Climate change Sea Ice Melt Glacia melt the developing science

Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by RainbowSingularity, Jun 8, 2019.

  1. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    29,287
    Depends on the existence of suitable ponds in suitable transition zones. It's probably likely somewhere - transition zones from oak to pine can't have been eliminated from the NA landscape altogether, surely?
    Btw: a transition like that is often and normally quick once begun: The existing forest holds its ground for a generation after it loses the ability to reproduce, and when it dies without heir (in the general or common case of pines, by disease or pest damage and then fire) the new and better suited forest grows in immediately.

    In Minnesota a transition from pine to "maple/basswood" (maple plus something) and the like happened within one human lifespan over large regions of the State, the white and red pine forests having held on in marginal climate zones until logged off.
    No. Too dry, and too dark, and not enough suitable area.
    One of the factors in all of this is that the surface area suitable gets smaller at high latitudes. The planet is an oblate spheroid, not a cylinder.
    Another factor is that trees and shrubs do not sequester carbon as efficiently as peat and tundra herbage do in many high latitude solar and temperature regimes - there's a net loss of CO2 capture when woody plants (willows and birches and alders and the like normally lead the transition) take over and shade the ground in those regions. So the boreal forest spread will not reliably replace what it replaces, let alone losses elsewhere.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,875
    once you gather enough correct information of the precise meaning of what that "growth" is, you may realise it is not a good thing.

    where it is growing is in areas that need the perma frost to remain to contain massive carbon sinks

    the shade from the trees prevents sun light reflection and the trees prevent liken growth.
    it is a changing of the ecology which allows the temperature to increase even faster.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,875
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,274
    Are you wondering why record breaking burns are news?
    Greenland, Alaska and Siberia.
    =====================
    Huge swathes of the Arctic on fire, ‘unprecedented’ satellite images show
    Earth’s boreal forests now burning at rate unseen in ‘at least 10,000 years’, scientists warn

    Harry Cockburn
    Monday 22 July 2019
    The Independent

    Vast swathes of the Arctic are suffering from "unprecedented" wildfires, new satellite images have revealed.

    North of the Arctic circle, the high temperatures are facilitating enormous wildfires which are wreaking ecological destruction on a colossal scale.
    It comes after the world’s hottest June on record which has been followed by a devastating heatwave in the US, with Europe forecast for the same treatment later this week.

    Satellite images reveal fires across Greenland, Siberia and Alaska, with warm dry conditions following ice melt on the enormous Greenland icesheet commencing a month earlier than average.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/envir...land-alaska-siberia-photographs-a9015851.html
    ====================
    Will there be areas that transition biomes rapidly due to climate change? Yes, in some places that will be likely - along with the mass extinctions that accompany such changes.
     
  8. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,240
    ain't very precise
     
  9. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,875
    if you are sitting in the corner staring at the wall yelling "oh no it isnt" it is hard to be logical about scientific terms of reference

    arctic natives have been reporting more and more wildfire for the last 10 years.

    it doesn't make sexy headlines for fat rich politicians to stroke their ego with though.
    it also doesnt sit well with those companys wanting to start drilling in the perma frost as it melts. makes for awkward family TV news during dinner.

    forests of trees in snow on fire while your local gas station drills for oil right beside it...
     
  10. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,240
    ok
    are the fires over peat or permafrost?
     
  11. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,875
    the fire that was burning 5 years ago ?
    or the fire that was burning 10 years ago ?
     
  12. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    29,287
    But is very large, and dangerous.
    Some are in peat, some are over peat, some are over permafrost, some are over and/or in past melted permafrost. AGW abets large landscape fires in a variety of ways.

    One of the threats is an increasingly likely and now predicted growth in underground peat fires (frequency, duration, and area or volume).

    Why are you asking people here? If curious, the net is at your fingertips.
     
    Quantum Quack likes this.
  13. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,875
    yes sculptors wording gives off an air of troll.

    did motivate me to start reading on boreal forest fires.
    turns out there is only 1 study by 1 group that i have found so far and published by the Royal-society.
    the charcoal from previous fires making up what they perceive as roughly 50% of the Co2 produced from 1 burn event.
    and .. the charcoal in total being roughly 1% of the entire forest

    it is worded in a manner that takes a certain adjustment to convert freely into data.
    my suspicion is that it was written to a style in an attempt to counter main stream media propaganda that was defining all ecology news as alarmist.

    methane sinks is something that i have not caught up reading on currently.
    i can understand many governments would want to keep it secret as the reality is like screaming fire in a cinema that is about to have opening night.





    please note "publishing" is not "writing"


    thought i better post the link
    https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rstb.2015.0345
     
    Last edited: Aug 15, 2019
  14. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,875
    fyi
    yes i am aware how some trolls may attempt to thread jack the subject to a proxy debate around something else and then play personality politics with it.



    https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/studying-how-arctic-wildfires-change-the-world

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    https://cce.nasa.gov/cce/hyperwall.htm
     
  15. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,875
    NYU Scientists Capture 4-mile Iceberg Breaking in Greenland


     
  16. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,875
    Iceland's Okjokull glacier commemorated with plaque
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-49345912

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



     
  17. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,240
    Yeh, in searching for the answer, i found that there was a noticeable paucity of detailed information and a plethora of using the events in furtherance of an agenda.
    It is well known that forest fires over permafrost vs fires over peat have different morphologies and outcomes.
    ergo my above question.
     
  18. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    29,287
    There is no "the answer" to anything you have posted here.
    Meanwhile, if you are running into a lot of people using events in furtherance of an agenda - like some here who use D-O warming events in pursuit of AGW denial - you are obviously not searching in the scientific publications regarding AGW.

    Try the published research into AGW. The effects of the invasion of woody plants into thawing permafrost (some of which involves peat) are a recent but hardly overlooked topic. The findings are so far discouraging.
    Your question was rhetorical, and had essentially nothing to do with forest fires over permafrost vs those over peat. It was well answered in this:
     
  19. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,875
    you have read some study's you can post a link to and copy n paste the core paragraph etc?

    many things are well-known
    common sense & calculus are arguably less well known.

    examining the facts to get an idea of social opinion around science they have not read on delivers .. what ?

    leaving me wondering if you are ... intellectual trolling of the subject to use fake leaning big data to over whelm the average person.

    ... well...
    maybe you could post a link ?
     
  20. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,875
  21. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,875
    https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2...ufX-PFxOpNJbFOYrdY5cIGRKf_n-aWTmmKxtgj2gIUD5A

     
  22. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,240
    Yeh, I phrased that badly-----------oops
    forrest over peat over permafrost vs forrest over peat(no permafrost) vs forrest (no peat no permafrost).

    I got no answers man, just questions that lead to more questions that lead to more questions ...
    .....................................
    That being said
    It seems likely that we may be in another superinterglacial? Given time and temperature, all below sea level may melt?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  23. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,875
    my main point is that there is scientific proof to show melt speed differs as a factor of exponential process in a mixed environment
    speed of ice melting
    speed of water boiling
    etc etc
    while business want to say not to anything that involves spending tax payers money
    tax payers as customers are paying businesses to pollute the world
    its all pretty messed up

    ice & glacier melting is not a simple equation based on Co2
    however the anti-science AKA creationists want to define it as such or label it as godly and thus uncontrollable and un-knowable.

    ... there are questions, and there are questions ...
    if you do not want answers to your questions, you are part of the problem...
    many people know this but pretend to themselves and others by direct lying that they do want to know the answer, then start screaming and run off before it is given.
     

Share This Page