Arctic permafrost is melting faster than predicted

Nov 29, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: New Scientist

We may be closer to a major climate tipping point than we knew. Earth's permafrost - frozen soil that covers nearly a quarter of the northern hemisphere and traps vast amounts of carbon - may be melting faster than thought and releasing more potent greenhouse gasses.

Comments (Page 6)

Showing posts 101 - 120 of147
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108
Mar 1, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Wallop10 wrote:
<quoted text>
I've had teachers dumb as dirt.
I knew a biology teacher at a university who insisted the Grand Canyon was caused by the "special waters" of the Genesis Flood.
Good luck with your home made wine efforts though.:)
So have I. But could you prove to that biology teacher that they were wrong. Or did you just do what you do with me and declare I had to be wrong and you right.

Funny how in your little world you are never wrong.

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#109
Mar 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
In my Space Mechanics class, the prof. was a nice Christian guy who had us calculate the possibilities of a close-approaching loosely bound cometary body & at what Earth distance it would break up from gravitational Roche limit. The reason...... whether the atmospheric phenomenon could approximate the stories about the Jewish withdrawal from Egypt, including the parting of the Red Sea.
My grandpa used to make wine from the plum tree in the front yard. He had the large glass bottles, curly tubes & everything.
Anything is possible. I know that one spot in the Gulf of Aquaba is extremely shallow. And just recently had an asteroid pass close to the earth and it cannot be the first.

Of course it would of made an excellent teaching opportunity for students to explore the subject.

And I have found that anything with a high sugar content can be used to make wine. I have also made brandy which is what he may of had those curly tubes for. Brandy is nothing more than distilled wine.
SoE

Montpelier, ND

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#110
Mar 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>

Funny how in your little world you are never wrong.
..........
I believe that would be labeled disciplined study...
One must acquire an area of study or discipline that would move knowledge beyond the common...
Disipline can also be applied to a study of the common...
it is a concept that holds one on track in avoiding a scatter brained approach leading away from the constant rehash of the same material and hopefully to new insights...
Sometimes even creating a new level of incite...:-)
SoE

Montpelier, ND

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#111
Mar 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Anything is possible.
..........
Calculate the amount of time in years that the probability of a human walking through a solid brick wall would occur..(=1)
a question given to grad students in at least one university
SoE

Montpelier, ND

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#112
Mar 1, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
So have I. But could you prove to that biology teacher that they were wrong.
..........
Oh, it's the old nothing can be proven absolutely crap..again?
Everything is related in some fashion...
It's how well (closely) the relationships fit...
Your relating the dust bowl to climate could almost be a case study
in how a lack of discipline would fit....

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#113
Mar 5, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

1

SoE wrote:
<quoted text>
..........
I believe that would be labeled disciplined study...
One must acquire an area of study or discipline that would move knowledge beyond the common...
Disipline can also be applied to a study of the common...
it is a concept that holds one on track in avoiding a scatter brained approach leading away from the constant rehash of the same material and hopefully to new insights...
Sometimes even creating a new level of incite...:-)
Then why do you not engage in displine study instead of the scatter brained biased you currently are engaged in.

True displine requires that you examine all the data and not just what you find agreeable in a unbiased and critical method. To study not only what is presented but do the research.

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114
Mar 5, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

1

SoE wrote:
<quoted text>
..........
Calculate the amount of time in years that the probability of a human walking through a solid brick wall would occur..(=1)
a question given to grad students in at least one university
And yet Hollywood has featured that feat repeatedly.

As for your grad student, I would ask him it it was possible if the bricks were made out of sugar, or soap, or foam. How about if the wall was a holograph?

Face the fact, that you have a hard time thinking out side the box.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#115
Mar 5, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Robot Called 'Yeti' Finds Cracks in Antarctic Ice

Logistical costs moving people account for about 70 to 75 percent of most research budgets in Antarctica, Ray said. A National Science Foundation (NSF) report put the total cost of transportation and support even higher, at 90 percent of the polar science research budget. With the median NSF research grant at $125,000 in July 2012, any cost-savings in logistics frees up money for science. The Yeti-led supply convoys across the ice to McMurdo Station in Antarctica save $2 million annually over plane trips, the NSF estimates.

The Yeti robot, conceived and built by Dartmouth engineering students, cost about $25,000.

The Mars Curiosity Rover cost $2.5 billion to design, construct, and land on another planet.
SoE

Rozet, WY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#117
Mar 6, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet Hollywood has featured that feat repeatedly.
As for your grad student, I would ask him it it was possible if the bricks were made out of sugar, or soap, or foam. How about if the wall was a holograph?
Face the fact, that you have a hard time thinking out side the box.
..........
And yet Hollywood has featured that feat repeatedly.
..........
Obviously where you received your science education
..........
As for your grad student, I would ask him it it was possible if the bricks were made out of sugar, or soap, or foam. How about if the wall was a holograph
..........
Oh, i can produce the density in grams/centimeter(D=m/v) if you would wish...I'm beginning to believe you have a minimal understanding of the tools required for any understanding of the data you haven't acquired...
Just think of the density as being 10^-12 of that residing behind your sinus's
Nice evasion tactic though...
SoE

Rozet, WY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118
Mar 6, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Then why do you not engage in displine study instead of the scatter brained biased you currently are engaged in.
True displine requires that you examine all the data and not just what you find agreeable in a unbiased and critical method. To study not only what is presented but do the research.
..........
Then why do you not engage in displine study instead of the scatter brained biased you currently are engaged in.
..........
A. that's your opinion for what it's worth.. and there may be a consensus forming regarding your opinions ?
..........
True displine requires that you examine all the data and not just what you find agreeable in a unbiased and critical method
..........
I find examination before data helpful
SoE

Montpelier, ND

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#119
Mar 6, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>

Face the fact, that you have a hard time thinking out side the box.
I was taught to think inside the box (discipline)...thus making the box larger...
A concept you seemly fail to apply... and with your science background i'm surprised....
litesong

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#120
Mar 6, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

SoE wrote:
Calculate the amount of time in years that the probability of a human walking through a solid brick wall would occur...
That consideration is the distance between the sub-atomic particles & the ability for sub-atomic particles in another body to pass between the particles of another body.

However, it isn't the actual particles that collide in collisions. If sub-atomic particles actually collided, nuclear detonations would occur. The electro-magnet force fields from one body is what is interacting with electro-magnetic force fields of another body. What we consider solid objects(but aren't), can't really pass through other solid objects, due to the incredibly powerful electro-magnetic fields.
SoE

Montpelier, ND

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121
Mar 6, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

True...the term solid was stated in a relativistic sense....
I can't remember the exact answer. but the probability was something around once in every 10-15 billion years.
True again,the chair i'm setting on isn't exactly
a accurate statement...
SoE

Montpelier, ND

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#122
Mar 6, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

I would settle for atoms passing between...
bronck burger

Bayonne, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#123
Mar 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

very good news, now I CAN TURN THE ARTIC into one big TOMATO FARM. SWEET ONE HUNDRED'S for ALL.
bronck burger

Bayonne, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#124
Mar 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

AND lets not forget some ICE-BERG LETTUCE YUM-YUM
litesong

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#125
Mar 7, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

barf burger wrote:
very good news, now I CAN TURN THE ARTIC into one big TOMATO FARM.
Thank God! I thought you were playing with the Arctic.
SoE

Rozet, WY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126
Mar 8, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

This is not my post...It may provide an idea how that concept came about
..........

The answer to your question is in fact, a matter of opinion. Quantum theory SAYS that there is an (indeed astronomically small) probability for the ball to tunnel through the wall. For that to be true, however, quantum theory must be a VALID theory on the macroscopic level (in other words, macroscopic objects must be describable by quantum theory). This is perfectly possible. It leads (again!) to a view on quantum theory which is a "many worlds" interpretation.
However, there's another view on quantum theory, which says that it DOES NOT describe macroscopic objects - which are strictly classical, but only microscopic objects, and that there is a kind of mysterious transition between them, called a "measurement process". This is the Copenhagen interpretation (the historical view on the matter). Personally, I don't like it, but it exists.

Now, the difficulty (and the reason why it is just a matter of opinion) is that the predictions of both viewpoints are essentially identical.
If you calculate that you have a chance of 10^(-23451234) to 1 to have your ball tunnel through the wall (quantum prediction), and you say that you've never seen it happening (and you've tried maybe, 10^(12345) times only), then there is PERFECT AGREEMENT between prediction and experiment so far. So the pure quantum prediction is verified.
If you take on the Copenhagen view and you say that, given that the ball is a macroscopic, and hence, classical object, it CANNOT tunnel through the wall, and you've tested that 10^(12345) times, then you ALSO conclude, that this is experimentally verified.

However, an argument in favor of the quantum case is that each time that there COULD have been a difference in prediction between the quantum and the classical case, the quantum case won. Albeit for much "smaller" systems than tennis balls. Still, it is a huge extrapolation, and it remains, as for now, still a matter of opinion to decide whether quantum theory is, or is not, valid for macroscopic objects. I like to think that it is, just for the economy of concept. But others are entitled to other opinions.
SoE

Rozet, WY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#127
Mar 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

litesong wrote:
<quoted text> If sub-atomic particles actually collided, nuclear detonations would occur.
I'm not sure i'm following that statement.
That would include particle accelerators like Cern.
Pictures are available of sub-atomic collisions from that facility.
If i recall acurately proton and anti-protons are imparted with near light speed energy and collided..:-)

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128
Mar 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Then why do you not engage in displine study instead of the scatter brained biased you currently are engaged in.
True displine requires that you examine all the data and not just what you find agreeable in a unbiased and critical method. To study not only what is presented but do the research.
Wow, talk about the ultimate Airhead pot who calls the kettle black.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 101 - 120 of147
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

5 Users are viewing the Global Warming Forum right now

Search the Global Warming Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 21 min No Warming 45,547
Expert: We must act fast on warming (Sep '08) 1 hr Patriot AKA Bozo 26,847
Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) 2 hr Mothra 31,843
Letter: Global warming's cause is unknown 4 hr SpaceBlues 1
Global warming is not settled science: Guest op... 4 hr SpaceBlues 1
Will it, won't it? Part 3 (Aug '12) 6 hr Brian_G 1,447
PM 'recklessly endangering future' 12 hr Foo 11
•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••