The wailing today is that the collapse of the Antarctic ice sheet has already begun.
It’s pretty bad when other environmental reporters start calling you out on it, such as NYT’s Andrew Revkin did today.
Awful misuse of "Collapse" in headlines on centuries-long ice loss in W. Antarctica. See rates in papers. Same as '09 http://t.co/kk48ztySvZ
— Andrew Revkin 🌎 ✍🏼 🪕 ☮️ (@Revkin) May 12, 2014
Yes, a slow affair indeed. Truly an abuse of the headline. Buried below the headline in the article, there is agreement with Revkin:
But the researchers said that even though such a rise could not be stopped, it is still several centuries off, and potentially up to 1,000 years away.
A lot can happen in several centuries, why even in the last couple of years Antarctic has seen record levels on Antarctic sea ice.
And the temperature isn’t cooperating either:
RSS Southern Polar Temperature Lower Troposphere (TLT) – 1979 to Present for the area where sea ice forms (60 to 70S)
[previous graph removed – wrong latitude span and no replacement, my mistake -Anthony]
UPDATE: Revkin gives more reasoning on “collapse” here:
Consider Clashing Scientific and Societal Meanings of ‘Collapse’ When Reading Antarctic Ice News
Here is the paper the claim is based on:
Widespread, rapid grounding line retreat of Pine Island, Thwaites, Smith and Kohler glaciers, West Antarctica from 1992 to 2011.
Abstract
We measure the grounding line retreat of glaciers draining the Amundsen Sea Embayment of West Antarctica using Earth Remote Sensing (ERS-1/2) satellite radar interferometry from 1992 to 2011. Pine Island Glacier retreated 31 km at its center, with most retreat in 2005–2009 when the glacier un-grounded from its ice plain. Thwaites Glacier retreated 14 km along its fast-flow core and 1 to 9 km along the sides. Haynes Glacier retreated 10 km along its flanks. Smith/Kohler glaciers retreated the most, 35 km along its ice plain, and its ice shelf pinning points are vanishing. These rapid retreats proceed along regions of retrograde bed elevation mapped at a high spatial resolution using a mass conservation technique (MC) that removes residual ambiguities from prior mappings. Upstream of the 2011 grounding line positions, we find no major bed obstacle that would prevent the glaciers from further retreat and draw down the entire basin.
And here is the press release from AGU:
New study indicates loss of West Antarctic glaciers appears unstoppable
12 May 2014
Joint Release
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A new study finds a rapidly melting section of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet appears to be in an irreversible state of decline, with nothing to stop the glaciers in this area from melting into the sea.
The study presents multiple lines of evidence, incorporating 40 years of observations that indicate the glaciers in the Amundsen Sea sector of West Antarctica “have passed the point of no return,” according to glaciologist and lead author Eric Rignot, of the University of California Irvine and NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Pasadena, California. The new study has been accepted for publication in Geophysical Research Letters, a journal of the American Geophysical Union.
These glaciers already contribute significantly to sea level rise, releasing almost as much ice into the ocean annually as the entire Greenland Ice Sheet. They contain enough ice to raise global sea level by 4 feet (1.2 meters) and are melting faster than most scientists had expected. Rignot said these findings will require an upward revision to current predictions of sea level rise.
“This sector will be a major contributor to sea level rise in the decades and centuries to come,” Rignot said. “A conservative estimate is it could take several centuries for all of the ice to flow into the sea.”
Three major lines of evidence point to the glaciers’ eventual demise: the changes in their flow speeds, how much of each glacier floats on seawater, and the slope of the terrain they are flowing over and its depth below sea level. In a paper published in Geophysical Research Letters in April, Rignot’s research group discussed the steadily increasing flow speeds of these glaciers over the past 40 years. This new study examines the other two lines of evidence.
The glaciers flow out from land to the ocean, with their leading edges afloat on the seawater. The point on a glacier where it first loses contact with land is called the grounding line. Nearly all glacier melt occurs on the underside of the glacier beyond the grounding line, on the section floating on seawater.
Just as a grounded boat can float again on shallow water if it is made lighter, a glacier can float over an area where it used to be grounded if it becomes lighter, which it does by melting or by the thinning effects of the glacier stretching out. The Antarctic glaciers studied by Rignot’s group have thinned so much they are now floating above places where they used to sit solidly on land, which means their grounding lines are retreating inland.
“The grounding line is buried under a thousand or more meters of ice, so it is incredibly challenging for a human observer on the ice sheet surface to figure out exactly where the transition is,” Rignot said. “This analysis is best done using satellite techniques.”
The team used radar observations captured between 1992 and 2011 by the European Earth Remote Sensing (ERS-1 and -2) satellites to map the grounding lines’ retreat inland. The satellites use a technique called radar interferometry, which enables scientists to measure very precisely — within less than a quarter of an inch — how much Earth’s surface is moving. Glaciers move horizontally as they flow downstream, but their floating portions also rise and fall vertically with changes in the tides. Rignot and his team, which includes researchers from UC Irvine and JPL, mapped how far inland these vertical motions extend to locate the grounding lines.
The accelerating flow speeds and retreating grounding lines reinforce each other. As glaciers flow faster, they stretch out and thin, which reduces their weight and lifts them farther off the bedrock. As the grounding line retreats and more of the glacier becomes waterborne, there’s less resistance underneath, so the flow accelerates.
Slowing or stopping these changes requires pinning points — bumps or hills rising from the glacier bed that snag the ice from underneath. To locate these points, researchers produced a more accurate map of bed elevation that combines ice velocity data from ERS-1 and -2 and ice thickness data from NASA’s Operation IceBridge mission and other airborne campaigns. The results confirm no pinning points are present upstream of the present grounding lines in five of the six glaciers. Only Haynes Glacier has major bedrock obstructions upstream, but it drains a small sector and is retreating as rapidly as the other glaciers.
The bedrock topography is another key to the fate of the ice in this basin. All the glacier beds slope deeper below sea level as they extend farther inland. As the glaciers retreat, they cannot escape the reach of the ocean, and the warm water will keep melting them even more rapidly.
The accelerating flow rates, lack of pinning points and sloping bedrock all point to one conclusion, Rignot said.
“The collapse of this sector of West Antarctica appears to be unstoppable,” he said. “The fact that the retreat is happening simultaneously over a large sector suggests it was triggered by a common cause, such as an increase in the amount of ocean heat beneath the floating sections of the glaciers. At this point, the end of this sector appears to be inevitable.”
Because of the importance of this part of West Antarctica, NASA’s Operation IceBridge will continue to monitor its evolution closely during this year’s Antarctica deployment, which begins in October. IceBridge uses a specialized fleet of research aircraft and the most sophisticated suite of science instruments ever assembled to characterize changes in thickness of glaciers, ice sheets and sea ice.
For additional images and video related to this new finding, visit: http://go.nasa.gov/1m6YZSf
For additional information on the West Antarctic Ice Sheet and its potential contribution to sea level rise, visit: http://go.nasa.gov/1oIfSlO
For more information on Operation IceBridge, visit: http://www.nasa.gov/icebridge
###




As a former journalist, from an era when facts had to be checked and double-checked and news stories were presented in a sober and honest manner, Goldberg is a journalistic embarrassment . At some point, Alan Rusbridger, her editor, has to take action. The Guardian has been a laughing stock for too long – come on, Alan, you are an honest and Establishment-defying journalist…you need to sort out this fact-defying new ‘Establishment’ that has developed within your unsuspecting bosom.
Pathetic
Pokerguy. . . The name of the malady is”Mediacracy”, Google the suffix acracy then the whole word. This new word from the urban dictionary describes the NYT and much other media involved in the cAGW narrative.
The NASA Model of this particular WAIS glacier chose one of the smallest and least significant, underlaid by an unusual grounding bed that guarantees it has to melt rather than slide. The two biggest are the Ronne. Cannot use that, since all evidence says it is gaining ice. And the Ross, which might be slowly losing. But cannot use that, since the grounding line stopped receding 4000 years ago. We know not because of models, but because Ross collapse was the previous bugaboo. So the Andrill program cored into the seabed, and nope. So now pick a tiny outflow that might happen if the models are right, and extrapolate to WAIS. Beyond bad. Wrote an essay on Ronne/Ross for the next book. Unclear worth revising for this drivel.
Being shouted from the rooftops without criticism in the Australian leftist press, as well.
It’s not only the Guardianistas, there is also the expected hyperventilating hype from Justin Gillis of the NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/13/science/earth/collapse-of-parts-of-west-antarctica-ice-sheet-has-begun-scientists-say.html?hp&_r=1
Nasa scientists: 1000 years of prediction based on 20 years of history! What was that? You need at least 30 years to define a trend? Well I suppose it depends whether its the ‘right’ trend or the ‘wrong’ trend. Oh dear.
The people who report this BS know that this story and other like it are lies, but when “the ends justify the means” then lies are perfectly acceptable.
This is complete B.S. It’s late fall / early winter in Antarctica. The temperature is below freezing. Nothing can possibly melt there for at least six months.
Saw same story and picture on MSN home page leading to NBC News. Yeesch! Alarm sells!
It might be true that “such a rise could not be stopped” BY PEOPLE, but it can certainly be stopped by natural processes. Bizarre of these researchers to speak as if the only motive force in climate science is the one that can’t do anything.
If you make ill-informed predictions about 5-10 years from now, people can look it up & call you out for it. If you make stupid predictions about 1000 years from now, a fat astrologer will make a show called Cosmos & claim you were a persecuted scientist. I know which I would prefer.
I just saw the story on See-BS nightly news. They distorted….. I mean reported that there would be a 4 ft rise in sea level. But not before 2214. Wake me when its over!
Off the subject but it just may be an anwser to how this all happened.
News story of German science guys who wired up humans brains and up’d the voltage.
Real lucid dreams and when the subjects woke up they were sure the dream was real.
Must be they wired up Michael Mann first, he gets the hockystick graph dream, then the 97% who belive the same dream got the same voltage, thus Climate Disruption was born.
Real Research.
Actually, the situation is much, much worse. The Universe, which originated from the Big Bang some 15 billion years ago, may collapse again – as some (not all) studies suggest. We should view Jerry Brown’s governorship of California in this light.
This showed up on Reuters too …
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/12/us-climatechange-antarctica-idUSKBN0DS1IH20140512
Not sure which article was first to publish but one of them looks to be a lazy copy of t’other.
Keep in mind that NYT’s Andrew Revkin is objecting to the word “collapse”, which is reasonable given people’s perceptions of time scales. He is not disputing what the research says about the retreat of these glaciers: observations show they are losing mass mostly due to ocean water melting them along their terminating ice shelves, and the bedrock which is below sea level only slopes deeper on the “inland” side leaving no high ground to stop the process.
The inevitable WUWT reference to Antarctic sea ice extent has little bearing on this.
We need a sarcasm department of skeptics whose purpose is to submit all kinds of climate whoppers to the press – without the sarc-on and sarc-off tags. For example: “New computer model shows Antarctic ice to completely melt in 5 years!” (I could write a program in 5 minutes that would do this.) Obviously the press seems to accept and transmit anything without critical inquiry – so if this were done, John Q. Public would more readily catch on to the folly of it all.
I guess Chris Turney just picked the wrong part of Antarctica… smh.
Here’s the article posted by the morons at Yahoo News.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/rise-oceans-due-melting-antarctic-ice-sheet-unstoppable-192714554.html
Here’s the headline…..
“Rise of Oceans Due to Melting Antarctic Ice Sheet Is ‘Unstoppable'”
Journalism is often a profession without conscience or self respect.
The Guardian’s Suzanne Goldenberg is full of sh!t, just like her idiotic colleague Nafeez Ahmed (9/11 truther).
Suzanne was the one who claimed the world’s FIRST, FIRST climate refugees in Alaska. I showed her she was wrong in comments at the Guardian for which I was banned.
See THIS from me. And that is not even what I showed her. I made it clear she did not know what she was talking about. I showed her Holocene climate extremes in N. America with decadal and centennial droughts etc. [I can’t be bothered to look so don’t ask, it’s buried in the Guardian comment somewhere.] I showed here relocated Alaskans before her claim due to climate changes decades ago.
Sol will evolve. All life on Earth will vanish.
BBC repeating the full BSstory.
Clarification.
Suzanne was the one who claimed America’s FIRST, FIRST climate refugees.
I still showed her why she was wrong. However you spin the cat, she was wrong.
They are going to simply have to let go of Antarctica for a while.
Plus this
Plus record April extent. Why can’t they let go of an expanding, freezing pole? We gave them the Arctic but that’s simply not enough. Suzanne has to find something to justify her propaganda.