Our Rising Oceans: VICE on HBO

The second episode of this season focused on sea levels rising from melted ice.


We are totally screwed at this point. All evidence points to the fact that the ice loss is now completely unstoppable and will result in a sea level rise of several meters.

www.youtube.com...

Thanks, I am watching it now.

Published on Mar 11, 2015
Our oceans are rising. With human use of hydrocarbons skyrocketing, waters around the globe are getting hotter and, now, this warm sub-surface water is washing into Antarctica’s massive western glaciers causing the glaciers to retreat and break off. Antarctica holds 90% of the world’s ice and 70% of its freshwater, so if even a small fraction of the ice sheet in Antarctica melts, the resulting sea level rise will completely remap the world as we know it – and it is already happening. In the last decade, some of the most significant glaciers here have tripled their melt rate.

VICE founder Shane Smith travels to the bottom of the world to investigate the instability of the West Antarctic ice sheet and to see first hand how the continent is melting -- and VICE follows the rising oceans to Bangladesh for a glimpse into the world's underwater future. From the UN Climate conference to the People's Climate March to the forces that deny the science of global climate change, this special extended episode covers all sides of the issue and all corners of the globe, ending with a special interview with Vice President Joe Biden.

a reply to: RickinVa

I watched it on the night it aired and I even thought about posting it here on ATS, but I opted not to do so because I wasn't in the mood to listen to all the B.S. that will soon be coming to this thread from the climate change denying right-wingers.

Anyway and as usual, it's yet another great documentary coming from VICE.

I love the part about the climate change conference held in Vegas for climate change deniers.

Apparently, they need periodic help and updates in order to maintain their level of ignorance on the subject.

Thanks for posting, F&S for the OP!

a reply to: RickinVa

Great, now that the doomsday scenario is realized, can we have an informed conversation about realistic mitigation?

No amount of anti-fossil fuel quackery will do want you want it to so, let us now stop being fools and working against our own best interests with the myriad totalitarian absurdities incessantly put forward as 'solutions'.

I posted the link for one simple reason....

The reason why are no longer important as well as trying to point blame somewhere..... the fact of the matter is that the people who have been monitoring the land ice in the Artics are all saying the same thing....

The ice is melting at an enormous rate and can not be stopped or slowed down. It's a done deal and sea levels will rise up and coastal cities will be under water.

As posted above... at this point it's about mitigation of the effects and what can be done to lessen the impacts on humans. Some coastal cities should already have a relocation plan in place for when the water does come... but I am willing to bet that most don't.

There is no solution at this time other than moving away from the coastal regions that will eventually be under water.

a reply to: Flatfish

I don't blame you for not posting it. As you said you can be sure of the attacks and people will do so without even watching the show. I am almost halfway through it right now.

The denier camp with the scripts and funding from the same groups who backed tobacco is kind of outrageous but people follow them blindly. It worked for tobacco and it is working for this as well.

a reply to: RickinVa

you say screwed, I say I have some future beach front property.

a reply to: RickinVa

How ironic this is. I just watched a show yesterday about the vanishing water of the Colorado river.

It's almost like nature is redistributing the resources based on changing environments.

Made it through the first ten minutes. Have to say, that devoting 1/4 of the production to 'attacking' the opposing point of view fails to bode well with me.

I want someone to get into the details of how global warming is being measured. Is the measurement system sound?

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: RickinVa

Great, now that the doomsday scenario is realized, can we have an informed conversation about realistic mitigation?

No amount of anti-fossil fuel quackery will do want you want it to so, let us now stop being fools and working against our own best interests with the myriad totalitarian absurdities incessantly put forward as 'solutions'.

Well that certainly explains this report out yesterday;

www.huffingtonpost.com...

Carbon Emissions Stabilized In 2014; Shows Efforts To Combat Climate Change May Be Working

Solar, wind and other renewables are making such a big difference in greenhouse gas emissions worldwide that global emissions from the energy sector flatlined during a time of economic growth for the first time in 40 years.

The International Energy Agency announced Friday that energy-related CO2 emissions last year were unchanged from the year before, totaling 32.3 billion metric tons of CO2 in both 2013 and 2014. It shows that efforts to reduce emissions to combat climate change may be more effective than previously thought.

Following an announcement earlier this week that China’s CO2 emissions fell 2 percent in 2014, the IEA is crediting 2014’s progress to China using more solar, wind and hydropower while burning less coal. Western Europe’s focus on sustainable growth, energy efficiency and renewables has shown that emissions from energy consumption can fall even as economies grow globally, according to the IEA.

Global CO2 emissions stalled or fell in the early 1980s, 1992 and 2009, each time correlating with a faltering global economy. In 2014, the economy grew 3 percent worldwide.

Apparently, our efforts to reduce CO2 emissions is indeed having a positive affect, despite being referred to as "anti-fossil fuel quackery."

Will it reverse what we're seeing in the polar regions overnight? I doubt it.

On the other hand, I don't think anyone in the documentary said that it's "no use" or that we should give up and concede defeat. What they said was that the ice is melting, it's doing so at an unprecedented rate and that we will realize a rise in sea level across the globe.

They never said that it couldn't be reversed over the long term with smarter, greener energy production and usage.

What they were really saying was that at this point in time, we cannot reverse the trend fast enough to save us from some degree of sea level rise, which is relatively obvious considering the fact that the ice is melting right now.

I don't think anyone said that all of the ice would melt before the trend could be reversed, only that's it's too late to head off at least some degree of intrusive rise in sea level that will now also need to be addressed.

This is what happens when we ignore a problem for 30+yrs.. The problem just gets bigger and the remedies get tougher.

a reply to: RickinVa

I just finished watching. It was very informative I really liked that they explained how the measurments of Antartic ice is taken. That was something I hadn't understood before.

It is sad to see how Bangladesh is being affected by sea level rise right now. They are not enjoying their new beachfront at all.

Yet a couple of months ago sea ice was at its highest since 1988, anyway, I'm roughly 50 feet above mean sea level, I'll sit tight and see what happens, mean while stocking up on tinned food, seeds, and natural fertilisers, and one more rain barrel. (might need those to make a raft?).

originally posted by: Snarl
Made it through the first ten minutes. Have to say, that devoting 1/4 of the production to 'attacking' the opposing point of view fails to bode well with me.

I want someone to get into the details of how global warming is being measured. Is the measurement system sound?

Doesn't matter how global warming is being measured. Climate change doesn't matter either... both a moot points at this stage.

The land ice in the Artic regions is kilometers thick vs. several meters for sea ice. It is the land ice that is melting ...meters per year in some cases.

The melting is continuing and speeding up resulting in faster loss of land ice. It can not be slowed down or stopped at this point... sea levels will continue to rise until coastal cities begin to submerge.

It ain't the sea ice....doesn't matter if next year the Artics have a record season for sea ice.... its the land ice that is the 800 lb gorilla and it is not looking good.

originally posted by: RickinVa

The land ice in the Artic regions is kilometers thick vs. several meters for sea ice. It is the land ice that is melting ...meters per year in some cases.

The melting is continuing and speeding up resulting in faster loss of land ice. It can not be slowed down or stopped at this point... sea levels will continue to rise until coastal cities begin to submerge.

You said 'melting'. Are you telling me that Antarctic temperatures are rising above freezing?

a reply to: pikestaff

see my reply above.... there is a huge difference between sea ice and land ice. Sea ice is several meters thick whereas land ice is miles thick.

The land ice is melting very rapidly.

Sea ice already maintains space in the water....... for a big chuck of sea ice to melt is essentially like taking an icecube out of a glass of water and pouring it back in after it melts... the level of the water in glass wont change much.

Land ice on the other hand, occupies no space in the current sea level. Once land ice melts... it has to go somewhere and the ocean is where it is going.

At least that's the way I understand it.

originally posted by: pikestaff
Yet a couple of months ago sea ice was at its highest since 1988, anyway, I'm roughly 50 feet above mean sea level, I'll sit tight and see what happens, mean while stocking up on tinned food, seeds, and natural fertilisers, and one more rain barrel. (might need those to make a raft?).

Sea ice really isn't a big concern when it comes to rising sea level because it's already in the water and it doesn't cause sea level rise when it melts.

Talking about increases in sea ice is just a deceptive ploy utilized to keep climate change deniers convinced that they're right when nothing could be further from the truth.

It's the melting land ice that you need to worry about.

a reply to: Snarl

Watch the video. Everything is explained in there.

Or if you prefer, change it to:

The melting is continuing and speeding up resulting in faster loss of land ice.

The decrease of land ice is continuing and speeding up resulting in faster loss of land ice.

Doesn't matter whether the pig is wearing lipstick or not. Still the same pig.

a reply to: Snarl

This may not be relevant, but the snow on my garage (not attached to the house, not heated) melted, filled the gutters with water, and froze solid that night. The daytime temp was about 9 degrees, but there wasn't a cloud in the sky. I don't think it has to be above 32 to melt, the air temperature isn't the only factor.

You can tell who hasn't watched the video.

My comment:
www.forbes.com...