Talk:Thwaites Glacier

message: * Heterogeneous retreat and ice melt of Thwaites Glacier, West Antarctica. Science Advances  30 Jan 2019  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Conan (talk • contribs) 21:58, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled reference 

message: " This study has raised alarm regarding the glacier collapse, which can lead to nearly 3 ft rise in the sea level.https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/travel/destinations/scientists-discover-warm-water-beneath-doomsday-glacier-in-antarctica/as73901574.cms"
Can someone clarify what the glacier's contribution to sea level rise is likely to be? Another source says "more than half a meter"https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-51097309, which may or may not be the same as "nearly 3 ft". Also the paragraph has a confusing mix of imperial and metric units (celsius and feet), and the sentence quoted (and much of the paragraph) seems to be lifted directly from the Time of India article cited.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.57.196.246 (talk) 20:20, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sea level rise 

message: Infobox needs basic date:  area; length; width; max & min elevation, etc.  — Lentower (talk) 17:59, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Belatedly, I added area and width. However, max elevation does not appear to be listed in any RS I could find, only ice thickness. Neither is length: I suppose it can be worked out from area and width, but this is probably not an exercise we should be engaging in. InformationToKnowledge (talk) 15:42, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox needs basic date added 

message: https://www.livescience.com/agu-antarctica-thwaites-glacier-future 
199.127.133.181 (talk) 17:38, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update 

message: Can someone find/create a map for this? Thanks! -TenorTwelve (talk) 21:28, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The EOS article in the para below has such a map. But I couldn't get it to work! -- except as the tiny thumbnail. --Pete Tillman (talk) 23:13, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I added nine more images recently, including some more maps. The one which currently illustrates the "Importance" section is probably the closest to what you have been looking for. InformationToKnowledge (talk) 15:44, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map please! 

message: https://eos.org/articles/icefin-investigates-a-glacial-underbelly
“Icefin” Investigates a Glacial Underbelly
-- An instrument-laden submersible reveals where—and how rapidly—the Antarctic glacier is melting."  EOS News, 15 March 2023.
Interesting  article, sort of a good-news, bad news combo. The good news is that "the underside of Thwaites is melting far less rapidly than predicted by models." So "the glacier’s lower melt rate [may] translate into slower retreat in the future." 
Time will tell. Pete Tillman (talk) 23:11, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Added to the article now, along with the original studies and an additional supporting reference. InformationToKnowledge (talk) 15:45, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Robot submersible investigates the bottom of Thwaites glacier 

message: I hope this is not controversial but I have just condensed some of the sentences by removing a mention of the names of scientists (especially those who are not notable in the Wikipedia logic, i.e. no Wikipedia articles) and their affiliations or the journal papers where they published in. I think all this is maybe relevant for an academic literature review but not for an encyclopedic article. Readers can find author names and universities if they click on the reference at the end of the sentence or paragraph. I think we should focus on the science and the observations, which less emphasis in the prose on where the scientists worked at the time, which journal they published in, or where the interview was published etc. I haven't removed it in all sentence but felt that those details were provided too often. EMsmile (talk) 22:35, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed mention of people's names and their affiliations 

message: The lead claims faster melting is "adverse"? Based on what? Is Spring (in the Northern Hemisphere) an "adverse event"??? Whether it is beneficial or detrimental depends on the answer to the question:"to What?" and is completely subjective - and clearly not neutral. (I note that water is expected to become an increasingly scarce resource in the decades ahead, so the net effects of higher sea level and lower salinity are moot, imho.)98.21.208.178 (talk) 10:19, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no credible opinion that sea level rise provides any kind of a solution to fresh water scarcity. Quite the opposite in fact. See Effects of climate change on agriculture#Changes in the extent and quality of agricultural land. The other reasons why sea level rise is universally agreed to be an adverse event (a process, really) are listed in that very article. InformationToKnowledge (talk) 12:30, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adversely affected? 

message: We present evidence for seawater intrusions occurring at tidal frequencies over many kilometers beneath the grounded ice of Thwaites Glacier, West Antarctica, a major contributor to sea level rise. The results call into question the traditional approach of modeling a fixed, abrupt transition from grounded ice to ice floating in the ocean with no ice melt at the transition boundary. We delineate a tidally controlled grounding zone, 2 to 6 km in length, and additionally irregular seawater intrusions extending another 6 km inland at spring tide. The rushing of seawater beneath grounded ice over considerable distances makes the glacier more vulnerable to melting from a warmer ocean than anticipated, which in turn will increase projections of ice mass loss.
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2404766121 AaronNGray (talk) 02:55, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Added. InformationToKnowledge (talk) 17:55, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Papers