I'd prefer the sentence I quoted in the post above to have been phrased "latest scientific results point to loss of marine-based areas of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet now being inevitable, implying a commitment to more than 3 metres of global mean sea-level rise", but you get the picture.
Yes, but don't get me started on the things that are wrong in that graphic. I spent a lot of time iterating with a graphic artist recently to eliminate a number of misconceptions and gross distortions in similar schematic figures.
That’s great, and necessary, because it takes some effort to understand this icecap. Where will this be published?
Initially these are figures that will be part of an infographic on the International Thwaites Glacier Collaboration website (thwaitesglacier.org) explaining some of the methods used to study the glacier. They might subsequently appear in what we're referring to as an "accomplishments" paper.
There's another one I advised @icebird.bsky.social on that I included in commentary published in Geophysical Research Letters a couple of years ago. doi.org/10.1029/2021...
Thank you, very kind 👌
"Believe" should never feature in a sentence about science.
Just a simple "experts think ..." would be a big improvement.
It would, but I think "consider" or "conclude" would be still better.
And yet many climate models “believe” low climate sensitivity despite scientific proof of very high climate sensitivity. Many climate scientists “believe” slow decadal warming of 0.2C per decade despite scientific evidence of 0.4C decadal warming.
