Antarctic 'Doomsday Glacier' Melting Faster, Scientists Warn 68
A massive Antarctic glacier, dubbed the "Doomsday Glacier," is melting at an accelerating rate and could be approaching irreversible collapse, international researchers are reporting. The Thwaites Glacier, holding enough ice to raise global sea levels by over two feet, has seen rapid retreat in the past 30 years.
Scientists from the International Thwaites Glacier Collaboration used ice-breaking ships and underwater robots to study the glacier up close since 2018. Their findings reveal warm ocean water funneling through deep cracks in the ice, causing unexpected melting patterns. While computer modeling suggests catastrophic cliff collapse is less likely than feared, researchers project Thwaites and the Antarctic Ice Sheet could disintegrate within 200 years. This collapse could ultimately lead to 10 feet of sea level rise, devastating coastal communities worldwide.
Scientists from the International Thwaites Glacier Collaboration used ice-breaking ships and underwater robots to study the glacier up close since 2018. Their findings reveal warm ocean water funneling through deep cracks in the ice, causing unexpected melting patterns. While computer modeling suggests catastrophic cliff collapse is less likely than feared, researchers project Thwaites and the Antarctic Ice Sheet could disintegrate within 200 years. This collapse could ultimately lead to 10 feet of sea level rise, devastating coastal communities worldwide.
In retreat sounds good (Score:5, Funny)
The Thwaites Glacier, holding enough ice to raise global sea levels by over two feet, has seen rapid retreat in the past 30 years.
Good! That thing looked way too threatening.
Re:In retreat sounds good (Score:4, Insightful)
these situations are studied in isolation but that's not how the world works, all it's going to take is the first tipping point and then there will be a domino effect and suddenly everything will change catastrophically
greedy rich people are going to wreck everything for everybody
Re: In retreat sounds good (Score:1)
He's just making light of their choice of words, dingleberry.
Re: (Score:2)
the more you troll me the more it proves you can't
Re: (Score:2)
insults say a lot about the insulter
Maybe don't break the ice... (Score:3)
Scientists from the International Thwaites Glacier Collaboration used ice-breaking ships (...) Their findings reveal warm ocean water funneling through deep cracks in the ice, causing unexpected melting patterns.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You use an ice-breaking ship to navigate through waterways prone to icing over.
Move to higher ground (Score:3)
When I moved home a couple of years ago, I made sure my new place is at the top a hill. Whilst sea level rise is still a long way off, higher global temperatures means more water in the atmosphere and more flooding events around the world.
Your local area should publish a floodplain map, I’d suggest being at least a couple of metres above the 100 year level if you can.
Re: Move to higher ground (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I’d suggest being at least a couple of metres above the 100 year level if you can.
So fuck the entire Netherlands then. :-)
Re: Move to higher ground (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
OTOH building up their nation-surrounding dykes by 3 metres and improving other sea defences and drainage systems in the next 200 years is going to be one major, constant, and very expensive project.
https://swzmaritime.nl/news/20... [swzmaritime.nl].
but it seems possible.
Re: (Score:1)
This is sensible. I'm also around the top of a hill well above sea level so should be fine, but will probably get stiffed with some other side-effect of climate change (most likely, ironically, colder weather due to the degradation of the atlantic gulf stream.
Yes, you should always check the flood maps before buying a house, over here that would be something most competent conveyancers would do.
Stay well away from engineered water courses that used to be flood plains and are now channels through housing.
GOP investment opportunities! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:GOP investment opportunities! (Score:4, Informative)
I'll just leave this here: "A report from consulting firm McKinsey found concern about sea rise could send Florida real estate prices tumbling as much as 15% this decade, years before floodwaters even touch doorsteps." Link: https://news.wgcu.org/news/202... [wgcu.org]
I meant my comment to be a joke but I fear you're proving it not to be.
Re: (Score:2)
How is this illogical, then?
Deep-convinced climate warrior like Barack Obama...why'd he buy a TWENTY SIX MILLION DOLLAR seaside home, if he seriously believed the impending sea-level rise was a threat. Does he believe it won't happen in his neighborhood(s)?
And your link "it COULD send prices tumbling". I'm sure you understand both subjunctive case AND the speculative nature of that.
That would not be an example of anywhere that land prices HAVE FALLEN because of all the sea-level rise.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"In his neighbourhood"? Indubitably not. "In his lifetime", ah now, that's a different question.
Re: (Score:2)
Here you go:
https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]
https://www.bostonglobe.com/20... [bostonglobe.com]
https://www.scientificamerican... [scientificamerican.com]
Re: (Score:2)
OK:
https://www.washingtonpost.com... [www.washingtonpost.com] [washingtonpost.com] - "houses built on literal sandbars are falling into the sea" (shrug? This surprises anyone?) and I don't see them being offered at fire-sale prices to anyone, I see a handout gov't program.
One of the families had bought the house in 2021 knowing the risk, now they're going to get bailed out? Nice!
https://www.bostonglobe.com/20 [bostonglobe.com]... [bostonglobe.com] - Paywall, can't really read it.
https://www.scientificamerican... [www.scient...merican...] [scientificamerican.com] - first, S
Re:GOP investment opportunities! (Score:4, Interesting)
There's some fantastic bargains to be had in prime coastal areas of the USA. GOP climate deniers should invest in these amazing opportunities!
Ah yes, that explains the absence of left wingers on the coasts.
Oh, wait ...
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Who do you think will sell the properties to the climate deniers?
So left wingers only learned just today that their coastal property is in danger? If not, why do they own it?
Sorry, I don't think this "clever" jibe is actually working out for you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Offloading doomed coastal properties to climate deniers isn't a good jibe? Well, that's your opinion.
If the properties are doomed, then why do the leftists own them?
You can't seriously believe that they bought them up to later sell to "climate deniers"?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:DEM investment opportunities! (Score:1)
If it's the GOP who's denying the risk of sea level rises, why is it the Dems buying all the real-estate on Martha's Vineyard. The multi-million dollar real-estate.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
NPR? LOL, That's the corrupt mainstream media, I know 'cause Tim Pool told me so!
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/r... [cbsnews.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I can't wait. (Score:2)
It's not like there's any chance of stopping whatever is going to happen. Even if it was possible in theory, even if we had the technology and the money to do it, the world doesn't have the will.
So it's going to happen. I hope it happens soon so all these doomsday articles can finally stop. It's getting quite annoying.
Re: I can't wait. (Score:3, Interesting)
Too bad. Its gonna get shoved in your face over and over and over and over again. For literally centuries. Youre not the real target. The human population needs to understand that were now big enough and advanced e
Re: (Score:1)
You have to understand they're following the 80's Club of Rome document on how to control a world-sized population. PDF is online (archive.org etc.)
The key idea is "Man is the Enemy of Man".
They suggested: man-made Global Warming, man-made Financial Crises, man-made pandemics.
So, it's probably untrue but the key economic insight, per your observation, is that all the money spent on prevention could be spent on adaptation and prevention money is worth zero in your scenario. So Opportunity Cost disaster.
Howev
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Were you triggered by the article? Show us on the picture of the internet where it hurt you.
aww, poor little hurt fee-fee cuckmod (Score:2, Troll)
Here, mod this down too, cuck. Most of the people you abuse won't get as many positive moderations as I will.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh LOL. Sorry I retract my other post. I read them in the wrong order when clicking on them. I didn't realise you were calling a mod a cuck, thought it was the parent, didn't realise the parent was yourself. XD. Fully agree with you, sorry :-)
Re: (Score:2)
It's perfectly understandable. This place does not bring out the best in people these days.
Re:Obligatory "we all gonna die!" (Score:4, Informative)
Show us on the picture of the internet where it hurt you.
Here [www.cbc.ca] and here [energy.gov].
Re: (Score:2)
The article says we're not all going to die. Not from this. On the other hand some of our great great great grandchildren will. But I get it Chas, reading is hard and understanding even harder.
Reflecting on the subject (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
That is more of an issue with glaciers further from the poles. I don't think Thwaites gets a lot of sun.
Don't be so quick to blame "climate change" (Score:4, Informative)
It just could be volcanic activity under the continent, which is substantial. https://www.nbcnews.com/scienc... [nbcnews.com]
N.B. Was there ever a more imprecise term than climate "change"? Just say which change you are specifically talking about.
Re:Don't be so quick to blame "climate change" (Score:5, Informative)
You really can't say which change, because it differs from place to place. Some places should expect increased flooding, other place increased droughts, etc. So far one of the main changes is the jet stream becoming slower and more unstable, but most people can't measure that directly, what they can notice is that rainly patches often remain in place longer. Ditto for dry patches. And the season at which some things happen has been changing. (Like caterpillars showing up early, but not the birds that usually eat them.)
Re: (Score:2)
Even granting all the different types of changes you are describing, by lumping all of them together under the same label of "climate change", we're implying they all have the same root cause. But that is clearly not the case. This sort of mislabeling actually muddies the waters, it doesn't clarify it. I just don't think we should be talking at the level of slogans at all when we discuss Science topics. It's just rather frustrating to have to spend all this time talking about how something isn't what we wan
Re: (Score:2)
The particular "different changes" I mentioned are all related to the single cause "slowing of the jet stream" which is because the temperature gradient between the poles and the equator has been reduced. And this is because of the increased level of CO2. There are definitely other changes that I can't as simply relate to that, but that doesn't show that they aren't related. (Often others can relate chains of causation that I am unfamiliar with.)
Now if you want to claim that there are multiple reinforcin
PANIC... (Score:2)
So how should we be responding to an apparently inevitable consequence of actions in the past?
I live in a second (third to my US readers) floor apartment a good distance from the sea and significantly above sea level. So I'm not going to get flooded. But otherwise?
At some point information like this serves very little purpose...
Re: PANIC... (Score:3)
You seem annoyed that others are pointing this out, but this is literally part of learning. Populations of people who dont understand
Is this the new right-wing excuse to do nothing? (Score:2)
And no you will not find a single scientist who isn't on the payroll of a major oil company that will tell you we shouldn't be doing everything we can to mitigate global warming and climate change. It can always get worse and we can always make it better a
Re: (Score:3)
People aren't very good a long term learning, even with the population having repeated exposures. If they haven't noticed a problem during their lifetime, they tend not to believe it's real. (They may *think* it's real, but it doesn't drive their actions.)
Re: (Score:2)
You're right, of course; the average prole doesn't really believe that CO2 emissions are causing the worsening weather that we're all experiencing; the fact that the GOP and other right wing parties in effect are climate deniers in some of their material is depressing. I'm just trying to respond rationally to the flow of bad news FOR MYSELF. And it makes me ask myself hard questions about my news consumption! I like to hope that I will have shuffled off this mortal coil before it gets really bad...
Which is it -- 2 feet or 10 feet ????????? (Score:1)
This is probably a lack on my part in reading skills, but it looks like the lead says 2 feet, anf later in the body it is 10. I agree with many here that at some point the environmental alarms going off are tanamount to car alarms in NYC, but this fatigue is only compounded by confliciting info which seems more to alarm rather than inform.
"holding enough ice to raise global sea levels by over two feet"
"This collapse could ultimately lead to 10 feet of sea level rise, devastating coastal communities worldwi
Re: (Score:2)
My guess is those are two predictions for different degrees of melt, probably at different time-points, but possibly also using different bounds for "what's in the glacier?" or "how thick is it?". Or possibly "what secondary effects are included?". The story's from CNN, and sometimes their science reporting is a bit confused.
Re:Which is it -- 2 feet or 10 feet ????????? (Score:4, Interesting)
The Thwaites Glacier melting would lead to about 65cm of sea level rise. The higher figure is likely based on this collapse destabilizing the entire ice sheet over West Antarctica.
I think the more concerning thing is that the rate of change in reality is streaking out ahead of what the models predict.
Re: (Score:3)
But note that currently there is more water running into the oceans from Greenland than Antarctica. The median predictions of sea lever rise by 2100 is 1.2 meters, and it won't stop there of course.
Question (Score:2)
Does anyone here actually believe we will (not can, will) prevent catastrophic sea level rise?
I find these news stories odd because I have never seen evidence of anything concrete done to stop it. A lot of talk and token gestures. But nobody's changing how they live to prevent this. So to me it's a forgone conclusion.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed, results are certain, or as certain as anything involving prediction of complex systems.
Just listen to the uproar when you suggest banning commercial air travel as a totally unnecessary luxury or suggest running a data center on solar power and simply turning it off at sundown.
Howls of agony everywhere. "Not my luxury! But my streaming!"
And it's not just here. Look at the super cruise ships. Or go to YouTube and watch the boats going in and out of Haulover inlet. Every 200 HP outboard drinks 20 GPH a
The end is nigh (Score:2)
Really. We swear it this time.
I know our track record of doomsaying and predicting the end of all things has been terrible thus far but, :|
we assure you, THIS time we're right. . . . .
I mean, look how far sea levels have risen since we started making those predictions . . . . .