- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Greenland & Antarctic ice loss
Posted on 9/2/14 at 2:22 pm to C
Posted on 9/2/14 at 2:22 pm to C
It talks about the "height" lost in certain areas, it doesn't show the larger growth of areas.
Understand, I didn't read the article yet, but the graph show areas of ice HEIGHT loss, even though, from what I can surmise, the areas of ice could have increased yet there still could be lost height in areas.
I sure do see a lot of light blue as well. So its decreasing in thickness (height) in some areas and increasing in others.
Does this article dispute the findings of the ice cap increasing in area (not necessarily height)
Understand, I didn't read the article yet, but the graph show areas of ice HEIGHT loss, even though, from what I can surmise, the areas of ice could have increased yet there still could be lost height in areas.
I sure do see a lot of light blue as well. So its decreasing in thickness (height) in some areas and increasing in others.
Does this article dispute the findings of the ice cap increasing in area (not necessarily height)
This post was edited on 9/2/14 at 2:28 pm
Posted on 9/3/14 at 1:23 pm to GeeOH
quote:
derived new elevation models (DEMs)
lol,, freudian doppelgangers..
the same govt that says inflation isn't rising and unemployment is on the decline, would never fudge data right?
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News