Bob

Satellite photos show small lakes on the East Antarctic ice shelf. In the past East Antarctica has been thought to be the most stable part of the continent.

Apart from that, a section of the Larson C ice shelf, is fracturing in readiness to calve, an area said to be about 6,000 square kilometres elsewhere.

There are a number of references.

http://mashable.com/2016/08/23/east-antarctica-surface-lakes-glaciers-melting/#iGOxLnKivgqF

A hyperlink in article provides access to comments about the area preparing to calve.

Quote:

"When this iceberg calving event happens — no one knows exactly when it will occur, except that it's getting closer — it will be the largest calving event in Antarctica since 2000, the third-biggest ever recorded and the largest from this particular ice shelf, scientists say."

@Craig Minns,

I haven’t even thought about it and I’m surprised that you have such a naïve comprehension of my earlier comments. For instance, why do you think the data are NOT available from the world of thousands of economists, sociologists, climate scientists, and a plethora of other experts required for proper analysis (but you ask me, a single mere engineer)? You are at risk of being labelled a troll.

I smile that you earlier feigned to uncertainty about human caused global warming, but have gradually exposed your real biased agenda.

@Ant,

I don’t get it. Are you responding to my analysis of a ludicrous scare-story of REPORTED sudden Antarctic sea ice loss this SEPTEMBER allegedly threatening animal species losses? I’ve exposed elsewhere that the F17 satellite data are crap since at least early April 2016 and that NSIDC switched to satellite F18 and have continuing problems in its calibration and whatnot. They’ve also deleted the erroneous graph employed in the big scare-story that was taken up so enthusiastically by the ABC et al.

Did you know that the areas of winter SEA ICE are warmer than the continental interior but can still be down to around minus 40 C air temperatures in September? What have small lakes of water somewhere else in summer got to do with it?

Did you know that that the fracturing of ice shelves (floating glacial ice) is primarily caused by mechanical stressing from tidal up and down bending plus a bit of wave action(storms)? Sure, the initiating mechanical failures will be aggravated by summer melting, but you need to look at the fuller probability that massive mechanical calvings have been (essentially) around for millennia and not be overawed by sensational interpretations of only a few decades of satellite photos.

Note that various satellite sources of data have shown a steady increase in sea ice cover but that was only since 1979 BTW.

"One Nation Senator Malcolm Roberts would not purport to be the first to claim the atmosphere cools the surface of the earth that is warmed by the sun."

Ha ha ha! It's too good. The laws of physics are overturned by sheer sentiment.

Think about what you are suggesting! If it isn't true, then this is the world's greatest conspiracy theory EVER! So the ATMOSPHERE COOLS THE PLANET! Well, that's just overturned a scientific observation just short of 200 years old!
From Wikipedia:
>>The existence of the greenhouse effect was argued for by Joseph Fourier in 1824. The argument and the evidence was further strengthened by Claude Pouillet in 1827 and 1838, and reasoned from experimental observations by John Tyndall in 1859.[12] The effect was more fully quantified by Svante Arrhenius in 1896.[13] However, the term "greenhouse" wasn't used to describe the effect by any of these scientists; the term was first used in this way by Nils Gustaf Ekholm in 1901.[14][15] In 1917 Alexander Graham Bell wrote "[The unchecked burning of fossil fuels] would have a sort of greenhouse effect", and "The net result is the greenhouse becomes a sort of hot-house."[16][17] Bell went on to also advocate the use of alternate energy sources, such as solar energy.[18]<<
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect#History

This short history shows that any 'conspiracy' Deniers believe in must span nearly 2 centuries. Just *think* about what they are suggesting! Some world-wide scientific conspiracy started just after the Napoleonic wars, and continued through WW1, WW2, the Cold War, the fall of the Soviet Union, the re-unification of Germany, etc. Such a conspiracy surviving all these different world-changing political changes boggles the imagination. Deniers must live in a very scary world, and believe in an organisation that dwarfs James Bond's "Spectre"!

I know you haven't thought about it Bob, because let's face it, you don't want to think about anything that doesn't confirm your already predetermined conclusions, do you? Not very good engineering practise mate...

As you say, however, lots of people with lots of different skill sets no doubt have looked at it and thought about it. Ask yourself this: why are none of them advocating for maintenance of the status quo as you are?

I've already clearly stated my view that the science around human induced climate change is not yet fully understood and I've also clearly made the point that it doesn't matter, if the clearly better economic decision is to change to a renewable-energy based industrial model, which seems to be the case.

On that note, I'll leave you lot to enjoy your endless circular argument.

@Silligy,

You’ve re-aroused my interest in Venus after many years and I’ve just found a fascinating study* employing Magellan programme graphics (otherwise pay-walled)showing atmospheric profiles. There’s a big transition above the massive sulphuric acid cloud layer. There are interesting comparisons with Earth.

http://www.datasync.com/~rsf1/vel/1918vpt.htm

Venus is strange. Why is the surface T roughly constant day and night? Why rotating in opposite direction to other planets? All that sulphuric acid suggests volcanic activity? The thick clouds may have a blanket effect rather different to Sagan’s GHG assumption? BTW at Venus surface T’s emission spectra would be substantially in the NEAR infrared to which CO2 is almost transparent on Earth.
*The study explores the possibility of live viruses above the clouds

@Max Green,

“This short history shows that any 'conspiracy' Deniers believe in must span nearly 2 centuries.”

Yes, that’s a fair statement if the term ‘deniers’ is properly used, as it would be for instance with the small group of deniers known as “the dragon slayers”. However, don’t apply it to the vast majority of ‘sceptics’ of CAGW who fully accept the nominal warming effect of GHG’s, but question that feedback mechanisms etcetera are ‘poorly understood’ and that the net outcomes have only been guessed at via computer modelling (and rather poorly).

“Deniers must live in a very scary world, and believe in an organisation that dwarfs James Bond's "Spectre"!”

That’s quite amusing if you are applying it to sceptics rather than deniers. It seems to me that YOU live in a scary world where you predict a horrible death for your grandchildren but cannot tolerate any discussion of good news.

You would probably relish this study that amazingly got past peer review in the esteemed Nature journal. It claims CO2 sensitivity at 7 – 13°C, so your grandchildren are at grave risk. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature19798.html

You probably don’t want to know, but even Gavin Schmidt asserts that claim to be wrong.

@Craig Minns,
Thank you for confirming what I suspected.

Don't thank me Bob, no matter what I wrote, it would have "confirmed what you suspected"...