Climate change Earth's habitability

At EurekAlert: Antarctic glaciers losing ice at fastest rate for 5,500 years, finds study

Spread the love

At the current rate of retreat the vast glaciers, which extend deep into the heart of the ice sheet, could contribute as much as 3.4 metres to global sea level rise over the next several centuries.

Antarctica is covered by two huge ice masses: the East and West Antarctic Ice Sheets, which feed many individual glaciers. Because of the warming climate, the WAIS has been thinning at accelerated rates over the past few decades. Within the ice sheet, the Thwaites and Pine Island glaciers are particularly vulnerable to global warming and are already contributing to rises in sea level.

Now, a new study led by the University of Maine and the British Antarctic Survey, including academics from Imperial College London, has measured the rate of local sea level change – an indirect way to measure ice loss – around these particularly vulnerable glaciers.

They found that the glaciers have begun retreating at a rate not seen in the last 5,500 years. With areas of 192,000 km2 (nearly the size of the island of Great Britain) and 162,300 km2 respectively, the Thwaites and Pine Island glaciers have the potential to cause large rises in global sea level.

“These currently elevated rates of ice melting may signal that those vital arteries from the heart of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet have been ruptured, leading to accelerating flow into the ocean that is potentially disastrous for future global sea level in a warming world. Is it too late to stop the bleeding?”

During the mid-Holocene period, over 5,000 years ago, the climate was warmer than today and thus sea levels were higher and glaciers smaller. The researchers wanted to study fluctuations in sea level since the mid-Holocene, so studied the remnants of old Antarctic beaches, which are today elevated above modern sea level.

They examined seashells and penguin bones on these beaches using radiocarbon dating – a technique that uses the radioactive decay of carbon locked in the shells and bones as a clock to tell us how long they have sat above sea level.

When heavy glaciers sit on the land, they push down or ‘load’ the Earth’s surface. After the glaciers’ ice melts or ‘unloads’, the land ‘bounces back’ so that what once was a beach is now higher than sea level. This explains why the local sea level for this land fell, while globally the water from the melting ice caused global sea levels to rise.

By pinpointing the precise age of these beaches, they could tell when each beach appeared and therefore reconstruct changes in local, or ‘relative’, sea level over time.

The results showed a steady fall in relative sea level over the last 5,500 years, which the researchers interpret as a result of ice loss just prior to that time. This pattern is consistent with relatively stable glacier behaviour with no evidence of large-scale glacier loss or advance.

The paper is published in Nature Geoscience.

EurekAlert

48 Replies to “At EurekAlert: Antarctic glaciers losing ice at fastest rate for 5,500 years, finds study

  1. 1
    relatd says:

    As soon as I see the wealthy beginning to sell their beachfront property, I remain little concerned

  2. 2
    asauber says:

    If UD becomes a Climate Alarmism organ, I’m gone.

    Andrew

  3. 3
    polistra says:

    The demons seem to be returning to their old fave “climate” emergency. This is annoying but not NEARLY as torturous and holocaustal as the “virus” emergency. If this means no more lockdowns and distancing and muzzles and needles, I’m all for it.

  4. 4
  5. 5
    ET says:

    Dirt and soot on glaciers cause them to melt even when the ambient temperature is below freezing. It’s part of the albedo effect.

  6. 6
    Belfast says:

    I’m with you, Andrew.

  7. 7
    ET says:

    To Andrew and Belfast- climate alarmists have the sea levels rising 3.4 meters in decades, not several centuries.

  8. 8
    asauber says:

    “decades, not several centuries”

    ET,

    Decades or centuries… it hardly matters. The headline and story is alarmist.

    Andrew

  9. 9
    ET says:

    It’s not alarmist if it’s true. And of course, decades or centuries matter. There isn’t any alarm over several centuries.

  10. 10
    asauber says:

    “It’s not alarmist if it’s true.”

    ET,

    What’s true? Some guesstimated rate over 5,500 ago? You cannot be serious, dude.

    Andrew

  11. 11
    ET says:

    No, Andrew. The 3.4-meter sea level rise in several centuries.

  12. 12
    BobRyan says:

    The last great ice age, which we are still in, started waning about 11,000 years ago. Great ice ages come and go leaving Earth free of ice when they are gone.

  13. 13
    Belfast says:

    Suppose it is true – so what? How does that serve the Intelligent Design Community?
    Don’t answer that – I’m not up for a month of definitions and philosophical musing and pondering the Question of Evil; nor the spectre of warnings of famine and ‘environmental refugees’.
    Let the cobbler stick to his last

  14. 14
    bornagain77 says:

    Where today’s environmentalists go completely off the rails into ‘environmental radicalism’ is that they, as a primary premise in their arguments, view man, not as the pinnacle of God’s creative acts on earth, but instead view man as a accident of nature, even as a parasite on the earth, and also hold industry as being a very ‘unnatural’ act of man.

    ‘Ecocentrism’: A Brief History of The Radical Environmental Movement – 2021
    In his book ‘The Ecocentrists,’ historian Keith Makoto Woodhouse traces the 1970s radical environmental movement in the U.S.
    “No compromise in defense of Mother Earth”
    – The slogan of Earth First!
    Ecocentrism is a key discourse taken up and developed by the radical environmental movement in the U.S., especially by activists during the 1970s and 1980s. In his 2018 book The Ecocentrists: A History of Radical Environmentalism, environmental historian Keith Makoto Woodhouse traces this fascinating history. He gives the following definition of ‘ecocentrism’ as a starting point:
    “Ecocentric thought assumed that trees, bears, fish, and grasshoppers should receive as much consideration as humans in decisions large and small about the shape of modern society. An ecocentric outlook granted no more value to people — at least in terms of a basic hierarchy of existence — than it did to plants, animals, and ecosystems…[the ecocentrists] believed, fundamentally, that as modern human society gradually destroyed wild nature it veered toward catastrophe, and that its self-destruction would take much of the planet with it.”
    Woodhouse writes that “The simplicity of radical environmentalism’s claims made them elegant and inspiring if taken as rallying cries, but dangerous and malevolent if taken as unqualified truth.”
    In other words, for radical environmentalists, embracing the discourse of ecocentrism often went hand in hand with embracing a discourse of antihumanism: “To reject ecocentrism, radical environmentalists argued, was to embrace anthropocentrism — human-centeredness. Beyond those two positions lay only equivocation.”
    https://medium.com/thewildones/ecocentrism-a-brief-history-of-radical-environmentalism-in-the-u-s-662330cb24b

    The root cause of climate catastrophism
    Excerpt: I believe that the root of today’s environmental catastrophism is a framework of false, anti-human assumptions and values.
    Catastrophists,,, believe that long-term human survival requires that we human parasites refrain from impacting the delicate, nurturing Earth. If we do that, the Earth will supposedly be a stable, safe, and sufficient place to life. Thus, minimizing our impact on our environment—being “green”—is a proper goal.
    None of this is true.
    https://industrialprogress.com/the-root-cause-of-climate-catastrophism/

    Yet, these primary presuppositions that environmental radicalists hold are simply not true.

    When looking at the evidence objectively, we find that the earth gives every indication of being prepared in advance, i.e. ‘terraformed’, for billions of years by God for a technologically advanced civilization to appear.

    Hugh Ross has done excellent work in this area of research.

    Life and Earth History Reveal God’s Miraculous Preparation for Humans – Hugh Ross, PhD – video (2015)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2Y496NYnm8

    Anthropic Principle: A Precise Plan for Humanity By Hugh Ross
    Excerpt: Brandon Carter, the British mathematician who coined the term “anthropic principle” (1974), noted the strange inequity of a universe that spends about 15 billion years “preparing” for the existence of a creature that has the potential to survive no more than 10 million years (optimistically).,, Carter and (later) astrophysicists John Barrow and Frank Tipler demonstrated that the inequality exists for virtually any conceivable intelligent species under any conceivable life-support conditions. Roughly 15 billion years represents a minimum preparation time for advanced life: 11 billion toward formation of a stable planetary system, one with the right chemical and physical conditions for primitive life, and four billion more years toward preparation of a planet within that system, one richly layered with the biodeposits necessary for civilized intelligent life. Even this long time and convergence of “just right” conditions reflect miraculous efficiency.
    Moreover the physical and biological conditions necessary to support an intelligent civilized species do not last indefinitely. They are subject to continuous change: the Sun continues to brighten, Earth’s rotation period lengthens, Earth’s plate tectonic activity declines, and Earth’s atmospheric composition varies. In just 10 million years or less, Earth will lose its ability to sustain human life. In fact, this estimate of the human habitability time window may be grossly optimistic. In all likelihood, a nearby supernova eruption, a climatic perturbation, a social or environmental upheaval, or the genetic accumulation of negative mutations will doom the species to extinction sometime sooner than twenty thousand years from now.
    http://christiangodblog.blogsp.....chive.html

    As well, Michael Denton’s work in this area, i.e. “Defending the Anthropocentric Thesis”, also deserves a honorable mention.

    The Place of Life and Man in Nature: Defending the Anthropocentric Thesis – Michael J. Denton – February 25, 2013
    http://bio-complexity.org/ojs/.....O-C.2013.1

    Privileged Species – video (2015)
    https://youtu.be/VoI2ms5UHWg

    A Reasonable, but Incomplete, Account of How Humans Mastered Fire – Michael Denton – August 4, 2016
    In short, the discovery of fire, our subsequent mastery of it, and the road it opened up to an advanced technology were only possible because of our inhabiting a world almost exactly like planet earth, complete with atmospheric conditions exactly as they are, along with the properties of carbon and oxygen atoms (and indeed many of the other atoms of the periodic table), and because we possessed a unique anatomical design (including the hand) uniquely fit for fire-making.
    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....03048.html

    Fire-Maker – Michael Denton – video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=an98jVCyApo

  15. 15
    bornagain77 says:

    Moreover, Darwinists simply have no clue why man is gifted, above all the other creatures on earth, with a unique ability to ‘master the planet’ simply by infusing ‘immaterial’ information into material substrates.

    Leading evolutionary scientists themselves admit as much,

    Leading Evolutionary Scientists Admit We Have No Evolutionary Explanation of Human Language – December 19, 2014
    Excerpt: Understanding the evolution of language requires evidence regarding origins and processes that led to change. In the last 40 years, there has been an explosion of research on this problem as well as a sense that considerable progress has been made. We argue instead that the richness of ideas is accompanied by a poverty of evidence, with essentially no explanation of how and why our linguistic computations and representations evolved.,,,
    (Marc Hauser, Charles Yang, Robert Berwick, Ian Tattersall, Michael J. Ryan, Jeffrey Watumull, Noam Chomsky and Richard C. Lewontin, “The mystery of language evolution,” Frontiers in Psychology, Vol 5:401 (May 7, 2014).)
    Casey Luskin added: “It’s difficult to imagine much stronger words from a more prestigious collection of experts.”
    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....92141.html

    Thus basically, the atheistic belief behind the global warming hysteria, (i.e. the belief that man, or more particularly the technologically advanced civilization of man, is ‘unnatural’, even parasitic), is a fearful, fallacious, belief that simply has no real evidential basis in reality.

    Moreover, the supposed scientific evidence for global warming itself, contrary to what the media constantly tries to claim, is very suspect.

    In fact, it is no exaggeration to say, “Money Dictates Climate Science”

    Top Scientist: UN “Climate Finance” Is Subsidy for Kleptocracy – 26 January 2016
    Excerpt: Dr. Singer, an atmospheric and space physicist with unassailable scientific credentials, told The New American in an interview after his speech that climate science was far from settled, and that taxpayer money distributed by governments was buying the cooperation of scientists. He also suggested that human impacts on the climate, if there are any, are likely to be so tiny as to be completely insignificant.
    “The climate has always been changing — warming and cooling, warming and cooling,” Singer said. “So we assume that this is a continuing process. The fact that we are now fairly well advanced in the industrial revolution — it has no influence on natural forcing, we don’t affect what the sun does, we don’t affect the volcanoes. So the null hypothesis, which means the normal way events go, we would assume that all changes in climate, even today, are due to the same kinds of natural forcing.”
    The burden of proof, then, is on the alarmists demanding trillions of dollars and vast new controls over humanity under the guise of battling alleged anthropogenic (man-made) global warming (AGW) — not the other way around. “The null hypothesis that has to be disproven or amended is that natural forcings are changing the climate, simply because it’s always been that way and we would assume that it would continue that way,” Singer emphasized. “So the burden of proof definitely has to be on the people who want to control CO2.” Other speakers at the summit emphasized that CO2 is the gas of life, not pollution.
    https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/22402-top-scientist-un-climate-finance-is-subsidy-for-kleptocracy

    Thus in conclusion, contrary to what the far left believes, man is not a ‘accidental parasite’ on earth, but was intended by God to be here.

    Moreover, only the Biblical view of creation gives us the proper and correct understanding of our place in nature and, while the Biblical view encourages us to be good stewards of the environment that God has given us,,,,

    Gen 1:15
    “Then the Lord God took the man and put him into the Garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it”

    ,,, while the Biblical view encourages us to be good stewards of the environment that God has given us,
    the Biblical view of our place in nature does not fall victim to the radical environmentalism that threatens to impoverish, and literally starve to death, a very large percentage of humanity.

    Poverty is the Answer: Radical Environmentalism Leading Us to a New Form of Human Sacrifice
    Excerpt: This willingness to sacrifice human welfare is reaching a fever pitch among those who believe that global warming is a crisis of unimagined proportions
    https://www.nationalreview.com/human-exceptionalism/poverty-answer-radical-environmentalism-leading-us-new-form-human/

    Though environmentalists may want to live in a utopian world where no industry, airplanes, and/or cars exist, I can assure you that if their utopian vision ever became a reality, and they themselves had to personally face the very real consequences of their utopian vision, they would be singing a VERY different tune!

    The world would be a very different, and a much, much. harder place for man to live without ‘intelligently designed’ industry to help us along.

    Jeremiah 29:11
    “’For I know the plans I have for you,’ declares the Lord, ‘plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you a hope and a future.’” —

  16. 16
    asauber says:

    “The 3.4-meter sea level rise in several centuries.”

    ET,

    This is the kind of thing you hold to be true? Chicken Littleism for hundreds of years later? What a joke.

    Andrew

  17. 17
    jerry says:

    For those interested, I highly recommend “Fossil Future” by Alex Epstein. It goes into detail all the implications of using/not using fossil fuels. And the actual details of climate change. Though the particular Antarctic ice sheet is not covered.

    Some here will like it because it is by a philosopher who goes into epistemology and uses a non religious basis for morality.

    Why a philosopher? Because he uses truth and it’s implications to evaluate the area of climate. This is his second book on the topic and shows how a smart person can evaluate anything. Especially the lies and the techniques used to distort what is really happening. Ring any bells on something else.

    Essentially he is saying the climate change advocates are selfish and are deniers of the effects of what their recommendations will do especially to the poor.

  18. 18
    ET says:

    Andrew- learn how to read.

  19. 19
    ET says:

    Belfast:

    Suppose it is true – so what? How does that serve the Intelligent Design Community?

    The intelligent design community is interested in scientific findings that pertain to the Earth.

  20. 20
    bornagain77 says:

    Jerry: “Some here will like it because it is by a philosopher who goes into epistemology and uses a non religious basis for morality.”

    Since God actually is the basis of objective morality, exactly how is that ‘non-religious’, i.e. philosophical, basis for objective morality suppose to work?

    Premise 1: If God does not exist, then objective moral values and duties do not exist.
    Premise 2: Objective moral values and duties do exist.
    Conclusion: Therefore, God exists.
    The Moral Argument – drcraigvideos – video
    https://youtu.be/OxiAikEk2vU?t=276

    As former atheist, turned christian, CS Lewis succinctly stated,

    “My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust?,,,
    – C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity. Harper San Francisco, Zondervan Publishing House, 2001, pp. 38-39.

    of note:

    C.S. Lewis: Top 10 Facts Everyone Should Know About ‘One of the Intellectual Giants of the 20th Century’
    Excerpt: Clive Staples Lewis was one of the intellectual giants of the twentieth century and arguably one of the most influential writers of his day,,
    7. Lewis was a great scholar. His academic books are still required reading at Oxford and Cambridge.,,,
    https://www.christianpost.com/news/c-s-lewis-top-10-facts-everyone-should-know-about-one-of-the-intellectual-giants-of-the-20th-century.html

  21. 21
    chuckdarwin says:

    Roughly 15 billion years represents a minimum preparation time for advanced life: 11 billion toward formation of a stable planetary system, one with the right chemical and physical conditions for primitive life, and four billion more years toward preparation of a planet within that system, one richly layered with the biodeposits necessary for civilized intelligent life. Even this long time and convergence of “just right” conditions reflect miraculous efficiency.

    As Ms. Piggy would say, “all for moi?” Quite the extravaganza, but “miraculous efficiency?” Really?

  22. 22
    asauber says:

    “This explains why the local sea level for this land fell, while globally the water from the melting ice caused global sea levels to rise.”

    It doesn’t explain jack squat.

    Andrew

  23. 23
    bornagain77 says:

    CD: “but “miraculous efficiency?” Really?”

    Well CD, if you disagree, prove Dr. Ross wrong and go ‘intelligently’ create a planet, ‘one richly layered with the biodeposits necessary for civilized intelligent life’, more efficiently.

    Of note:

    The Microbial Engines That Drive Earth’s Biogeochemical Cycles – Paul G. Falkowski – 2008
    Excerpt: Microbial life can easily live without us; we, however, cannot survive without the global catalysis and environmental transformations it provides.
    https://www.nrel.colostate.edu/assets/nrel_files/projects/ssi/docs/microbiology_articles/falkowski_et_al_2008.pdf
    – Paul G. Falkowski is Professor Geological Sciences at Rutgers

    When did oxygenic photosynthesis evolve? – Roger Buick – 2008
    Excerpt:,, U–Pb data from ca 3.8Ga metasediments suggest that this metabolism could have arisen by the start of the geological record. Hence, the hypothesis that oxygenic photosynthesis evolved well before the atmosphere became permanently oxygenated seems well supported.
    http://rstb.royalsocietypublis...../2731.long?

  24. 24
    asauber says:

    “This explains why the local sea level for this land fell, while globally the water from the melting ice caused global sea levels to rise.”

    The more I think about this stupid statement, the stupider it becomes. So the local sea level fell, but rose everywhere else?

    Andrew

  25. 25
    asauber says:

    So maybe next time Eric can post something about what’s missing from the story in the OP. You know, actually investigate coulda woulda shoulda claims.

    Andrew

  26. 26
    jerry says:

    The more I think about this stupid statement, the stupider it becomes.

    Actually make logical sense.

    Land rose so apparent coast line fell. The weight of glacier/ice sheet suppressed the land. The weight is gone so land rose up some.

    Maybe opposite effect is happening to Manhattan. All the buildings are pushing land down so it might appear the water is rising.

  27. 27
    asauber says:

    “Land rose so apparent coast line fell.”

    Jerry,

    How much did it rise? Does the story say?

    Andrew

  28. 28
    jerry says:

    How much did it rise?

    I have no idea.

    The OP just said it did rise.

  29. 29
    asauber says:

    “I have no idea.”

    Jerry,

    Well, the story doesn’t say. It doesn’t say how it was measured. Apparently, that bit of info isn’t important to the story, if you know what I mean.

    Andrew

  30. 30
    JVL says:

    Post-glacial rebound (also called isostatic rebound or crustal rebound) is the rise of land masses after the removal of the huge weight of ice sheets during the last glacial period, which had caused isostatic depression.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound

    It’s a well known and well studied phenomena. Why didn’t you just look it up?

  31. 31
    asauber says:

    “It’s a well known and well studied phenomena.”

    Well-measured?

    Andrew

  32. 32
    JVL says:

    Asuaber: Well-measured?

    You could actually read the article and find out for yourself, make up your own mind.

    But if you’d rather have me tell you what to think I can do that.

  33. 33
    asauber says:

    “You could actually read the article and find out for yourself, make up your own mind.”

    Read through it. It’s not well-measured.

    Andrew

  34. 34
    JVL says:

    Asauber: Read through it. It’s not well-measured.

    So, why did you ask me?

  35. 35
    asauber says:

    “So, why did you ask me?”

    JVL,

    I kind of asked it rhetorically. Wasn’t expecting a reasonable dialog with you.

    Andrew

  36. 36
    JVL says:

    Asauber: I kind of asked it rhetorically. Wasn’t expecting a reasonable dialog with you.

    Thanks for the vote of confidence.

  37. 37
    chuckdarwin says:

    BA77/23
    I don’t think Ross is necessarily wrong in his rendition as far as it goes, I just don’t see it as “miraculous efficiency.” Rather, it seems like an awfully circuitous route just to create a couple people…..

  38. 38
    bornagain77 says:

    CD, so you don’t want to ‘intelligently’ create a planet capable of supporting ‘advanced’ life more efficiently than God did? 🙂

    Please don’t be so modest. 🙂

    ,,, The ‘anthropic principle inequality’ originally comes from Brandon Carter,

    Hugh Ross, Ph astrophysicist — Why the Universe is the way it is – (The Anthropic Inequality) – video (50:24 minute mark)
    ?https://youtu.be/mzIVrcSyprU?t=3028

    Moreover, Dr. Ross’s main point is that the ‘anthropic principle inequality’ strongly indicates that the universe had us in mind all along,,, as the end goal as it were.

    Why the Universe is the Way it is – page 113
    https://books.google.com/books?id=U5LToA5PI-UC&pg=PA113&lpg=PA113&dq=Anthropic+inequality+hugh+ross&source=bl&ots=XubeMWvYpY&sig=ACfU3U1tOYweSmeEpruXa7TW_jaaKjrWzA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjE_c-7laT4AhWULH0KHdk1D9sQ6AF6BAgXEAM#v=onepage&q=Anthropic%20inequality%20hugh%20ross&f=false

    This ‘miraculous efficiency’ for the universe in producing a planet capable of supporting an ‘advanced civilization’ is simply not to be expected under naturalistic presuppositions. Specifically, it smacks of teleological, i.e. end directed, purpose which is strictly forbidden under naturalistic presuppositions.

    And Dr. Ross is not alone in his observation that this is a very ‘lucky’ coincidence

    Lucky Us: Turning the Copernican Principle on Its Head – Daniel Bakken – January 26, 2015
    Excerpt: What if intelligence and technology hadn’t arisen in Earth’s habitability time window? Waltham in Lucky Planet asks “So, how do we explain the remarkable coincidence that the timescale for the emergence of intelligence is almost the same as the timescale for habitability?” Researchers Carter and Watson have dubbed this idea the anthropic inequality and it seems surprising, if it is not for some purpose.,,,
    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....93011.html

    Supplemental notes falsifying the Copernican principle and/or the ‘principle of mediocrity’,

    the Copernican Principle and/or the Principle of Mediocrity has now been overturned by both General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, our two most powerful theories in science: (as well as by several other lines of scientific evidence)
    March 2022
    https://uncommondescent.com/evolution/neil-thomas-on-evolutionary-theory-as-magical-thinking/#comment-748883

    Verse:

    Isaiah 45:18-19
    For thus says the Lord, who created the heavens, who is God, who formed the earth and made it, who established it, who did not create it in vain, who formed it to be inhabited: “I am the Lord, and there is no other. I have not spoken in secret, in a dark place of the earth; I did not say to the seed of Jacob, ‘seek me in vain’; I, the Lord speak righteousness, I declare things that are right.”

  39. 39
    Querius says:

    So, where did all this ice come from anyway?

    And what happened 5,500 years ago to cause the same thing to happen?

    And what would be the effect if all Arctic ice melted?

    Is climate stasis even a reasonable goal?

    FWIW, I think that the number three threat after a nuclear exchange by insane dictators, the largest threat to the earth’s biome continues to be massive rates of deforestation and desertification.

    The number two threat is climate scientists intervening with the the earth’s climate and accidentally wiping out life on earth. Remember that some of them in the 1960s proposed to forestall a predicted ice age by setting off nuclear weapons at the poles . . .

    -Q

  40. 40
    Belfast says:

    ET@19
    “ The intelligent design community is interested in scientific findings that pertain to the Earth.”
    You’re joking, of course, or reaching way out to find a hook.
    If you are not, then it it to be supposed that we will have meteorite collision scares, earthquake news, volcano warnings, drought, floods – the potential list of topics is gargantuan.
    Intelligent design, generally speaking, deals with evidence of design found in life, primarily, and just behind, evidence of design in the formation of the universe. This necessarily deals with aspects of materialism, cause, evolution, and consciousness. Other topics can find a place in the fringes but theoretical predictions of sea-level rises is not one of them.

  41. 41
    Querius says:

    Belfast @40,

    Let me assure you that ET understands ID and is not joking.

    ID does not, generally speaking, have a mission of finding evidence of design in life or the origin of the universe.

    ID is simply the presumption of design in contrast to the presumption of random materialistic interactions out of which life “musta” come about.

    That ID is superior to materialism is based solely on pragmatism, namely that the presumption that all living things and their components have a designed purpose advances science faster than assuming everything is “junk” until proven otherwise. So-called “junk” DNA and “vestigial” organs are two excellent examples.

    From the start, ID has not taken a position on the source of that design. If it makes you happy, you can assume it’s Gaia or a class project at some extraterrestrial university.

    -Q

  42. 42
    chuckdarwin says:

    BA77/38

    This ‘miraculous efficiency’ for the universe in producing a planet capable of supporting an ‘advanced civilization’ is simply not to be expected under naturalistic presuppositions. Specifically, it smacks of teleological, i.e. end directed, purpose which is strictly forbidden under naturalistic presuppositions.

    Like KF, you seem bent on reading more into my comments than is there. I’m not contrasting “design” with naturalism or materialism. Rather, I’m saying that your omnipotent God is surely capable of creating an Eden for a couple human beings without the elaborate and wasteful runup…..

  43. 43
    bornagain77 says:

    CD: “you seem bent on reading more into my comments than is there. I’m not contrasting “design” with naturalism or materialism.”

    And then in the very next sentence he states,,,

    CD: “Rather, I’m saying that your omnipotent God is surely capable of creating an Eden for a couple human beings without the elaborate and wasteful runup…..”

    To point out the blatantly obvious, to argue against Judeo-Christian Theism is to, by default, to argue for some other worldview, whether it be naturalism or materialism, (and/or Deism, Pantheism).

    Yet, the scientific evidence simply does not support any of those worldviews, but rather supports the Judeo-Christian worldview which holds that God created the earth and everything on it, not instantaneously as CD is trying to hold, but over a period of time, i.e. ‘six days’.

    Genesis 2:1-3.
    Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array. By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. Then God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done

    What Happened on Each Day of Creation?
    https://www.christianity.com/wiki/bible/what-happened-on-each-day-of-creation.html

    Thus for CD to ‘theologically’ presuppose that God should have created Eden, basically, instantaneously, (without a ‘wasteful runup’ as he termed it), is for CD to argue against a position that Judeo-Christian Theism never held.

    In short, CD is employing what is known as a straw man fallacy in that he is arguing against a position that I never held.

    Straw Man fallacy
    – A straw man fallacy occurs when someone takes another person’s argument or point, distorts it or exaggerates it in some kind of extreme way, and then attacks the extreme distortion, as if that is really the claim the first person is making.

  44. 44
    bornagain77 says:

    Of related note:

    The Miracle of Man: Extraordinary “Coincidences” All the Way Down –
    – June 9, 2022
    Excerpt: On a new episode of ID the Future, Miracle of Man author and biologist Michael Denton continues his conversation with host Eric Anderson. Here Denton offers a review of several more anthropic “coincidences” in chemistry, biochemistry, and Earth sciences that are fine tuned to allow air-breathing, bipedal, technology-developing terrestrial creatures like ourselves to exist and thrive. The fine tuning, what Denton calls anthropic prior fitness, would seem to require foresight and planning on literally a cosmic scale.
    https://evolutionnews.org/2022/06/the-miracle-of-man-extraordinary-coincidences-all-the-way-down/

    Podcast:

    The Miracle of Man: Extraordinary “Coincidences” All the Way Down
    https://idthefuture.com/1609/

    First three parts of the interview with Dr. Denton are here

    1
    https://idthefuture.com/1601/
    2
    https://idthefuture.com/1604/
    3
    https://idthefuture.com/1606/

    Book

    The Miracle of Man: The Fine Tuning of Nature for Human Existence (Privileged Species Series) – May 6, 2022
    https://www.amazon.com/dp/1637120125/

  45. 45
    jerry says:

    A couple relevant facts about glacier formation.

    First: Glaciers are formed sometimes hundreds of miles from the calving that is the most visible part of a glacier. Snow fall is what forms glaciers and the snow levels at the accumulation area of a glacier have more to do with how big the glacier is than anything else.

    Second: The Antarctic is one of the driest areas on earth. There is little snow fall each year and considered the largest desert on earth. So the accumulation is extremely slow.

    I spent about 2 months in Antartica and there was a movie available about it called I “Desert without Sand.” However, there are some interesting areas that are extremely barren with little ice called the Dry Valleys.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_Hh0q6KsmE

  46. 46
    ET says:

    belfast- ID is about the detection and study of design in nature. Accordingly, the Earth is intelligently designed. So, we study it so we can understand it. Pretty simple, actually.

  47. 47
    Fasteddious says:

    The article focuses on the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS), which is indeed melting/shrinking. However, the Eastern one is apparently growing, as BA-77 alludes to. Articles at wattsupwiththat.com suggest that the WAIS melting is at least partly caused by increased volcanic activity in that area – a purely natural effect – rather than human produced CO2 and “climate change”.
    However, when every storm, flood, drought, hot spell, or unusual weather is blindly attributed to “climate change”, which itself is assumed to be entirely caused by human CO2 emissions, it is no wonder that this article makes the same assumption.
    For any climate change “alarmist”, I have two questions:
    – when has the climate not been changing?
    – when was the climate ideal and how do you know?
    If you cannot answer these questions then how can you say that “climate change” is a bad thing?
    For more, see: https://thopid.blogspot.com/2020/11/climate-change-revisited.html

  48. 48
    bornagain77 says:

    per post 44:

    How We Moved Beyond Darwin to the Miracle of Man – Michael Denton – May 11, 2022
    Concluding paragraph: “The more I examine the universe and study the details of its architecture, the more evidence I find that the universe in some sense must have known that we were coming.”
    And it is not only our biological design which was mysteriously foreseen in the fabric of nature. As The Miracle of Man shows, nature was also strikingly prearranged, as it were, for our unique technological journey from fire making, to metallurgy, to the advanced technology of our current civilization. Long before man made the first fire, long before the first metal was smelted from its ore, nature was already prepared and fit for our technological journey from the Stone Age to the present.”
    https://evolutionnews.org/2022/05/how-we-moved-beyond-darwin-to-the-miracle-of-man/

Leave a Reply