forms lakes that empty down crevasses to the bottom of the ice. You get rivers of water underneath the ice. And the ice slides towards the ocean. Our Nasa scientists have measured this in Greenland. And once these ice streams start moving, their influence stretches right to the interior of the ice sheet. Building an ice sheet takes a long time, because it is limited by s nowfall. But destroying it can be explosively rapid. How fast can this go? Right now, I think our best measure is what happened in the past. We know that, for instance, 14,000 years ago sea levels rose by 20m in 400 years - that is five metres in a century. This was towards the end of the last ice age, so there was more ice around. But, on the other hand, temperatures were not warming as fast as today. How far can it go? The last time the world was three degrees warmer than today - which is what we expect later this century - sea levels were 25m higher. So that is what we can look forward to if we don't act soon. None of the current climate and ice models predict this. But I prefer the evidence from the Earth's history and my own eyes. I think sea-level rise is going to be the big issue soon, more even than warming itself. It's hard to say what the world will be like if this happens. It would be another planet. You could imagine great armadas of icebergs breaking off Greenland and melting as they float south. And, of course, huge areas being flooded. How long have we got? We have to stabilise emissions of carbon dioxide within a decade, or temperatures will warm by more than one degree. That will be warmer than it has been for half a million years, and many things could become unstoppable. If we are to stop that, we cannot wait for new technologies like capturing emissions from burning coal. We have to act with what we have. This decade, that means focusing on energy efficiency and renewable sources of energy that do not burn carbon. We don't have much time left. Jim Hansen, the director of the Nasa Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, is President George Bush's top climate modeller. He was speaking to Fred Pearce Edited February 17, 2006 by Rob W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Brief synopsis please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now