Largest Glacier Ice Calving Recorded

The amazing thing is not the size of these things but how far north and south the calving is happening. While everyone in the 'know' is carrying on about global warming - the glaciers are calving much further equatorward than at any time in the last 50 years - the ice is not so much retreating as moving away from the poles and calving into warmer waters - the entire reason why they are calving off is that have moved away from the poles .. . . because of colder than normal conditions which drive the bergs away. I know that is not what you have heard but the only reason glaciers and ice move south or north away from the poles is because it is colder than it was when the ice was created . . .

flame away - but take a look at it on google earth where these things are happening - if the image is from 5 years ago there is no ice there.
 
Where I am sitting right now was covered in 1,000' of ice twice in the last 100,000 years. In between those "ice ages" there were tropical conditions allowing dinosaurs and abundant tropical plant life to abound. This is evident though the fossils we discover here in NE.

Taxing climate change is not gonna to anything for the natural temperature fluctuations that is normal for the 3rd rock from the sun, called earth.
 
Geico266 said:
Where I am sitting right now was covered in 1,000' of ice twice in the last 100,000 years. In between those "ice ages" there were tropical conditions allowing dinosaurs and abundant tropical plant life to abound. This is evident though the fossils we discover here in NE.

Taxing climate change is not gonna to anything for the natural temperature fluctuations that is normal for the 3rd rock from the sun, called earth.
Click to expand...

yeeeeehaaaawwwwwwww

dinosaurpalin.jpg


Dino's died out 65 MILLION years ago. Add another 3 zeros to that 65,000.
 
EdFred said:
Dino's died out 65 MILLION years ago. Add another 3 zeros to that 65,000.
Click to expand...
Ya beat me to it, Ed.

I'd only add that there were no "tropical conditions" in ME between any of the Pleistocene ice ages. The last interglacial (the Eemian) was warmer than the current one, but our current warming trend will probably erase that difference within the next century or two, if it persists.
 
Last edited:
A scene at the beginning of The Day After Tomorrow showed a giant hunk of ice the size of Delaware breaking away from Antarctica, of course right under our heroes feet. The day after I saw it a giant piece of ice the size of Delaware broke away from the Arctic.

I liked that movie. It was fun how the writers were able to get global warming to chase the main characters. I imagine you guys liked it too. AFter all, Manhatten was wiped out by a giant tsunami.
 
steingar said:
A scene at the beginning of The Day After Tomorrow showed a giant hunk of ice the size of Delaware breaking away from Antarctica, of course right under our heroes feet. The day after I saw it a giant piece of ice the size of Delaware broke away from the Arctic.

I liked that movie. It was fun how the writers were able to get global warming to chase the main characters. I imagine you guys liked it too. AFter all, Manhatten was wiped out by a giant tsunami.
Click to expand...

That movie was horrible.
 
Geico266 said:
Where I am sitting right now was covered in 1,000' of ice twice in the last 100,000 years. In between those "ice ages" there were tropical conditions allowing dinosaurs and abundant tropical plant life to abound. This is evident though the fossils we discover here in NE.

Taxing climate change is not gonna to anything for the natural temperature fluctuations that is normal for the 3rd rock from the sun, called earth.
Click to expand...

Before you make sweeping statements like this you need to have your facts straight. Being so wrong, (by orders of magnitude), on something so simple calls any statement you will ever make into question. As Abraham Lincoln said of Stephen Douglas, " It's not what he doesn't know that disturbs me, it's what he thinks he knows that ain't so..."
 
comanchepilot said:
The amazing thing is not the size of these things but how far north and south the calving is happening. While everyone in the 'know' is carrying on about global warming - the glaciers are calving much further equatorward than at any time in the last 50 years - the ice is not so much retreating as moving away from the poles and calving into warmer waters - the entire reason why they are calving off is that have moved away from the poles .. . . because of colder than normal conditions which drive the bergs away. I know that is not what you have heard but the only reason glaciers and ice move south or north away from the poles is because it is colder than it was when the ice was created . . .

flame away - but take a look at it on google earth where these things are happening - if the image is from 5 years ago there is no ice there.
Click to expand...

Huh?

Ice MOVES. Especially floating ice. It drifts with currents just like your airplane does.

Unlike the air, the ocean has highly significant north/south currents due to those inconvenient things called "continents" in the way.

If you're seeing ice further from the poles, it can also be explained by there just being more and/or bigger icebergs, because some of the glaciers and ice shelves are breaking up. Which is known to be true...

And free ice taken from a shelf or a glacier is a retreat, even if the total amount of ice were to remain constant (though it won't). Icebergs don't count.

Big big big logic problem there.
 
Last edited:
Threefingeredjack said:
Before you make sweeping statements like this you need to have your facts straight. Being so wrong, (by orders of magnitude), on something so simple calls any statement you will ever make into question. As Abraham Lincoln said of Stephen Douglas, " It's not what he doesn't know that disturbs me, it's what he thinks he knows that ain't so..."
Click to expand...

Thank you. I got the dinosaur thing wrong by a few years. ;) The fact that ice covered most north America twice in the last 100,000 years is not in dispute. Where I am sitting right now was covered by 1,000' feet of ice. :yes:

Also fact is that dinosaurs roamed this area as we have many, many dig sites finding fossils.
 
We're supposed to be in an ice age right now. The global cycle is not repeating as it should.
 
Geico266 said:
Thank you. I got the dinosaur thing wrong by a few years. ;) The fact that ice covered most north America twice in the last 100,000 years is not in dispute. Where I am sitting right now was covered by 1,000' feet of ice. :yes:

Also fact is that dinosaurs roamed this area as we have many, many dig sites finding fossils.
Click to expand...

The continents were in different places WRT to the equator and each other when the dinosaurs roamed the Earth. At one point where I am at 7500' on the Continental Divide was at the bottom of the ocean.
 
MAKG - the logic problem is yours. If the Earth was warming there would be less ice away from the poles resulting in fewer icebergs away from the poles regardless of the ocean currents. A warmer planet means less ice . . . a colder planet means more ice.
 
comanchepilot said:
MAKG - the logic problem is yours. If the Earth was warming there would be less ice away from the poles resulting in fewer icebergs away from the poles regardless of the ocean currents. A warmer planet means less ice . . . a colder planet means more ice.
Click to expand...

There is less ice... And its climate change. Europe will be plunged into an iceage, North America will turn to a desert. How do you explain Sandy? and the horrific droughts causing massive wildfires? The climate is changing it really isn't up for debate it is an accepted scientific prospect. We still have people debate evolution and cell theory... I don't know why. it's not even opinion it's fact.

But lets try to keep this out of the SZ
 
Last edited:
comanchepilot said:
MAKG - the logic problem is yours. If the Earth was warming there would be less ice away from the poles resulting in fewer icebergs away from the poles regardless of the ocean currents. A warmer planet means less ice . . . a colder planet means more ice.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you're ready to publish a major scientific paper that will be of interest to scientists around the globe. You should consider contacting the National Academy of Sciences with your findings.
 
Mtns2Skies said:
There is less ice... And its climate change. Europe will be plunged into an iceage, North America will turn to a desert. How do you explain Sandy? and the horrific droughts causing massive wildfires? The climate is changing it really isn't up for debate it is an accepted scientific prospect. We still have people debate evolution and cell theory... I don't know why. it's not even opinion it's fact.

But lets try to keep this out of the SZ
Click to expand...

Climate has always been changing. It's not like it was static until 150 years ago. At some point in Earth's history it's been: warmer, cooler, drier, wetter, more CO2, less CO2, more O2, less O2, ice free, ice covered, etc... than now. If it's been all those things, we certainly can't point the finger at any one thing, declare it a witch and burn it at the stake.

As far as the cell theory - that's all it is, theory. Until something can be duplicated or falsified it remains a theory. We haven't duplicated in the lab what has been proposed as the theory, so until then, no it isn't fact.
 
write-stuff said:
Sounds like you're ready to publish a major scientific paper that will be of interest to scientists around the globe. You should consider contacting the National Academy of Sciences with your findings.
Click to expand...

Many people with those ideas have, after collecting tax dollar funded grants to come up with it. Their conclusions are always dire so they need more tax dollar funding. :mad2:



Geez guys, this thread was about the absolute beauty of ice caving of the largest chunk in recorded history, literally. :lol: ;)

The earth has always changed. Always. The sun is never constant. Never. Life begins and will end for us all, one way or another. Enjoy it while you can, life is short. Very short. :rockon:
 
Geico266 said:
Many people with those ideas have, after collecting tax dollar funded grants to come up with it. Their conclusions are always dire so they need more tax dollar funding. :mad2:



Geez guys, this thread was about the absolute beauty of ice caving of the largest chunk in recorded history, literally. :lol: ;)

The earth has always changed. Always. The sun is never constant. Never. Life begins and will end for us all, one way or another. Enjoy it while you can, life is short. Very short. :rockon:
Click to expand...


But but but, we can CONTROL WEATHER PATTERNS!!! Just ask them how!

<Cough BS> reduce cabron emmissions... :goofy:
 
Mtns2Skies said:
There is less ice... And its climate change. Europe will be plunged into an iceage, North America will turn to a desert. How do you explain Sandy? and the horrific droughts causing massive wildfires? The climate is changing it really isn't up for debate it is an accepted scientific prospect. We still have people debate evolution and cell theory... I don't know why. it's not even opinion it's fact.

But lets try to keep this out of the SZ
Click to expand...

Only way to avoid SZ is to quit spinning wild theories that are NOT accepted by all scientists! Yes, climate is changing...has been as long as we've been here. We can't stop it. We can adapt.
 
EdFred said:
Climate has always been changing. It's not like it was static until 150 years ago. At some point in Earth's history it's been: warmer, cooler, drier, wetter, more CO2, less CO2, more O2, less O2, ice free, ice covered, etc... than now. If it's been all those things, we certainly can't point the finger at any one thing, declare it a witch and burn it at the stake.

As far as the cell theory - that's all it is, theory. Until something can be duplicated or falsified it remains a theory. We haven't duplicated in the lab what has been proposed as the theory, so until then, no it isn't fact.
Click to expand...

Yes climate has been changing. However prior to the industrial revolution all signs point to the idea that by now we're supposed to be in an ice age.

Ed when is the last time you took a science class? 30 years ago? You clearly have no idea how a theory works. A theory can only be disproven never proven, however; it can be accepted by the scientific community which means it has been reviewed by people far smarter than all of us. I'm going to go with the PhD's on this one ya know the guys that have spent years and years studying and understanding.

The problem with these things is old people. The people that are so far removed from scientific ideas that they refuse to believe them and think they're all conspiracies. When you all die off climate change will not be even considered controversial because EVERYONE will have accepted it. Like I said I'll defer to the PhD's around the world.
 
Last edited:
Mtns2Skies said:
Yes climate has been changing. However prior to the industrial revolution all signs point to the idea that by now we're supposed to be in an ice age.

Ed when is the last time you took a science class? 30 years ago? You clearly have no idea how a theory works. A theory can only be disproven never proven, however; it can be accepted by the scientific community which means it has been reviewed by people far smarter than all of us. I'm going to go with the PhD's on this one ya know the guys that have spent years and years studying and understanding.

The problem with these things is old people. The people that are so far removed from scientific ideas that they refuse to believe them and think they're all conspiracies. When you all die off climate change will not be even considered controversial because EVERYONE will have accepted it. Like I said I'll defer to the PhD's around the world.
Click to expand...

No. Not 30 years ago. You're going to go with the guys that get funding based on their findings? The same guys that predicted that 2006 would be the worst hurricane season ever? The same ones that have made prediction after prediction, and their guess rate is only slightly better than a coin flip. Sure, go ahead and blindly accept what someone says just because they have letters after their name. Sure, they *may* be right, but their record of predictions also show they are almost as likely to be wrong. Back before you were born, we had a blazing hot year, and all the "experts" said in 25 years the sea level was going to be up 3 meters. Well, it's been 25 years, and as far as I know they haven't moved NYC or Miami, or London, or any other coastal city due to the sea level being 10 feet higher. So much for your experts and their PhDs.

Ice ages don't pop up in the span of 100 years. They advance and retreat over a couple thousand years. Oh, yeah, and the delay may also have something to do with astrometrics, not just the amount of cows farting.
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately, the arguments used against global warming, or climate change as it's now known, are in form the same as those used by Creationists against evolution, and by anti-science activists. Similarly, those who adhere to such arguments are absolutely convinced of their own rightness, despite truly abundant evidence to the contrary.
 
steingar said:
Unfortunately, the arguments used against global warming, or climate change as it's now known, are in form the same as those used by Creationists against evolution, and by anti-science activists. Similarly, those who adhere to such arguments are absolutely convinced of their own rightness, despite truly abundant evidence to the contrary.
Click to expand...

So the dinosaurs had carbon spewing factories that got destroyed by the Chicxulub event? I never knew those pesky avian ancestors were pumping all that carbon dioxide into the air. Man I learn something new every day.

Hey, be careful patting yourself on the back, you might need to see an orthopedist to fix your shoulder.
 
steingar said:
Sorry Ed, just how I see it.
Click to expand...

Yes, convinced of your own "rightness" and anyone who disagrees with you is an inferior being and should be removed from the eugenics pool
 
EdFred said:
Yes, convinced of your own "rightness" and anyone who disagrees with you is an inferior being and should be removed from the eugenics pool
Click to expand...

No, convinced that the majority of arguments I've seen are the same in form as those used by Creationists, just like I said.
 
steingar said:
No, convinced that the majority of arguments I've seen are the same in form as those used by Creationists, just like I said.
Click to expand...

I never stated God caused global warming. There are so many factors at play that there is no way we can assign blame to one thing. That's the problem I have with the "consensus" today. Hell, you can't even get all the PhD's on the same team:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23118-earth-and-others-lose-status-as-goldilocks-worlds.html
 
LDJones said:
Me, too. Except all the PhDs I am listening to disagree with "The Consensus". Go figure. :dunno:
Click to expand...

Just out of curiosity, are you suggesting that the majority of climate scientists do not support the idea of anthroprogenic climate warming?
 
write-stuff said:
Just out of curiosity, are you suggesting that the majority of climate scientists do not support the idea of anthroprogenic climate warming?
Click to expand...

I think he was saying the PhD's he listens to oppose the consensus, and the consensus supports AGW.
 
Threefingeredjack said:
Before you make sweeping statements like this you need to have your facts straight. Being so wrong, (by orders of magnitude), on something so simple calls any statement you will ever make into question. As Abraham Lincoln said of Stephen Douglas, " It's not what he doesn't know that disturbs me, it's what he thinks he knows that ain't so..."
Click to expand...
Wait - how old is the earth again? :dunno:
 
Mtns2Skies said:
Yes climate has been changing. However prior to the industrial revolution all signs point to the idea that by now we're supposed to be in an ice age.

Ed when is the last time you took a science class? 30 years ago? You clearly have no idea how a theory works. A theory can only be disproven never proven, however; it can be accepted by the scientific community which means it has been reviewed by people far smarter than all of us. I'm going to go with the PhD's on this one ya know the guys that have spent years and years studying and understanding.

The problem with these things is old people. The people that are so far removed from scientific ideas that they refuse to believe them and think they're all conspiracies. When you all die off climate change will not be even considered controversial because EVERYONE will have accepted it. Like I said I'll defer to the PhD's around the world.
Click to expand...
Hey smarty pants. When was the industrial age? In your case it must have been after 1976; otherwise we wouldn't have had these headlines in the 1970s:

Yet not so long ago the news media issued dire warnings about global cooling and a coming Ice Age. Consider these headlines:
  • “The Earth’s Cooling Climate,” Science News, November 15, 1969.
  • “Colder Winters Held Dawn of New Ice Age,” Washington Post, January 11, 1970.
  • “Science: Another Ice Age?” Time Magazine, June 24, 1974.
  • “The Ice Age Cometh!” Science News, March 1, 1975.
  • “The Cooling World,” Newsweek, April 28, 1975.
  • “Scientists Ask Why World Climate is Changing; Major Cooling May Be Ahead,” New York Times, May 21, 1975.
  • “In the Grip of a New Ice Age?” International Wildlife July-August, 1975.
  • “A Major Cooling Widely Considered to Be Inevitable,” New York Times, September 14, 1975.
  • “Variations in the Earth’s Orbit, Pacemaker of the Ice Ages,” Science magazine, December 10, 1976.
Reporters told the public about global cooling in the same confident tone used in today’s coverage about global warming, creating the strong impression that no reasonable person could disagree. Here are some examples:
  • “The evidence in support of these predictions [global cooling] has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it.” The Cooling World
  • “A study release last month by two NOAA scientists that the amount of sunshine reaching the ground in the continental U.S. diminished by 1.3% between 1964 and 1972.” The Cooling World
  • “Telltale signs are everywhere...the thickness of the pack ice...the southward migration of warmth-loving creatures like the armadillo...” Another Ice Age?
  • “Since the 1940s the mean global temperature has dropped about 2.7 degrees.” Another Ice Age?
  • “The threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for mankind,” The Ice Age Cometh!
Click to expand...
http://www.examiner.com/article/today-it-s-global-warming-the-70s-it-was-the-coming-ice-age
I don't know when Ed last took a science class, but two things us "old" guys can do is read, and reason. If your life experiences have taken place after the internet was invented, your point of reference is really pretty narrow.
 
Last edited:
IF …. the earth isn't on a warming trend since the last major ice age, why don't we have glaciers in Yosemite valley? or why did the north cascade range of mountains loose all the ancient ice in 1995?

The only 2 questions we have is, "How much has man influenced the trend"? and "How hot will it get before the trend reverses"?
 
Mtns2Skies said:
Yes climate has been changing. However prior to the industrial revolution all signs point to the idea that by now we're supposed to be in an ice age.

Ed when is the last time you took a science class? 30 years ago? You clearly have no idea how a theory works. A theory can only be disproven never proven, however; it can be accepted by the scientific community which means it has been reviewed by people far smarter than all of us. I'm going to go with the PhD's on this one ya know the guys that have spent years and years studying and understanding.

The problem with these things is old people. The people that are so far removed from scientific ideas that they refuse to believe them and think they're all conspiracies. When you all die off climate change will not be even considered controversial because EVERYONE will have accepted it. Like I said I'll defer to the PhD's around the world.
Click to expand...


Yeah, screw the old people, the ones who have been here long enough to know that in fact nothing significant has changed, the wise ones who have seen a long period of time go by on the earth. Ignore them, concentrate on brainwashing the young and impressionable. Yell them the old are wrong and not to be trusted, that trust must be in the state, not their elders, because the state knows best. So because the earth's cycle (not exactly clockwork) is off it must be us right? Logic my ass.

I agree with you however on your statement regarding theories. I will expand and say there is a big difference between a scientific theory and an "I have an idea!" kind of theory.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top