|Fig. 1 Seesaw / Sawtooth pattern of SLC|
In so doing I ran across indications that a lot of myth, ignorance, and plain old "we don't know" are involved in some of the issues concerning both climate change and sea level change.
|Fig. 2 Seesaw / Sawtooth pattern of SLC|
I had addressed the issue, yesterday, in this manner:
I have been looking into the historical foundation for notions such as "El Niño," "La Nina," and "The Polar Vortex."(On The Origin of the Sea-level Seesaw). A while after writing that, and then getting back into the research, I ran across this statement:
I am doing so because I think many aspects of current civilization's development of explanations is wrong headed.
"The truth is, no one knows what really causes El Niño."(NOVA PBS, emphasis added). So, that puts the inquiry into the "valid questioning of an issue category," the zone where scientists themselves are not completely in agreement.
There is one thing, in that NOVA PBS post, about the physical aspects of an El Niño which intrigued me.
Not only that, the subject fits nicely into today's discussion even if it is a bit abstract:
In one sense, it's [El Niño is] like an iceberg; most of it is submerged, but part of it sticks out above the sea's surface, as the wedge floats in the surrounding ocean. Partly because warm water is less dense than cool water, and also partly because El Niño waters are less salty than normal seawater. (It's always raining over an El Niño, and the rainwater dilutes the sea.) Both of these conditions contribute to buoyancy. A sharp temperature and density change—called the thermocline—floats about 100 meters below the surface, and marks the bottom of this warm "iceberg." The top layer of water may protrude 150 or more centimeters above sea level. This isn't so hard to picture if you think about tides, which also pile water up above sea level.(ibid, NOVA PBS, emphasis added). There is counter-intuitive material in this issue.
Counter-intuitive like in the issue of the gravity of sea level change (The Gravity of Sea Level Change).
Interestingly, there is even some disagreement about what seems to be a straight forward issue, which is: the movement of actual icebergs.
Yes, that can also cause differing views to be held by competent scientists.
For example, take the case of the iceberg that sank the Titanic (The Iceberg’s Accomplice: Did the Moon Sink the Titanic?).
In these cases it is often a good idea to begin a discussion based upon what aspects of the issue has more. or the most, agreement.
There is agreement that when melt water or an iceberg calves into the ocean from an ice sheet, there is immediate displacement of ocean water, there is immediate loss of mass of the ice sheet, and immediate mass increase of the ocean.
There may be some differing viewpoints, however, as to what happens next, and differing viewpoints as to how it happens.
How does the melt water of the ice sheet get relocated or redistributed in the ocean?
The same question goes for the iceberg melt water once it melts.
My hypothesis at this point is that the displacement and the transference of gravitational-energy, from the ice sheet to the ocean, is the ghost factor which behaves more like the tidal waves, the ocean tides.
Which are created by the gravity of the Moon and Sun, in terms of speed and shape.
But in principle, other than the speed involved, they are like a tsunami wave in the sense of being hidden for most of their early existence:
In the deep ocean, a tsunami wave may only be a few inches high.(What's New). When I finished reading that, I thought "that is wild."
Then I attributed some of the seesaw / sawtooth pattern to the mystery of the tsunami, until I read about the mystery of any wave, ocean type or not.
Once again, this potential solution also tends to be counter intuitive:
Waves are among the most familiar features in the ocean. All waves work similarly, so although we are talking about ocean waves here, the same information would apply to any other waves you might discuss in science classes.(Oceans in Motion: Waves and Tides, emphasis added). The writer is talking about the water itself not moving with the movement of wave energy over vast distances (in order to transfer that energy from point "A" to point "B").
Ocean waves transport energy over vast distances, although the water itself does not move, except up and down.
In the application of this dynamic to ice sheets, the parts that cannot immediately become waves, the icebergs, are moved about slowly until they melt.
So, the sea level rise and fall caused by ice sheet mass-gravity energy loss, in Greenland and Antarctica, is primarily a function of a transfer of energy to a distant location by waves of various sorts, and far less so a relocation of the molecules of water (when the molecules are moved it is via ocean currents).
Those waves move at different speeds, and in different directions, eventually having an effect at tide gauge stations around the globe.
"The truth is in the trend line." - Dredd
The next post in this series is here, the previous post in this series is here.
The Ocean (lyrics here):