6 ms·

You really can just Google this. We came out of an ice age 10,000 years ago and glaciers are still melting from then. Why are so many commenters just making fa

You really can just Google this. We came out of an ice age 10,000 years ago and glaciers are still melting from then. Why are so many commenters just making false knee-jerk claims without paying attention to well established science?

eloff 6y ago
There are two melting cycles overlapping here. The cycle coming out of the last ice age, and the human caused warming. That latter is really stark in the velocity of change. It's not yet that stark in total magnitude, but it's also not linear with most of the change coming at the end in the future. It's looking like we may be headed for 4 degrees of average warming, which is pretty terrifying. That might just be enough to end the cycles of ice ages that's been happening for millions of years - which could be overall positive for us long term. But shorter term the disruptions to our cities, countries, and food supply is unprecedented in recorded history.
furins 6y ago
I'm a geologist and I've focused on palaeoclimatology putting an eye on the rate of climate change. I've wrote several articles on international peer-reviewed journals. I can say, basing on 20+years of study and lab/field work, that what is happening is really concerning because human emissions are summing up to natural Milankovitch cycles, altering the rate of climate change with unpredictable (since they are unprecedented) implications for food chain supply and society.
gzer0 6y ago
> Why are so many commenters just making false knee-jerk claims without paying attention to well established science? I can't find any of this "well established science". Kindly link a primary source.
- exporectomy 6y ago
  A primary source showing that Greenland was melting since preindustrial times? Really? No, sorry. It's not contentious at all. If you genuinely disagree, then I'll put some effort into it. Or is it something else you're asking for a source for? EDIT: Turns out it is contentious because there are multiple cycles spanning different time periods so we're probably talking about different ones. I'm talking about the general holocene but there's also a separate human caused increased melt rate which is obviously post-industrial.
  - TomSwirly 6y ago
    Translation of what you wrote: "I have nothing to back up my false claims, so I'll just splutter in outrage."
    - Stupulous 6y ago
      What you are doing here is not helpful. Yes, the Greenland ice sheet has been melting since before industrialization [1]. Yes, at current rates the ice will take 10,000 years to melt, as long as Jericho has been a city [2]. Productive responses to these claims include: Greenland's rate of melting has dramatically accelerated since industrialization and will likely continue accelerating as atmospheric carbon rises further. and Even losing a small percentage of the ice sheet will have devastating consequences in some regions. These responses have a remote shot at making someone think about their position and whether it makes sense. Snarky answers where you accuse someone of ignorance over their informed claims only make you and your side look bad. I'm on your side, and I don't care for it. [1] https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/greenland-could-lose-more-ice-this-century-than-it-has-in-12000-years https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/greenland... [2] A little more tricky, sources rightly refuse to assume constant melt rate for their models. We can eyeball this, though. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/greenlands-oldest-ice-melting-fast-180973560/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/greenlands-oldest-... gives amount of ocean rise in the last 8 years (as of 2019) as a quarter inch, and says 25 feet total ocean rise if the whole thing melted. 4 quarter in./in. * 12 in./ft * 25 ft * 8 years = ~9600 years

eloff 6y ago

There are two melting cycles overlapping here. The cycle coming out of the last ice age, and the human caused warming. That latter is really stark in the velocity of change. It's not yet that stark in total magnitude, but it's also not linear with most of the change coming at the end in the future. It's looking like we may be headed for 4 degrees of average warming, which is pretty terrifying. That might just be enough to end the cycles of ice ages that's been happening for millions of years - which could be overall positive for us long term. But shorter term the disruptions to our cities, countries, and food supply is unprecedented in recorded history.

furins 6y ago

I'm a geologist and I've focused on palaeoclimatology putting an eye on the rate of climate change. I've wrote several articles on international peer-reviewed journals. I can say, basing on 20+years of study and lab/field work, that what is happening is really concerning because human emissions are summing up to natural Milankovitch cycles, altering the rate of climate change with unpredictable (since they are unprecedented) implications for food chain supply and society.

gzer0 6y ago

> Why are so many commenters just making false knee-jerk claims without paying attention to well established science? I can't find any of this "well established science". Kindly link a primary source.

exporectomy 6y ago
A primary source showing that Greenland was melting since preindustrial times? Really? No, sorry. It's not contentious at all. If you genuinely disagree, then I'll put some effort into it. Or is it something else you're asking for a source for? EDIT: Turns out it is contentious because there are multiple cycles spanning different time periods so we're probably talking about different ones. I'm talking about the general holocene but there's also a separate human caused increased melt rate which is obviously post-industrial.
- TomSwirly 6y ago
  Translation of what you wrote: "I have nothing to back up my false claims, so I'll just splutter in outrage."
  - Stupulous 6y ago
    What you are doing here is not helpful. Yes, the Greenland ice sheet has been melting since before industrialization [1]. Yes, at current rates the ice will take 10,000 years to melt, as long as Jericho has been a city [2]. Productive responses to these claims include: Greenland's rate of melting has dramatically accelerated since industrialization and will likely continue accelerating as atmospheric carbon rises further. and Even losing a small percentage of the ice sheet will have devastating consequences in some regions. These responses have a remote shot at making someone think about their position and whether it makes sense. Snarky answers where you accuse someone of ignorance over their informed claims only make you and your side look bad. I'm on your side, and I don't care for it. [1] https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/greenland-could-lose-more-ice-this-century-than-it-has-in-12000-years https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/greenland... [2] A little more tricky, sources rightly refuse to assume constant melt rate for their models. We can eyeball this, though. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/greenlands-oldest-ice-melting-fast-180973560/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/greenlands-oldest-... gives amount of ocean rise in the last 8 years (as of 2019) as a quarter inch, and says 25 feet total ocean rise if the whole thing melted. 4 quarter in./in. * 12 in./ft * 25 ft * 8 years = ~9600 years