modest temp increase=irreversible loss of ice caps:

https://phys.org/news/2018-11-modest-irreversible-ice-sheet-loss.html

Sounds like century 22 is in for a rude awakening.

@sonhouse

Here is an excerpt from the article from your link:

"Although scientists predict it would take hundreds of years for them to melt even with huge global temperature increases, Monday's study provides further cause for concern with mankind's only realistic plan to avert runaway warming.

Many models of the 1.5-2C scenario allow for the threshold to be breached in the short term, potentially heating the planet several degrees higher, before using carbon capture and other technologies to bring temperatures back into line by 2100."


Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-11-modest-irreversible-ice-sheet-loss.html#jCp

So scientists say it would take hundreds of years, but some climate model says we should panic. Did they get together and flip a coin and the climate modelers won the coin toss?

@metal-brain said
@sonhouse

Here is an excerpt from the article from your link:

"Although scientists predict it would take hundreds of years for them to melt even with huge global temperature increases, Monday's study provides further cause for concern with mankind's only realistic plan to avert runaway warming.

Many models of the 1.5-2C scenario allow for the threshold to be brea ...[text shortened]... s we should panic. Did they get together and flip a coin and the climate modelers won the coin toss?

You mean it's ok if it 'only' happens in two hundred years instead of 50? Humans get screwed in any case. I guess you are ok with oceans rising high enough to cover most of the cities around the world, NYC underwater, no big deal, who needs London? Florida is worthless anyway, right?

@sonhouse said
You mean it's ok if it 'only' happens in two hundred years instead of 50? Humans get screwed in any case. I guess you are ok with oceans rising high enough to cover most of the cities around the world, NYC underwater, no big deal, who needs London? Florida is worthless anyway, right?

Humans don't get screwed. They adapt like to climate change like they always have. You don't even know how long it would take for sea levels to rise 10 feet. Guessing is a poor way to conduct science.

@metal-brain said
Humans don't get screwed. They adapt like to climate change like they always have. You don't even know how long it would take for sea levels to rise 10 feet. Guessing is a poor way to conduct science.

So science doesn't know even though the vast majority of climatologists say world climate IS going to melt the ice caps in Greenland and the sea levels WILL rise but we don't know the timeline. Not possessing a time machine, gee, I wonder why that is?

Could it be we are still in Kindergarten in science? Earth is an extremely complex system and everything effects everything else, like cloud cover or heat from cities or more CO2 or more methane, we KNOW from lab experiments more CO2 and more methane = increase in temperature and you look at the drought in California and wildfires setting records right now, no big deal, in ten years everything will be back to normal according to you.
So because science can't positively peg the date oceans will be up ten or more feet, let's put our head in the sand and see how long it takes to drown, meanwhile, I still will have my Florida Keys Kondo.......
So because you don't think science can say how much the temps will rise, oh, they HAVE risen and we have droughts that have ALREADY gone 6 years in California but no bid deal right, NEXT week, all will be better.
So what if next year it also shows an incremental increase in temperatures, just how many of those incremental increases will it take before you realize you are not just a LITTLE wrong, but BIGTIME wrong?

@metal-brain said
Humans don't get screwed. They adapt like to climate change like they always have. You don't even know how long it would take for sea levels to rise 10 feet. Guessing is a poor way to conduct science.

Humans may adapt. But many animals and plants wouldn't.
Nature take much damage, created by humans. Nature undergo, as we speak, a mass extinction, not seen since 65 millions ago. And Humans are to blame for that.
We humans are a part of nature. If we destroy nature, we will destroy ourselves.

@fabianfnas said
Humans may adapt. But many animals and plants wouldn't.
Nature take much damage, created by humans. Nature undergo, as we speak, a mass extinction, not seen since 65 millions ago. And Humans are to blame for that.
We humans are a part of nature. If we destroy nature, we will destroy ourselves.

Don't be silly. All the glaciers have melted before during the Pliocene Epoch. They adapted as we well know.

Man causes extinctions, but that has nothing to do with AGW. Extinctions happened before man existed. I don't hear about any mass extinctions on the news. What is your source of information?

@metal-brain said
Don't be silly. All the glaciers have melted before during the Pliocene Epoch. They adapted as we well know.

Man causes extinctions, but that has nothing to do with AGW. Extinctions happened before man existed. I don't hear about any mass extinctions on the news. What is your source of information?

What is wrong with your ability to google stuff? It took me one minute to find this:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jul/10/earths-sixth-mass-extinction-event-already-underway-scientists-warn

My conclusion, you don't want to know or are intellectually lazy.

@sonhouse said
What is wrong with your ability to google stuff? It took me one minute to find this:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jul/10/earths-sixth-mass-extinction-event-already-underway-scientists-warn

My conclusion, you don't want to know or are intellectually lazy.

Here is an excerpt from that link:

"But the ultimate cause of all of these factors is “human overpopulation and continued population growth, and overconsumption, especially by the rich”, say the scientists, who include Prof Paul Ehrlich, at Stanford University in the US, whose 1968 book The Population Bomb is a seminal, if controversial, work."

If you had bothered reading your own link you would know the 6th extinction event has very little to do with climate change. If fact, they never mentioned a single example of a species going extinct because of recent climate change, only past climate change events like the ice age.

Why didn't the article mention the Pliocene Epoch at all? All glaciers melted back then. Does that show warming is better than an ice age?

@Metal-Brain
What you fail to understand is the ocean currents are slowing down and maybe stopping which will make Europe and US east coast have very bad winters in spite of a global warming going on as we speak. When the ice caps melted, there was much less land mass since all the coastlines were now under a couple hundred feet of water. You figure if it happened now, no big deal?

Of course humans will adapt but a large number will just die from starvation since they won't be able to grow crops.

No biggie, right? Hundred years later, the caps re-freeze, weather goes back to our new normal, (stable weather for the last 10,000 years) and we get all our lost land back? I don't hear you talk about the biggest ice age of them all, snowball Earth as it is called, 700 odd million years ago the entire planet froze and stayed that way for literally millions of years.
What will stop the global warming caused by humans is when billions of us die and now burn 1/10th the fossil fuel as before. Problem solved. Except for the millions dead from it all.
A big part of our nutrients come from the ocean and the way it is getting acidified we may have no more fish to catch since part of the present die off also is happening in the oceans.
A hundred years later that will not come back so fast, even assuming you are right and what we have now is just a transient event and everything smooths out in a couple hundred years and everything goes back to what it was in century 21, minus a few billion people. That's the best case scenario. Could be worse at least till we stop using fossil fuels and releasing more and more methane into the atmosphere, now at about 17% of the total which is bad since it is some 20 times worse than CO2 as a greenhouse gas.
That seems to me the elephant in the room and that has just started. There could be ten times as much methane in another hundred years and that would spell real disaster. No bid deal, right? A couple hundred years after that, all gets well again, right?

@sonhouse said
@Metal-Brain
What you fail to understand is the ocean currents are slowing down and maybe stopping which will make Europe and US east coast have very bad winters in spite of a global warming going on as we speak. When the ice caps melted, there was much less land mass since all the coastlines were now under a couple hundred feet of water. You figure if it happened now, no ...[text shortened]... ll real disaster. No bid deal, right? A couple hundred years after that, all gets well again, right?

What you fail to understand is the difference between theory and fact. You are clinging onto unlikely theories to justify panic just like the guy mentioned in your article. He predicted mass famine would happen in the 70s. Now you want us to believe cold winters are evidence of global warming. Remember when you claimed the low water levels of the great lakes was caused by global warming?

https://www.regions.noaa.gov/great-lakes/index.php/highlights/record-breaking-increase-in-great-lakes-water-levels/

How many failed predictions do you have to make before you accept you are being duped by leftist propaganda? You are supposed to be a scientist, not a gossip queen.

@Metal-Brain
You fail to understand the word 'average'. Of COURSE it will still be cold in winter. DUH. The planet is tilted 23 degrees off vertical so of course there will be strong variations season to season and that won't change when the temp AVERAGE goes up 3 or 4 degrees C.

You also talk about people adapting last time the ocean levels were way up.

Just a bit different when there were MAYBE a million humans on the planet of various versions, Neandertal, Desinovans, hobbits, and our line, all living together in some time era's. So if the ocean level rises a hundred feet, they are on foot, it won't happen overnight so they get a lot of warning, take up the Tepee and move
to higher ground, they wouldn't have the concept of owning land so would not really care whether they are HERE or THERE, all the same to them.

Not the same now. How big a wall do you think it would take to keep Manhattan dry when the shyte hits the fan, even if it takes 200 years? End up with 100 foot high wall and hope a hurricane doesn't blow it down?

Nobody said humanity would go extinct if the oceans rose 100 feet and no more ice caps but life will become a lot more difficult for the survivors. We would lose the ability to send large rockets into space, Cape Canaveral would be gone, all that infrastructure of launch tech having to be redone inland. Science advancements would be back burner to just survival.

Oceans going more acidic, maybe the coral reefs die off, and the huge biodiversity which is the life blood of the reef's also gone.

You dismiss all that with an arrogant hand wave, everything will be alright.

It WON"T be alright, it will be hell and billions may die from starvation and new diseases popping up like more virulent strains of cholera or new ones we would not have a clue as to how to manage, much less cure.

@sonhouse said
@Metal-Brain
You fail to understand the word 'average'. Of COURSE it will still be cold in winter. DUH. The planet is tilted 23 degrees off vertical so of course there will be strong variations season to season and that won't change when the temp AVERAGE goes up 3 or 4 degrees C.

You also talk about people adapting last time the ocean levels were way up.

Just a bit d ...[text shortened]... irulent strains of cholera or new ones we would not have a clue as to how to manage, much less cure.

You are very gullible.
Billions may die from starvation? Ridiculous!

Here is some real science and not pseudoscience:

CO2 increases make plants/crops grow faster. MORE FOOD.

A warmer climate will generally cause worldwide increased rainfall which results in increased crop yields. MORE FOOD.

You are a gossip queen. You don't do the research needed to know what you are talking about and spread myths as if you know they are facts. Stop gossiping and provide evidence of your claims. I'm sick of correcting your ridiculous claims that are myths.

Rumors are not facts.

@Metal-Brain

Jesus, you are fuddled. More CO2 may increase crops but also increase acidifation of the ocieans, google it if you don't believe me or more likely, don't give a shyte.
Oceans more acidic means mass extinctions of ocean life, fish down to levels not seen in millions of years, not much fishing left.
You only THINK you know all about climate, based on 90 year old dudes whose last paper was in 1980.
Hint: A LOT has been figured out since then. But of course you still are besotted with your old dudes and so, being brainwashed by them, cannot process actual scientific advancement since then, like many more weather satellites, more data by far, higher resolution temperature measurements, ocean acidic measurements, CO2 and Methane. Did you forget methane is almost 20% of CO2 but some 20 times more powerful as a greenhouse gas so it may be dominating the world increase in temperatures and that comes from melting permafrost in the arctic.

Wait till methane becomes EQUAL to CO2 in the atmosphere. That will be well past the tipping point where humans can do anything to counter the temperature rise. AVERAGE temperature rise. There will still be snow, there will still be cold winters but there WILL be stronger hurricanes and such because there is a direct link between ocean temperature and the power of hurricanes. You want to deny THAT?

@sonhouse said
@Metal-Brain

Jesus, you are fuddled. More CO2 may increase crops but also increase acidifation of the ocieans, google it if you don't believe me or more likely, don't give a shyte.
Oceans more acidic means mass extinctions of ocean life, fish down to levels not seen in millions of years, not much fishing left.
You only THINK you know all about climate, based on 90 year ...[text shortened]... here is a direct link between ocean temperature and the power of hurricanes. You want to deny THAT?

CO2 will not increase acidification much because the warmer oceans are the less CO2 they can hold. Remember?

" there is a direct link between ocean temperature and the power of hurricanes. You want to deny THAT?"

Yes, that is a myth. Name a hurricane recently that was stronger than the Great Hurricane of 1780.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Hurricane_of_1780