We really are FUBAR

Ikohn4ever

CAGiversary!
Feedback
5 (100%)
Ominous Arctic melt worries experts

By SETH BORENSTEIN, AP Science Writer 1 hour, 11 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - An already relentless melting of the Arctic greatly accelerated this summer, a warning sign that some scientists worry could mean global warming has passed an ominous tipping point. One even speculated that summer sea ice would be gone in five years.

Greenland's ice sheet melted nearly 19 billion tons more than the previous high mark, and the volume of Arctic sea ice at summer's end was half what it was just four years earlier, according to new NASA satellite data obtained by The Associated Press.

"The Arctic is screaming," said Mark Serreze, senior scientist at the government's snow and ice data center in Boulder, Colo.

Just last year, two top scientists surprised their colleagues by projecting that the Arctic sea ice was melting so rapidly that it could disappear entirely by the summer of 2040.

This week, after reviewing his own new data, NASA climate scientist Jay Zwally said: "At this rate, the Arctic Ocean could be nearly ice-free at the end of summer by 2012, much faster than previous predictions."


So scientists in recent days have been asking themselves these questions: Was the record melt seen all over the Arctic in 2007 a blip amid relentless and steady warming? Or has everything sped up to a new climate cycle that goes beyond the worst case scenarios presented by computer models?

"The Arctic is often cited as the canary in the coal mine for climate warming," said Zwally, who as a teenager hauled coal. "Now as a sign of climate warming, the canary has died. It is time to start getting out of the coal mines."

It is the burning of coal, oil and other fossil fuels that produces carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, responsible for man-made global warming. For the past several days, government diplomats have been debating in Bali, Indonesia, the outlines of a new climate treaty calling for tougher limits on these gases.

What happens in the Arctic has implications for the rest of the world. Faster melting there means eventual sea level rise and more immediate changes in winter weather because of less sea ice.

In the United States, a weakened Arctic blast moving south to collide with moist air from the Gulf of Mexico can mean less rain and snow in some areas, including the drought-stricken Southeast, said Michael MacCracken, a former federal climate scientist who now heads the nonprofit Climate Institute. Some regions, like Colorado, would likely get extra rain or snow.

More than 18 scientists told the AP that they were surprised by the level of ice melt this year.

"I don't pay much attention to one year ... but this year the change is so big, particularly in the Arctic sea ice, that you've got to stop and say, 'What is going on here?' You can't look away from what's happening here," said Waleed Abdalati, NASA's chief of cyrospheric sciences. "This is going to be a watershed year."

2007 shattered records for Arctic melt in the following ways:

• 552 billion tons of ice melted this summer from the Greenland ice sheet, according to preliminary satellite data to be released by NASA Wednesday. That's 15 percent more than the annual average summer melt, beating 2005's record.

• A record amount of surface ice was lost over Greenland this year, 12 percent more than the previous worst year, 2005, according to data the University of Colorado released Monday. That's nearly quadruple the amount that melted just 15 years ago. It's an amount of water that could cover Washington, D.C., a half-mile deep, researchers calculated.

• The surface area of summer sea ice floating in the Arctic Ocean this summer was nearly 23 percent below the previous record. The dwindling sea ice already has affected wildlife, with 6,000 walruses coming ashore in northwest Alaska in October for the first time in recorded history. Another first: the Northwest Passage was open to navigation.

• Still to be released is NASA data showing the remaining Arctic sea ice to be unusually thin, another record. That makes it more likely to melt in future summers. Combining the shrinking area covered by sea ice with the new thinness of the remaining ice, scientists calculate that the overall volume of ice is half of 2004's total.

• Alaska's frozen permafrost is warming, not quite thawing yet. But temperature measurements 66 feet deep in the frozen soil rose nearly four-tenths of a degree from 2006 to 2007, according to measurements from the University of Alaska. While that may not sound like much, "it's very significant," said University of Alaska professor Vladimir Romanovsky.

- Surface temperatures in the Arctic Ocean this summer were the highest in 77 years of record-keeping, with some places 8 degrees Fahrenheit above normal, according to research to be released Wednesday by University of Washington's Michael Steele.

Greenland, in particular, is a significant bellwether. Most of its surface is covered by ice. If it completely melted — something key scientists think would likely take centuries, not decades — it could add more than 22 feet to the world's sea level.

However, for nearly the past 30 years, the data pattern of its ice sheet melt has zigzagged. A bad year, like 2005, would be followed by a couple of lesser years.

According to that pattern, 2007 shouldn't have been a major melt year, but it was, said Konrad Steffen, of the University of Colorado, which gathered the latest data.

"I'm quite concerned," he said. "Now I look at 2008. Will it be even warmer than the past year?"

Other new data, from a NASA satellite, measures ice volume. NASA geophysicist Scott Luthcke, reviewing it and other Greenland numbers, concluded: "We are quite likely entering a new regime."

Melting of sea ice and Greenland's ice sheets also alarms scientists because they become part of a troubling spiral.

White sea ice reflects about 80 percent of the sun's heat off Earth, NASA's Zwally said. When there is no sea ice, about 90 percent of the heat goes into the ocean which then warms everything else up. Warmer oceans then lead to more melting.

"That feedback is the key to why the models predict that the Arctic warming is going to be faster," Zwally said. "It's getting even worse than the models predicted."

NASA scientist James Hansen, the lone-wolf researcher often called the godfather of global warming, on Thursday was to tell scientists and others at the American Geophysical Union scientific in San Francisco that in some ways Earth has hit one of his so-called tipping points, based on Greenland melt data.

"We have passed that and some other tipping points in the way that I will define them," Hansen said in an e-mail. "We have not passed a point of no return. We can still roll things back in time — but it is going to require a quick turn in direction."

Last year, Cecilia Bitz at the University of Washington and Marika Holland at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado startled their colleagues when they predicted an Arctic free of sea ice in just a few decades. Both say they are surprised by the dramatic melt of 2007.

Bitz, unlike others at NASA, believes that "next year we'll be back to normal, but we'll be seeing big anomalies again, occurring more frequently in the future." And that normal, she said, is still a "relentless decline" in ice.




All i know is that you are living in a small island country in the South Pacific, you can pretty much kiss your atoll goodbye in the next 10-20 years if this much ice continues to melt. Where the hell those people are going to go will be an interesting situation.
 
Wait - Canada will be warmer and greener and Washington DC wil be drowned in a half-mile of water? You think that could happen during a joint session of congress? I really don't see the down side here...


edit: Oh yeah, and is this the same NASA scientist that recently found out all his data on the mean global temperature was critically flawed?

I also find it hard to fathom that if we are indeed responsible for this warming over the last 150 years from all our bad, bad technology, that it's theoretically possible to reverse the effects considering there are 6 billion people on the planet who breathe that awful pollutant carbon dioxide
 
[quote name='bmulligan']Wait - Canada will be warmer and greener and Washington DC wil be drowned in a half-mile of water? You think that could happen during a joint session of congress? I really don't see the down side here...


edit: Oh yeah, and is this the same NASA scientist that recently found out all his data on the mean global temperature was critically flawed?

I also find it hard to fathom that if we are indeed responsible for this warming over the last 150 years from all our bad, bad technology, that it's theoretically possible to reverse the effects considering there are 6 billion people on the planet who breathe that awful pollutant carbon dioxide [/QUOTE]


fuck.... I live about 20-30 miles from DC.

And my gf wants to work for the government?!?!!?

fuck that... The further I am away from DC, the better chances of me surviving the blast from 20-30 miles out and enough time to get to a good shelter to avoid the fall out.

:)

I know south florida is a gonner.... I told my friend who lives in Kendal , but he wants to move to west side of florida.

I just want to get the fuck out of here.
 
Yeah my pops lives right on the Atlantic near Ft. Lauderdale. Sea levels rise, property values fall.

The way some well paid scientists in the pocket of big oil deny global warming reminds me of how well paid sceintists in the pocket of big tobacco denied smoking was bad for you.

I never quite understood the point "good for the environment = bad for the economy." Oh really? Where are you going to spend your fortunes, drive your Lexus, float your boat or floss your chains without an earth to inhabit?
 
[quote name='Article']"The Arctic is screaming," said Mark Serreze, senior scientist at the government's snow and ice data center in Boulder, Colo.[/quote]
[quote name='article']"The Arctic is often cited as the canary in the coal mine for climate warming," said Zwally, who as a teenager hauled coal. "Now as a sign of climate warming, the canary has died. It is time to start getting out of the coal mines."[/quote]
I know this article is meant to be all doomy and gloomy, but these two quotes are almost Onion-worthy.
 
I'm so sick of hearing people talk about global warming who obviously have no scientific background.

This is not a "Politics & Controversy" topic.
 
[quote name='pittpizza']
The way some well paid scientists in the pocket of big oil deny global warming reminds me of how well paid sceintists in the pocket of big tobacco denied smoking was bad for you.[/quote]"Reminds" you? fuck me, man, they're often the exact same fucking scientists.
 
[quote name='pittpizza']I never quite understood the point "good for the environment = bad for the economy."[/QUOTE]

Eh, those folks have clearly never been to Wild Oats, Trader Joes, Aveda, or god knows whatever other "holistic lifestyle" cult shops.
 
[quote name='pittpizza']
I never quite understood the point "good for the environment = bad for the economy." Oh really? Where are you going to spend your fortunes, drive your Lexus, float your boat or floss your chains without an earth to inhabit?[/QUOTE]

That's because it's true, short term. And that's the only thing people in Washington or on Wall Street seem to care about.

I'm not as concerned about the Arctic melting as I am the entire Southeast going up in flames.

And honestly, while the S. Georgia fires were bad in 2005(?), if you see a Southern California-type wildfire start up in the suburbs of Atlanta, we're all fucked.
 
[quote name='pittpizza']I never quite understood the point "good for the environment = bad for the economy." Oh really? Where are you going to spend your fortunes, drive your Lexus, float your boat or floss your chains without an earth to inhabit?[/QUOTE]They can coexist just fine (see Catellus' projects, for example), but often, environmentalist mentalities can harm the economy.

Here's an example: AMD wanted to build a new building here in Austin for it's employees. It's a very green building that will recycle rain water, among other things, and AMD is leaving a full 43% of their new campus undeveloped, as well as launching an initiative to repopulate native grasses.
The Save Our Springs Alliance (SOS) actually tried to stop the construction of AMD's new building because it might harm the salamanders in the Edwards Aquifer. While the aquifer is Austin's source of water, it was shown that the damage to it would be negligible over all--and it has been.
 
[quote name='Liquid 2']They can coexist just fine (see Catellus' projects, for example), but often, environmentalist mentalities can harm the economy.

Here's an example: AMD wanted to build a new building here in Austin for it's employees. It's a very green building that will recycle rain water, among other things, and AMD is leaving a full 43% of their new campus undeveloped, as well as launching an initiative to repopulate native grasses.
The Save Our Springs Alliance (SOS) actually tried to stop the construction of AMD's new building because it might harm the salamanders in the Edwards Aquifer. While the aquifer is Austin's source of water, it was shown that the damage to it would be negligible over all--and it has been.[/QUOTE]


well i dont know the case so I cant give specifics, but most animals that lively solely underground can easily go extinct because they are different species per underground cave. They are much more susceptible to change. I am all for building green building, just make sure that it passes an ecological damage report and build away.
 
we're right on schedule!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012

and it's not 'global warming'

it's 'global climate change'

some cold places get warm, some warm places get warmer
some warm places get cold, some cold places get colder
storms get bigger... and more violent

society breaks down

jake gyllenhall can't find his parents....

new jerusalem descends...

don't you people go to the movies?

/gore
 
Humans have been forcing the environment to adapt to us rather than the other way around. Not as big a deal as people make it out to be.
 
[quote name='dopa345']Humans have been forcing the environment to adapt to us rather than the other way around. Not as big a deal as people make it out to be.[/quote]

Yeah, the heartbeat of the human-race's sole source of survival is starting to murmur. No big deal at all.
 
[quote name='pittpizza']Yeah, the heartbeat of the human-race's sole source of survival is starting to murmur. No big deal at all.[/QUOTE]

agree

i think a good analogy would be...

the earth is the heart, and humans are the plaque in the arteries

up to a point the heart can deal, fine

but once we hit critical mass, the higher order of things can get fuxxored in a relatively short period of time

it's not an evil/good or master/dominance scenario

it's just a common sense, self preservation one

PLUS, in the war of making each other adapt.... who do you think will win eventually.... long term? The Earth, (and its deceptively strong gravitational field) that's who.

meteor_impact_2003.gif


The Earth is all like... adapt to THIS, bitches!!!
 
[quote name='dopa345']Humans have been forcing the environment to adapt to us rather than the other way around. Not as big a deal as people make it out to be.[/quote]

I don't think that's accurate. How are/can we force the environment to adapt to us?

Making the world hotter via the greenhouse effect isn't exactly adapting the environment to us since it isn't good for us and also isn't purposeful, it's just a consequence of the ways that we've tried to adapt to the environment.
 
Keep in mind that Greenland is called Greenland for a reason. You think the Vikings survived on Polarbear meat in-between vanquishing foreign lands ?
Some of you people have no sense of history.

Happy Leif Eriksson day !
 
I think it's pointless discussing global warming now because if it is caused by man nothing will change till we're all wading through seawater.

The bottom line is no-one in the world wants to change. People in developed countries like the US and Uk won't change. Quickly developing countries like China and India aren't going to change anything that may effect their economic development and the poorer counries will just get screwed as always.

Until something happens that effects people globally nothing will get done because people don't want to change. By then it will too late.
 
Like I always said, I'm gonna head to antartica because by the time I get there it will be just right. Not too hot not too cold. xD
 
bread's done
Back
Top