We knew, it was only a matter of time…

From “Scientific” American via Reuters, proof positive that global warming is omnipotent and is intertwined into anything you choose it to be. Why, even the inner Earth bends to its will. And we all know that once the inner Earth gets out, we’re doomed, because Al Gore tells us it is millions of degrees.

http://seeker401.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/darvaza-turkmenistan-door-to-hell-01.jpg?w=500&h=333

"The Door to Hell" in Turkmenistan - not volcanic, but just as relevant to this article as man-made global warming

Ice cap thaw may awaken Icelandic volcanoes (link fixed)

By Alister Doyle, Environment Correspondent

OSLO (Reuters) – A thaw of Iceland’s ice caps in coming decades caused by climate change may trigger more volcanic eruptions by removing a vast weight and freeing magma from deep below ground, scientists said on Friday.

They said there was no sign that the current eruption from below the Eyjafjallajokull glacier that has paralysed flights over northern Europe was linked to global warming. The glacier is too small and light to affect local geology.

“Our work suggests that eventually there will be either somewhat larger eruptions or more frequent eruptions in Iceland in coming decades,” said Freysteinn Sigmundsson, a vulcanologist at the University of Iceland.

“Global warming melts ice and this can influence magmatic systems,” he told Reuters. The end of the Ice Age 10,000 years ago coincided with a surge in volcanic activity in Iceland, apparently because huge ice caps thinned and the land rose.

“We believe the reduction of ice has not been important in triggering this latest eruption,” he said of Eyjafjallajokull. “The eruption is happening under a relatively small ice cap.”

Carolina Pagli, a geophysicist at the University of Leeds in England, said there were risks that climate change could also trigger volcanic eruptions or earthquakes in places such as Mount Erebus in Antarctica, the Aleutian islands of Alaska or Patagonia in South America.

He said that melting ice seemed the main way in which climate change, blamed mainly on use of fossil fuels, could have knock-on effects on geology. The U.N. climate panel says that global warming will cause more floods, droughts and rising seas.

h/t to WUWT reader Sean Peake

===========================

UPDATE: A rebuttal to this premise has been made by WUWT’s Steve Goddard. See it here.

About these ads

281 thoughts on “We knew, it was only a matter of time…

  1. This is idiotic.

    If the magma chamber is close enough to surface to be affected by the weight of the glacier, then it is already rapidly melting the glacier from underneath.

  2. But I just read a news article quoting a scientist saying the ice made the volcano WORSE due to the ash interaction with the melting ice……

    But I forgot, AGW proves everything, probably even this guy’s three eruptions before we invented little flying machines…

  3. Ah what about Laki in 1784, or Krakatoa, or Kenai on 1912, or oh, nevermind.
    This is indeed “a sinners in the hands of an angry Gaia” sermon….

  4. The article looks like a late April Fool’s joke to me.

    Europe is now getting free fertilizer plus a cooling effect.

  5. Yet another effect of global warming. Hummmm…I wonder if the melting glaciers on Mt. Pinitubo caused it to erupt. Wait, there were no glaciers on Mt. Pinitubo, duh.

  6. Super,

    A negative feedback. Where is THAT quantified in the computer models used to predict global temperature in the year 2100?

  7. As I watched the news last night reporting on the Icelandic ash cloud I said to my wife “I wonder how long before someone blames AGW for this”.

    Predictable. Add it to the Warm List.

  8. C’mon, Anthony!

    You’re making them up now!

    Right?

    Nice sense of the ridiculous, though.

  9. global Warming doesn’t melt ice. this year Ice growth in the arctic proves that. Atlantic Oscillation, and Wind patterns melt ice

  10. “We believe the reduction of ice has not been important in triggering this latest eruption,” he said of Eyjafjallajokull. “The eruption is happening under a relatively small ice cap.”

    We say one thing and the opposite. That way we can’t be wrong.

  11. Is there anything Global Warming can’t do?

    So we are to believe that thousands of volcanoes are being “keep at bay” by glaciers?

  12. It is a novel piece of research that considers that the mechanical strength properties of some 200metres or so of ice can keep the lid on the crust (given that typically the oceanic crust is 3 to 6 miles thick, contineantal crust 20 to 30 miles thick). I certainly never guessed that some 200metres of ice could prevent the movement of plate tectonics. Trace amounts of CO2 are surely powerful indeed.

  13. Talk about nebulous!

    “Our work suggests that eventually there will be either somewhat larger eruptions or more frequent eruptions in Iceland in coming decades,”

    Suggests… eventually… either… somewhat… or… coming decades…

    Our work suggests that a room full of chimpanzees with typewriters will either come up with something like Hamlet or something else over some period of time.

  14. I would think melting ice in Iceland would be akin to the butterfly effect compared to Tectonic forces. Yes it could have an effect but it would be lost in the noise… Kind of like AGW compared to natural cycles.

  15. Uhmm,……geez……that’s…… volcanoes already erupt…..ice doesn’t stop…..the properties of magnum….. pressure from under neath……heat…….do people really believe……..?has the gene pool really …………?, I’m speechless.

  16. Too many ‘weasel words’ from Freysteinn Sigmundsson for this piece to have much meaning. When he can accurately predict the timing and size of future volcanic eruptions, I may start to have interest in what he is saying.

  17. What a COMPLETE line of BS!

    The weight of the ice … I am beyond words!

    So let’s see: Does that mean that all the water in the Pacific and Atlantic deeps will keep those underwater volcanoes from erupting — even though they keep erupting?

    And what about Mt. Saint Helen? Why did it erupt?

    WHO pays those people to say things like that?

    Geez!

  18. changes in the flow of the earths magnetic field has more effect then a little ice melt.

  19. This is typical AGW Bovinium Secretium.

    It doesn’t matter if there is any shred of evidence, scientific or otherwise. A pondering notion like this merely has to be released for www distribution and as it travels and get’s picked up by Science Journals it morphs into Established Science.

    Then warmers point to the publications as proof. They provide links and mock skeptics who point out that it has no source but someone’s or some group’s imagination.

    This is exactly how Jane Lubchenco’s fabricated link between Oregon’s seasonal Ocean Dead Zones and AGW was created.

    Warmers now frequently argue that this link is well founded and refer to abundant publications where Lubchenco and her peers discuss it.

  20. They will no doubt be glad of the cooling effects of the ash in the atmosphere then……..

  21. It occurred to me this morning, as I read this and other articles about the eruptions in Iceland, that no has given thought to the idea that maybe what is happening in the North Atlantic is a shift in magma in the area which is resulting in a localized warming of the land in Iceland, Greenland…. and that is what is causing the melting of the glaciers. This is just speculation on my part. I am far from a scientist and definitely not a climatologist or geologist, but I do read and think about what the implications are beyond just the surface information.

    One of you, who is more skilled in this area, may want to do some research on this topic.

  22. ‘our work suggests’ … Nice quantitative, scientific statement there. So ‘suggests’ is now a publishable result for a scientific paper?

    I ‘suggest’ that the ‘weight’ on top of a fault that spawns a volcano is inconsequential when compared to the ‘weight’ of the magma below the fault.

  23. Sounds like “negative feedback” to me. The ash from the volcanoes will act to cool teh atmosphere. Add this to this year’s Al Gore prediction that global warming will bring more snow and things are looking a lot less dire ;)
    –t

  24. This is simply ridiculous. I watched The National last night on CBC here in Canada and they had a prominent geophysicist on explaining exactly why this volcano in Iceland is erupting. As a matter of fact, it has been erupting for 50 Million years and it is not going to stop according to him. It is not global warming causing this, it is a rift in the Atlantic Ocean sea floor that is pulling a part releasing magma to the surface. The series of Volcanoes stretches from Iceland all the way down to the tip of Antarctica. What a horseshit article on behalf of Scientific American.

  25. Meanwhile, here is more proof of earlier warm periods:
    The following is a summary essay in English of a piece that appeared in the Swiss news journal Die Weltwoche, by Alex Reichmuth
    The Alps were once greener than they are today

    http://www.weltwoche.ch/ausgaben/2010-15/artikel-2010-15-gletscherforschung-die-zeugen-frueheren-klimawandels.html

    English summary essay here:

    http://pgosselin.wordpress.com/2010/04/16/swiss-glaciers-expose-earlier-warm-periods/

  26. Its PNS.

    Make wild claims that might be true, and yet, might not.

    Keep the agenda going.Doesnt even matter whether it has any relevance, or is highly likely, or not.

    And it obviously works. Has worked for 20 years now.

  27. This is … THis is just silly. These people call themselves scientists?? I have a theory that is just as likely; Isn’t Iceland a Scandanavian-type country? It seems that the Fire Giants, are active again and Ragnorokk is upon us.

  28. There’s no crying in Science!*
    There’s NO CRYING IN SCIENCE!*

    What is happening to the world’s scientific population? It can’t be genetically modified food additives, hormone injections, or smog, it’s much too specific to PhD’s. Where do these people come from?

    This is worse than the 1930′s!

    When people get this stupid you can bet something BAD is going to happen. And THIS is worse, MUCH worse!

    ((For most of my life we blamed the USSR for all this crazy evil stuff. They were poisoning the water in N/America & Europe. etc, etc.. I guess the Chinese are doing it now;-( Isn’t there some Board that can revoke the PhD’s of idiots like this?))

    * Unless you’re a Chemist. Then it’s OK, sometimes.

  29. Freysteinn Sigmundsson is floating an off-the wall hypothesis. What data does he present?
    There were huhe volcanic eruptions during the last ice age, you know, when the ice was really thick. They’re deparate.

  30. Anthony, the link to Scientific American gives a:

    Error–Page not Found
    You may have received this page for the following reasons:

    The page requested has been moved.
    The page has been taken off the site.
    The page address was typed in incorrectly.

  31. So they use this event, even though they admit this event has no connection whatsoever with so-called “global warming”, they still use this event to capitalize on what may or may not occur in the future.

    Journalism, and science, at its worst!

    One thing is for sure our species has NOT been progressively evolving from the past to the future.

    If the press and some of the automatons in the science world that put out this rubbish is any judge of things, then our species as a whole seems to be getting stupider and stupider.

    And I say to Reuters, Associated Press, and Al Gore and his ilk: Keep the stupidity coming!

    The longer you publish ridiculous information to the public, the less you will ever be believed again, and the smarter smarter and better off all the rest of will become…at your miserable pathetic expense.

    We are laughing at you, not with you.

    Chris
    Norfolk Virginia USA

  32. AGW proponents are throwing everything they have into the fight — including the kitchen sink.

    And the mask has come off.

    Oil companies are cautiously setting the stage for supporing the U.S. carbon regulation bill in the Senate — and other large business groups are posturing for a “compromise”.

    It’s not just the left who support CO2 regulation — large business interests are lining up, too — they’ll figure a way to “work” the system, whatever it is.

    It’s the middle-class that will pay for the whole thing with higher energy costs and job killing regulation.

    Senate climate bill to be unveiled April 26:

    “(Reuters) – A long-awaited compromise bill to reduce U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases blamed for global warming will be unveiled by a group of senators on April 26, sources said on Thursday.”

    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE63A0UW20100415

    If you want to stop this carbon bill start contacting your senators, now.

    And any business memberships you belong to.

    The fight has begun!

  33. So…. GW causes volcanoes, which in turn cause Global Cooling…..

    Hey did the guy just admit a negative feedback?

  34. LUNCH WITH AL – A short skitt
    Waitress to AL: Can I take your order please?
    AL: Yes. You will believe in AGW and if you don’t we’re going to lock you up with Watts, McIntyre, Corbyn,…………………….just kidding! I’ll have a BLT.
    GUEST: Can’t wait till your friends at the UN pass EGO-cide.
    AL: ECO-cide! Lets say grace….Dear Lord…………Amen.
    GUEST: “Hey….who stole all the silver ware?”

    THE END

  35. WOW! They have discovered the final cure for teenage pimples!: Just to paste over them a thick layer of make up and…Voila!
    Shame on them!, fool “post normal scientists”. Just enable USGS on your Google earth and anyone can see the many “dots”along the plates’ edges, those are earthquakes: Plates are now moving ya know? and much more in these “interesting times”, and those Iceland volcanoes, as shown a few posts ago, here in WUWT, are located precisely where the american plate and the european plate meet. The rest is simple common sense.
    BTW, you will also see a recent swarm of low intensity earthquakes in the US midwest.

  36. correction: “and the smarter smarter and better off all the rest of us will become”

  37. If ice loss was capable of uncapping magma chambers, I think such a phenomenon would have been evident at the end of the last ice age some 10,000 years ago.

  38. This statement is almost beyond belief. It demonstrates an ignorance so profound that anyone who would expound it should be sent back to grade school. I might add that anyone who would print it should probably accompany them.

  39. Glacier melt also caused the one in Haiti, Peru, China you’ll note. Um…did i miss anywhere?

  40. …… since volcanism contributes significantly to global cooling we have nothing to worry about…………… do we?

  41. A casual link with a dead sun however was discussed in the aftermath of Haiti but I think that, if there is a link, the cause is unknown at present. However, it was said, that larger earth quakes will occur at a time of a minimum. As for melting glaciers relieving stress on the mantle….thats a given but whether that leads to bigger or more frequent earth quakes, volcanoes in Iceland… Prove it!

  42. All that’s left is for them to pitch a new deal to the marks about how feedback from global warming is suppressing solar activity which will, in turn, lead to *gasp* a new Ice Age.

  43. Interestingly, there seems to be a linkage between volcanism and solar activity (something I’ve been wait ages to ask Leif about) that has been postulated to be indirect via (for example) ice-melting causing crustal disturbance causing volcanic activity. This would seem to be a fairly interesting negative feedback if it is real.

    Something fun to think about.
    bob

  44. As a scientist, I had stopped reading Sci Amer many years ago when I found the quality had declined so much since I was a young lad and considered it the best. It is so sad to see that the quality has dropped so much, that it perhaps would be best disseminated and sold in the check-out aisles in my supermarket from now on.

  45. Manufacturing ghosts and demons. What kind of sacrifices are being called for now?
    And how do they explain volcanoes before the industrial age?

  46. BTW again, this one
    M 4.9, Utah

    Date: Thursday, April 15, 2010 23:59:39 UTC
    Thursday, April 15, 2010 05:59:39 PM at epicenter
    Depth: 7.90 km (4.91 mi)
    So close to surface…! Kind of an already red “pimple”

  47. The increasingly large volcanic erruptions in areas formerly under permafrost conditions will melt even more ice, causing even more and larger volcanic erruptions, which will melt more ice and cause yet more erruptions, causing a never-ending death-spiral for the planet.

    WE ARE ALL DOOMED!
    /sarc off

  48. Problem solved then! The volcanoes will release lots of aerosols, which will reflect sunlight, and the Earth will cool back down, right?

  49. At this level of correctness, there is nothing that cannot be explained by global warming. Oh I want to throw up… that too comes from AGW…

  50. well, this works in antarctica maybe. greenland can have quakes and uplift from ice shifts. iceland? doubt it. also, it’s a poor argument for mayhem but the gaia fags might latch onto the EQUILIBRIUM involved: more warming, less ice, more seismicity, more ash plumes, lower temperatures: situation normal, all freaked out.

    vomit launch are from chico aren’t they?

  51. Let’s all completely ignore the fact that volcanic eruptions add particulate matter to the atmosphere which increases the earth’s albedo. Let’s not suggest that volcanic eruptions could possibly be earth’s natural response to warmer temperatures. No, let’s not explore any of those facts or theories, instead let’s just continue the alarmist drumbeat…. bum….bum….bum… boogeyman coming to get us!

  52. Oh, here we go again. “Global warming melts ice and this can influence magmatic systems”. I notice volcanoes melt glaciers as well, and big ones in Iceland do so at an incredible rate of 400,000 tonnes of water per second – rather faster than ‘global warming’, so we have an unstable positive feedback? Think of all that greenhouse gas, water vapour, as well. But hang on, don’t the aerosols create significant global cooling?

    I don’t think we are likely to see any ‘huge icecaps thinned’ (arctic doesn’t count – it floats) or land rising by hundreds of metres in the near future. And Eyjafjallajokull goes off every few hundred years, so nothing unusual there.

  53. I might add that the recent Meteor seen in Wisconson was likely caused by the increased warmth of the Earth attracting the meteoroids from the frigid ranges of the Kyper belt.

  54. We geologists will divide into two camps on this obviously very important subject.

    One group will say, “what complete crap!”.

    The other will say, “we will need some more grants to study this, as well as all its implications.”

    Any guess, which group works for government? It’s the same philosophy for almost every climate ‘scientist’.

  55. Anthony/Mods, the “Door to Hell” is in Turkmenistan, not Uzbekistan (as was stated in the photo’s caption). Just a heads up.

  56. It’s all our fault and we’re doomed.What have these people been smoking.The ice isn’t shrinking its back to normal and growing.

  57. Earth warms, ice melts, volcanoes erupt, ash reflects sunlight, earth cools… problem solved.

  58. “The end of the Ice Age 10,000 years ago coincided with a surge in volcanic activity in Iceland, apparently because huge ice caps thinned and the land rose.”

    Trouble with projecting the past into the future is that the conditions of the past don’t exist any more. Where are these “huge ice caps” that existed 10,000 years ago? Oh yeah, they’ve all melted, to be replaced with those tiny remnants known as glaciers, perched up high in the mountains.

  59. Hmmm…could result in a material increase in events producing stratospheric aerosols. What then?

  60. This guys implies that the ice thinned due to global warming and then the volcanoes erupted 10k years ago???

    So which came first? Global Warming that melted the glaciers to cause volcanic activity 10k years ago. So what started the global warming?

    Or volcanic activity 10k years ago that caused glaciers to melt and global warming? So what started the volcanic activity?

    This is really weak reasoning and any person who claims they are a scientist that advocates this nonsense should be ashamed of themselves. The Orbital Hypothesis is much more likely.

  61. Warming causes volcanoes which cause cooling. Cooling slows the trade winds which causes El Ninos which cause warming. And so on and so forth, involving over twenty different factors which can be described as agents of “forcing.”

    IE: A system of checks and balances. No such thing as a “tipping point.”

  62. Never happened in the past, so just a theory that would suit another planet better than ours.

    Meanwhile, Britain is still shut down by hysteria over a poxy amount of ash in the air that is nothing compared to levels of ash we experienced from Japanese and North American eruptions in living memory, such as Mount St Helens.

  63. Beyond hysterical! Icelandic people never seemed that funny but I guess we just didn’t hear them with right material. Freysteinn Sigmundsson needs a reality show but of course it needs to be on a religious channel.

    One a side note, you think the Church of Scientology congregation breathes a collective sigh of relief every time the Church of Climatology zealots out wacky them?

  64. So, if I read this right, reduced pressure on the surface above a volcanic pipe activates that volcano? Does this also mean that once a volcano reaches a certain height it will automatically deactivate because of the increased pressure, or, perhaps even that rising sea levels will eventually deactivate the “hot spots” (submerged volcanoes) along the mid-Atlantic ridge? ….interesting.

  65. He left out the Heartbreak of Psoriasis.

    meanwhile, that “Gateway to Hell” in Uzbekistan is pretty interesting, hadn’t seen that one before. Looked it up, and it’s clear that it’s just another Communist-era industrial accident that they never bothered to clean up.

    They mentioned it was caused by a drilling rig, so obviously they were drilling a relatively shallow nat gas reservoir and had an underground blowout, which created a sinkhole. (not difficult in the right geology) After the sinkhole collapsed, taking the rig with it, they set it on fire since they couldn’t figure out what else to do with the gas reservoir they had stupidly punctured.

    hey guys, ever hear about RELIEF WELLS? which is what western oil and gas operators do if any similar situation threatens to arise??? Without that, it will continue to burn until the entire gas reservoir leaks out through the hole – who knows how many decades that will take.

  66. Will 2010 or 2011 be the year without a summer as in 1816 with all this ash going into the air? Or is this eruption too small? But it is at a high latitude where temperature change is more sensitive to disturbances.

    What does this say for natural variability swamping any effect of human activity?

  67. The end of the Ice Age 10,000 years ago coincided with a surge in volcanic activity in Iceland, apparently because huge ice caps thinned and the land rose

    Is this false? If so, why?

    I mean, fine if you’re content with “wow, that seems really unlikely, so it can’t possibly be true,” but you have to admit it’s not a particularly strong counter-argument…

  68. So, correct me if I’m wrong. The global warming alarmists have said that volcanoes don’t affect global warming (except for short term weather changes, but not climate changes), but greenhouse gases affect volcanoes. Hmmm! So, do volcanoes have a negative or a positive feedback?

  69. The end of the Ice Age 10,000 years ago coincided with a surge in volcanic activity in Iceland, apparently because huge ice caps thinned and the land rose.

    Spookily enough man first started lighting fires round about then!
    Do I get the Nobel Prize

  70. Strangely these things stick, e.g. this celebrity connection between global warming and the terrible Haitian earthquake:

    What’s next ‘agw causes agw’ – or do we already have that with the GCM feedback loops?

    Probably time to give up and invest in Gore’s carbon management firm…

  71. I have actually been waiting for someone to link earthquakes to global warming, as impossible a feat as this seemed. Impressive how Pagli snuck that in there.

  72. Egads!! I started losing my hair in the early 80′s and now I’m completely bald. That coincides with AGW. Coincidence?? I don’t think so!! It’s all related, see?? I want my fair share of hair. Who do I sue?

  73. ‘Missing’ Heat May Affect Future Climate Change

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/04/100415141121.htm

    “Current observational tools cannot account for roughly half of the heat that is believed to have built up on Earth in recent years, according to a “Perspectives” article in this week’s issue of Science. Scientists at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) warn in the new study that satellite sensors, ocean floats, and other instruments are inadequate to track this “missing” heat, which may be building up in the deep oceans or elsewhere in the climate system.”

    Hmmmm. Sort opf like dark matter.

  74. The problem with Alarmists focusing too much on isostatic movements of the earth’s crust is that they are bound to dig up evidence of past movements related to the MWP.

    The ice had receded so much in Greenland, when the Vikings were there, that the land was rising. When the Little Ice Age brought the glaciers grinding back down Greenland’s valleys, the land settled again.

    In the late 1700′s a Swedish scientist poking around the Viking settlements in Greenland noted that the places where the Vikings had docked their boats were under water, which showed the land was sinking. (This was notable to a Swede, for back in Sweden the coasts were rising.)

    This shows that isostatic movements can be quite local, though they have effects to the sides: As central Greenland is repressed the southern tip rises, and vice versa. (And also as Scotland rises southern England sinks.)

    Some really fascinating studies on isostatic geological movements have been done by Scandinavians, as it effects their landscapes in a striking manner. I think such research has been underfunded, because it is politically incorrect, for it fails to support the concept of rising seas caused by global warming.

    Perhaps now they will get more funding. All they need to do is to work the possibility of volcanoes blowing up due to shrinking icecaps into the final paragraph, to please Alarmists with deep pockets.

    However in the long run the evidence they uncover will show the MWP was warmer, and the earth did not blow up or drown in hot lava.

    Truth always wins in the end, though sometimes the waiting is hard.

  75. Tim Clark (08:19:17) :
    Anthony, the link to Scientific American gives a:
    Error–Page not Found
    You may have received this page for the following reasons:
    The page requested has been moved.
    The page has been taken off the site.
    The page address was typed in incorrectly.

    Anthony/Mods
    I’m serious here.
    I can’t find this article anywhere in Scientific American back to Jan 2010, and nowhere on the Reuters site as well. I think it’s a hoax, and they found out and removed it.

    [Reply: Anthony notified. ~dbs]

  76. Saddam Hussein did have a weapon of mass distruction after all. It was oil and Britain and northwestern Europe are evidently suffering from the effects of all the Iraqi oil consumed since the Second Gulf War! Fortunately for the United States the direction of the prevailing winds mean that it is likely to escape.

  77. It is known that particular parts of the world, such as Tohoku in Japan, will have an extremely cool summer after a very big eruption (according to Dr. Junsei Kondo, Prof. Emeritus, Tohoku Unviersity). This causes, for instance, a poor crop of rice there.

    We should prepare against it if the present eruption is really a big one.

  78. Just because something CAN happen DOESN’T mean that it will happen!

    I guess it’s a lesson that the alarmists need to really learn. Just because all the ice in the world can melt doesn’t mean that it will all melt.

    Most of the stories of alarmism seem to think that just because something can or could happen doesn’t mean that it will but the way the stories are written they make it like just because it can it will happen!!! They seem to forget about something known as Nature that has some minor itisy bitsy wee little say in the matter.

  79. To the alarmist CAN HAPPEN = WILL HAPPEN AND WE’RE TO BLAME.

    To the actual scientist CAN HAPPEN = what’s the probability of it happening? what scenarios are there? How likely are they? What’s the Null Hypothesis? …

  80. Rob (07:53:39) :

    Is there anything Global Warming can’t do?
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    It can’t make my colors brighter or my whites whiter !!!

  81. gcb (08:39:16) :

    Problem solved then! The volcanoes will release lots of aerosols, which will reflect sunlight, and the Earth will cool back down, right?
    Right!, but make the simple exercise of thinking how many suv exhausts would equal the exhaust of this volcano, it it evident that all, all the green policies are a scam. The many years of green policies, enforced by european countries, spoiled by a single burp from a “politically biased” volcano and all the clean air so hardly gotten goes to the sink, not forgetting all the jobs losses that these so smart green policies have caused and all the broken economies,the empires destroyed (like UK’s), etc.etc
    WARNING: FORBIDDEN TO CONTAMINATE MORE THAN A VOLCANO

  82. When you have banks like Morgan-Stanely, Sachs, and Chase wanting to make money from selling carbon credits, it’s almost a sure thing that the environmentalists are going to win.

  83. Just you wait until all the volcanoes under the Antarctic ice are uncapped!
    That should give us a global winter to allow the ice to build up again.
    See, negative feedback when volcanoes are uncapped by melting ice.
    We’ve been promised a severe northern hemisphere winter already.
    /sarc

  84. You know, if a volcano blows it’s top while a glacier is sitting on top, you get a nasty mud slide (St Helens anyone?). It’s only a matter of time before such a mudslide decimates Seattle (Rainier anyone?)-let’s hope AGW melts the glaciers on the most glaciated peak in the lower 48 in time!

  85. Paul Daniel Ash (08:58:41) :
    The end of the Ice Age 10,000 years ago coincided with a surge in volcanic activity in Iceland, apparently because huge ice caps thinned and the land rose

    Is this false? If so, why?

    I mean, fine if you’re content with “wow, that seems really unlikely, so it can’t possibly be true,” but you have to admit it’s not a particularly strong counter-argument…

    And that’s not a particularly well thought out response.

    Volcanism causes global cooling by the emmission of reflective ash and aerosols, sulphur compounds in particular.
    Explain how would that end an ice age?

    Definition coincide: to happen at or around the same time

    Geologically speaking, what exactly is around the same time? Perhaps the volcanoes blasted off and precipitated the ice age.

    Think about it.

  86. Those post modern-normal-new age-geologists need to relax, to take a deep, very deep breath of hydrogen cyanide, and only then, opine about science issues. This is a perfect recipe: they won’t worry anymore, they will inmediately begin seein opening under their feet that beautiful “gate to hell” depicted above: Their promised land of oblivion, where they will find all the warm they were preaching and longing for.

  87. When an ice cap disappears the solid Earth deforms in response to these load changes, as observed e.g. at Glacier Bay, Alaska [Larsen et al., 2005] and at the Vatnajökull ice cap, Iceland [Pagli et al., 2007], where mass balance measurements indicate concentrated thinning at the edges of the ice cap and a total volume of ice loss of ~435 km3 in 1890–2003 [see Pagli et al., 2007, and references therein]. GPS measurements of glacio-isostatic deformation in the area have been used in the past to evaluate the underlying Earth structure [Pagli et al., 2007a]. An axisymmetric finite element Earth model with an elastic plate over an isotropic, incompressible Maxwell viscoelastic half-space with Vatnajökull modeled as a circular ice cap explains the observations well [Pagli et al., 2007]. The ice retreat history assumes isostatic equilibrium in 1890 and gradual thinning of the ice cap between 1890 and 2003. A viscosity of 8 × 1018 Pa s, assuming an elastic plate thickness of 10 km, gives a best fit to the data. Using this model, the stress tensor due to glacio-isostasy at Vatnajökull for example can be calculated. The tensor is taken as positive in tension and the pressure, P, is obtained as the mean of the normal stresses (see Pagil et al. 2008 for more information).

    Does anyone on here not believe in isostatic rebound? Because places like the great lakes and Hudson bay are still rising in response to removal of the ice from the last ice age.

    The article did not state that global warming caused the recent eruption. The article is actually not well-written, and it’s unfortunate that the media tends to do a poor job communicating science. The media probably wanted a story, that’s all and there’s nothing more to make of it except that.

  88. “Our work suggests that eventually there will be either somewhat larger eruptions or more frequent eruptions in Iceland in coming decades,”

    So can they let us know what happened regarding Icelandic eruptions during the Roman Warm Period and the Medieval Warm Period?

  89. John Egan (07:58:47): Does global warming cause male pattern baldness?

    Yes it does and I have the “hole in the ozone layer”-like thin patch on my head to prove it! There is no other possible explanation. I haven’t looked into any, but I’m reasonably sure that my robust method of possibility nullifications might be the key to a future type of research that may be useful to potentially come up with possibilities to link AGW to all sorts of possible human health and appearance concerns. There is consensus among all of us who do this research, so we know it’s correct. Me myself and I have reviewed each other’s work and concur.
    I’m not sure if I feel like an official post modern scientist after spewing all that gobbledeegook or if I just feel dirty. Perhaps some grant money and more research are needed…

  90. gcb (08:39:16) :
    “Problem solved then! The volcanoes will release lots of aerosols, which will reflect sunlight, and the Earth will cool back down, right?”

    – Also known as a function of (The Willis Equilibrium)?

  91. Dennis Hand:

    I like your perspective. Greenland warming seems confined to the extreme south at sea level. Iceland is something like 250 km from Greenland at the closest. The magma feeding Iceland’s existence has been doing so for millennia and is associated with the Mid-Atlantic Rift. Seismicity in Greenland must be related, but if the cause of Iceland’s eruptions were warming southern Greenland now, why hasn’t it succeeded in melting the Greenland ice over the past 2,000 years? And why at sea level?

    It’s worth noting there is some uplift going on in Greenland, east Greenland I think. It’s probably not any more dramatic than the uplift in southern Finland which has been going on forever. Greenlandic lifting is also probably one of those things that has only been noticed relatively recently.

  92. Oh, spare me, it’s probably too late in the thread to post this, but…

    We sailed up the coast of Cape York in 1991 and the results of Mt Pinatubo in the sky were spectacular sunsets, lots of porphry in the water, interesting colours in the water at night.

    When we returned home 2,500km south, our local beach was covered with porphyry from the Pinatubo eruption, which we still have as a nice Japanese-style rock garden.

    In 2006 we were sailing in islands north of Fiji and passed through an amazing huge floating field of porphyry which we later heard was an underwater eruption that resulted in a new island just where we hade made our passage.

    How good’s that?

    But these things happen in the areas we have named “Vulcania” all the time, and if it happens under water in 5000m, you don’t know until the evidence surfaces.

  93. Tim Clark,

    You have it backwards. The surge in volcanic activity did not end the ice age, but rather the end of the ice age increased volcanic activity (which is further evidence supporting the scientist’s claims).

    The gist of this is that the mass of ice resting on the surface of the earth, unmoving, on Greenland and Antarctica, is not nearly as “light” as people would imagine. It is kilometers thick, covering thousands of square miles, and so has considerable mass.

    It sits on top of the tectonic plates, which in turn float on a layer of magma (molten rock). At any time, at weak points in the crust (volcanoes), the pressure can build up and the magma can escape.

    When a very large volume of the ice melts (such as the glaciers that covered the northern hemisphere during the ice age), for whatever reason, the change in mass resting on the continents can cause very minor shifts in the tectonic plates. This is not nearly enough to directly create a volcano, but certainly enough to shift the balance and cause many more eruptions from existing volcanoes than “usual.”

  94. “He said that melting ice seemed the main way in which climate change[s], blamed mainly on use of fossil fuels.”

    So the ice ages and interglacials, the Minoan, Roman, Medieval and Modern warm periods, and all the cold periods in between are due to the use of fossil fuels?

  95. Al Gore’s Holy Hologram (08:51:55) :
    Never happened in the past, so just a theory that would suit another planet better than ours.

    Meanwhile, Britain is still shut down by hysteria over a poxy amount of ash in the air that is nothing compared to levels of ash we experienced from Japanese and North American eruptions in living memory, such as Mount St Helens.

    Actually, I think this is conjecture or speculation. Maybe science fiction is an apt description as well?

  96. The latest theory about AGW –

    The increase in global warming (and CO2) will cause a measureable decline in the IQ of people in Japan, North America and Europe; the same will not be true in India or China.

    The closer to the source of CO2 production the less the IQ problem and the greater the likelyhood of Cancer, Lung, and Heart Disease.

  97. Peter Miller (08:47:39) :

    “We geologists will divide into two camps on this obviously very important subject.”

    I disagree Peter, we are in three camps, skeptical and practical, government or academic and consultants. Us consultants say, “I think not but I could be wrong, I will be glad to give you proposal.” Lets join forces and maybe we can get some fool to give us an all expense paid trip to Iceland.

  98. What has this got to do with CO2 thinning icecaps leading to angrier volcanoes? Where is the evidence? Pure, speculative drivell from a bunch of rent seeking charlatans.

    “We believe the reduction of ice has not been important in triggering this latest eruption,”

    Then why open your mouths? Funding!

    Hot magma against ice and hot magma wins eventually.

  99. Never get in the enemy’s way while they are in the process of destroying themselves.

    The global warming movements worst enemy is not us “deniers”, it is the true believers among them.

  100. “Our work suggests that eventually there will be either somewhat larger eruptions or more frequent eruptions in Iceland in coming decades,”

    and then…after that…somewhat smaller eruptions or less
    frequent eruptions in Iceland….So says Mafesto!

  101. Caleb:
    …In the late 1700’s a Swedish scientist poking around the Viking settlements in Greenland noted that the places where the Vikings had docked their boats were under water, which showed the land was sinking. (This was notable to a Swede, for back in Sweden the coasts were rising.)…
    —-
    Quite right. Some of the Thule archaeological sites in northern Greenland are now underwater. But so is Roanoke colony in Virginia. Anyway, yes, it is happening, Helsinki is rising and the Kola Peninsula on the White Sea is sinking, Australia is also doing this table-dip thing. Greenland is probably more than a single landmass ringing a bowl-shaped depression filled with ice, it’s probably many small islands and several large with multiple large outlets to ocean at a rebounded, zero-ice state. But for it to have zero ice and rebound, the entire geography would change and it would probably look more like a very large atoll of rocky islands around a shallow sea with some mountains sticking out of it.

  102. “Does anyone on here not believe in isostatic rebound? Because places like the great lakes and Hudson bay are still rising in response to removal of the ice from the last ice age.”

    Yeah, I believe that when mile thick glaciers melt, it affect geology. What is ridiculous is the idea that there are still enough mile thick glaciers around to melt to affect it again. By that I mean mile thick glaciers that survived the Holocene Optimum, which was much warmer than today and lasted thousands of years.

    I don’t get the idea that these glaciers will now melt, when they didn’t before with much greater provocation.

  103. Dark matter is based on observation. A galaxy continues to rotate at the same speed out towards it’s edge as it does just off the central hub. It takes matter to constrain it from flying apart. Observational data supports dark matter/dark energy surrounding spiral galaxies.

    Dark Warming is based on model assumption. The models predicted runaway warming, and it did not happen. It’s a travesty because the observational data does not support dark warming/dark heat surrounding or hidden in Earth.

    So, what do the warmers come up with? Fudged observational data to support the model.
    Take as much budget allocation as you want from NOAA and GISS and give it to a worthy cause: NASA Space. Let NOAA and GISS operate with dark funding.

  104. This may get snipped to being slightly off-topic and completely verboten at WUWT:

    Will the grounding of flights over Europe help debunk the chemtrails nonsense?

  105. Anthony, you might have found the reason why the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere has been rising non-stop… for 35 years!

    Greenpeace will surely now be all over this and try to turn that fire off. It’s fossil fuel burning non-stop in there…

    As for my earlier remark… it might not be Gaia’s belly button if sulfated methane comes out of this hole… ooopppsss!

  106. schnoerkelman (08:33:21) :

    I have floated an hypothesis on some blogs that it is the rate of change from one microclimate to another that precipitates vulcanism and earthquakes.

    The earth’s crust is very thin compared to the earth volume. Two orders of magnitude thinner than an egg shell is to an egg.

    When a cooling occurs, the brittle shell contracts from the plates over the elastic lower mantle, weakening the fault and allowing vulcanism. When warming occurs, the tectonic plate spreads, leading to speeding up of plate movement and increased heat and pressure, also leading to vulcanism and earthquakes, if the plate sticks and pops.

    I see this possibility as an inertial mechanism that buffers changes, by either releasing CO2 and warming the atmosphere slightly, or releasing sulfur and particulates to cool the climate, or both. Since ice ages are 4 to 10 times more common than interglacial periods, I think the earth tends to respond more rapidly to effect cooling than to warming. Cooling appears to be more “runaway” (forced) than warming may be.

    Just another hypothesis. It is unfortunate that the measure of global temperature at present appears to be manipulated, and the past measure of temperature history uncertain. Otherwise we could try to link “crustal inertia” with climate.

  107. Ref – hippie longstocking (09:55:40) :
    “John Egan (07:58:47): Does global warming cause male pattern baldness?”
    Yes it does and I have the “hole in the ozone layer”-like thin patch on my head to prove it! There is no other possible explanation…
    __________________________________
    I hate to be the one to pass this on but the exact opposite is true of women. DO NOT TELL ANYONE ABOUT THE LATEST DISCOVERY IN ANTHROPROGENIC CLIMATOLOGY AND GENETICS BUT GLOBAL COOLING DURING THE LAST GLACIAL PERIOD CAUSED WOMEN TO DEVELOP SEVERE PATTERN BALDING.

    At the beginning of the last glacial period men and women had the same amount of body hair AND muscle mass. There is something in an Ice Age that seems to make women more attractive and men get less so and more hairy.

  108. Some of the Thule archaeological sites in northern Greenland are now underwater. But so is Roanoke colony in Virginia. Anyway, yes, it is happening, Helsinki is rising and the Kola Peninsula on the White Sea is sinking, Australia is also doing this table-dip thing…

    I’m confused. Help a poor layman out here. I’d thought that the submerging shorelines were being caused by rising ocean levels due to global warming (sic) but now I’m told that the earth is falling?

    Or is it the increased weight of the additional water causes the earth to subside?

  109. Related to earthquakes:

    USGS Newsroom
    Is Recent Earthquake Activity Unusual? Scientists Say No.
    Released: 4/14/2010 2:55:24 PM
    source: http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=2439

    “China’s tragic magnitude 6.9 earthquake on April 13 and the recent devastating earthquakes in Haiti, Chile, Mexico, and elsewhere have many wondering if this earthquake activity is unusual.

    “With six major earthquakes striking in the first four months of this year, 2010 is well within the normal range. Furthermore, from April 15, 2009, to April 14, 2010, there have been 18 major earthquakes, a number also well within the expected variation.

    “While the number of earthquakes is within the normal range, this does not diminish the fact that there has been extreme devastation and loss of life in heavily populated areas,” said USGS Associate Coordinator for Earthquake Hazards Dr. Michael Blanpied.

  110. Andrew (09:41:33) : That scenario ocurred in the 1970 earthquake where part of a glaciar broke down and interred the city of Yungay, in the peruvian andes. That earthquake caused 70,000 deaths.

  111. If that’s the *real* Door To Hell, then where’s the Road Paved With Good Intentions?

    *gratuitous straight line provided at no additional charge*

  112. Just say it.. AGW causes everything.. take our money now.. before we sin again.

    ps humm shouldn’t you be burning that evil money instead of living like a King?

  113. Tim Clark (09:43:15) :

    Think about it.

    Good advice, I’d recommend you try it. Your response was not “a particularly well thought out” one.

    Geologically speaking, what exactly is around the same time? Perhaps the volcanoes blasted off and precipitated the ice age.

    10000 years is not relevant to the geologic timescale, which is generally measure in millions, not thousands of years. But no, <a href="http://geoleoedocs.sub.uni-goettingen.de:8080/dspace/bitstream/gledocs-108/1/Andrews%2BGudmundsson.pdf&quot;)vulcanism increased in Iceland after the start of the current interglacial. You could have investigated that yourself with one Google search if you were really interested.

    Volcanism causes global cooling by the emmission of reflective ash and aerosols, sulphur compounds in particular.
    Explain how would that end an ice age?

    The hypothesis is not that the vulcanism ended the ice age. You’ve got it exactly backward, clearly because you haven’t even bothered to read the article.

    If you’d followed the link and read it rather than skimming the edited excerpt above, you’d have seen that Dr. Pagli theorized that the weight of the ice prevented rocks from expanding and turning into liquid magma. “As the ice melts,” she explained, “the rock can melt because the pressure decreases.”

    Of course, you can always try to argue against something you haven’t even read, but it’s hardly persuasive.

  114. It seems to me that increasing ice cover will put more stress on rock over a magma chamber, push the cap rocks into the magma and will also lead to breaking rocks and more eruptions.

    What we really need to do is monitor the pressure in the magma dome and add ice (better, rocks – denser and don’t melt) to keep the magma in place. One would think the increasing pressure might lead to a really big eruptions should the cap be breached, but this article assures us that only reducing pressure leads to bigger eruptions.

  115. sphaerica (10:10:25) :
    Tim Clark,
    You have it backwards. The surge in volcanic activity did not end the ice age, but rather the end of the ice age increased volcanic activity (which is further evidence supporting the scientist’s claims).

    References please. The authors coincide.

  116. Elizabeth (Canada) (09:08:43) “I have actually been waiting for someone to link earthquakes to global warming, as impossible a feat as this seemed. Impressive how Pagli snuck that in there.”

    I haven’t brought ice variables into this study yet, but it’s clear that there is some kind of multivariate coupling at play:

    More details here:

    http://www.sfu.ca/~plv/VolcanoStratosphereSLAM.htm

    The coupling could be a very big deal as the coupling direction appears to vary by timescale (which means this is going to be a serious pile of work to sort out – i.e. the usual assumptions thrown into conventional decompositions might be a joke inviting hearty laughter).

  117. John from CA (10:39:25) :

    Related to earthquakes:

    USGS Newsroom
    Is Recent Earthquake Activity Unusual? Scientists Say No
    So rest assure that the next ones: The Big One (wich will specifically affect a known prophet’s property) and the New Madrid (*), are within POST NORMAL STATISTICS (Ya know: That LEVY WALK thing).
    (*)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1812_New_Madrid_earthquake

  118. I am sceptical of global warming causing volcanic eruptions and earthquakes. However what is certain is that geothermal development is causing earthquakes.

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=geothermal-drilling-earthquakes

    The recent earthquake in California was preceded by foreshocks whose epicenter was at the Cerro Prieto geothermal field in Mexico, the worlds largest.
    An article published by the Seismological Society of America pointed to evidence of earthquakes being generated by the geothermal plant.

    http://bssa.geoscienceworld.org/cgi/content/abstract/86/1A/93

    I have tried to bring this to the attention of California newspapers with no luck.

  119. If I understand the logic here, the current ice caps are pushing down ground. But doesn’t this mean that the ground is rising/bulgingsomewhere else? Thus causing problems somewhere. Then when the ice melts the trouble is under the old ice and the bulge problem somewhere is reduced. The AGW people truly can have it both ways. My apologies to the English enforcer and anyone who is rational.

  120. Since any measurable variable that increases or decreases across time is due to CO2 emissions, then we must conclude that CO2 emissions are causing an increase in human population. The following two graphs illustrate this disturbing trend:

  121. A long time ago I enjoyed scientific american. I have since cancelled my subscription due to their rigid adherence to AGW orthodoxy. I am sorry I clicked on their link and gave them site traffic.

    Tim

  122. Paul Daniel Ash,

    ” Dr. Pagli theorized that the weight of the ice prevented rocks from expanding and turning into liquid magma. “As the ice melts,” she explained, “the rock can melt because the pressure decreases.”

    The earth’s crust is on average 100km thick. Given that the density of rock is 2.5 times that of ice, the 100km of rock is equivalent in pressure to 250km of ice. That seems like a lot of pressure already. How much difference will another kilometer of ice make?

    Colour me sceptical on that one.

  123. Tim Clark (10:48:19) :

    References please. The authors “said” coincide.

    The Reuters reported wrote “coincide,” but if you would stir yourself to do the tiniest bit of reading before opining, you’d have seen that the researchers were noting increased volcanic activity at the start of the Holocene interglacial, not before it.

    The “reference” you request is at the top of this page: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=ice-cap-thaw-iceland-volcanoes

  124. melting ice caused the volcanoe……hmmmm….oceans cover most of the earth and there a lots of undersea volcanoes….has to be true….

    /sarc off….

    repeat after me….we believe in AGW….we believe… ok enough….

  125. Tim Clark (09:43:15) :
    Think about it.

    Paul Daniel Ash (10:44:56) :
    Good advice, I’d recommend you try it. Your response was not “a particularly well thought out” one.
    10000 years is not relevant to the geologic timescale, which is generally measure in millions, not thousands of years. But no, <a href="http://geoleoedocs.sub.uni-goettingen.de:8080/dspace/bitstream/gledocs-108/1/Andrews%2BGudmundsson.pdf&quot;)vulcanism increased in Iceland after the start of the current interglacial. You could have investigated that yourself with one Google search if you were really interested.
    The hypothesis is not that the vulcanism ended the ice age. You’ve got it exactly backward, clearly because you haven’t even bothered to read the article.
    If you’d followed the link and read it rather than skimming the edited excerpt above, you’d have seen that Dr. Pagli theorized that the weight of the ice prevented rocks from expanding and turning into liquid magma. “As the ice melts,” she explained, “the rock can melt because the pressure decreases.”
    Of course, you can always try to argue against something

    Let me interpret my initial post.

    I was lamenting the weasel term coincide. I was using the pre/post volcanism coment sarcastically. I was not postulating a novel ending for the ice-age, that, by my interpretation of available data, is orbital variations; nor was I suggesting that geologic time was not long.

    That being said, thank you for the reference. It bolsters my point concerning the coincidence of the end of the ice-age and it’s effect on the onset of volcanism: from your reference-

    Abstract: Holocene shield volcanoes (lava shields) are common in Iceland, but they are restricted in space and time. As regards space, most of the shield volcanoes in Iceland occur within two bands in the West and North Volcanic Zones. There are no shields in the East Volcanic Zone apart from the island of Surtsey. The shields are mostly at the margins of or outside the volcanic systems. As regards time, many Holocene shield volcanoes formed some 5000–10000 years ago during early postglacial time. Apart from the shield on top of the island of Surtsey, there are no known shields in Iceland younger than about 3500B.P….

    Yesirree.. they got that baby nailed down.

  126. Vincent (11:09:30) :
    How much difference will another kilometer of ice make?

    Colour me sceptical on that one.

    Good! Being skeptical would necessitate that you investigate claims, rather than blindly accepting or rejecting them.

    The researchers actually address your question right at the beginning of their 2008 paper (http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~earcpa/2008GL033510.pdf):

    We calculate the rate of change of pressure decrease in the mantle due to the present thinning of Vatnajo ̈kull (Figure 3a). The largest rate of pressure decrease is 1700 Pa/yr beneath the ice cap. It is an order of magnitude smaller than the inferred pressure decrease during the deglaciation of Iceland at the Pleistocene-Holocene boundary, that was up to 19000 Pa/yr [Jull and McKenzie, 1996]. A pressure change of 1700 Pa in the mantle corresponds to pressure change due to removal of 17 cm of water, or removal of about 5 cm of rock. The influence of present ice thinning produces therefore decompression equivalent to material upwelling of up to 5 cm/yr.

    1 Pascal = 1 newton per meter squared (a newton is the amount of force required to accelerate a kilogram one meter per second per second)

    They agree with your assessment of the pressure exerted by rock as being about 2.5x (17/5) that of ice, but your guess of the thickness of the Earth’s crust is off. Continental crust is mostly 35 to 40 km. The researchers note that “crustal thickness in Iceland varies from 15 to 46 km.” For this study, they “use an average thickness of the crust of 25 km.”

  127. Paul Daniel Ash (11:15:02),

    Scientific American is not a credible reference, as shown by the article Anthony posted.

    And google returns 320,000 hits for “holocene optimim”, vs 12,800 for your “holocene interglacial.”

    George Orwell would see what you’re doing there. It’s the same sinister ploy used by people who refer to the MWP as the “medieval anomaly.”

  128. Carolina Pagli, a geophysicist at the University of Leeds in England, said there were risks that climate change could also trigger volcanic eruptions or earthquakes in places such as Mount Erebus in Antarctica, the Aleutian islands of Alaska or Patagonia in South America

    She appears to be out of her mind. To give her benefit of my doubt, has she conducted an experiment to test this? These creepy claims are so outrageous, a rational mind has no choice but to be skeptical.

    Jerry Ravetz for some crazy reason said it was our duty to go with hypothesis #2 or our duty to disprove it.

  129. Do you realize that Global Warming has been causing the New York Yankees to win the World Series? The correlation between increases in temperature and increases in their wins is almost 1.00 for those with a scientific frame of mind. As proof, just check their record for the last thousand years and it has been relatively flat. But starting in the 1920′s, about the time the internal combustion engine became popular, the percentage of times they’ve won the WS has sky-rocketed. If plotted it even looks like a hockey stick. Why in only a few years unless something drastic is done, they will be winning it more than twice a year! As a Mets fan I find this intolerable. Where is the IPCC when we need it? Or more importantly, where can I file for a grant to look into this phenomena more closely.

  130. Oooh… this looks like a fun game! Can I play too? Ok….earthquakes are caused by plates shifting which are caused by the earth shrinking which is caused by the earth cooling, but CO2 slows down the cooling so hence less earthquakes which means AGW is good, right?

  131. Melting glaciers have nothig to do with increased volcanic activity. If weight was removed from above volcanoes, then certainly, weight additions from lava deposits would have the reverse effect and seal off the volcanoes, wouldn’t they? Since the latter does not happen, how do these geniuses conclude that melting glaciers increase volcanic activity?

    When Mt. St. Helens blew, it tossed a fifth of a cubic mile of Earth out of its way like balsa wood in a cyclone. Do you really think a few dozen or even hundreds of feet of ice are going to hold back a volcanic eruption?

    Where do these guys get this stuff? What are they smoking?

  132. I would like an explanation from these Rooters how 2000 degree lava gives a rat’s fart(methane) about 32 degree ice covering it. As a side dish, the lava forces and melts it’s way through miles of earth to get to the surface, regardless what it weighs.

    The stupidity of the lame stream media is on full display in one article. Why didn’t they ask someone who knows AGW is a hoax.

  133. Tim Clark,

    First, a minor apology, I mixed memories of some previous studies (which involved changes in ice mass on land and water mass in the ocean, thus affecting tectonic plates) with this one (which appears to have more to do with actual ice caps on volcanoes, although I hesitate to believe anything these days until I’ve seen the original scientific paper, because the journalists are rather pathetic at getting these things even close to right).

    But, to your point… you are reading too much into the word “coincide.” The exact quote from the article, included in the WUWT post above, says (emphasis mine):

    The end of the Ice Age 10,000 years ago coincided with a surge in volcanic activity in Iceland, apparently because huge ice caps thinned and the land rose.

    Note the use of the phrase “because huge ice caps thinned,” as in the ice age ended, so the ice caps thinned, so there was a surge in volcanic activity.

  134. “They said there was no sign that the current eruption from below the Eyjafjallajokull – was linked to global warming.”

    Well of course not.

    These people are the weakest link.

  135. Smokey (11:32:03) :
    Scientific American is not a credible reference

    Tim asked for a reference on what the authors of the study said. I gave him the reference that Anthony provided right up at the top of the page, which was a Scientific American reprint of a Reuters wire story. Reading is fundamental, Smokey. You should try it sometime.

    google returns 320,000 hits for “holocene optimim”, vs 12,800 for your “holocene interglacial.”

    “My” Holocene interglacial? Wait… are you actually questioning that we’re in an interglacial period now? This should be interesting… what’s your evidence of that, Smokey?

  136. Magma and pressure can blow the top of a mountain (seriously close to where I was working at the time) clean off. That takes a lot of muscle. That last bit of snow and ice on the top, even if it had been much thicker, was a cotton ball compared to the amount of boulders, rocks, dirt, and debris that got blown off.

    Have we lowered the Ph.D. bar that much?

  137. Volcanoes cool the earth, so it seems that if there were more volcanoes, then we would have more ice. and the problem would be solved.

  138. So, Hernando’s (IIRC) joke on another thread came out true word by word. I’m aaah flabbergasted .

    Just for keeps, here’s a link supporting to No Scientist from another thread: here.

    This is too creative [banging head on table].

  139. The Most Casual Observer (11:43:44)
    Not my point. I was speculating with a testable hypothesis.

    Earth has many buffer systems, deep ocean heat sinks being a major player, and my hypothesis is just another of many moderating effects on the globe. CO2 is a very weak GHG compared to water, but one of many other very interesting modulators of drastic change. That is why AGW can never work, because the earth has many mechanisms to prevent warming. Cooling, on the other hand, appears to be the real monster in the closet, because its onset is sharp and accelerating, as witnessed by the fact that the last 100 million years or so have had a preponderance of glaciation. For you, observer, I can simplify it down to warm -good, cold-bad, but earth has other tricks to use to keep us in a decent range, at least in the last 10,000 years or so. CO2 cannot be a major player, IMHO.

  140. Pascvaks (08:17:46) :

    “There’s no crying in Science!*
    There’s NO CRYING IN SCIENCE!*

    “What is happening to the world’s scientific population? It can’t be genetically modified food additives, hormone injections, or smog, it’s much too specific to PhD’s. Where do these people come from?”
    [...]
    “* Unless you’re a Chemist. Then it’s OK, sometimes.”

    Oh, I see. I was a biochemist myself, you have my simpathy. As anyone knows, all biochemists are a bit far out, if that’s the term, but I wouldn’t possibly think of something like these guys said. It seems that geologists are getting weirder than theoretical physicists.

  141. There’s a big ball (kind’a) of nickle/iron in the middle of the world, right? And there’s this constant change in the wobble and tilt of the world, right? And sometimes it’s warm for about 14K years and sometimes it’s cold for about 86K years, right? So… it must be that the wobble/shift of the big, old nickle/iron ball has started to push some hot lava out of the vents and we’re getting all this “stuff” in the air and things are going to start changing, like they always do, right? Now I know this is very technical and over the heads of most folks who believe in AGW but, as you like to believe in idiots like fat Albert, believe in me for a minute. OK? And if you want to donate to my favorite charity….(snip)

  142. Unbelievable how backwards some AGW believers are becoming. They simply can not see straight by ounce again putting the cart in front of the horse…

    Seems to me that Earth’s direct contribution to climate is presently underestimated as our planets geothermal dynamics are vaguely known. If the case, variability in surface crust temperature will play a role in the release of GHG’s especially from the Ocean’s depth and permafrost regions. There is an enormous amount of unmonitored underwater volcanic activity aside from the continental fire belts we know off.

    Climate does not produce volcanoes it’s more likely the other way around…

  143. A flagrant abuse of the science switching cause and effect to make a case!
    Which seems to be the standard method to make the AGW claim.

    Quite boring isn’t it?

  144. Richard Lynch (12:07:48) :

    By that line of reasoning, the Earth is well on it’s way to a big cooldown.
    Now, if we can only cure Al Gore Warming fever.
    2012 approaches, and it’s not the Earth that is ending, it’s the sanity of our leadership.

    Pam: Here’s the bar for PhD: Just get out your loudspeaker and proclaim something that Global Warming causes, and you’ll be instantly knighted.

  145. Reuters should change their name to Rooters.

    Why haven’t they found the link to earthquakes yet, or did I miss that?

    One thing that AGW definitely has caused is the meltdown of too much scientific integrity, a flood of nonsensical propaganda, a dramatically rising levels of wasted money, and the migration of many cash-sensitive ‘species’ onto this bandwagon.

  146. Dennis Hand (08:04:21) :
    It occurred to me this morning, as I read this and other articles about the eruptions in Iceland, that no has given thought to the idea that maybe what is happening in the North Atlantic is a shift in magma in the area which is resulting in a localized warming of the land in Iceland, Greenland…. and that is what is causing the melting of the glaciers. This is just speculation on my part. I am far from a scientist and definitely not a climatologist or geologist, but I do read and think about what the implications are beyond just the surface information.

    One of you, who is more skilled in this area, may want to do some research on this topic.
    ——–
    REPLY: Dennis, you show good scientific insight! WUWT discussed this a while back:

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/06/25/surprise-explosive-volcanic-eruption-under-the-arctic-ice-found/

    Who knows?? I am sure that the AGW community far underestimated the negative feedback effects of volcanism in their models.

    This puppy in Iceland may continue to belch ash for years, which may either (a) reduce global temperatures by increasing the Earth’s albedo and creating sulfur dioxide aerosols, or (b) increase polar ice cap melting if the darker ash settles onto the ice.

    Anybody’s guess at this point, I’m willing to bet that we have a nice period of cooling to go along with our ongoing solar minimum.

  147. M White (11:59:03) :
    It’s all happened before

    However not everything: “The prophet of evil” just once every two millenia and a half, every platonic month, the beast reiincarnates….☺

  148. Back a long time ago when I was young and stupid (instead of being old and foolish!), I used to read the Scientific American. But as I got older I found more and more liberal talking points disguised as “science”.

    If I want liberal talking points, I can get bumper stickers for free at the Democrat Party HQ. The rest of the magazine, I found that I could not trust. Like the National Geographic.

    I no longer waste my money on either.

    Regards,

    Steamboat Jack

  149. And volcanic particulates and sulphur dioxide, etc. will circulate the globe reducing temperatures in a natural self-moderating process. I find it interesting that AGW alarmists seem to predicate their dire predictions on the demonstrably silly assumption that we won’t ever see another Pinatubo, Mt. St. Helens or similar event that would tend to mute any AGW greenhouse effect. Now, by claiming that AGW may actually cause such events, it seems that they are admitting that there are feedback processes that tend to undermine their own conclusions.

  150. Yeah, yeah, yeah…

    Why are these guys given honor and “degrees”?

    The “standard geologists” for years waved their hands and talked about the “continents” sinking because of accumulation of sediments, and this causing the formation of “sedimentary basins”.

    PURE UTTER RUBBISH! Eventually satellite’s showed the actual MOVEMENT of the continents…and plate techtonics and continental drift was ESTABLISHED AS FACT.

    As far as “sediment” causing the land to SINK…RUBBISH! What’s the DENISTY of basalt versus “sedimentary rock”? 2:1? SO sedimentary basins sank, and some “magic” process, uplifted the BASALT mountains (don’t take this for GRANITE, look it up).

    SO LIKEWISE a MINOR coating of ICE is going to “push down” the basalt that forms ICELAND? Again, RUBBISH.

    Now if these clowns had said 9 months ago, “There is a lot of activity in certain plate planes and joints, and there will be a major eruption in the spring of 2010, I’d be impressed.

    This did not happen.

    Max

  151. I am not surprised. in an AGW mind, if a bit of CO2 ( say a couple of hundred PPM ) could be so deadly, why a not couple hundred feet of ICE make a volcano happen?

  152. “Our work suggests…”

    For “work” read “modelling, adjusting, conspiring, cherry-picking, fudging, transposing, hiding, smoothing, extrapolating, exaggerating, manipulating, destroying, inventing.”

    Did I leave anything out?

  153. Oh, I see, that was hypothesizing under the influence of CO2.

    ——————-
    Pamela Gray (12:06:42) :

    “Have we lowered the Ph.D. bar that much?”

    Hm, hm. Soon they’ll be doing them on the web, with downloaded models.

  154. Ok in all seriousness, is there anything that can happen on planet Earth that these fanatics won’t claim is related to global warming? I mean anything?

  155. My God! I’m not sure what to think about this. Is this just a desperate attempt to scare ‘our leaders’ into action? Is it just fishing for research funding? Or both?

    Are our institutions of higher learning now completely staffed by those educated in the politically correct era? You have to wonder, because a complete lack of understanding of basic principles is the only way this kind on nonsense sees the light of day. Or is it drugs? (prescription, illegal or otherwise)

    At this point, I have to wonder if part of the intent of the the proponents of the AGW theory is to completely destroy the credibility of all scientific endeavors.

  156. OK: Tectonics 101.

    Iceland is an above sea level manifestation of the Mid Atlantic Ridge. The ridge is of course an active constructive margin (It is actually the principle prime-mover of continental drift at this point in time). Upwelling of hotter (ie less dense) magma along the ridge is pushing the Eurasian plate and North American plate in opposite directions at about the speed that human nails grow. The Eurasian plate heads east, the North American plate heads west.

    So Iceland has about 200 metres of ice lying in a glacier across this active margin. Assuming plastic deformation, then this ice behaves like a fluid and exerts a hydrostatic head of pressure on the rock beneath. In other parts of the world, in the past, Glacial ice has exerted sufficient pressure to warp the crust. There is ample evidence all over Northern Europe of isostatic rebound in the Baltic, Scottish Highlands and probably North America. The ice mass required for crustal warping is in Kilometers rather than metres of depth.

    However, in this case, the insignificant weight and pressure of the ice is no where near enough to reduce, mitigate or hold back the massive pressure of the upwelling magma – which is sufficient to drive two massive continental plates in opposite directions.

    A simple test: If The Atlantic ridge can operate and create new crust at depths of 3000 metres of water, how can 200 metres of ice stop magma at the surface of the planet?

    Iceland has had a period of relative quiescence over the 20th century. Could be that quiet phase is becoming less so. (But predictions are difficult – especially about the future)

    This is just so silly it is barking mad and frankly it is a good example of the magical thinking prevalent in post modern science and education.

    The person suggesting this could either be a Fool (magical thinking) or a Knave (hunting for more research grants).

    I could understand the latter since Iceland is technically bankrupt.

    But what really sucks is that a supposedly educated scientist fais to grasp that a globally significant eurptive continental margin cannot be stopped by any known human agent or started by human agency in the form of melting ice.

    If it is melting, I should imagine that the very high geothermal gradient and proximity to magma at 1300 deg C might, just might, have something to do with it.

    And yes, right at the top of this thread, someone suggested a link between global warming and male pattern baldness. This is correct. My MPB commenced about the time that Hansen triggered global warming. It also causes male pattern waist thickening (beer is not believed to be a sufficient forcing agent at this time).

  157. Sooooo; as long as the world’s oceans keep rising cos of all that nasty melted ice, the increased weight on the sea floor ridges and thermal vents (where 70% of the world active vocanoes live & breathe) should basically shut down 70% of the largest single contribution of non-AGW CO2

    Wot’s the problem?

    Gaia has struck, we’re back on track for cross country skiing in Florida and Saint Paul of the 70′s global cooling gig has been vindicated and might now get a richly deserved Nobel gong too

  158. I am all in favour of believing that volcanic eruption can be related to Global Warming.

    It seems to me this can be just one more internal mechanism the planet has to manage the climate. This eruption may very well cause a cooling effect.

    Another reason we don’t need to worry about tipping points, if they exist. There may be untold ways that they can be un-tipped.

    We really haven’t a clue. I just think after 3 or 4 billion years, the balance and equilibrium (such as it exists, see Lindzen) has a lot more systems worked out than we understand.

  159. I think that the weight of the B.S. being piled on by the AGW proponents more than makes up for the loss of ice weight, so there is no way that volcanoes are going to erupt more frequently, if fact they will likely erupt less frequently, and the earth will be more fertile as well from all the fresh excrement.

  160. Paul Daniel Ash might be right saying there is some correlation between melting glacier and volcano activity, but I guess this is not the main problem.

    The main issue here is whether the AGW is the one that is responsible to make such a great impact on volcano activity.

    As we have always been arguing, the global temperature was DECREASING for at least 10 years, so these supposedly glacier melting of Iceland don’t even seems to fit the trend of global temperature, regardless whether this trend is cause by human or not. Moreover since the temperature never really fit the trend of carbon dioxide emitted, as the world was quite warm in the medieval period (as we have always been arguing) while there is nearly no industrial activity that emitted carbon dioxide (beside straw burning), it made the case that we human somehow can cause all these volcano eruption absurd.

    Also, although I am not a expert in volcano, yet in the paper Ash shown us seems to only contain data that show correlation between the pressure of volcano and the amount of glacier ice, it makes us wonder that is the real causation pattern. Perhaps it is the volcanic pressure that cause the melting of ice! If one look closely at the paper you can also see the devil in the detail, as they claim
    “The processes described here have broad relevance as global
    warming causes extensive world-wide ice retreat. Modification
    of mantle melting by ice retreat requires relative large
    ice caps whereas important changes in crustal stresses due
    to ice retreat may be more widespread at ice-capped
    stratovolcanoes. Areas affected may be locations such as
    Mount Erebus, Antarctica, the Aleutian Islands volcanoes,
    Alaska and the volcanic zone of southern Patagonia.”

    And as we now all know the ice cap have been regenerated in Arctic location, and relatively unchanged in Antarctica, the paper still assume the glacier in following area are shrinking, proving their paper consist some error that need to be noticed.

  161. Jon Jewett (12:47:33) :

    Back a long time ago when I was young and stupid (instead of being old and foolish!), I used to read the Scientific American. But as I got older I found more and more liberal talking points disguised as “science”.

    ———-

    That became most obvious when they launched their tirade against Bjorn Lomborg’s book ‘The Skeptical Environmentalist.’

    As for National Geographic… LOL. Nice photos though.

  162. If, as these guys say, the release of the weight of ice will increase volcanic activity why isn’t Scotland Scandinavia bubbling with volcanos since the end of the last ice age?

  163. Paul Daniel Ash (11:27:20) :

    Thanks again for the link, seriously. It was an interesting topic to explore on a Friday. Be informed, I consider 90%+ of the conclusions drawn from otherwise reliable empirical data (not just AGW conspired) to be tunnel-vision garbage. But that aside here are some assumptions involved in that paper:

    The ice retreat history assumes isostatic equilibrium in 1890 and
    gradual thinning of the ice cap between 1890 and 2003.

    We must believe that the ice only began melting in 1890. umm…

    Allen et al. [2002] indicate that crustal thickness in Iceland varies from 15 to 46 km. We use an average thickness of the crust of 25 km.

    Good compromise.

    We also assume that the melting is restricted to the area underneath the Vatnajo¨kull ice cap, where ice thinning influences the melting regime.
    2007b], when 0.45 km of magma erupted.

    Sounds good, continuing:

    Based on the variation of eruptive activity and lava composition after deglaciation, the vertical ascent velocity of melt in Iceland is inferred to
    be >50 m/yr, without a well defined upper limit [Maclennan
    et al., 2002].

    Which is in line with the eruptive activity of 5,000 – 10,000yr post-ice age from your earlier citation ( 25 km / 50m/yr = 5,000y).

    Coupled with:

    Our inferred melting rate due to present day glacial thinning is over 2 orders of magnitude smaller than the inferred melt production rate during deglaciation [Jull and McKenzie, 1996], that was about 3.5 km3/yr over an unloading interval of 1 kyr.

    Don’t know where the 1ky comes from because the previous paper you referenced estimated that volcanism started 5-10 kyr after initiation of ice melt. Regardless, they actually admit that we can expect volcanism solely from the current ice melt rate to began approximately 5,000yrs (lower end of 5,000 – 10,000 estimate) X 100 (2 orders of magnitude) = 50 kyr.

    Now that’s a time frame that scares me to death. Oh there’s some uncertainty involved:

    This estimate is, however, uncertain as a large part of eruptive products
    accumulate sub-glacially, and volumes of sub-aerially deposited tephra are not well known.

    And lastly:

    Glacio-isostasy may thus have facilitated or triggered the anomalous sequence of reverse faulting earth-quakes from 1974 to 1996 at Ba´rdarbunga, although a prior event at the volcano is likely to be the original source of a compressive stress field.

    Hmmm… So this proposed effect only functions where there is already volcanic activity at the location. Well, how much effect does this mechanism have?

    In order to generate 30 km thick crust over the 300-km north-south length of Iceland spreading at 1.9 cm/year, a magma generation of 0.17 km3/yr is required. Thus our inferred magma volume increase of
    0.014 km3/yr corresponds to 10% increase in magma production.

    Which is in line with my previous calculations indicating this effect contributing to volcanism in the year 52,010 A. D. Wake me up when it happens.

    Oh but there’s more:

    In any case, our model indicates that a significant volume of additional magma, as high as 1.4 km3, could be produced every century under
    Vatnajo¨kull due to present day glacial retreat, suggesting that increased volcanic activity may be expected in the future.

    So, to sum up;

    1. volcanism exists already in Iceland regardless of surface features.

    2. we can expect increased volcanism in the future,

    3. our estimated effect adds 10% of activity.

  164. As the old saying goes, “when you have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail”.

    Every time one of these clowns comes up with this kind of nonsense, they just make real science look bad.

  165. There is a giant ice cap on Iceland? Realy? From Wikipedia

    The interior mainly consists of a plateau characterised by sand fields, mountains and glaciers, while many glacial rivers flow to the sea through the lowlands. Iceland is warmed by the Gulf Stream and has a temperate climate despite its high latitude just outside the Arctic Circle.

    Doesn’t sound like an ice cap to me!

  166. And then you have this level of “reporting” from the talking heads at CNN

    SANCHEZ: I was just asking Chad, how can you get a volcano in Iceland? [Myers laughs]. Isn’t it too- when you think of a volcano, you think of Hawaii and long words like that. You don’t think of Iceland.

    MYERS: Right.

    SANCHEZ: You think it’s too cold to have a volcano there. But no! There it is.

  167. Thanks to Mike Core (13:34:53) for a nice splash of ice-water-in-the-face reality (“Tectonics 101″):

    . . . A simple test: If The Atlantic ridge can operate and create new crust at depths of 3000 metres of water, how can 200 metres of ice stop magma at the surface of the planet?

    Even a layman can tell that this Freysteinn Sigmundsson is engaging in sheer, unbridled speculation. Nothing wrong with speculation, surely, but let’s not dignify it with label ‘hypothesis’.

    But there is a real scientific discovery in this thread. It strikes me as wonderfully important, so here’s the comment in full:

    pgosselin (08:12:10) :
    Meanwhile, here is more proof of earlier warm periods:
    The following is a summary essay in English of a piece that appeared in the Swiss news journal Die Weltwoche, by Alex Reichmuth

    The Alps were once greener than they are today

    http://www.weltwoche.ch/ausgaben/2010-15/artikel-2010-15-gletscherforschung-die-zeugen-frueheren-klimawandels.html

    English summary essay here:

    http://pgosselin.wordpress.com/2010/04/16/swiss-glaciers-expose-earlier-warm-periods/

    This deserves a lead post of its own; in the meantime, read pgosselin’s summary on his website.

    Finally, many thanks to Just The Facts (08:31:28) for the exciting trailer to “The Mole People.” I may just have to rent this forgotten drive-in-movie classic!

    /Mr Lynn

  168. In the same vacuous vein as the headline article here, try reading this one from AlJazeera. It truly is abysmal alarmist BS, but it’s read by millions.

  169. You can tell me that these are scientists speaking all you want, but they really don’t know what they are talking about. There is so little known about what causes volcanos to erupt that only guesswork prevails. The nature of things on this earth are so very complicated that scientists really don’t know much about how it all works yet. I suspect they never will.

    You will notice that the weasel words such as; may, could, or might, precede almost all of the scientific statements on climate change. Thet’s the state of scientific knowlege as of now. Something might happen. I have know this since I was a little boy. And so have you. Now you know.

  170. It will be interesting to see if all that fresh water runoff from XXX,XXX cubic metres of ice resulting from the eruption with end up showing as a nice red dot on the NOAA April TA map (assuming it is warmer than the surrounding sea) or whether it will contribute to more Arctic ice later in the year.

  171. savethesharks (08:20:48) :

    “….One thing is for sure our species has NOT been progressively evolving from the past to the future.

    If the press and some of the automatons in the science world that put out this rubbish is any judge of things, then our species as a whole seems to be getting stupider and stupider….”

    Stupidity no longer removes a potential breeder from the breeding population, worse they mate with others lacking the common sense gene. This is the problem with insulating children completely from reality.

    Yes that is partially sarcasm, but I keep remembering the scene from 9/11 where the firemen were clearing one of the twin towers before it collapsed and some idiot on a computer kept telling the fireman not to bother him…. Or the eighteen year old who walked up to one of my ponies and kicked him HARD in the rump. Lucky for him he did it to a well mannered gelding and not one of the more temperamental mares.

    Lack of common sense is no longer allowed to punish children in many first world countries. Many of our young are shielded from reality, especially those who go on to get advanced degrees. The rest (street kids) learn to live by their wits with less than a nodding acquaintance with honesty. (I am talking about the USA here)

  172. Apparently, we could save the earth from the scourge of volcanoes if we just had the sense to cover the earth with a sheet of ice.

    Sadly, it just isn’t funny anymore. Witness the person(s) willing to give credence to Sigmundsson. Why don’t those people crack a book on volcanoes or even a high-school level geology book before reading these crackpots thinking they found something novel. I don’t think this stuff is going to stop until we start holding these “scientists” accountable in some way for the bs they’re spewing. Evidently, a significant portion of the earth’s human inhabitants have acquiesced their thinking responsibilities to anyone that wishes to call themselves a scientist.

  173. Poor old SciAm, sad to see it sunk so low. Next they’ll be printing papers about Alien Abductions and Hitler’s Secret Base on the Moon.

  174. Come on EPA/NASA/NOAA, don’t let those Norwegians take your points. You may as well go defensive and throw in meteors, asteroids, and coronal mass ejections as Anthropogenic Global Warming effects before someone takes the last few points in this game. Remember, there are few left for the taking.

  175. “Our work suggests that eventually there will be either somewhat larger eruptions or more frequent eruptions in Iceland in coming decades”

    Sigmundsson must be angling to head the next sham inquiry into AGW pals doing naughty things with data.

  176. A bit of fun, jest, from elsewhere related to the eruption and AGW ties…..

    Iceland and its going green campaign is solely responsible and to blame for its rogue volcano which is spewing out filth, contaminating the atmosphere and about to destroy the international airline industry.

    The United Nations must demand that Iceland be put on trial in the World Court at the Hague for atrocities against humanity.

    For the past 20 years Iceland has been carelessly poking and digging around amongst its silly mountains and glaciers in search of geothermal energy sources. Eureka! They found one. Now they must be sued for damages and ordered to cap it.

    or

    Ahh heck, lets do it in AlGoreski style.

    The temperature of earth’s core was only a 1-2 million degrees. Man’s use of fossil fuel and CO2 emissions have generated global warming. Now the earth’s core is several million degrees, building pressure. That pressure, as the earth swells is causing earthquakes and volcanoes to erupt. The Arctic Ice cap disappeared completely in 2008 (as I said it would) and the oceans are now rising several meters each year. But, it is not too late. If you buy carbon offsets from my company I can save you. Call now, our operators are standing by. For the next hour we can offer you not one but TWO offsets for the special low, low price of……

  177. Carolina Pagli, a geophysicist at the University of Leeds in England, said there were risks that climate change could also trigger volcanic eruptions or earthquakes in places such as Mount Erebus in Antarctica, the Aleutian islands of Alaska or Patagonia in South America.

    I wasn’t aware they offered a Ph.D in Dildotics.

  178. QUICKLY, IGOR, WE MUST START THE FLOGISTRON!
    yes, yes, master, the flogistron–but, master, it’s a volcano! shouldn’t we hunt up a virgin?
    PERHAPS AFTER WE TRY THE FLOGISTRON, IGOR. THE POOR DEAR WOULD ROAST IN THE MILLIONS OF DEGREES BEFORE SHE HIT BOTTOM. CAN’T BE CRUEL, IGOR.
    yes, yes, master, but couldn’t we at least request a grant to find one?
    OH, ALL RIGHT. YOU WIN THIS TIME, IGOR.

  179. Harold Vance (07:44:50) :

    Europe is now getting free fertilizer plus a cooling effect

    Howard, I was having that very discussion with a colleague at lunchtime. Is volcanic ash good for the soil?

  180. David, UK (13:16:43) :

    “Our work suggests…”

    For “work” read “modelling, adjusting, conspiring, cherry-picking, fudging, transposing, hiding, smoothing, extrapolating, exaggerating, manipulating, destroying, inventing.”

    Did I leave anything out?

    —–

    What you are actually saying is that science conc. the whole earth system
    is complicated. But, you should stay in there. Rejecting everything
    difficult or unpleasant as to consequences is not the way.

  181. fhsiv (13:32:29) said:

    “My God! I’m not sure what to think about this. Is this just a desperate attempt to scare ‘our leaders’ into action?”

    No, this is the bidding of our leaders, to scare *us* into allowing them to take whatever the hell action they want.

  182. 899 (07:57:25) :

    What a COMPLETE line of BS!

    The weight of the ice … I am beyond words!

    Baltic shorelines, possibly in Canada too? – land is still rising after the weight
    of ice during last glacial.

  183. Be prepared for a cool summer 2010 and really cold winter of 2010/11:

    http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2010/04/nasas-jpl-monitoring-iceland-volcano-worried-it-will-trigger-more-massive-eruptions.html


    Volcanic eruptions in high-latitudes can greatly alter climate and distant river flows, including the Nile, according to a study funded in part by NASA. Researchers found that Iceland’s Laki volcanic event, a series of about ten eruptions from June 1783 through February 1784, significantly changed atmospheric circulations across much of the Northern Hemisphere creating unusual temperature and precipitation patterns that peaked in the summer of 1783, including far below normal rainfall over much of the Nile River watershed and record low river levels.

    The study provided new evidence that large volcanic eruptions north of the equator often have far different impacts on climate than those in the tropics.

  184. Building water reservoirs can cause earthquakes. Water, and ice, are heavy. Adding a lake or removing a glacier can influence seismic activity. See:

    http://www.nyx.net/~dcypser/induceq/ris.html

    See also mlf’s post above.

    @Tom Bowden (13:00:32) :”And volcanic particulates and sulphur dioxide, etc. will circulate the globe reducing temperatures in a natural self-moderating process.”

    The cooling impact of volcanoes is largely limited to tropical volcanoes. See (gasp):

    http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/05/current-volcanic-activity-and-climate/

  185. How much weight is on underwater volcanoes? This is not serious article, is it?

    I just scrolled up, I see it is categorized as satire.

  186. Feuillet (13:39:26) :
    Paul Daniel Ash might be right saying there is some correlation between melting glacier and volcano activity, but I guess this is not the main problem.

    The main issue here is whether the AGW is the one that is responsible to make such a great impact on volcano activity.

    And as we now all know the ice cap have been regenerated in Arctic location, and relatively unchanged in Antarctica, the paper still assume the glacier in following area are shrinking, proving their paper consist some error that need to be noticed.

    Touche’

    Henry chance (11:42:51) :
    She appears to be out of her mind. To give her benefit of my doubt, has she conducted an experiment to test this?

    Paul Daniel Ash (12:11:05) :

    Replied:
    Off-the-wall suggestion here: how about you do some reading?

    O.K.
    So what is your analysis. Is the current volcanism in Iceland a direct self-sufficient result of global-warming induced activity? Is the western Antartica volcanism wholly attributable to mankind. Are you related to the authors of this paper. Just quit blowing smoke-rings out your *** and tell us what your take us. Give us some empirical figures and not just some foolish justification, at-large, of the paper,

    http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~earcpa/2008GL033510.pdf

  187. adpack at 07:29 PM on 04/16/10
    This nonsense is why I discontinued my almost 60 years of subscribing to what is now un-Scientific American.

  188. To CRS Dr.P.H. and Dennis Hand (08:04:21) :

    Quote: “It occurred to me this morning, as I read this and other articles about the eruptions in Iceland, that no has given thought to the idea that maybe what is happening in the North Atlantic is a shift in magma in the area which is resulting in a localized warming of the land in Iceland, Greenland…. and that is what is causing the melting of the glaciers. This is just speculation on my part. I am far from a scientist and definitely not a climatologist or geologist, but I do read and think about what the implications are beyond just the surface information.

    One of you, who is more skilled in this area, may want to do some research on this topic.”
    ————————————————————-Indeed, here you go:

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071212103004.htm

  189. The idea of a change in the stress field causing seismic or volcanic activity isn’t completely nuts. See the following link as a case study:

    http://www.onepetro.org/mslib/servlet/onepetropreview?id=00002558&soc=SPE

    This is a small scale change in stress compared to large scale removal of ice. So, we do have solid observations to support the general hypothesis. Now, the idea that AGW=thinner ice , that’s a whole different kettle of fish on so many levels – from is AGW even a valid hypothesis to what are the local effects – we all saw how cold the US & Western Europe were this winter, despite “above normal” global temps.

  190. Lots of comments here. But no cogent comments at Scientific Amer. One guy suggests this article is old too? I don’t know where he gets that.

    At same time, I will never buy another Scientific American again, or national geographic since Murdoch got a hold of them. They have become political diatribes against nations.

  191. Enneagram (16:43:34) said…..”just wait and see. It began with St.Helen and Pinatubo”

    What’s the analogy to Pinatubo? There was no blast in Iceland to inject the particulates and aerosols into the upper stratosphere as was the case at Pinatubo (up to 35km high) and Mt. St. Helens (up to 27km high). They are reporting the tops of these current pyrocumulus ash plumes at 6km which is not even as high as the pyrocumulus clouds generated by the forest fire in the San Gabriel Mountains in southern California last summer that reached 10km.

    Interestingly, this eruption appears to have more in common with last summer’s California wildfire than it does with the Pinatubo eruption. Some now claim that the fires and this eruption were both caused by AGW!

  192. Why bother gawking at lava fountains when sites like this erupt geophysical codswallop at rates worthy of Ian Plimer ?

  193. The Icelandic volcanoes are erupting because the earths core has reached a tipping point and it’s 10,000,000°C temperature is melting the Icelandic glaciers releasing volcanoes might.

    WE’RE DOOMED I SAY, DOOMED.

    RUN FOR YOUR LIFE.

  194. Sort of off topic, but I’ve been reading up on the Iceland eruption at the ‘Eruptions’ blog (http://scienceblogs.com/eruptions/). Good site for coverage of current volcanic activity, but my impression is the guy is a warmer.

    He says dismissively “Remember, all the volcanoes in the world release 130 times less CO2 than the human race does each year, so even big eruptions add relatively little to the atmosphere.”

    This statistic seemed way out to me. It is undoubtedly calculated with over estimates of all possible (and some impossible) sources of man made CO2 against optimistically low and incomplete souces of volcanogenic CO2. He links to a USGS site which gives references to a 1991 paper which gives a range of 145 to 255 million tons of volcanogenic CO2 per year and a 2006 paper which estimates 30 billion tons of anthropogenic CO2 per year. Seems to me that the former is low and the latter is way high. Does anyone know of any more recent and realistic estimates of volcanogenic CO2 emissions?

  195. Global warming causing future volcanoes… I guess we are seeing insanity unfold right before our eyes… sort of like “The Shining”.

  196. I’m searching the news to find out how much CO2 is being released by this Volcanic eruption in Iceland.
    Is it more CO2 than my car makes?
    More CO2 than all the cars in California? More CO2 than all the cars there ever were?
    Prentiss Davis
    Truckee, CA

  197. Paul Daniel Ash (11:59:24),

    Your ‘credible reference’ is a Scientific American reprint of a Reuters wire story. Sorry, a reprint of a Reuters wire story with no attribution is a pretty low bar for validation of anything.

    My response @11:32:03 referred to George Orwell’s concern over the misuse of language. Given your response, that went flying right over your head.

    The problem is the same as with those calling the Medieval Warming Period the “Medieval Anomaly.” They are attempting to minimize the reality of the well established MWP, because it doesn’t fit their CAGW agenda ["We've got to get rid of the MWP!" - re: Deming].

    Likewise with your labeling the Holocene Optimum the “Holocene interglacial.” It is an attempt to minimize the fact that the H.O. had temperatures well above today’s. Not only during the MWP, but the Roman Optimum and the Minoan Optimum as well, when temps were even higher than during the MWP, and prior to the appearance of the first ancient SUV.

  198. @fhsiv (20:04:08) : “He (http://scienceblogs.com/eruptions/) says dismissively ‘Remember, all the volcanoes in the world release 130 times less CO2 than the human race does each year, so even big eruptions add relatively little to the atmosphere.’ …This statistic seemed way out to me. …. Does anyone know of any more recent and realistic estimates of volcanogenic CO2 emissions?”

    Short story:

    http://www.grist.org/article/volcanoes-emit-more-co2-than-humans

    More details: “Scientists have calculated that volcanoes emit between about 130-230 million tonnes (145-255 million tons) of CO2 into the atmosphere every year (Gerlach, 1991). This estimate includes both subaerial and submarine volcanoes, about in equal amounts. Emissions of CO2 by human activities, including fossil fuel burning, cement production, and gas flaring, amount to about 27 billion tonnes per year (30 billion tons) [ ( Marland, et al., 2006) - The reference gives the amount of released carbon (C), rather than CO2, through 2003.]. Human activities release more than 130 times the amount of CO2 emitted by volcanoes–the equivalent of more than 8,000 additional volcanoes like Kilauea (Kilauea emits about 3.3 million tonnes/year)! (Gerlach et. al., 2002)”

    http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/index.php

    But, of course if a fact does not fit with your preconceived believes it should be dismissed, ignored, or made fun of.

  199. Mike (12:09:57) :

    More details: “Scientists have calculated that volcanoes emit between about 130-230 million tonnes (145-255 million tons) of CO2 into the atmosphere every year (Gerlach, 1991). This estimate includes both subaerial and submarine volcanoes, about in equal amounts. Emissions of CO2 by human activities, including fossil fuel burning, cement production, and gas flaring, amount to about 27 billion tonnes per year (30 billion tons) [ ( Marland, et al., 2006) - The reference gives the amount of released carbon (C), rather than CO2, through 2003.]. Human activities release more than 130 times the amount of CO2 emitted by volcanoes–the equivalent of more than 8,000 additional volcanoes like Kilauea (Kilauea emits about 3.3 million tonnes/year)! (Gerlach et. al., 2002)”

    http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/index.php

    Let me see if I have this straight. In 1991 Gerlach estimates that “volcanoes emit between about 130-230 million tonnes (145-255 million tons) of CO2 into the atmosphere every year (Gerlach, 1991). This estimate includes both subaerial and submarine volcanoes, about in equal amounts.” In 2002 Gerlach et al say “(Kilauea emits about 3.3 million tonnes/year)!”.

    From what I’ve seen the conventionally accepted number for active land based volcanoes is about 1500, of which on any given day 20 are actually erupting. Several studies I’ve seen from the last several years suggest the number of ocean floor volcanoes has been underestimated, perhaps vastly so. To accept the ratio of volcanic to human contribution of global CO2 that you suggest, it looks to me that we would need to conclude that several thousand volcanoes, of which some number likely higher than 40 are erupting daily, are only able to put out 70 times as much CO2 as Kilauea does when it’s just sitting there percolating. What am I missing here?

  200. He said that melting ice seemed the main way in which climate change, blamed mainly on use of fossil fuels, could have knock-on effects on geology. The U.N. climate panel says that global warming will cause more floods, droughts rising seas,
    40 years of volcanic eruptions,
    dogs and cats sleeping together, Clone wars,

    Mass Hysteria.

  201. So is there any evidence at all to support this claim in geological history? I would expect them to be able to show reduced eruptions during the last ice age and increased eruptions during the medieval warming period.

  202. Mike (12:09:57)

    Hey Mike, you’re a genius, and so are your friends at grist. As Dave Wendt pointed out above, If you had read what I wrote and followed the link from the Eruptions blog, you might have realized that the the quote you regurgitated from ‘grist’ is a direct sponge (word for word) off of the USGS volcanic gases information page. Wow! Unquestioning acceptance of speculation from government scientists by a warmer, what a surprise!

    And just in case you weren’t aware, the type of eruption that is occurring in Iceland right now is representative of what is going on along the entire length of the Mid-Atlanatic Ridge. What’s the difference between Iceland and the rest of the ridge? It ain’t covered with hundreds to a few thousand feet of sea water, which tends to result in just a slight difference in the way the erupted materials behave!

    Why is it that you folks can’t answer simple questions about the foundations of your faith. Oops, I’m sorry. I meant your opinions. All I’m asking is if someone knows of a more recent reference relevant to estimates of the amount of world wide volcanogenic CO2 emissions. I guess that’s too steep a slope for you to climb. I’ll try to be more gentle with you next time!

    @fhsiv (20:04:08) : “He (http://scienceblogs.com/eruptions/) says dismissively ‘Remember, all the volcanoes in the world release 130 times less CO2 than the human race does each year, so even big eruptions add relatively little to the atmosphere.’ …This statistic seemed way out to me. …. Does anyone know of any more recent and realistic estimates of volcanogenic CO2 emissions?”

    Short story:

    http://www.grist.org/article/volcanoes-emit-more-co2-than-humans

    More details: “Scientists have calculated that volcanoes emit between about 130-230 million tonnes (145-255 million tons) of CO2 into the atmosphere every year (Gerlach, 1991). This estimate includes both subaerial and submarine volcanoes, about in equal amounts. Emissions of CO2 by human activities, including fossil fuel burning, cement production, and gas flaring, amount to about 27 billion tonnes per year (30 billion tons) [ ( Marland, et al., 2006) - The reference gives the amount of released carbon (C), rather than CO2, through 2003.]. Human activities release more than 130 times the amount of CO2 emitted by volcanoes–the equivalent of more than 8,000 additional volcanoes like Kilauea (Kilauea emits about 3.3 million tonnes/year)! (Gerlach et. al., 2002)”

    http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/index.php

    But, of course if a fact does not fit with your preconceived believes it should be dismissed, ignored, or made fun of.

  203. Everyone has an authoritative statement on what causes vulcanism, even the Mullahs of Iran: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/extramarital-sex-fuels-earthquakes-warns-iran-cleric/story-fn3dxity-1225854907773

    Hmmm, so whom do we believe? Both declarations are equally (un)believable. The Mullahs or the AGW self appointed experts? Maybe it’s scantilly clad women causing the ice pack to melt which causes the volcanoes to erupt????

    So do we bow to the Shia God or Gaia?

  204. A total non-scientist, and very puzzeled. Why would a little block of ice possibly have any impact on the incedible power of a subterranean volcano?

  205. It looks like Sixpack Chopra has been meditating again.

    Did I say “meditating”? Cos’ I meant “medicating”.

    Seismology Matters.

Comments are closed.