We have a hit on a prediction I did last year that this spring climate news would become dire, actually the word that came it me was "terrifying".
The NYTimes came out with this story today that characterized the current situatiOn in Antarctica as very scary and pointed out what I though everyone already knew-- that the ice sheet's collapse is inevitable.
Timing is everything here. They think 6 to 8 feet by the end of the century, give or take several decades. I have thought 20 feet by 2100 but maybe as much as 50 years sooner. Concerned about costal cities and a vision I had in 1986 that well heeled refugees would be pouring out of nyc all at once. I think that vision will come true within the next 20 years.
I'd like to know more about the science, i.e. How quickly would a collapse effect our cities if it happens. Also I would think that they'd see it happening before the final collapse and people would have time to lace coastal cities. what is the earliest it could happen? They don't know I think because this has never happened before in earth history.
But if anyone has some scientific answers about this-- can point to some studies , I'd like to know. All I get on it is that it will happen much earlier than they predict. I don't see it happening this year but when?
I don't want to hear what other psychics think. I've got my own visions and also I trust the visions we get using the prediction timeline method with a lot of people weighing in.
Just want to know all the science the scientists know--glaciologists mainly.
https://climate.nasa.gov/interactives/climate-time-machine
NASA's JPL website interactive is a good place to start, I think. I'll try to find best stats link in a bit...
Wow, Doc..what am amazing resource. I could understand Icelinks at the bottom section. I'm looking forward to a data translation by someone in the know for the rest of it ;-)
My husband and I were talking about all of this yesterday after hearing the piece on NPR with their broader predictions for the end of the century.
I told him they'll be something within a year that surprises everyone and he added and he added..and once it speeds up it will be faster than they imagine. I want us all to be wrong on any dire prediction!!
Hi Michelle - thanks so much! I visit the NASA JPL site often, but the NSIDC site is new to me and I've been surfing for hours there since I found it....
Here's a good read - I like this one because it shows the different Larsen shelves and their effects. Very dramatic! https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-02-24/researchers-continue-watch-massive-rift-antarctica-likely-create-delaware-sized
Glad you and your husband enjoyed the links! :-)
Doc thanks. I've been away and off the grId since posting that NYTimes article. I look forward to reading the science when I get back at the end of the week.
So far I respect James Hansen's work the most. His latest study says 10-20 feet by 2100 give or take some decades. His models are more comprehensive than most other climate scientists, i.e., he includes many more factors in his estimates, and thus his final predictions show higher sea level rise happening much sooner than other estimates, but I still think he is conservative compared to what I sense is coming.
He left NASA because he said political pressure there wouldn't let him tell the truth.
I also read a study a few years ago that used what I consider the best method for getting the truth. It was an intuitive method that sent questionnaires to 500 publishing climatologists asking them for their sense of what the sea level rise would be by century's end. Many would not answer. Using intuition in this way combines their vast scientific knowledge with their intuition which, if you read Malcolm gladwell's book Blink, you will understand why the intuition of an expert may get at the truth on a complex subject. But a few said 20 feet. My gut is that coastal cities will be inundated before 2030.
I look forward to reading the studies you linked.
Unfortunately glaciologist say they don't know how to determine when a glacier will collapse. They say that there's a lot going on inside the glacier that they can't see, then suddenly it collapses. If this whole issue hadn't become so wrapped up in politics and financial stake holders not wanting people to know the truth, governments would start moving people out of nyc and other vulnerable cities much sooner or at least they'd be building storm barriers.
I pray there won't be loss of life but since the government is irresponsible, we are surly going to have a refugee problem and a lot of traumatized displaced people when instead we could have done sensible planning.
I'm also going to meditate on this issue this week and will post something. This is one issue I want to get right, but far the most important issue we face.
Hi Jeanne! Yes, the Antarctic ice loss is one of the most challenging scientific issues right now. Mostly Antarctica was ignored in favor of the Arctic science expeditions for a long, long time.
Researchers just don't know how long it will take for the glaciers to empty into the bay after the Larsen C shelf drops into the sea. Even mile-deep drilling at multiple places upstream from the shelf can't provide the exact volume of ice versus water that's present in those glaciers. That's only one problem, and without that type of data, scientists just don't know how fast sea levels will rise.
And for multiple good reasons, Arctic extrapolations aren't much help when applied to Antarctica since the former is mostly floating ice and the latter has a continent under it.
So solid data predictions are sparse indeed, as you note above.
I do hope the links I added can help provide more info, but again, predicted timelines for sea-level effects are slim indeed.
Oh, I would also add that even with massive glacier melt upstream of Larsen C, along with all the other melts on the continent as well as in the Arctic, a rise to 30 foot levels in 12 years couldn't result -- not without a third of all ice at each pole totally melting at an extremely rapid rate. Right now, the shear volume of ice and thus the data, just don't support that.
Hi Doc,
I generally concur. The sea level rise at the moment is not from melting ice, its from thermal expansion of the oceans, as the seas heat up.
There has been a recent surge in the North Atlantic, which may also be due to the massive shift in Currents underway...and large changes to the Gyres, which are heat pumps, essentially. Who knows, we are into uncharted territory. The problem is the logistical curve of event timings. Everything is speeding up, horribly, in a way I never thought possible. Its a ski ramp of stuff happening. We also are also now firmly, for practical purposes, in early stages of runaway. The frozen tundra is going awol. The huge undersea methane vents, in the Arctic, are there, and getting larger. So the process will now run until it ends, and sometime in the next century, it will stabilise at the new level of climate and the new ocean/weather circulation system. Change will go on for a while, but most of it is in the next 120-150 years, I think. The geomagnetic field is going wild. The Glaciers are definitely going. The Greenland cap is now fragmenting. Etc etc etc. But sea level, well, it is definitely going to get higher. The issue is, how fast. I think we need to split thermal expansion from melt water from the caps, etc. I think it entirely possible that some of the internal estimates I have seen, and discussed, in climate research groups, are possible. My own gut feeling is around 10 meters, plus or minus 5, by say 2120. The unknowables are large. I also believe that things like very large, double vortex storms will become common, and that ultimately, we are going to get superstorms. (Hollywood disaster movie scale). For the next 100 years, sea level rise is not the main issue, its the collapse of the existing weather system, as the rain forests die, and the Geomagnetic vortex of the weather machines at the poles go strange. I think we are facing several decades of severe drought, in the early phase, and then several decades of massive rains, as the system readjusts. Say 40 years of drought, 40 years of rain. Say 100 years of severe agricultural problems. Also throw in strange Solar events, over the next 100 years. If I had heard this 30 years ago, I would have written it off as simply not credible. Now the issue is: "How Bad". I do not want to use frightening language, Doc, but some plain-speaking is required. I have this strange dual role, where the scientist in me overlaps the Intuition. Very weird. Your comments are welcome and appreciated. Regards Zoron.
"I think we are facing several decades of severe drought, in the early phase, and then several decades of massive rains, as the system readjusts."
Zoron, I recently found this 2015 NASA projection which shows a map of North America's drought conditions (see second video) worsening over time in two scenarios: business as usual and moderate emissions. It does not show that 40 years of drought will be followed by 40 years of rains.
I stopped the video at certain years to see where the world might be as I got older. I was really surprised to see the northwest drying up; I thought Oregon and Washington would be relatively safe havens.
The article states that previous research included analysis of only one drought indicator and results from fewer climate models, while this study was the most robust drought projection than any previously published.
"What I think really stands out in the paper is the consistency between different metrics of soil moisture and the findings across all the different climate models," said Kevin Anchukaitis, a climate scientist at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, who was not involved in the study. "It is rare to see all signs pointing so unwaveringly toward the same result, in this case a highly elevated risk of future megadroughts in the United States."
So I was just wondering what you thought of this study and how it does/doesn't jive with your psychic visions.