James, I meant the second sentence from the Eurekalert press release I
pasted:
"The findings from an international study published today in the journal
Science suggest that the southern Greenland ice sheet may be much more
stable against rising temperatures than previously thought."
Given what the paper says, the above phrase seems to me to be more or less
saying "much more stable" = not guaranteed to melt before the WAIS. IMHO
"less predictable" or "potentially more persistent" would have better
captured the sense of the paper.
-- Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Annan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2007 1:01 AM
Subject: [Global Change: 1872] Re: Latest Hansen
>
> Steve Bloom wrote:
>> Eurekalert has a bit more interpretation from the authors (pasted below).
>> James, given that the study discusses sharply different conditions in the
>> Eemian as contrasted with prior post-MPT interglacials and implies a much
>> greater contribution from the WAIS, "relatively stable" isn't quite the
>> phrase that comes to my mind. That second sentence seems frankly
>> misleading.
>
> Which second sentence? Care to be a bit less cryptic?
>
> James
>
> >
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
