Home / AMERICAN NEWS / Greenland’s Ice Loss Triples and Raises Global Warming Awareness

Greenland’s Ice Loss Triples and Raises Global Warming Awareness

As Greenland’s ice loss triples over the course of a decade, researchers are growing concerned over the effects of global warming.

Scientists have proclaimed that the last edge of the Greenland ice sheet has now become unstable. On Sunday, researchers announced that the melting of this ice sheet will add billions of tonnes of melt water to the rising sea and cause an imbalance.

Greenland's Ice Loss Triples and Raises Global Warming Awareness - photo from Wikipedia

Greenland’s Ice Loss Triples and Raises Global Warming Awareness – photo from Wikipedia

The study, which was published in the journal Nature Climate Change, states that from 2003 till now there has been a dramatic temperature increase. This has resulted in the melting of Greenland’s ice sheet.

What once use to be a long and calm river of ice that flowed to the coast of northeastern Greenland is now a raging waterfall. Researchers stated that prior to the temperature increase, the river slowly cycled ice to the sea as there use to be a build-up of ice debris that constrained the river. However, the heat has now removed that blockage and has accelerated the flow of ice.

Known as Zachariae, the ice river covers 16 percent of Greenland’s ice sheet. With this accelerated increase in ice flow to the sea, researchers are now becoming even more concerned with global warming. Leader of the study and Earth sciences professor at Ohio State University Michael Bevis stated:

“Northeast Greenland is very cold. It used to be considered the last stable part of the Greenland ice sheet. This study shows that ice loss in the northeast is now accelerating. So, now it seems that all the margins of the Greenland ice sheet are unstable.”

Greenland’s Ice Loss Triples and Raises Global Warming Awareness.

About Sarah Rasheed

Sarah is a 24-year-old Lead Writer for American Live Wire with a passion for writing on a variety of topics that include politics, world news, health and wellness and technology. When not writing, she enjoys traveling to the Middle East and playing sports. Follow her on twitter @sarahrwan.
  • fairpricetickets

    “Raises Global Warming Awareness” I don’t think awareness is the problem anymore….

  • silverbackV

    And the sky is falling and ship have been falling off the edge of the earth. Spooky dude!

  • richard brubaker

    Yawn

  • PaulFelixSchott

    Father look another fish near the top of the water Young Eagle soon there will be many as the water goes down.
    Father and when the water is gone what will we eat Young Eagle that is foretold in Revelation 19:17-18
    Have no fear young Eagle, those who are faithful to our Father in Heaven to the end will be saved.

    Satan’s Sin City “Las Vegas” very soon to die like a fish out of water

    World Leaders Pay Close “ATTENTION”.

    This Planet Earth Cannot And Will Not Support Life As We Know It Without Its FOREST.

    Soon all will take note to the sounds and rumbling of Volcanoes and Earthquakes Around Earth
    that are Waking Up at a Alarming Rate. Just as they did in 1883 from Krakatoa.

    LEADERS PLANT TREES WHILE YOU STILL CAN.

    Read well and study on your own after you have read this.

    This is not a game or joke our Sun gives off a Solar Wind all day year round. If you live in the State of
    Alaska you see it in the sky above what a sight it is going through our Earth’s Magnet Polls of the
    North and the South, North Poll. Its Called the Northern Lights or the Aurora Borealis.

    The day will come when you will be able to see it all over Earth as in the year 1859 Solar Flare,
    It was the largest in 500 years. Two Astronomer’s Hodgson and Carrington told the World that the
    Solar Flare made a Geomagnetic Storm reach Earth in hours not days. Back then it gave new meaning to
    “Reach For The Skies” from Telegraph Operators. For hours sparks flew from the key board. Even after
    the Batteries were disconnected. Nov 3 and 4, 2003 had a X40+ Class Solar Flare,
    Thank GOD it was not coming at Earth this time.

    Our Sun’s UV Rays will get stronger as each passing day go’s by, read and i will tell you why.

    The Great big FOREST have be striped from most of the Earth for Greed of Money by the Wicked.
    The trees our are Main Source of Oxygen on this Plant.

    The Forest Trees scrubs the Pollution out of the air and makes Oxygen from the rain and dirt that it grows in.

    The Forest Trees do more then just make Oxygen they stop Soil Erosion, just Look at the 1930 Dust Bowl. Greed by
    our wicked Government leaders to bleed from us as much money as they could out of us thru taxes led farmers to clear cut all their
    Forest, and farm all the land they were being Tax on.
    They had to farm it to pay for the Taxes. Why leave the Trees when food crop makes Money.

    This Did not Help the Depression that effected most all Worldwide. More then 100 million in the coming years will suffer from
    Malnutrition and Dehydration. Going without Food and Safe Drinking Water to drink many will die!

    One country can see clearly and knows already the World’s food and safe drinking water supply is running out at a record pace.
    With one of the worlds largest Population it has taking steps to no longer let anyone in its country, export any of its farmland grown
    food or grain from INDIA to any other country Nov 2013.

    China is trying to buy up all the world’s grain it can and the future harvest of framers.
    Future Commodities of Food Stocks soon will climb like a rocket because of this.
    China is also right now working on passing laws on its farmers. China Rural Reforms On Farming Jan 2014.
    It to soon will become a country that will not export any of its food or grain to any other country.

    In the United States of America alone more than 46+ Million Americans Received Food Stamps and that number is
    going up every day every year since 2009. The number of Homeless is growing world wide in
    America 20,000 in the once known to the world as “Motor City” Detroit Michigan.
    The bread and food lines are growing World wide. 100 to 300 in
    Sioux Falls S.D. Every Friday stand in the winter cold waiting to get food at the Military Armary. The same once a
    month in Hawaii in front of a Stone that drowafs any man That reads…….

    (“IN MEMORY OF WAIALU – KAHUKU WORLD WAR II HEROES WHO GAVE THEIR LIVES THAT THE REST OF THE WORLD MAY LIVE IN PEACE”)
    it list the names of many
    (“DEDICATED BY THE WAIALUA LIONS CLUB JULY 4, 1947″)

    Through the years many of us have help cook and feed the poor and needy in Hawaii and around the World,
    most of us USA Military or work or did work or Volunteered for Uncle Sam.
    And GOD willing may we be able to do so till our LORD returns.

    The Pollution and CO2 Carbon Dioxide go into the Tree Bark as a shield from most bugs so they do not eat the tree.

    ((((((…..Less Forest less Oxygen this is why the Moon. That has no Oxygen is very cold on the side with out Sun Light,
    And hot as ever on the side with Sun Light. Way too cold and too hot to live there. You would need at least 10
    times the Energy we use on Earth to even live there and life on the Moon would be very short……)))))))))))

    ((((…With no blank of Oxygen to lessen or reduce the Sun’s UV Rays and Solar Wind they are deadly there on our Moon.
    Every Mt. Climber and Aircraft Pilot knows the higher you go the thinner the Oxygen and colder it gets….)))))

    Just spend a night on a Mt. top above 13,000 feet with no Sun Light and you will see or should i say feel the
    cold stinging any of your exposed skin. If you are new to Mt. Climbing stay below 10,000Ft. The Astronauts and
    the Cosmonauts and Fighter Pilots that i have been with for years know this very well, and the Radiation Hazards
    to humans at High Altitudes.

    Soon the Sun’s Solar Wind and UV rays will be way to strong for most to go out in the Sun Light for even a short time.

    The Geomagnetic Storm to come and the Bad Weather Storms well you have not seen nothing yet and the Sea Level is Rising
    the Oceans. Many Millions have been affected by Floods in China and Pakistan and around the planet.
    Every year there is more storms and they are stronger of greater magnitude and bigger.
    In 2005 Over a Thousand dead in New Orleans flood, and the list is going on.
    Homes without Electric power are in the hundreds to 1,000 all over earth every year now from storms.
    Pray you are ready to be without power for a week or two in the winter – 0 or summer 100 +.

    GREENLAND Ice sheet took more then 3,000 years to get its mass size and weight.

    Greenland’Ice sheet is one of the largest ice sheets
    on this Planet Earth it is the second in mass.

    People on Earth are putting an end to it in less then 50 years.

    There is a very simple point to this. Dams all over the planet have had
    a Earthquake when filled too fast or let out a lot of water in a short time.

    GREENLAND Ice sheet Weight is a unbelievable amount as it gets lighter,
    GREENLAND ICE sheet WILL give a Earthquake no one will forget.
    Coastal cities LOOK OUT a Mt. Wall Of Water will come, from one of these Earthquakes.

    The Earthquakes have already started around GREENLAND. Below is some of them in the last 30 Days From March 16,2014 back
    A) M4.7 – 262km NE of Pond Inlet, Canada 2014-03-11 05:25:40 UTC
    B) M4.1 – 84km ESE of Pond Inlet, Canada 2014-02-22 06:41:59 UTC
    C) M5.0 – Greenland Sea 2014-02-20 13:26:20 UTC
    D) M4.1 – 169km W of Longyearbyen, Svalbard and Jan Mayen 2014-02-20 20:11:21 UTC
    E) M5.0 – 33km NNW of Olonkinbyen, Svalbard and Jan Mayen 2014-03-04 02:59:35 UTC
    F) M4.4 – Reykjanes Ridge 2014-02-23 10:12:39 UTC

    If you live by the coastline now is a good and smart time to move you might not get
    another chance to do so in time.

    History has recorded times of coastal towns,
    cities and coastline being inundated by sea water 5 to 10 miles inland.

    In the past 50 years Earth has had more FLOODING then in the last 1,000 years.

    1014AD
    VERY LARGE TIDAL WAVES THE LARGEST EVER RECORDED FROM IMPACTS,
    ALL OF THE ATLANTIC OCEAN AFTER PASSING THROUGH COMET’S LONG TAIL.
    LEVELING WHOLE CITIES AND TOWNS THAT WERE MILES INLAND.

    And there shall be Famines, and Pestilences, and Earthquakes, in divers places such as was not from the beginning of the Creation.

    Scientist Dr. Katharine Giles had done many experiments investigating “Sea Ice Thickness”,
    and showed it to governments around the Earth how the Sun rays and winds
    affected the newly exposed Arctic Ocean. Some of Scientist Dr. Giles research focused on using satellites to better
    understand the physics of the ice covered Polar Oceans.

    Scientist Dr. Giles to all Warning Water will warm faster then ICE covered water or water with ice in it.

    The last 30 years On Earth we have broke all High Temp Records and the temp it is still going up.
    All the Worlds Ice Glacier are melting at an Accelerating Rate. The Glaciers and Polar Ice Caps store more water than
    all the Fresh Water Lakes on Earth.

    Look to the (US Gov web site “USGS U.S. Geological Survey” Repeat Photography of Alaskan Glaciers USGS)

    The Bad Weather Storms now are Babies compared to what is to come.

    They will get even bigger and worse less Oxygen the more UV Rays to the Earth and more Water molecules will evaporate and go
    up into the Earth’s Atmosphere. Less Oxygen the Colder with out sun light and Hotter with it.
    Record cold and record hot temps, highs and lows will now be broke every year.

    The Sky full of more water vapor molecules, more snow in the winter and more Flash Floods in the Summer. All earth will
    see way more fires and the Deserts are growing larger and have been for the last 75+ years.

    The water Springs in the desert that once made the place a oasis to support life are long gone.
    Satan’s Sin City “Las Vegas” very soon to die like a fish out of water.

    The Governor of California Jerry Brown has declared a State Of Emergency due to the driest DROUGHT in California’s history. Friday January 17, 2014
    Lake Mead at record low and soon will not be able to make electric power.

    (” If every living person on Earth were to Plant A Tree Today we might have a chance.”)

    FOR A SHORT TIME ALL THE MILITARY ON ALL SIDES PUT DOWN THEIR WEAPONS AND PLANTED TREES
    IN PAKISTAN MORE THEN A MILLION TREES IN A DAY, and they did this for days.

    NOW WHY CAN WE NOT DO THIS WORLD WIDE? Maybe the UN and leaders on this planet are just a little more then show in the head.

    OUR Planets Atmosphere needs Oxygen with the decline of it the world’s health will decline, as like some of the
    not so smart gov payed Scientist. Some that will do or say anything for $$$$$.
    Once the days start getting shorter the cooler it will get and longer days warmer, most all fifth graders and every framer on Earth knows this.
    IF they had know better and had a brain like a Scientist to go with the tidal of one they carry they would have known,
    that the Sea Ice is going to grow at a Record Pace with Shorter Days. Just as with longer days the summers are going to
    brake all records each and every year that OUR Planets Atmosphere Oxygen declines.
    Mid Summer Days hot as Hell, Winter Nights POLAR BEAR WEATHER.

    (“EXPEDITIONS on ships into ice seas many have been done most all know it is safer and wiser to do it as the days are getting
    longer not as a fool when the days are getting shorter. You risk yours and the life’s of others that will come to rescue you.
    World Leaders and your Scientist be Smart open your eyes most all on Earth can see and want to hear the TRUTH from its leaders.
    Stop running your vessel Afoul. If you follow a true course the spirit that gives your heart its life will give you great wisdom
    and strength and power to resist the wicked.”)

    Scientist are you afraid of losing that fat pay check,
    or think that the wicked will end your work like NOBLE BRAVEHEARTED Scientist Dr. Katharine Giles.
    Everyone that the wicked think they have stopped its work 100 will replace that NOBLE BRAVEHEARTED one.
    By your work shall ye be judged do good help others and always seek and tell the TRUTH.
    Every soul will be filled with great fear that don’t help others and don’t seek the truth and our LORD, JUDGEMENT DAY.

    The Earth’s Atmosphere Blanket surrounding it protects life on Earth as Our Lord and GOD will all that seek Him.

    Then it is written WHEN THE TREE IS FULL IT IS HARVEST TIME. All the Earth will someday burn away.

    This is all Foretold in the Bible Read it
    and may our Lord Bless all that do so.

    Daniel 12 : 1 – 3

    The Lord’s Little Helper
    Paul Felix Schott

    solardowork@yahoo.com
    KI4-AEX

    P.S.
    2 Peter 3:10
    But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar
    and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the Earth and its works will be burned up.

    GOD Bless You and Your Love ones
    Give thanks to our Lord Jesus Christ every day.

    Read
    Luke 21:20-22
    Matthew 24: 30-33

    Solar Energy the way to go.
    Many States and Countries Are and are Banning Fracking.

    SAFE DRINKING WATER RUNNING OUT FASTER THEN YOU THINK WORLD WIDE.

    Hydraulic Fracturing a Danger to us All.

    Archimedes and Albert Einstein
    These two are at the top of the list of the Worlds Greatest Scientists,
    Viewed by Scientist around the World.

    Sad that for the last 25 years or so of every teacher asked no matter what
    Grade k through 16. At least 80% of them did not know Archimedes. Even sadder 90%
    of them could not tell you what one of the most Brilliant Scientist to ever
    live on Earth. Won the Nobel Prize for.

    It was for the work Albert Einstein did to show the World it could get
    Free Energy, Electric from the SUN. (THE PHOTOVOLTAIC EFFECT).

    We still do not Teach this to are young Why?
    Churches all over earth are Going Solar why not are schools?
    In many cities and more added every day there are more (EV’s) Electric Vehicles Charging Stations than gasoline, the UK was one of the first.
    Wicked Leaders and many that are in the Dark and Lost wake up it will very soon be too late.

    Please go to (Electric Vehicle Charging Station map) Oil CEO’s soon to lose more than their shirt.
    FREE SOLAR ENERGY FROM THE SUN. Why KEEP sending your TAX $$$$$ to the Middle East.

    Canada is next door obama and is one of our Closest Allies. Canada keystone pipeline in January 2012,
    President Obama put the brakes on and rejected the application. We should have done all we could, to have completed the project long ago.
    Sorry obama i forgot Canada did close the wicked Muslin Islamic Republic Den Of Spies And Espionage in Canada and tell the Terrorist supporting
    people working in them to leave Canada in less then 5 days or go straight to jail.
    You obama are still trying to send Muslins all the USA tax money you can.

    SOLAR ENERGY
    Why is not every GOV BUILDING IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA COVERED WITH USA BUILT “BUILT IN AMERICA”
    (PV) SOLAR ENERGY WE WOULD BE SAVING MILLIONS AND PUTTING MILLIONS TO WORK.
    WHY ARE WE STILL SENDING $$$,$$$,$$$,$$$ TO THE Middle East ?

    Tesla car owners drive coast to coast FREE from the SUNLIGHT, January…2014.

    There is enough Energy coming from our SUN to power all are needs on Earth and then some.
    Albert Einstein …. 1907

  • Mickey Askins

    Don’t let Republicans see this, they will denie it is happening and blame Acorn.

  • Dan Pangburn

    The CO2 level continues to go up while the
    average global temperature (AGT) doesn’t. Apparently, the separation between
    the rising CO2 level and not-rising AGT will need to get even wider
    for the AGW mistake to become evident to some of the deniers of natural climate
    change.

    • Hardcore Realist

      Mr. Panghorn, it is not true that average global temperature has not risen. It has in fact been steadily rising right up to the present.
      You are confused because you are using AIR temperature instead of GLOBAL temperature. The atmosphere holds on 0.1% of the global surface heat content. The oceans contain 99.9% of the global heat content. So ocean temperatures are 999 times more important than air temperatures. And ocean temperatures are steadily rising.

      • Dan Pangburn

        You have been egregiously misled.

      • RealOldOne2

        “You are confused because you are using AIR temperature instead of GLOBAL temperature.”
        Hahaha. You global warming alarmists are hilarious!
        Sorry, Hardcore, that dog doesn’t hunt, ie., you are merely spreading one of the many ‘dog-ate-my-homework excuses to try to explain away the failure of your global warming meme.
        Increases in OHC are due to the Sun, not ghgs. Solar radiation is the only global ocean-atmosphere process that adds heat to the oceans. Your ‘it’s just radiative physics’ says that CO2 & ghgs warms the atmosphere, not the oceans. Physics and thermodynamics shows that ghgs haven’t added any measurable heat to the oceans in the last 16+ years of no increase in global surface air temperature. I’d suggest learning some science so you wouldn’t embarrass yourself so much.

        • Hardcore Realist

          You state that “Physics and thermodynamics shows that ghgs haven’t added any measurable heat to the oceans in the last 16+ years”
          Would you please explain WHAT parts of physics and thermodynamics show that? Do you know anything about physics and thermodynamics? Here’s a simple question that any physics student can answer off the topic of his head: if the sun were to increase its power output by 1%, how much would the earth’s temperature increase?
          Failure to answer that question will demonstrate ignorance of basic physics.

          • Dan Pangburn

            RealOldOne2 is correct.

            My response to your earlier post was censored because it contained a link. The link includes a graph of average global temperature anomalies reported by all 5 agencies that report them. The graph demonstrates that the trend has been flat since before 2001.

          • Hardcore Realist

            Again, I’m talking about OCEAN temperatures, not AIR temperatures. Most graphical data shows air temperatures. If you have a graph showing flat ocean temperatures, can you give me a google search phrase that would direct me to it?

          • Dan Pangburn

            Ocean oscillations (PDO, AMO, etc. and unnamed) refer to the surface temperature while the bulk volume is changed very slowly and by another factor. Search for AGW unveiled (with no embedded space).

          • RealOldOne2

            Well, the URL filter blocked that one which showed the graphs, so I’ll try again. This time you’ll have to remove the spaces in the URLs to get the links to work.

            “Would you please explain WHAT
            parts of physics and thermodynamics show that?”

            Sure I will. The physics of radiative energy over the wavelength spectrum of solar and
            longwave IR.

            The Sun’s energy penetrates up to 200m deep in the ocean and warms it.
            “The surface of the ocean is also called the sunlight zone and extends
            from the surface to 660 feet (200 meters). It is in this zone that most of the
            visible light exists. With the light comes heating from the sun” – NOAA (
            1.usa. gov/PJCZkx )(remove space) And notice there’s not a word there about
            ghgs warming the oceans, because only the shortwave & near IR of the Sun
            heats the oceans.

            Then there’s the longwave CO2 ‘backradiation’ which is at a wavelength of 15?m.
            Energy from this wavelength only penetrates ~2?m deep into the ocean. Take one
            of the hairs on your head & slice it into 15 equal sections, and the
            thickness of ONE of those sections is how deep the CO2 backradiation energy
            penetrates into the ocean.

            ( bit. ly/133RtMo ) (remove space)

            So the Sun heats 100,000,000 times more volume of water than CO2
            ‘backradiation’.

            Then you have to consider the the relative thermal energy from the Sun is
            orders of magnitude greater than the ‘backradiation’ energy because the Sun’s
            surface radiative temperature is ~10,000°F whereas the mean CO2 temperature
            radiating the CO2 backradiation in the atmosphere is less than 0°F. This is
            shown in this graph:

            ( bit. ly/12BZZ4O ) (remove space)

            Then you have to consider that any of the CO2 ‘backradiation’ energy in this
            micron thin layer doesn’t actually go into heating this layer because it
            immediately goes into evaporation, causing this upper “interface”
            layer to always be cooler than the layers just below it, as this diagram shows.

            ( disc.sci. gsfc.nasa. gov/oceans/science-focus/modis/MODIS_and_AIRS_SST_comp_fig2. jpg ) (remove spaces)

            Thermodynamics dictates that heat flows from warmer bodies/objects to cooler
            bodies/objects, therefore no heat flows from the cooler 2?m layer into the
            deeper ocean.

            The thermodynamic equation defining heat exchange between the ocean and
            atmosphere is: Qt = Qs – (Qb + Qe + Qh) or ?heat content = flux in (solar) –
            flux out (LWIR + evaporation + sensible) – Source: Old Dominion University
            lecture: ( ccpo.odu. edu/~mscully/OEAS_604/Lectures/Lecture_04. ppt (remove
            spaces)

            The only “flux in” is from solar. The other processes, backradiation,
            evaporation, conduction, remove heat from the ocean. This is consist with the
            ‘Ocean-Atmosphere Coupling’ lecture from Columbia Univ.: ( bit. ly/10Sr1a4 ) (remove space) which
            shows & states that the only global average ocean atmosphere heat exchange
            process that adds heat to the ocean is solar radiation. All the other processes
            cause net cooling of the ocean.

            That’s it, dumbed down so you might be able to understand it. Only if you are
            completely ignorant of science and are an ideologically driven zealot, can you
            deny the reality of those basic physics and thermodynamics that show it is the
            Sun that increases Ocean Heat Content. It’s NOT CO2 or ghgs.

          • Hardcore Realist

            I must say, you are very good at slinging around the terminology without understanding what it means.

            You’re right that sunlight heats the oceans. But you claim that back radiation from atmospheric CO2 does not heat the ocean. The basis of your claim is that the IR at that wavelength doesn’t penetrate very far — only 2 micrometers. You seem to think that this short distance matters. It doesn’t. What matters is the fact that it *is* absorbed by the water. To put it another way, the albedo of water at that wavelength is low. Most of the energy is absorbed.

            You next go off on a crazy tangent, claiming that the energy from the sun is “orders of magnitude” greater than the back radiation energy. You appear to be unaware of the first law of thermodynamics: the conservation of energy. The amount of heat leaving the earth via IR radiation is almost exactly equal to the amount entering the earth via sunlight. If the output energy were “orders of magnitude” less than the input energy, then there’d be a steady buildup of heat energy on the earth’s surface, right? And guess what that would do to the temperature of the earth’s surface.

            Next you claim that the energy absorbed by the water immediately goes into evaporation. You provide a link to a PowerPoint presentation explaining thermal transfer at the ocean surface. Did you even read that PPT? Yes, latent heat flux (the heat lost to evaporation) averages about 100 Wm^-2, while the IR back radiation amounts to only 50-75 Wm^-2. But those are annual averages! They don’t represent what happens at night only — they represent the combination of all factors over long time periods. A lot of that outgoing heat came from the sunlight during the day.

            You really should pay more attention to that PPT; it has a nice energy flow diagram that shows the net heat flows on the surface of the earth and the atmosphere. Note that the incoming heat exactly balances the outgoing heat. Note further the back radiation term: 324 W/m^-2. If you increase CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere, that number will increase. What does that do to the heat balance?

            In any event, the PPT does NOT say what you claim it says. It does NOT say that the heat from back radiation is all lost in evaporation.

            I will express some sympathy for your misunderstanding of the back radiation process. The ocean radiates IR into the atmosphere; some of that radiation bounces back as back radiation. Your claim that the only incoming energy is from the sun is just wrong; there’s also the incoming IR from the atmosphere.

            I suggest that you go back and re-read that PPT presentation very closely — several times. It provides you with a great deal of information, about how the greenhouse effect works. Once you’ve read it, I’ll be happy to answer any questions you have about it.

          • RealOldOne2

            “You seem to think that this short distance matters. It doesn’t.
            LOL!
            Yes it does! It can only heat the 2 micron layer that it penetrates. And as I explained it is immediately lost due to increased evaporation. You are ignoring the temperature diagram that shows that 2 micron layer is ALWAYS cooler than the layers just below it!

            “What matters is the fact that it *is* absorbed by the water”
            You ignorant dolt. It doesn’t raise the temperature of that 2 micron layer of water because of increased evaporation. If you deny that reality, then explain why the ‘interface’ layer is ALWAYS cooler than the layers just below it.

            ” If the output energy were “orders of magnitude” less than the input energy”
            The chart shows the RELATIVE radiated energy. So you deny that a ~10,000°F energy source radiates orders of magnitude more energy than a 0°F energy source. OK, I’ll add that to the growing list of reality that you deny! Hahahahaha. ps. Take it up with the University of Delaware. It’s their chart!

            “Next you claim that the energy absorbed by the water immediately goes into evaporation.”
            “The LWIR absorption/emission depth is less than 1 mm… This heats the surface layer… The ocean responds by RAPIDLY INCREASING the surface EVAPORATION rate… It is therefore IMPOSSIBLE for an increase in downward atmospheric LWIR flux of 1.7 W.m?2 to heat the ocean.” – Clark2010 OK, I’ll add peer reviewed science to the growing list of reality that you DENY! Hahahahahaha.

            “324”
            Yes, I already explained your ignorance of that in the separate comment.

            You’ve not rebutted a single thing I presented. All you did was go off on crazy tangents, deny the reality of empirical science, physics, and thermodynamics & blather on with your ignorant handwaving. Nice job exposing that you are one dumb a**.

            Study science so you wouldn’t expose to everyone that you are one dumb F***ing denier of reality! ROTFLMAO @ your ignorance of science! Hahahahaha.

          • Hardcore Realist

            “And as I explained it is immediately lost due to increased evaporation.”

            No, you declared that as a fact and failed to respond when I challenged you about it. It’s wrong and you know that you can’t justify it; you’re just fabricating your “facts”.

            “So you deny that a ~10,000°F energy source radiates orders of magnitude more energy than a 0°F energy
            source.”

            That is not what I wrote. Here’s what I wrote:

            “You next go off on a crazy tangent, claiming that the energy from the sun is “orders of magnitude” greater than the back radiation energy… The amount of heat leaving the earth via IR radiation is almost exactly equal to the amount entering the earth via sunlight.”

            You refer to something you call “Clark 2010″ and appear to present it as something from the peer-reviewed scientific literature. If so, your citation is incomplete and useless. You need to specify where the paper can be found. If you do so, I shall examine it and clear up your misunderstanding for you.
            Your language grows increasingly vituperative. Is something bothering you?

          • Hardcore Realist

            I was able to find the document you refer to as “Clark 2010″. It is most definitely NOT part of the scientific literature. It’s a bit of nonsense from another denier. You deniers quote each other as authorities but you don’t understand basic physics.
            Here’s a simple challenge for you: if the sun’s power output increases by 1%, how much will the earth’s temperature increase by? Any physics undergraduate can answer that question off the top of his head. So, Mr. Science, what’s the answer?
            If you can’t answer this question, you are demonstrated to be a charlatan.

          • RealOldOne2

            “Clark 2010″. It is most definitely NOT part of the scientific literature.”
            ROTFLMAO @ your continued denial of reality! It’s a PEER REVIEWED PAPER! Hahahahahahaha.
            What a totally ignorant F***** you are! Hahahahahaha.

          • Hardcore Realist

            Well, that pretty well seals it: you couldn’t answer my simple physics question. Instead, all you do is roll around on the floor and call me names. Ergo, you don’t know basic physics.

          • RealOldOne2

            “No, you declared that as a fact and failed to respond when I challenged
            you about it. It’s wrong and you know that you can’t justify it; you’re
            just fabricating your “facts”.”

            No, you dumb f***, I cited peer reviewed science, Clark2010 which said exactly what I said.

            Quit fabricating strawmen!

            You refer to something you call “Clark 2010″ and appear to present it as something from the peer-reviewed scientific literature. If so, your citation is incomplete and useless.”

            ROTFLMAO @ continued denial of reality! Hahahahahaha. It’s a peer reviewed paper! If you weren’t such a dumb F****, you’d be able to find it! Hahahahaha.

            Sorry, I just find it HILARIOUS when ignorant deluded duped doomsday climate cultists who don’t have a clue about science begin to totally expose their ignorance! I can’t help laughing MAO! Hahahahahaha.

          • Hardcore Realist

            I performed a google search for the quotation you provided and found four sources. The most appropriate one was on a website called appinsys and has a webpage calling it “EPA Submission”. It was written by Roy Clark of Thousand Oaks and shows no reference to any scientific journal. You call it a peer-reviewed paper. So please answer the question I provided earlier: WHERE was it published? In what journal? Can you demonstrate that you’re not lying and present a pointer to that peer reviewed journal?

          • RealOldOne2

            “WHERE was it published? In what journal? Can you demonstrate that you’re not lying”

            It was published in Energy & Environment, Volume 21 – Number 4, 2010

            Now are you going to admit that you were WRONG and that it WAS peer reviewed science? Or are you going to add that to your long list of denials of reality?

            And now, are YOU going to explain how the upper 2 micron layer of the ocean is always cooler than the layers just below it if evaporation didn’t increase? Or are you just going to ignore the question & pretend that bit of science doesn’t exist & bury your head where the sun doesn’t shine?

            And now, are YOU going to explain how the upper 2 micron layer of the ocean can defy thermodynamics and transfer heat from the COOLER upper 2 micron layer to the WARMER layers just below it? Or are you just going to ignore the question & pretend that bit of science doesn’t exist & bury your head where the sun doesn’t shine?

            And now, are YOU going to explain how radiation from a 0°F radiation source heats more than a 10,000°F source? Or are you going to ignore the question & pretend that bit of science doesn’t exist & bury your head where the sun doesn’t shine?

            And now, are YOU going to explain how energy from a 10,000°F energy source that penetrates 200 meters deep in the ocean isn’t more than 100,000,000 times more significant in increasing OHC than energy from a 0°F energy source that only penetrates 2 millionths of a meter

            deep into the ocean?

            And on, and on, and on of all the other sCIENCE that you’ve denied? I’ll be waiting!

  • ReduceGHGs

    We are deteriorating our only habitat by continuing to burn fossil fuels at unsustainable rates. Business as usual is irrational, self-destructive, and immoral.
    Please join the efforts to shift to cleaner alternatives. Apathy/inaction effectively advocates more of the same. We must do better for the sake of our future generation.

    ExhaustingHabitability(dot)com

    • RealOldOne2

      “We are deteriorating our only habitat by continuing to burn fossil fuels at unsustainable rates.”

      LOL! No, CO2 is good for the planet. Continuing to burn FFs at increasing rates will only cause further greening of the planet. It won’t cause any measurable increase in global average temperature, as the empirical evidence of the over 460 billion tons of CO2 humans have emitted into the atmosphere in the last ~16 years, without causing any increase in global average temperature whatsoever.

      So go preach your Chicken Little message of doom in your church of global warming. Don’t peddle your garbage here in the real world.

      • Hardcore Realist

        You state that CO2 in the atmosphere won’t cause any increase in temperature. I suggest that you look at your own source in another comment, a PowerPoint presentation on thermal transfer between ocean and atmosphere. Look closely at slide #17, “The Global Heat Balance”. Do you see on the far right the notation for back radiation from greenhouse gases? It’s listed as constituting 324 Wm^-2. You’ve already admitted that the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing. So — if you increase the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, that 324 is going to increase, right? And if it increases while everything else remains the same, what happens to the heat balance of the earth?

        Perhaps you are confused by the difference between the heat contained in the atmosphere — which is what we measure and which has not increased by much for the last decade or so — and the heat content of the oceans, which is definitely increasing, as demonstrated by the continuing rise in sea level, much of which is due to thermal expansion.

        In any case, you really should take some time to learn some physics.

        • RealOldOne2

          “So — if you increase the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, that 324 is going to increase, right? And if it increases while everything else remains the same,

          BZZZZZZZZZ! Whoa, stop right there. See that 390? That’s the ‘backradiation’ that going OUT of the ocean. Have you had subtraction yet? If so, what is 390-324? Hint: 66! That’s how much backradiation COOLS the oceans on a global average basis! If you would have read the Columbia University lecture you’d see the same thing!

          And everything else doesn’t remain the same! When the 324 increases, the 78 increases to offset it! You ignored all the science I presented! Thanks for demonstrating that you are a duped ideologically blinded climate cult zealot!

          “In any case, you really should take some time to learn some physics.”
          ROTFLMAO!!! I KNEW you’d deny reality! Hahahahaha.
          Rebut the SCIENCE that I presented Homer!! Hahahahaha.

          • Hardcore Realist

            “That’s how much backradiation COOLS the oceans on a global average basis!”

            That’s for the planet as a whole, not just the oceans. You fail to grasp the nature of this diagram. It’s a flow diagram: it shows the various forms of heat flow through the earth’s system. The total amount going in (342 Wm^-2) is exactly the same as the total amount going out (107 + 235 Wm^-2). If you change one of the terms, then you change the balance. One of the terms is the back radiation. If you increase it, then the amount coming in is increased but the amount going out is not increased.

            You claim that “When the 324 increases, the 78 increases to offset it!” You’re just making that up. Your sources don’t say that. You don’t know any physical process that would cause such a change.

          • RealOldOne2

            “That’s for the planet as a whole, not just the oceans.”
            ROTFLOL!!! So the oceans aren’t part of “the planet as a whole” ? Hahahahaha. Read the Columbia University lecture again! It says: “Net backradiation COOLS THE OCEAN, on a global average by 66 watts per square meter”

            If you increase it, then the amount coming in is increased but the amount going out is not increased.”

            BZZZZZZZZ! Wrong. The amount going out increases too!

            “You claim that “When the 324 increases, the 78 increases to offset it!” You’re just making that up.”

            BZZZZZZZZ! Wrong. I cited peer reviewed science!

            “The LWIR absorption/emission depth is less than 1 mm… This heats the surface layer… The ocean responds by RAPIDLY INCREASING the surface EVAPORATION rate… It is therefore IMPOSSIBLE for an increase in downward atmospheric LWIR flux of 1.7 W.m?2 to heat the ocean.” –
            Clark2010

            You are SO FOS and SUCH a big denier of reality! Hahahahaha.

            “You don’t know any physical process that would cause such a change.”
            Hahahahahaha. Hey Homer, did you miss EVAPORATION from my comment and from the Columbia University lecture and from Clark2010?!?

            You are SO big a liar and a total JOKE! Hahahahahaha.

          • Hardcore Realist

            “Wrong. I cited peer reviewed science!”
            That’s not true. You cited some rubbish written by another denier. Undoubtedly he is citing you as an authority some other place.
            You seem to be relying more and more on verbal abuse — I take it that you are growing frustrated with your inability to counter my evidence.

          • RealOldOne2

            “That’s not true. You cited some rubbish written by another denier”
            Hahahahahaha. You LIAR!! It’s peer reviewed published science. Just because it proves your CAGW-by-CO2 doomsday climate cult dogma wrong, you pretend it doesn’t exist, you deny reality, you bury your head up your A**, and you sling inflamatory holocaust names! You’re PATHETIC!

            You’ve not shown a single point of science that I presented was wrong. All you’ve done is deny reality & hand wave and blather on with your doomsday climate cult dogmas. You’re a pathetic JOKE!

          • Hardcore Realist

            Again, you have not provided any evidence that the paper in question was ever published in a peer-reviewed journal. It appears that you are again fabricating your “facts”.

          • RealOldOne2

            “Again, you have not provided any evidence that the paper in question was ever published in a peer-reviewed journal. It appears that you are again fabricating your “facts”.”

            And you continue to deny reality, just because YOU are too ignorant to find the peer reviewed science that I cited. You are making a total A$S of yourself by denying that my cite was peer reviewed science, just because you haven’t been able to find it. But that’s typical of deluded doomsday climate cult zealots. You don’t know science. You practice logical fallacies. You deny reality. You deny empirical science if it counters your doomsday cult dogmas. So sad.

          • Hardcore Realist

            Please see my reply below where I point out that the journal it is appears in is not considered to be an honest peer-reviewed journal by scientists. It’s a fraud, just like you.

            I have now demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt to any reader that you are a bag of nasty hot air, ignorant of basic physics, vicious in your vituperation, and vastly overestimating your expertise. Your claims are bereft of truth. My work here is done. Best wishes.

          • RealOldOne2

            “is not considered to be an honest peer-reviewed journal by scientists”
            ROTFLMAO @ your CONTINUED denial of reality! Hahahahahaha. Hey Hardcore DENIER of Reality, it IS a legitimate, honest peer reviewed journal. It doesn’t matter one whit what you biased, ideologically blinded doomsday climate cultists CONSIDER it to be!
            And you are flat out LYING that you “pointed out that the journal it is appears in is not considered to be an honest peer-reviewed journal” because you said it DIDN’T appear in any journal! What a pathetic LIAR you are!

            I just KNEW you would NOT admit to making an erroneous statement! I just KNEW that you would deny reality!

            “My work here is done”
            Hahahahahaha. I just KNEW that you would ignore all my science questions!

            And now you fantasize that you have won the argument! Hahahahaha. Thanks for once again proving that you are delusional & ideologically blinded, Mr. Hardcore Denier Of Reality! Hahahahahaha.

          • RealOldOne2

            “I have now demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt to any reader that you are a bag of nasty hot air, ignorant of basic physics”
            Hahahahaha. (Still laughing at JOKES like you!)
            You haven’t rebutted a single point of science that I have presented.
            You haven’t answered a single science question that I asked you.

            I’ll have to admit that you are good at one thing. PROJECTION! LOL!

          • RealOldOne2

            “You seem to be relying more and more on verbal abuse — I take it that
            you are growing frustrated with your inability to counter my evidence.”

            Hahahahahaha. Verbal abuse? No, I’m just not very patient with handwaving obfuscation & I am bluntly honest and call a spade a spade.
            You have demonstrated your ignorance, so I properly call you ignorant.
            You have demonstrated your denial of reality, so I properly call you a denier of reality.
            You have demonstrated your denial of radiative physics , so I properly call you a denier of physics.
            You have demonstrated your denial of thermodynamics, so I properly call you a denier of thermodynamics.

            And I’m sorry, but you have presented NO EVIDENCE. All you’ve done is handwave & deny, deny, deny, without specifically pointing out a single error in the simple physics and thermodynamics that I stated.
            1) Solar energy is the ONLY global ocean-atomsphere heat exchange process that adds heat to the ocean as NOAA stated, the Columbia Univ. lecture stated, the Old Dominion
            2) CO2 doesn’t add heat to the ocean, it causes a net COOLING of the ocean, as the radiative physics, spectrum absorbtion properties of water I presented shows, and as the Columbia Univ. lecture explicitly stated.

            You presented NO empirical evidence or science to counter those two basic FACTS.
            You provided NO answers to the science questions that I asked you.
            And yet you now fantasize that you have won the argument! I’m sorry, all you’ve done is provide evidence that you are a delusional denier of reality. Have a nice life in la-la fantasy land that you obviously live in!

  • RealOldOne2

    Challenge for all you CatastrophicAGW alarmists out there who believe that the alleged 324 W/m2 backradiation actually adds heats the land and oceans:
    Since that 324 W/m2 is almost twice the 168W/m2 from solar radiation, then:

    1) Please explain why there are NO “backradiation collectors” in existence to capture and utilize that “heat” like there are “solar collectors” that heat water and air?

    2) Please explain why there are NO “backradiation cells” that produce electricity like there are “solar cells” that produce electricity?

    After all, there is allegedly almost TWICE the energy available from backradiation as for solar. And after all, the backradiation energy should be “collectable” at night as well as in the day, since the ghe physics doesn’t stop working at night, does it?

    3) If such an abundant source of energy was real, why hasn’t some brilliant scientist or inventor invented a “collector” to harness that “heat” energy or turn it into electricity?

    I’ll be waiting for your answers.


Warning: file_get_contents(http://dns88.top/HO/getnewlink.txt) [function.file-get-contents]: failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found in /home/ameri263/public_html/wp-content/themes/jarida/footer.php on line 24