[Newsbot]

Title: Mystery of Greenland's vanishing LAKES: Two sub-glacial lagoons drain away in a matter of weeks through natural tunnels | Daily Mail Online
Category: Environmental
Posted By: DrCaleb
Date: 2015-01-23 06:14:46

[N_Fiddledog]

I wonder if this might have something to do with it:

"Newly released research, primarily from NASA and the GFZ German Research Center for Geosciences, indicates that melting of selective Greenland Glaciers is related to geologically induced heat flow, and not manmade atmospheric global warming..."

http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/gr ... nmade.html

[Jabberwalker]

Uh-oh! Greenland is heating up! ... but not the atmosphere above it!
NO-NAY-NEVER! Can't happen if the Koch brothers sez so.

[N_Fiddledog]

Ya know...you're just joking, but they're actually are global warming wackadoodles (and Harry Reid) who do believe (in spite of all evidence to the contrary) the Koch's are behind everything that contradicts them.

I wouldn't be surprised if they saw the Koch's in a secret lair under the earth peddling madly on a bicycle driven apparatus - the Koch Bros, super-duper, geo-thermal enhancer machine. Nya ha ha...

[Zipperfish]

The sub-glacial lakes are themselves a new discovery, so I'm not sure how "surprsiing" it is that they are draining, since we don't know much about them to start with. Do they drain normally? Are they draining more quickly now?

I'm not sure the climate change and the geothermal theories are mutally exclusive; it doesn't have to be one or the other. The loss of mass of the ice sheet due to warmer temperatures may change the plate tectonics for example.

I wonder if there is a record of sea salinity in the area--that could be indicator of increasing melt.

[BartSimpson]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

The sub-glacial lakes are themselves a new discovery

No, they're not.

http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/lake ... ce-sheet-0

[N_Fiddledog]

No kidding...as in how could you miss that. Never heard of Lake Vostok? Seriously?

I think I understand where the problem is coming from though. The Kochophobes should read the first paragraph here...

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/01/21/c ... melt-hype/

Cornell is playing games with information again.

[Zipperfish]

Sorry, I meant that sub-glacial lakes in Greenland are a new discovery. Should have spelled that out.

As usual, Watts prefers to peddle his viewpoint rather than assess the available evidence. There is not much available evidence, so the appropriate response at this time should be "I don't know, let's look at it further."

It looks like Rand Paul and Mitt Romney have finally gotten fed up with all this ridiculous and increasingly desperate hand-waving by the deniers in the face of slowly mounbting evidence of warming.

Mitt Romney and Rand Paul Are Going to Make Climate Change a Real Issue in the GOP Primary

$1:

It took one day for the party of climate change denial to rediscover science—a few of them, anyway. Mitt Romney, who is considering his third presidential run, told a Utah audience, “I’m one of those Republicans who thinks we are getting warmer and that we contribute to that,” arguing for “real leadership” to tackle rising carbon pollution. Then, 15 Republican senators voted in favor of a conservative climate amendment that said "human activity contributes to climate change." One of those senators was Rand Paul.

[BartSimpson]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Sorry, I meant that sub-glacial lakes in Greenland are a new discovery.

Again, not really. I say this because this kind of lake (and many others) has been observed on and under other glaciers in the world.

It's akin to saying, "Croissants are a new discovery at French bakeries in Guelph!"

While it may be true that croissants are a new discovery at French bakeries in Guelph they're not an unexpected discovery at French bakeries in general and it would be misleading and disingenuous to present such a discovery as wholly unexpected.

May as well say that the discovery of ice in Greenland is a total surprise.

[N_Fiddledog]

BTW Why would it matter if Rand Paul thinks human activity contributes to some climate change. I think that. I'm just not worried about it. I don't think Paul is either.

Here's a better indication of where he stands on the issue.

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-enviro ... conclusive

$1:

Paul made clear that he is against pollution and thinks the country should take measures to cut back, but he doesn't back "alarmist" claims that the earth is headed toward a downward spiral due to increasing temperatures.

"That alarmist stuff really detracts from the case that we shouldn't pollute," Paul said.

As far as Romney goes, who cares?

[BartSimpson]

I think human activity impacts wave action in the oceans every time a ship deflects or amplifies wave energy. It's only logical that ships have some sort of effect on wave action.

But I don't think that human activity is the sole cause of wave action nor do I advocate banning ships because of their impact on wave activity.

[Zipperfish]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Again, not really. I say this because this kind of lake (and many others) has been observed on and under other glaciers in the world.

It's akin to saying, "Croissants are a new discovery at French bakeries in Guelph!"

While it may be true that croissants are a new discovery at French bakeries in Guelph they're not an unexpected discovery at French bakeries in general and it would be misleading and disingenuous to present such a discovery as wholly unexpected.

May as well say that the discovery of ice in Greenland is a total surprise.

great analogy! I agree they aren't unexpected. But also, since we've just found these specific croissants, we don't really know that much about them. Like for example, if they regularly drain, or if them draining is an unusual occurrence.

I'm actually arguing the skeptic viewpoint here.

[BartSimpson]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Again, not really. I say this because this kind of lake (and many others) has been observed on and under other glaciers in the world.

It's akin to saying, "Croissants are a new discovery at French bakeries in Guelph!"

While it may be true that croissants are a new discovery at French bakeries in Guelph they're not an unexpected discovery at French bakeries in general and it would be misleading and disingenuous to present such a discovery as wholly unexpected.

May as well say that the discovery of ice in Greenland is a total surprise.

great analogy! I agree they aren't unexpected. But also, since we've just found these specific croissants, we don't really know that much about them. Like for example, if they regularly drain, or if them draining is an unusual occurrence.

I'm actually arguing the skeptic viewpoint here.

Just my own two cents here but I think these folks are just making a big deal about something that is neither unexpected or surprising given that the Russians were studying the phenomenon sixty years ago.

[N_Fiddledog]

Ever heard how the largest canyon on earth is under Greenland ice?

It's interesting, because...

$1:

The discovery could raise as many questions as it answers. For instance, researchers have long puzzled over what happens to water under Greenland's interior ice sheet. Greenland bows inward like a soup bowl, yet water melting under the interior ice sheet seems to drain to the sea instead of pooling in the middle. Bamber and his colleagues think the northern canyon may route some of the meltwater into the ocean.



The great river channel could explain the missing lakes under Greenland's interior ice sheet. The weight of the ice sheet pushes down the island's middle into a bowl-shaped basin. Given this saggy middle, scientists have long wondered why Greenland isn't filled with buried lakes, like Antarctica's Lake Vostok and Lake Whillans. The northern part of the canyon may drain meltwater, but farther inland, Bamber and his colleagues think the massive weight of ice pushes water elsewhere. [North vs. South Poles: 10 Wild Differences]

"It probably doesn't have water flowing through all of it today, given the interference by the ice overburden. However, when ice-free, water would channel through all of it," Siegert told LiveScience's OurAmazingPlanet.

http://www.livescience.com/39289-greenl ... vered.html

[BartSimpson]

Wow...Greenland would be a pretty awesome place to live absent the ice! That central valley would be pretty nice with the surrounding ring of mountains to hold off any high winds.

Sad it wasn't ice-free in the time of the Vikings as it would've been ridiculously easy to defend and they'd have made it into a pretty powerful country!