News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Can we get to 350 ppm? Yes we can by stouset on Saturday July 22, 2017 @03:27PM (#14828889)
The Larsen C shelf collapse has nothing to do with climate change. Even climate scientists have been adamant about this fact.

As Antarctic glaciers flow out toward the ocean, they form shelves over the water. At ape point, the shelf becomes too large to sustain itself and collapses. This is what happened recently, and it's an event that would have happened no matter what.

Re:Can we get to 350 ppm? Yes we can by kenfox on Saturday July 22, 2017 @03:45PM (#14828980)
The language that scientists have used is significantly less confident than yours (from http://www.projectmidas.org/blog/calving/):

> Dr Martin O’Leary: “Although this is a natural event, and we’re not aware of any link to human-induced climate change, this puts the ice shelf in a very vulnerable position. This is the furthest back that the ice front has been in recorded history."

I interpret those comments as saying it's currently an open research question. Lots of popular press I've read though does leap to there being some link. I think it pays to be open minded here and consider that ocean and polar warming could have an impact on ice shelf stability.

Re:Can we get to 350 ppm? Yes we can by _puk on Saturday July 22, 2017 @04:30PM (#14829196)
"This is the furthest back that the ice front has been in recorded history."

I'm curious; in the context of the ice front, when does recorded history begin?

Are we talking, 10s, 100s, or 1000s of years?

Re:Can we get to 350 ppm? Yes we can by strainer on Saturday July 22, 2017 @07:24PM (#14830008)
An obvious minimum link is that the area which has melted and broke off, also coincidently happens to have elevated temps recorded and indicated by modelling.

https://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/warming_antarctic...

There is still the whole "correlation isnt causation / aint necessarily so" caveat, but the correlation with AWG is obvious.