Arctic sea ice 'lowest in recorded history - and still one more month to melt

CyberDuck

Senior member
Oct 10, 1999
258
0
0
Arctic sea ice 'lowest in recorded history'

by Paul Handley
Fri Aug 10, 4:12 PM ET

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Sea ice in the northern hemisphere has plunged to the lowest levels ever measured, a US Arctic specialist said Friday, adding that it was likely part of the long-term trend of polar ice melt driven by global warming.

University of Illinois Champaign-Urbana Arctic climate expert William Chapman told AFP that Arctic sea ice had plunged to new lows some 30 days before the normal point of the annual minimum.

He also said that with a lower ice cover and fewer clouds this year, the waters of the Arctic are being exposed to more intense sunlight, further warming them.

"As of yesterday and today ... we have set a historical low for sea ice in the northern hemisphere," he said.

Chapman, a researcher on Arctic meteorology of the university's Department of Atmospheric Sciences, wrote Thursday in the online publication "The Cryosphere Today" that the new record comes a full month before the historic summer minimum typically occurs during the first or second week of September.

"There is still a month or more of melt likely this year. It is therefore almost certain that the previous 2005 record will be annihilated by the final 2007 annual minima closer to the end of this summer."

He told AFP that current summer ice cover in the northern hemisphere is averaging 25-30 percent below what it was 50 years ago.

"The trend has been going down since the late 1970s at least, and maybe 50 years," he said.

Chapman said there are a few factors at work to cause the sharp dip this year.

One is the late freeze last autumn and a second, the early thaw in spring 2007. "The ice was not around for as long as it usually is," he said.

"The earlier spring melt opens up more dark water to sun," he added, helping the sea ice to melt faster.

Yet another factor is the uncommon low level of clouds this summer in the far north.

"This summer is also relatively clear, not 90 percent cloudy as usual," he said, allowing more sun to warm the waters and melt the ice.

"The concern is that the Arctic ocean is absorbing a lot of heat."

While immediate weather circumstances explain the plunge in ice cover this year, Chapman linked it all to the greater trend of global climate change.

"It is certainly likely that the overall trend is related to global warming."

One interesting aspect this year, he pointed out in his online article, is that the drop in sea ice is more geographically sweeping than in previous low years.

In earlier low years, big drops in the level of sea ice were confined to specific areas, such as the North Atlantic, the Bering Sea, the Beaufort Sea, or other locales.

This comes in part from prevailing winds blowing ice from one area or sea to another.

"The character of 2007's sea ice melt is unique in that it is dramatic and covers the entire Arctic sector," he wrote.

--

So, does pollution lovers belive this is also a hoax?

 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,894
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: CyberDuck
Arctic sea ice 'lowest in recorded history'

by Paul Handley
Fri Aug 10, 4:12 PM ET

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Sea ice in the northern hemisphere has plunged to the lowest levels ever measured, a US Arctic specialist said Friday, adding that it was likely part of the long-term trend of polar ice melt driven by global warming.

University of Illinois Champaign-Urbana Arctic climate expert William Chapman told AFP that Arctic sea ice had plunged to new lows some 30 days before the normal point of the annual minimum.

He also said that with a lower ice cover and fewer clouds this year, the waters of the Arctic are being exposed to more intense sunlight, further warming them.

"As of yesterday and today ... we have set a historical low for sea ice in the northern hemisphere," he said.

Chapman, a researcher on Arctic meteorology of the university's Department of Atmospheric Sciences, wrote Thursday in the online publication "The Cryosphere Today" that the new record comes a full month before the historic summer minimum typically occurs during the first or second week of September.

"There is still a month or more of melt likely this year. It is therefore almost certain that the previous 2005 record will be annihilated by the final 2007 annual minima closer to the end of this summer."

He told AFP that current summer ice cover in the northern hemisphere is averaging 25-30 percent below what it was 50 years ago.

"The trend has been going down since the late 1970s at least, and maybe 50 years," he said.

Chapman said there are a few factors at work to cause the sharp dip this year.

One is the late freeze last autumn and a second, the early thaw in spring 2007. "The ice was not around for as long as it usually is," he said.

"The earlier spring melt opens up more dark water to sun," he added, helping the sea ice to melt faster.

Yet another factor is the uncommon low level of clouds this summer in the far north.

"This summer is also relatively clear, not 90 percent cloudy as usual," he said, allowing more sun to warm the waters and melt the ice.

"The concern is that the Arctic ocean is absorbing a lot of heat."

While immediate weather circumstances explain the plunge in ice cover this year, Chapman linked it all to the greater trend of global climate change.

"It is certainly likely that the overall trend is related to global warming."

One interesting aspect this year, he pointed out in his online article, is that the drop in sea ice is more geographically sweeping than in previous low years.

In earlier low years, big drops in the level of sea ice were confined to specific areas, such as the North Atlantic, the Bering Sea, the Beaufort Sea, or other locales.

This comes in part from prevailing winds blowing ice from one area or sea to another.

"The character of 2007's sea ice melt is unique in that it is dramatic and covers the entire Arctic sector," he wrote.

--

So, does pollution lovers belive this is also a hoax?

See non heartsurgeons post from a Princton Professor quack Freeman Dyson. Never heard of the guy yet a radical righty says his word is gospel against what I call Global Extremes (Warming has been to politicized).
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,446
7,508
136
You should read your own words.

Arctic sea ice 'lowest in recorded history'

Humans have not recorded everything, the concept that this melting has ?never? happened before is not proven by our few hundred years of history. In fact, if you?re to claim they?ve never done this before I suggest the uncovered medieval buildings found under the glaciers as proof that those assertions are a lie.

Or how about in millions of years past there has previously been NO ICE at all on either pole. Raising the alarm over something that happens naturally, but not yet before in our ?recorded history? simply proves that not every cycle is as young as our recordings.
 

CyberDuck

Senior member
Oct 10, 1999
258
0
0
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
You should read your own words.

Arctic sea ice 'lowest in recorded history'

Humans have not recorded everything, the concept that this melting has ?never? happened before is not proven by our few hundred years of history. In fact, if you?re to claim they?ve never done this before I suggest the uncovered medieval buildings found under the glaciers as proof that those assertions are a lie.

Thats true, we don't know if it has happened before, we have to act on what we know. This is what we know. The northern pole is melting, for real, with or without climate models. Some of us thinks its interresting, and maybe something we should keep an eye open to.

Or how about in millions of years past there has previously been NO ICE at all on either pole. Raising the alarm over something that happens naturally, but not yet before in our ?recorded history? simply proves that not every cycle is as young as our recordings.

Yes, but millions of years ago there where no humans here to be troubled by it. I saw an interresting figure on this page: Climate and the Carboniferous Period . What can bee seen from this figure is that in a very long perspective there seems to be two stable tempeartures for the planet, one of about 12°C as now, and one at about 22°C. Now, if we adverently flips the climate to the warmer temperature some 10°C (18 F) higher than now it might hurt the economy a little bit more than trying to reduce the pollution a bit.



 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
28,496
20,610
146
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
You should read your own words.

Arctic sea ice 'lowest in recorded history'

Humans have not recorded everything, the concept that this melting has ?never? happened before is not proven by our few hundred years of history. In fact, if you?re to claim they?ve never done this before I suggest the uncovered medieval buildings found under the glaciers as proof that those assertions are a lie.

Or how about in millions of years past there has previously been NO ICE at all on either pole. Raising the alarm over something that happens naturally, but not yet before in our ?recorded history? simply proves that not every cycle is as young as our recordings.
Really, that is all I take away from these observations. Our recorded history amounts to a eye blink in duration, of this planet's history.

 

CyberDuck

Senior member
Oct 10, 1999
258
0
0
Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
If this weren't so serious . . . it would be hilarious . . . .

Norway: Ice breaks off glacier, hits boat and injures 18

Ice broke off a glacier and hit a ship of British tourists sightseeing off a set of remote Arctic islands, injuring 18 people, police and the tour operator said Thursday.

Yes, they where brought to the hospital in my town. The tourist ship captain though that "maybe" they where a little bit close :) , and they are discussing if there should be legislated a limit to how close to a glacier they can take the ships.

 

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
You should read your own words.

Arctic sea ice 'lowest in recorded history'

Humans have not recorded everything, the concept that this melting has ?never? happened before is not proven by our few hundred years of history. In fact, if you?re to claim they?ve never done this before I suggest the uncovered medieval buildings found under the glaciers as proof that those assertions are a lie.

Or how about in millions of years past there has previously been NO ICE at all on either pole. Raising the alarm over something that happens naturally, but not yet before in our ?recorded history? simply proves that not every cycle is as young as our recordings.



Dang those pesky ice core samples! Science Kills!

and so much for Pangaea and continental drift . . .
 

CyberDuck

Senior member
Oct 10, 1999
258
0
0
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
See non heartsurgeons post from a Princton Professor quack Freeman Dyson. Never heard of the guy yet a radical righty says his word is gospel against what I call Global Extremes (Warming has been to politicized).

There will always be those who does not agree, and thats perfectly fine with me. We have to be carefull to not become what some of the extremeists on the other side calls us. Challanging the climate models is of course something that should be done, better models can only emerge from realising that there are flaws in the current ones. Anyway, the climate models we have now is the best models we have ever had, and they seem to predict whats happening now pretty well. If anything they are in my oppinion to conservative, as science usually are conservative. But reality speaks for itself with or without the models.

 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
28,496
20,610
146
Originally posted by: heyheybooboo




Dang those pesky ice core samples! Science Kills!

and so much for Pangaea and continental drift . . .
Certainly, C02 and other greenhouse gas levels are bad news right now, and regardless of the nature of the environmental crisis that seems to be looming, anthropogenic exacerbation being responsible or not, we need to stop shating where we eat, so to speak. Becoming better stewards of this planet, is a matter of self-preservation, in the final analysis. No matter what the underlying cause/s of global climate change are, our species will eventually choke to death on it's own toxic refuse, if we don't .
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
From Jaskalas-

In fact, if you?re to claim they?ve never done this before I suggest the uncovered medieval buildings found under the glaciers as proof that those assertions are a lie.

You have a link to support that assertion, right?
 

hellokeith

Golden Member
Nov 12, 2004
1,665
0
0
Originally posted by: CyberDuck
So, does pollution lovers belive this is also a hoax?

They must, because there are so many people who love pollution. :roll:

Oh, you were being sarcastic? So was I. :)

On a serious note, would you care to show me where in the article the scientist demonstrates pollution is the cause of the ice melting?

BTW, my car of 9 years gets 32 MPG, I use super unleaded (low polluting) gas, I've replaced all the bulbs in my house with CF's, and my recycle bin is as full as my trash can. Guess you can't lump all those luny mmgw deniers into a pollution-loving group, can you?
 

OrByte

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
9,302
144
106
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
You should read your own words.

Arctic sea ice 'lowest in recorded history'

Humans have not recorded everything, the concept that this melting has ?never? happened before is not proven by our few hundred years of history. In fact, if you?re to claim they?ve never done this before I suggest the uncovered medieval buildings found under the glaciers as proof that those assertions are a lie.

Or how about in millions of years past there has previously been NO ICE at all on either pole. Raising the alarm over something that happens naturally, but not yet before in our ?recorded history? simply proves that not every cycle is as young as our recordings.

hilarious. The whole argument here is truly tragic.

No one stops to think that the 'how' and 'why' concerning our environment and global warming matters not.

What does matter is our civilization having flourished within this environment as we see it TODAY and now our environment seems to be changing...and it is not a change for the benefit of life as we know it. Do we care to do something about it? It amazes me that some people don't.

And we still squabble like idiots.

again, the argument is tragic.
 

ScottMac

Moderator<br>Networking<br>Elite member
Mar 19, 2001
5,471
2
0
Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
Originally posted by: heyheybooboo




Dang those pesky ice core samples! Science Kills!

and so much for Pangaea and continental drift . . .

Certainly, C02 and other greenhouse gas levels are bad news right now, and regardless of the nature of the environmental crisis that seems to be looming, anthropogenic exacerbation being responsible or not, we need to stop shating where we eat, so to speak. Becoming better stewards of this planet, is a matter of self-preservation, in the final analysis. No matter what the underlying cause/s of global climate change are, our species will eventually choke to death on it's own toxic refuse, if we don't .

Well, no. If it was certain (i.e., undisputed scientific fact) then the topic would not be nearly as contentious as it is. It is your right to accept it as fact if you so choose; many people do not, and they are (at least) as educated and informed as you feel you are.

 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
That's odd, the recent expidition by the Russians to claim the Arctic was jepordized by thicker than expected ice. At least according to reports of the accounts in the media.

That was conducted by respected Russian scientists, One would think that they'd know what they were taliking about.

Who to believe?

Fern
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,894
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Fern
That's odd, the recent expidition by the Russians to claim the Arctic was jepordized by thicker than expected ice. At least according to reports of the accounts in the media.

That was conducted by respected Russian scientists, One would think that they'd know what they were taliking about.

Who to believe?

Fern

You obviously misread something.

The only reason they were able to take a sub into that region was because the ice shrank enough that they could get into the target area.
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
hrm, maybe russia is behind the ice melting.
They wanted the arctic pretty bad :)

Seriously though, it has been unusually hot in the carolinas this past week.
I don't recall in the 30 or so years I have lived here it ever getting this hot.
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Originally posted by: hellokeith
Originally posted by: CyberDuck
So, does pollution lovers belive this is also a hoax?

They must, because there are so many people who love pollution. :roll:

Oh, you were being sarcastic? So was I. :)

On a serious note, would you care to show me where in the article the scientist demonstrates pollution is the cause of the ice melting?

BTW, my car of 9 years gets 32 MPG, I use super unleaded (low polluting) gas, I've replaced all the bulbs in my house with CF's, and my recycle bin is as full as my trash can. Guess you can't lump all those luny mmgw deniers into a pollution-loving group, can you?

Actually, I doubt your combination of actions and views is all that uncommon. This debate seems to be almost exclusively split on political ideological lines. Man-made climate change deniers seem to be almost universally conservative, and the more conservative they are, the more they fight tooth and nail against the idea that we're changing the climate. While the folks that DO accept the science demonstrating man-made climate change seem to be pretty universally liberal. I'm still not sure why yet, but darn it all if it doesn't seem to be true in almost every case. And since you are a huge conservative, it's not really surprising that you dismiss man made climate change...your usage of CFCs notwithstanding.
 
Oct 30, 2004
11,442
32
91
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Humans have not recorded everything, the concept that this melting has ?never? happened before is not proven by our few hundred years of history. In fact, if you?re to claim they?ve never done this before I suggest the uncovered medieval buildings found under the glaciers as proof that those assertions are a lie.

Or how about in millions of years past there has previously been NO ICE at all on either pole. Raising the alarm over something that happens naturally, but not yet before in our ?recorded history? simply proves that not every cycle is as young as our recordings.

That may be true, but what's interesting is that the new changes seem to correlate with a large increase in human activity. What are the chances that climate changes that could occur over tens of thousands of years would begin happening with human industrialization? There isn't necessarily a causal relationship that can be proven with 100% certainty, but it sure does look suspicious, doesn't it?

 
Oct 30, 2004
11,442
32
91
Originally posted by: OrByteWhat does matter is our civilization having flourished within this environment as we see it TODAY and now our environment seems to be changing...and it is not a change for the benefit of life as we know it. Do we care to do something about it? It amazes me that some people don't.

Not to worry. Perhaps climate change, rising sea levels (less land for people), and a shortage of oil (Peak Oil) combined with population explosion will be solved with a massive worldwide die off. Perhaps then, an alien race will make contact with us, realize that humans are morons (collectively), and enslave us. We might have a higher quality of life living under alien rule, especially if you were part of the impoverished third world; who knows.
 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,628
183
106
If you know your history in the late 1800s during the Search for the Northwest Passage and Race for the North Pole, the Artic ice did not always thaw and open during the summer, sometimes staying frozen for two or more years in a row. For earlier info check whaler''s log books for conditions in Artic and Antartic waters.
 

bsobel

Moderator Emeritus<br>Elite Member
Dec 9, 2001
13,346
0
0
What does matter is our civilization having flourished within this environment as we see it TODAY and now our environment seems to be changing...and it is not a change for the benefit of life as we know it. Do we care to do something about it? It amazes me that some people don't.

Actually we don't know if its a change for better OR worse, its just a change. Most people would like to see the status-quo, but there is little debate on wether such changes would be *overall* for the better or worse.

There will always be stories of 'well Miami' will be under-water, but heck mid Canada sure would be pretty by then....

Bill

 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,894
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: WHAMPOM
If you know your history in the late 1800s during the Search for the Northwest Passage and Race for the North Pole, the Artic ice did not always thaw and open during the summer, sometimes staying frozen for two or more years in a row. For earlier info check whaler''s log books for conditions in Artic and Antartic waters.

These deniers will not acknowledge any such thing as the "Northwest passage" ever existed.

 

bsobel

Moderator Emeritus<br>Elite Member
Dec 9, 2001
13,346
0
0
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: WHAMPOM
If you know your history in the late 1800s during the Search for the Northwest Passage and Race for the North Pole, the Artic ice did not always thaw and open during the summer, sometimes staying frozen for two or more years in a row. For earlier info check whaler''s log books for conditions in Artic and Antartic waters.

These deniers will not acknowledge any such thing as the "Northwest passage" ever existed.

Oh please Dave, do you really think that?