On Jun 20, 4:33 am, William M Connolley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jun 2007, Tom Adams wrote:
> > On Jun 19, 5:02 pm, William M Connolley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I don't think the implication of probable rapid sea-level rise by 2100,
> >> from
> >> analogies with the palaeo record, is supportable.
> > I don't think that was his whole argument.
> Errrm, what else does he have to say then?
The other key part of his argument is:
"IPCC (2001, 2007) foresees twenty-first century sea-level rise of
only a fraction of
a metre with BAU global warming. Their analysis assumes an inertia for
ice
sheets that, we argue, is ... inconsistent
with observations of current ice sheet behaviour."
"existing ice sheet models are missing
realistic (if any) representation of the physics of ice streams and
icequakes,
processes that are needed to obtain realistic nonlinear behaviour."
"...the IPCC analyses and projections do not well account for the
nonlinear physics of wet ice sheet disintegration, ice streams and
eroding ice
shelves..."
Do you believe that part?
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated
venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of
global environmental change.
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the
submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not
gratuitously rude.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
