Monday, 17 July 2017

Just How Big Is The Larsen C Iceberg?

quote [ It's hard to imagine the Larsen C iceberg. These images help make it clear how massive it is...
With an area the size of Delaware and a volume of 277 cubic miles, its measurements boggle the mind. ]

That's a lot of ice cubes. I need a whisky.
[SFW] [environment & nature]
[by Bob Denver@5:02amGMT]

Comments

damnit said @ 6:26am GMT on 17th Jul
The cool thing is that the sea level did not get a significant bump since Larsen C was already on the water to begin with.
cb361 said @ 11:54am GMT on 17th Jul
The very fact that that is something we need to take into consideration is the scariest thing.
midden said @ 12:48pm GMT on 17th Jul
As I understand it, the issue is not that the melting ice shelf itself raises sea level, but that the ice shelf acts as a dam, holding back the glaciers that rest on the land. If those slide into the sea, that will raise the sea level.
blacksun said @ 6:30am GMT on 17th Jul
I don't know, how tall is the ice wall that borders the flat earth in Antarctica? I'd say, as tall or taller than the ice wall that keeps out teh white walkers. ;p
Jack Blue said @ 8:11am GMT on 17th Jul [Score:1 Underrated]
I often prefer just to be told weights and dimensions. I never been to new york city, don't care about sports playing fields or try to fill any olympic swimming pools. I know what a ton and a kilometer is though.
Fish said @ 12:14pm GMT on 17th Jul [Score:-4 Boring]
filtered comment under your threshold
lilmookieesquire said @ 1:28pm GMT on 17th Jul [Score:-2 Classy Pr0n]
I'm glad you can resist Al Gore's harpy song about global climate change and his gaggle of scientists and their authoritarian agenda. You are a true American patriot.
C18H27NO3 said[1] @ 4:43pm GMT on 17th Jul [Score:-3]



Jesus fucking Christ.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2017/jul/10/conservatives-are-again-denying-the-very-existence-of-global-warming

I'll save you the trouble.

Working backwards from a politically-motivated conclusion
The claim is based on what can charitably be described as a white paper, written by fossil fuel-funded contrarians Joseph D’Aleo and Craig Idso along with James Wallace III. Two months ago, D’Aleo and Wallace published another error-riddled white paper on the same website with fellow contrarian John Christy; both papers aimed to undermine the EPA’s Endangerment Finding.

Both papers are rife with flaws because they start from a desired conclusion – that the science underpinning Endangerment Finding is somehow wrong – and work backwards trying to support it. In this paper, the contrarians try to undermine the accuracy of the global surface temperature record, which has been validated time and time again. They don’t bother trying to hide their bias – the paper refers to “Climate Alarmists” and speaks of invalidating the Endangerment Finding.



Fish said @ 2:45am GMT on 18th Jul [Score:-4 Troll]
filtered comment under your threshold
rylex said @ 1:57am GMT on 18th Jul [Score:-4]
filtered comment under your threshold
midden said @ 12:58pm GMT on 17th Jul
That was actually less impressive than I expected. I think an ice slab 38.25 miles long and wide and as thick as the Empire State building is tall would have been more effective.
ethanos said @ 2:49pm GMT on 17th Jul
I've seen bigger.
Ankylosaur said @ 7:32pm GMT on 18th Jul
mechanical contrivance said @ 7:45pm GMT on 18th Jul
I see a perfect opportunity for merchandising.

Post a comment
[note: if you are replying to a specific comment, then click the reply link on that comment instead]

You must be logged in to comment on posts.



Posts of Import
SE v2 Closed BETA
First Post
Subscriptions and Things
Mentions - Beta
AskSE: What do you look like?

Karma Rankings
arrowhen
XregnaR
HoZay
lilmookieesquire
sanepride