Sentences with phrase «much about the glaciers»

So don't worry too much about the glaciers, they'll be back someday.

I don't personally care much about the glaciers but I want fuel for my car and electricity to come out of the wall socket.

Not exact matches

For glaciers that extend from low to high elevation, measurements taken at the low end — the glacier's «snout» — may not tell scientists much about how the same ice sheet is behaving higher up the mountain.

However, the idea is simple, and I've talked about this much in many presentations this winter: Take the amount of ice you need to get rid of from Greenland to raise sea level 2 m in the next century, reduce it by your best estimate of the amount that would be removed by surface mass balance losses, and try to push the rest out of the aggregate cross-sectional area of Greenland's marine - based outlet glaciers.

Oerlemans's reconstruction of global temperatures (largely from mid latitude glaciers) is entirely independent of the much talked about temperature records from other paleoclimate proxy data (e.g. Moberg and others, Mann and others, Crowley and others).

Striking how this blog talks about polar bears, hurricanes, melting glaciers, melting sea ice, disappearing frogs, intelligence estimates, the snows of Kilimanjaro, drought, famine, insect infestations, too much rain, lack of rain, and who knows what else, and links it all to AGW.

Amount of advance or retreat of the glacier snout is as much about snow accumulation above the permanent snowline as temperature.

While recent headlines about the woes of U.N. - led efforts to assemble a comprehensive picture of the science have caused gleeful headlines on The Drudge Report and other skeptical media outlets, the vast weight of the evidence — from melting glaciers to warming oceans to satellite temperature readings, and much more — still points to a changing climate caused by human activity.

The horizontal location motion has the mean motion removed to emphasize short - term change over the much, much larger forward motion of the glacier that varies from about ~ 700 (black) to ~ 1250 meters per year (red).

For most of the 2000s, satellite data shows the glaciers lost about as much ice as they gained, meaning they stayed roughly stable.

That would be much more informative than yet another story about melting glaciers.

In project syndicate's article by Bjørn Lomborg we find: «For sea - level rise, the IPCC now includes modeling of glacier responses of 3 - 20 centimeters, leading to a higher total estimate of 40 - 62 cm by century's end — much lower than the exaggerated and scary figure of 1 - 2 meters of sea - level rise that many environmental activists, and even some media outlets, bandy about.»

Given the potential importance of West Antarctica to future global sea level and our current knowledge of glacier instability, why is there so much uncertainty about its future?

Loss of glacial volume in Alaska and neighboring British Columbia, Canada, currently contributes 20 % to 30 % as much surplus freshwater to the oceans as does the Greenland Ice Sheet — about 40 to 70 gigatons per year, 66,78,63,57,64,58 comparable to 10 % of the annual discharge of the Mississippi River.79 Glaciers continue to respond to climate warming for years to decades after warming ceases, so ice loss is expected to continue, even if air temperatures were to remain at current levels.

scientists who dissagree cant reach media they are cencured but i have learned so much about carbondioxid glaciers storms deserts the atmosphere historic climate oceancurrents fotosynthes the arctic the antarctis etc etc... so im able to say that its all a bluff

The researchers estimate that the dissolved organic carbon released by melting glaciers will be an increase of half as much again on the current flow − the equivalent of about half the annual flow of dissolved carbon down the mighty Amazon River.

What I love about this book is that it presents all the evidence — evidence from flowers, butterflies, birds, frogs, trees, glaciers and much more gathered by scientists around the world.

If you want intelligent discussion and claim to have read so much literature, it is rather surprising you make such claims about «thermal activity», and «Antarctic glaciers advance».

So about 1000 times as much heat went into melting the glaciers at the end of the Pleistocene as went into heating the atmosphere, implying CO2 had only a negligible effect - A. McIntire

The current interglacial period is getting long in tooth so again by any sane measure we should be worried about an impending ice age and if there is any merit whatsoever in anthropogenic global warming we should be glad for it and try to get as much of it as we can in the hope that it might delay the inevitable return of glaciers a mile thick covering everything north of Washington, D.C.

Meanwhile if the glaciers are still largely stuck to their beds today then sea levels between now and say 2020 aren't likely to tell us much about what they're likely to become by 2100.

Much like how a wrong date on glacier melting doesn't undermine the fact that they are indeed still melting and that it's something to be concerned about, but I digress...

When I started looking at this topic the first thing that struck me was just how much time is spent in the blogosphere debating the effects (real or imagined) of global temperature rise and how little time seemed to be spent on the key evidential science; as though retreating glaciers, arctic sea - ice or coral bleaching said anything about causality.

In contrast to the polar regions, the network of lower latitude small glaciers and ice caps, although making up only about four percent of the total land ice area or about 760,000 square kilometers, may have provided as much as 60 percent of the total glacier contribution to sea level change since 1990s (Meier et al. 2007).