Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Iceberg 3 times the size of London







jabba

Well-known member
Jul 15, 2009
1,342
York
i recall they once shipped ice from the Artic for early refrigeration. i also recall an idea to tow an iceburg to the desert for irrigation, though that might be the plot to a B movie.

Don't know if a movie, but was a question in Nuffield Physics A-level in the 70's. You had to estimate a number of parameters to see if economically viable.
 




daveinprague

New member
Oct 1, 2009
12,572
Prague, Czech Republic
To imagine pumping crap into the atmosphere for the last 300 years isnt going to have an effect is a bit daft if you ask me
 






daveinprague

New member
Oct 1, 2009
12,572
Prague, Czech Republic
Cows have been doing it a lot longer than that

Ah, but not in the vast herds we see today in Brazil and other South American countries that encroaches on forests dramatically. It is another aspect for sure, but the crap we have pumped up into the ozone must be huge over 300 unregulated years.
 








sydney

tinky ****in winky
Jul 11, 2003
17,965
town full of eejits
Without being pedantic - the iceburg is 6000sqkm... London is 1500sqkm, so it's actually 4 times the size...

London is , i would say , on average , less than 25 mtrs tall over it's entire area , this iceberg is likely to be 80- 200 mtrs deep........this would make it 12 times the size.
 




Napper

Well-known member
Jul 9, 2003
24,452
Sussex
31 posts in and not one comedian has mentioned this in relation to "ulloas penalty"

Jokers losing their touch
 














Triggaaar

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
53,183
Goldstone
Without being pedantic - the iceburg is 6000sqkm... London is 1500sqkm, so it's actually 4 times the size...
Without being rude - you're stupid :whistle:
 


No one can deny that global warming is happening. The earth temperatures rise and drop long before humans walked on the surface, and will continue to do so long after we become extinct.

The debate is whether we cause it, or can anything to stop it.

100% this.

We could change our ways, stop driving, flying and generate all other power from renewable methods. Such things would dramatically reduce the standard of living and cost more money than one could imagine both in terms of lost productivity and initial costs of new infrastruture.

And new, as there is every few dozen years, a big volancoe errrupts, spewing more greenshouse gasses into the atmosphere in a few hours than the whole of hunan kind had saved over years.

It's natural and it's always happened. And as quoted, this statement does not deny global warming in occuring, but disagrees we can or should do something about it.

If humans are the cause and we are making it so much worse then guess what. The earth will become much less hospitable in suporting life. A good chunck of the population will die and the problem is solved.

Not the be confused with the immediate issue of making air cleaner in our cities. The current Dieselgate smog that produces these awful No2 particles are a direct result of do gooders trying to reduce greenshouses gases.

Coz of them we save pumping a few bottles of CO2 into the air (which, incidentally, plants and trees love and need to survive on) and instead pumped loads of black sooty diesel fumes into it instead.
 


The Antikythera Mechanism

The oldest known computer
NSC Patron
Aug 7, 2003
8,090
No not a giant lettuce.

An iceberg 3 times the size of London just broke off from Antarctica weighing an estimated one trillion tonnes.

How can the most powerful man in the world deny that global warming IS happening.

Piers Corbyn told him it's not happening as a result of human actions!
 




larus

Well-known member
100% this.

We could change our ways, stop driving, flying and generate all other power from renewable methods. Such things would dramatically reduce the standard of living and cost more money than one could imagine both in terms of lost productivity and initial costs of new infrastruture.

And new, as there is every few dozen years, a big volancoe errrupts, spewing more greenshouse gasses into the atmosphere in a few hours than the whole of hunan kind had saved over years.

It's natural and it's always happened. And as quoted, this statement does not deny global warming in occuring, but disagrees we can or should do something about it.

If humans are the cause and we are making it so much worse then guess what. The earth will become much less hospitable in suporting life. A good chunck of the population will die and the problem is solved.

Not the be confused with the immediate issue of making air cleaner in our cities. The current Dieselgate smog that produces these awful No2 particles are a direct result of do gooders trying to reduce greenshouses gases.

Coz of them we save pumping a few bottles of CO2 into the air (which, incidentally, plants and trees love and need to survive on) and instead pumped loads of black sooty diesel fumes into it instead.


There are 5 main datasets for temperature. 3 based on land and ocean measurements and 2 on satellite data. The 2 satellite datasets show hardly any warming (RSS showed an 18 year pause until the new version suddenly made 'adjustments' and produced a new version to take into account orbital decay). The new version is produced and, guess what' the pause has gone.

The land based ones are a joke - 70% of the planet is ocean. Of the remaining 30%, 9% is Antarctica (I'm sure we have loads of thermometers there collecting data). Then there's the huge areas of Africa, South America, Russia, Greenland, Asia where the historical records are non-existent or patchy (to say the least).

In the earths history, CO2 has been as high as 7000 ppm (it's currently 400 ish). One thing many people don't realise is that if CO2 drops below 150/160 ppm life ceases on the planet.

Cooling oceans absorb more CO2 and warming ones give up more to the atmosphere.

Yet, we are trying to extrapolate a 20 year slight warming (1979 - 2000) and project that forward. In the unadjusted 20th century temperature datasets, there was warming up to the 1940s, then cooling to the 1970s, then warming again. In the US in the 1930s they had the "dustbowl" due to the extreme heat.

Yes, we should protect the planet and eliminate pollution, but the science is not settled on CO2 and global warming.

We've had warmer oceans at the end of the 20th century too with more El-Nino, and this releases vast amounts of heat into the atmosphere. There is so much we don't understand about the climate (ocean cycles, AMO, PDO, ENSO), yet the 'lefties' and there green agenda seem to thing it's down to a minor increase in a trace gas from 0.0287% to 0.04%.

michaels-102-ipcc-models-vs-reality.jpg

The IPCC models are very impressive I must admit.
 




Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here