Terry, are you aware that this thread's subject is c*****e c****e ? That is why when I am here I write mostly about c*****e c****e. Is there something about this fact that you don't understand ?

Antarctic ice shelves rapidly thinning
Fri, 03/27/2015 - 10:08am

A new study led by Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the Univ. of California, San Diego (UC San Diego) researchers has revealed that the thickness of Antarctica’s floating ice shelves has recently decreased by as much as 18% in certain areas over nearly two decades, providing new insights on how the Antarctic ice sheet is responding to c*****e c****e.

Data from nearly two decades of satellite missions have shown that the ice volume decline is accelerating, according to a study published in Science and supported by NASA. Scripps graduate student Fernando Paolo, Scripps glaciologist Helen Amanda Fricker and oceanographer Laurie Padman of Earth & Space Research (a non-profit institute specializing in oceanography research) constructed a new high-resolution record of ice shelf thickness based on satellite radar altimetry missions of the European Space Agency from 1994 to 2012.

Merging data from three overlapping missions, the researchers identified changes in ice thickness that took place over more than a decade, an advancement over studying data from single missions that only provide snapshots of trends.

Total ice shelf volume (mean thickness multiplied by ice shelf area) across Antarctica changed very little from 1994 to 2003, then declined rapidly, the study shows. West Antarctic ice shelves lost ice throughout the entire observation period, with accelerated loss in the most recent decade. Earlier gains in East Antarctic ice shelf volume ceased after about 2003, the study showed. Some ice shelves lost up to 18% of their volume from 1994 to 2012.

“Eighteen percent over the course of 18 years is really a substantial change,” said Paolo. “Overall, we show not only the total ice shelf volume is decreasing, but we see an acceleration in the last decade.”

While melting ice shelves do not contribute directly to sea-level rise, the researchers indicate that there is an important indirect effect.

“The ice shelves buttress the flow from grounded ice into the ocean, and that flow impacts sea-level rise, so that’s a key concern from our new study,” said Fricker.

Under current rates of thinning, the researchers estimate the ice shelves restraining the unstable sector of West Antarctica could lose half their volume within the next 200 years.

“This work demonstrates the power of satellite observations to understand change in the great polar ice sheets,” said Thomas Wagner, Program Manager for Cryospheric Sciences at NASA Headquarters. “And with data spanning decades, we can understand some of the most important changes and their implications for sea-level rise.”

Fricker said future studies will concentrate on the causes behind changes in ice shelf volume, including the effects of the atmosphere and ocean.

“We’re looking into connections between El Niño events in the tropical Pacific and changes in the Antarctic ice sheet,” said Paolo. “It’s very far apart but we know that these teleconnections exist. That may ultimately allow us to improve our models for predicting future ice loss.”

Source: Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego

Attitudes shift on i*****l i*********n
GEORGE SKELTON IN SACRAMENTO
Times change. Attitudes soften. People get to know each other and chill.
Twenty-one years ago, California v**ers decided overwhelmingly — 59% of them — to deny public services for immigrants who came here illegally. That included refusing to educate kids.
Courts tossed out most of Proposition187. But they couldn’t throw out the sentiment behind it.
Fast-forward to a dramatic reversal in opinion.
In a new statewide poll released Wednesday night, the Public Policy Institute of California reported that the vast majority of v**ers now favor providing a pathway to citizenship for immigrants here illegally.
They’d need to meet certain conditions, including paying back-taxes, passing a criminal-background check, undergoing a waiting period and learning English.
Likely v**ers favored citizenship for these immigrants by 73% to 24%. Even 61% of Republicans favored it, although nationally GOP politicians have been the biggest obstacle to immigration reform.
All ethnic and age groups strongly supported such citizenship. So did every California region, whether blue or red.
A USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll last September also found broad California support for legalization.
Why the turnaround?
“So many Californians experience immigrants in their daily lives,” said Mark Baldassare, the policy institute’s president and pollster. “And they’re positive experiences.
“We’ve seen in our polling that people consistently see immigrants as more of a benefit to the economy than a burden. They know the importance of citizenship. And they’re at the point where they just want a solution.”
Republicans nationally have been d**gging their feet on immigration reform, one of the blemishes on the GOP brand in California, where the Latino e*****rate has grown substantially since Proposition187.
Three Republican congressmen from the immigrant-rich San Joaquin Valley — Reps. Devin Nunes of Tulare, Jeff Den-ham of Turlock and David Valadao of Hanford — have been fighting their party on the issue, pushing for major reform. So has the agriculture industry.
But not the valley’s most powerful congressman, Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield. He reflects his party’s national base and opposes a comprehensive immigration bill because, his spokesman Matt Sparks recently told The Times, President Obama “cannot be entrusted to enforce the i*********n l*ws previously enacted by Congress.”
Last November, the impatient president acted on his own, through an executive order, to shelter from threatened deportation up to 5 million immigrants living in the country illegally. Roughly 1.5 million are in California.
A Texas federal judge froze the Obama program, and the case is probably headed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
In the policy institute’s poll, 57% of likely v**ers supported the president’s unilateral action. People’s views of Obama played into their opinions, Baldassare said.
Overall, however, California no longer is bashing i*****l i*********n.
There’s no broad public consensus on three other issues confronting the state, the poll found. And it’s one reason the politicians often have such a tough time taking decisive action.
One polarizing issue is Gov. Jerry Brown’s bullet train project.
The price tag, projected at $68 billion, is twice what v**ers were told when they approved the Los Angeles to San Francisco high-speed-rail line seven years ago. And the start of construction is more than two years behind schedule for a 29-mile section in the San Joaquin Valley.
Asked whether they now favor or oppose building the rail system, v**ers were evenly split: 48% to 48%. The biggest support was in the San Francisco Bay Area, the weakest in the Central Valley and Inland Empire.
Another issue where v**ers are torn is whether to spend windfall tax receipts on higher education or on paying down state debt.
The pollster noted that state government is expected to enjoy a multi-billion-dollar surplus over the next several years. V**ers were asked whether the extra should be used to restore university funding or to pay off debt. The response: 47% universities, 48% debt.
V**ers sided with Brown in his dispute with the University of California over money. They also did in a USC Dornsife/Times poll in February.
The governor has proposed kicking in an extra $120 million next year, but only if tuition remains frozen. UC President Janet Napolitano says the university needs $100 million more than that annually or it will hike tuition 5% a year.
Asked about this in the institute’s poll, 52% of v**ers said university funding should be increased only if tuition isn’t raised. In fact, 27% said funding shouldn’t be boosted in any case.
Brown and Napolitano are trying to negotiate a compromise.
One plus for Brown: His job approval remains high for a politician who has been around so long. It’s at 56%.
Whether to extend Brown’s “soak the rich” tax increase — Proposition 30 — when it starts to expire after next year is another issue that divides Californians.
Brown insists it was only meant as a temporary tax, as he promised. But a lot of money is involved — more than $6 billion annually — and Democrats are plotting to keep the revenue flowing.
In the poll, 48% of v**ers favored extending the tax; 32% even making it permanent. But 45% said let it expire. There was one unifying thought, however: 68% said the v**ers should decide, not the Legislature.
They still don’t trust Sacramento.
But they’ve lightened up on i*****l i*********n. Maybe it’s not exactly welcomed. But it’s tolerated and viewed realistically. george.skelton  @latimes.com   Twitter: @LATimesSkelton