The United States of Esoterica
http://www.theusofe.com/phpBB3/

Climate change 'irreversible' as Arctic sea ice fails to re-
http://www.theusofe.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=4142
Page 1 of 2

Author:  gnosticgnowledge [ Tue Mar 14, 2006 6:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Climate change 'irreversible' as Arctic sea ice fails to re-

Climate change 'irreversible' as Arctic sea ice fails to re-form
By Steve Connor, Science Editor
Published: 14 March 2006
Sea ice in the Arctic has failed to re-form for the second consecutive winter, raising fears that global warming may have tipped the polar regions in to irreversible climate change far sooner than predicted.

Satellite measurements of the area of the Arctic covered by sea ice show that for every month this winter, the ice failed to return even to its long-term average rate of decline. It is the second consecutive winter that the sea ice has not managed to re-form enough to compensate for the unprecedented melting seen during the past few summers.

Scientists are now convinced that Arctic sea ice is showing signs of both a winter and a summer decline that could indicate a major acceleration in its long-term rate of disappearance. The greatest fear is that an environmental "positive feedback" has kicked in, where global warming melts ice which in itself causes the seas to warm still further as more sunlight is absorbed by a dark ocean rather than being reflected by white ice.

Mark Serreze, a sea ice specialist at the US National Snow and Ice Data Centre in Colorado, said: "In September 2005, the Arctic sea ice cover was at its lowest extent since satellite monitoring began in 1979, and probably the lowest in the past 100 years. While we can't be certain, it looks like 2006 will be more of the same," Dr Serreze said.

"Unless conditions turn colder, we may be headed for another year of big sea ice losses, rivalling or perhaps even exceeding what we saw in September 2005. We are of course monitoring the situation closely ... Coupled with recent findings from Nasa that the Greenland ice sheet may be near a tipping point, it's pretty clear that the Arctic is starting to respond to global warming," he added.

Although sea levels are not affected by melting sea ice - which floats on the ocean - the Arctic ice cover is thought to be a key moderator of the northern hemisphere's climate. It helps to stabilise the massive land glaciers and ice sheets of Greenland which have the capacity to raise sea levels dramatically.

Dr Serreze said that some parts of the northern hemisphere experienced very low temperatures this winter, but the Arctic was much warmer than normal. "Even in January, when there were actually record low temperatures in Alaska and parts of Russia, it was still very warm over the Arctic Ocean," he said.

"The sea ice cover waxes and wanes with the seasons. It partly melts in spring and summer, then grows back in autumn and winter. It has not recovered well this past winter - ice extent for every month since September 2005 has been far below average. And it's been so warm in the Arctic that the ice that has grown this winter is probably rather thin," he explained.

Professor Peter Wadhams, of Cambridge University, who was the first Briton to monitor Arctic sea ice from nuclear submarines, said: "One of the big changes this winter is that a large area of the Barents Sea has remained ice-free for the first time. This is part of Europe's 'back yard'. Climate models did predict a retreat of sea ice in the Barents Sea but not for a few decades yet, so it is a sign that the changes that were predicted are indeed happening, but much faster than predicted."

Sea ice in the Arctic has failed to re-form for the second consecutive winter, raising fears that global warming may have tipped the polar regions in to irreversible climate change far sooner than predicted.

Satellite measurements of the area of the Arctic covered by sea ice show that for every month this winter, the ice failed to return even to its long-term average rate of decline. It is the second consecutive winter that the sea ice has not managed to re-form enough to compensate for the unprecedented melting seen during the past few summers.

Scientists are now convinced that Arctic sea ice is showing signs of both a winter and a summer decline that could indicate a major acceleration in its long-term rate of disappearance. The greatest fear is that an environmental "positive feedback" has kicked in, where global warming melts ice which in itself causes the seas to warm still further as more sunlight is absorbed by a dark ocean rather than being reflected by white ice.

Mark Serreze, a sea ice specialist at the US National Snow and Ice Data Centre in Colorado, said: "In September 2005, the Arctic sea ice cover was at its lowest extent since satellite monitoring began in 1979, and probably the lowest in the past 100 years. While we can't be certain, it looks like 2006 will be more of the same," Dr Serreze said.

"Unless conditions turn colder, we may be headed for another year of big sea ice losses, rivalling or perhaps even exceeding what we saw in September 2005. We are of course monitoring the situation closely ... Coupled with recent findings from Nasa that the Greenland ice sheet may be near a tipping point, it's pretty clear that the Arctic is starting to respond to global warming," he added.
Although sea levels are not affected by melting sea ice - which floats on the ocean - the Arctic ice cover is thought to be a key moderator of the northern hemisphere's climate. It helps to stabilise the massive land glaciers and ice sheets of Greenland which have the capacity to raise sea levels dramatically.

Dr Serreze said that some parts of the northern hemisphere experienced very low temperatures this winter, but the Arctic was much warmer than normal. "Even in January, when there were actually record low temperatures in Alaska and parts of Russia, it was still very warm over the Arctic Ocean," he said.

"The sea ice cover waxes and wanes with the seasons. It partly melts in spring and summer, then grows back in autumn and winter. It has not recovered well this past winter - ice extent for every month since September 2005 has been far below average. And it's been so warm in the Arctic that the ice that has grown this winter is probably rather thin," he explained.

Professor Peter Wadhams, of Cambridge University, who was the first Briton to monitor Arctic sea ice from nuclear submarines, said: "One of the big changes this winter is that a large area of the Barents Sea has remained ice-free for the first time. This is part of Europe's 'back yard'. Climate models did predict a retreat of sea ice in the Barents Sea but not for a few decades yet, so it is a sign that the changes that were predicted are indeed happening, but much faster than predicted."

Author:  gnosticgnowledge [ Tue Mar 14, 2006 6:32 pm ]
Post subject: 

I wish the government would start to prepare for the impact of this. I guess all the politicans are too busy lineing their pockets.

Author:  WTL [ Tue Mar 14, 2006 6:56 pm ]
Post subject: 

What do you want them to do?

The fact that the Earth is warming is not in question, the reason it is warming is bitterly disputed. No one knows why the Earth is warming, and anyone who tells you they do know is either flat out lying, or they do not know what they are talking about.

So what do you do? The solution to the problem is quite different depending on the cause.

Do you advocate dismantling the world economy? Some do.

So, exactly what steps do you propose taking?

Author:  Austin Nichols [ Wed Jun 14, 2006 2:27 pm ]
Post subject: 

WTL wrote:
What do you want them to do?

The fact that the Earth is warming is not in question, the reason it is warming is bitterly disputed. No one knows why the Earth is warming, and anyone who tells you they do know is either flat out lying, or they do not know what they are talking about.

So what do you do? The solution to the problem is quite different depending on the cause.

Do you advocate dismantling the world economy? Some do.

So, exactly what steps do you propose taking?


I would like to have a better understanding of WHY the earth is warming, and if anything CAN or SHOULD be done about it BEFORE we spend TRILLIONS to fix what MAY NOT be broken.

Really, how accurate were ocean temp/salinity samples taken 50 years ago? Or 100 years ago?

What effect does the solar cycle have on weather? Can we throw enough money at the sun to make it happier? Doubt it.

We know the moon is moving away from the planet. We know the sun will die. We think that earth orbit is pretty stable. No matter the cost, could we actually do anything about any of these events?

I'm certainly not suggesting that we continue to spew toxins into the earth, air and water. We should clean up after ourselves. But maybe we are going through a natural cycle.

Maybe, man's own warming of the earth is staving off an ice-age.

Point is, we don't know.

Author:  WTL [ Wed Jun 14, 2006 4:15 pm ]
Post subject: 

Exactly my point, we do not know.

1500 years ago the earth was warmer than it is now. Why? No one knows. 250 years ago it was colder than now. Why? No one knows.

But twits like al Gore want you to think they know so you will buy into their political agenda.

Gore couldn't steal an election, how in the world does he expect anyone to believe he understands one of the most complex systems in this part of the universe?

Author:  Clendennan [ Wed Jun 14, 2006 4:33 pm ]
Post subject: 

Wow WTL and I agree again. Hell must have froze over. Guess thats a republicans fault also.


I guess all the warm data from 65my to 250my ago doesnt matter to them. Or the fact the earth was covered in ice 2.3by ago. Hell, only the last 50 years matter for analysis of the data. Don't you love it when politicians put on their scientist caps, like for say...stem cell research, cloning, animal testing, global warming, birth control, etc etc.
Im not sure who annoys me more, politicians who are intelectually dishonest and lead the stupid people where they will, or religious zealots who do the same.


ok, im done :P

Author:  WTL [ Wed Jun 14, 2006 4:47 pm ]
Post subject: 

It's BUSH's fault! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Author:  baemark [ Wed Jun 14, 2006 9:26 pm ]
Post subject: 

How much CO2 is in the atmosphere? It's very little isn't?

How much of the CO2 is from human activity, and how much is from natural activity (i.e. vulcanoes)?

If I remember right, vulcanic activity on the earth was pretty quiet for most of the 20th century until about 1980, at which time it picked up. Has anyone studied what effects they have had? They can and do put up a lot of CO2. We should outlaw vulcanoes.

Author:  Austin Nichols [ Thu Jun 15, 2006 9:38 pm ]
Post subject: 

baemark wrote:
How much CO2 is in the atmosphere? It's very little isn't?

Probably not as much as during the Carboniferous Period - which was a good thing - now we have coal!
Quote:

How much of the CO2 is from human activity, and how much is from natural activity (i.e. vulcanoes)?

If I remember right, vulcanic activity on the earth was pretty quiet for most of the 20th century until about 1980, at which time it picked up. Has anyone studied what effects they have had?

Yes. Surprisingly, volcanic activity was responsible for Frankenstein's monster. Mary Shelley wrote the novel during the "Year Without a Summer" - 1816, the year in which skies were darkened by the eruption of Mount Tambora, the year before.
Quote:

They can and do put up a lot of CO2. We should outlaw vulcanoes.


I'd agree with you, but the guys at the Global Volcanism Program differ

http://www.volcano.si.edu/faq/index.cfm?faq=06

even if you couldn't tell that from their graphs.

Image

Author:  Clendennan [ Fri Jun 16, 2006 11:20 am ]
Post subject: 

Irreversible?!


Thats the typical humanistic view of things, thinking in their time reference. It is completely reversible, and 100% certainty that it will reverse, just on a geologic time scale. I hate absolutes used in news article titles.

Author:  Jeremy Vaeni Sucks! [ Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:16 pm ]
Post subject: 

Clendennan wrote:
Irreversible?!


Thats the typical humanistic view of things, thinking in their time reference. It is completely reversible, and 100% certainty that it will reverse, just on a geologic time scale. I hate absolutes used in news article titles.


But we're still all gonna die, right? I mean...RIGHT?!

Author:  tauzero [ Tue Jul 01, 2008 7:58 pm ]
Post subject: 

Jeremy Vaeni Sucks! wrote:
Clendennan wrote:
Irreversible?!


Thats the typical humanistic view of things, thinking in their time reference. It is completely reversible, and 100% certainty that it will reverse, just on a geologic time scale. I hate absolutes used in news article titles.


But we're still all gonna die, right? I mean...RIGHT?!

Naw, the extra CO2 will make plants grow like crazy and with a little genetic modification we'll have all the food we need right off the trees year-round. It'll be warm all over, so we won't need oil for heat or much clothing. We can all live a life of indolent ease... and for the tech toys we want we can lock up some criminals in underground factories for anything more that we want. I know, we can call them Moorlocks... why does this sound familiar? :twisted:

Author:  Orpheus [ Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:33 pm ]
Post subject: 

Jeremy Vaeni Sucks! wrote:
Clendennan wrote:
Irreversible?!


Thats the typical humanistic view of things, thinking in their time reference. It is completely reversible, and 100% certainty that it will reverse, just on a geologic time scale. I hate absolutes used in news article titles.


But we're still all gonna die, right? I mean...RIGHT?!


I tend to take a positive view of things.

Which is to say that, with the oceans rising, I will soon be the owner of prime beachfront property.

Author:  Fazer [ Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:57 pm ]
Post subject: 

Jeremy Vaeni Sucks! wrote:
Clendennan wrote:
Irreversible?!


Thats the typical humanistic view of things, thinking in their time reference. It is completely reversible, and 100% certainty that it will reverse, just on a geologic time scale. I hate absolutes used in news article titles.


But we're still all gonna die, right? I mean...RIGHT?!

The stage is being set.

Author:  DiosKilos [ Tue Apr 20, 2010 6:16 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Climate change 'irreversible' as Arctic sea ice fails to re-

Image
Picture taken by Icelandic coast guard using special camera. Shows a Nordic Volcano God Awakening from his slumber.

Image
Lightning streaks across the sky as lava flows from a volcano in Eyjafjallajokul

Image

Image
This is the trajectory of the ash cloud over Europe.


I think I figured out what causes ice to grow. Perhaps the planet is naturally hot. But Because we have very powerful eruptions of Volcanoes they cause "blackouts" of the Sun and hence Ice will grow. Perhaps we only need the Politicians to Shut the Hell Up and we should be listening more close to Mother Earth.

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/