NE warming faster

[Greg]

1) Loss of summer sea ice at the North Pole, which is estimated by some to occur by 2030. As more ice melts, the Artic Ocean losses an insulating ice cap and the Arctic warms up.

2) Melting of extensive permafrost in the Arctic of Russia and Alaska that could potentially melt off better than a 10' deep layer of frozen earth spanning more than 1 million kilometers. This is expected by 2100 and could result in a massive release of methane gas, which would speed up global warming.

3) Extensive melting of the Greenland Ice Cap which is estimated to be melting at the rate of 1 meter around the edges every year, and causing a sea level rise of 0.4" every 75 years at the present rate of melt.

4) Melting of Northern and Sub Tropical glaciers, that will cause severe drought conditions in Peru, China, the Northwestern United States, Western Canada, Alaska and parts of Europe.

I don't want to get into a global warming debate, but the doom and gloom predictions are what annoy me the most. Wasn't it just last year that many doom and gloomers were suggesting that last year's active hurricane season was a result of global warming? So far this year, hurricane activity has pretty much returned to normal...

 

[JimG.]

I don't want to get into a global warming debate, but the doom and gloom predictions are what annoy me the most. Wasn't it just last year that many doom and gloomers were suggesting that last year's active hurricane season was a result of global warming? So far this year, hurricane activity has pretty much returned to normal...

Normal? Katrina (K) hit New Orleans on 8/26/05. That was the 11th named storm in the Atlantic last season, one where we ran through the alphabet for names and wound up with Greek letter names.

Today is 8/24/06, one year later, and after all the hand wringing about how this year was going to be catastrophic, we've had 2 or 3 named storms, none of which caused much if any damage. "Hurricane" hasn't even been on the news radar screen.

That's BELOW normal.

The "predictors" and "gloom and doomers" are great for dramatic sound bytes but nothing else. And their wild and inaccurate predictions only hurt the cause of those who believe in global warming. The "boys who cry wolf" make the general population lazy and uncaring.

When you make predictions to forward a theory and those predictions are totally wrong, the populace feels that you're just another chicken little who has no idea what you're talking about.

 

[ctenidae]

The "predictors" and "gloom and doomers" are great for dramatic sound bytes but nothing else. And their wild and inaccurate predictions only hurt the cause of those who believe in global warming.

DING DING DING DING! We have a winner.

We don't ahve anywhere near the kinds of data or models needed to make a prediction of what the hurricane season is going to be like. Hell, we have a hard enough time saying what it was. However, I blame the press and media much more than the scientists. One scientist saying, "Global warming could lead to an increase in the frequency and severity of Atlantic hurricanes" gets turned into "ZOMG!!1!! We're all going to die!!11" by the media.

Remember too, though, that while the Atlantic season has been calm so far, the Pacific season has been tearing people kew ones all over. I blame the International Date Line.

 

[loafer89]

I don't want to get into a global warming debate, but the doom and gloom predictions are what annoy me the most. Wasn't it just last year that many doom and gloomers were suggesting that last year's active hurricane season was a result of global warming? So far this year, hurricane activity has pretty much returned to normal...

The only problem is the facts that I listed are NOT predicitions, they are actually happening right now. Global warming and cooling are cyclical patterns that happen naturally and will continue in the future, we just have to adapt to the changes as mankind has in the past.

As far as the hurricane patterns are concerned, they seem to occur in cycles of very active seasons, even decades, followed by years or decades of little or no activity. We do not quite understand why this is, but I doubt anyone along the Gulf Coast is complaining about a lack of tropical activity.

 

[Greg]

The only problem is the facts that I listed are NOT predicitions, they are actually happening right now. Global warming and cooling are cyclical patterns that happen naturally and will continue in the future, we just have to adapt to the changes as mankind has in the past.

No....they ARE predictions. You said yourself that at least one of those "predictions" is based on the "present rate of melt". You also state that global warming and cooling are "cyclical patterns that happen naturally and will continue in the future." To maintain a "present rate of melt", there would have to be no cooling. I would use the term "fact" lightly.

 

[loafer89]

I do not want to start a pissing war, but anyone who does not believe that the Earth is warming up, has their head buried in the sand.

The loss of polar ice, the melting of subtropical glaciers, and the melting of permafrost are not predicitions they are occuring right now, and will so for the foreseable future.

 

[loafer89]

YELLOWKNIFE - Normally when Jimmie Qaapik looks out his window in Canada's northernmost community at the beginning of August, he sees a bay choked with sea ice.
This year he's shielding his eyes from the bright sunlight reflecting off the water, which is open as far as he can see from Grise Fiord, a hamlet of 170 on the southern tip of Ellesmere Island, just 1,500 kilometres from the North Pole.
''Usually the ice doesn't go until about the middle or towards the end of August, and it was ice-free in July,'' he said. ''We had a cruise ship come in yesterday. That's never happened this early, ever.''
In 2005, temperatures soared so high that scientists declared it the warmest in recorded history. But last year's heat has been followed by even higher temperatures, and the Arctic is once again hurtling toward a record-shattering year, as an unusually mild spring melted into a sweltering summer that arrived in many northern hamlets a full month before normal.
''When you look at the Arctic, it was the warmest winter on record. I mean, you had rain in Iqaluit in February they've never had that before. And they were anywhere from four to seven degrees warmer than normal. There was no winter in the North,'' said David Phillips, senior climatologist for Environment Canada.
''We used to be the Great White North, but that reputation is being sullied a bit. Maybe we have to rethink what we are.''
The warmth was felt across the country, which averaged 2.9 C above normal this January to July a new record. But it was most pronounced in the Arctic, where mainland temperatures in the first seven months of 2006 soared 3.5 C above a 30-year average the highest ever for that part of the year.
As a result, satellite images show less Arctic sea ice in July than ever for that month. Normally, the Arctic is covered in 10.1 million sq. km of sea ice in July. This year, it was down to 8.7 million sq. km a loss of area larger than Peru.
''Right now things are not looking good as far as the sea ice is concerned. From January 2005 to July of 2006, the sea ice has been essentially at a record minimum,'' said Mark Serreze, a research scientist for the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center.
''Will it get to a new record? We don't know. If it doesn't, it's going to be darn close. But if the warm that we see continues, we could easily set a new September record.''
September is the month when the Arctic usually experiences its lowest annual ice level. This year, public interest in the disappearance of the ice has grown to the point where Serreze's office will launch a website on August 20 with daily reports and analysis on the Arctic melt.
''We're actively tracking the unfolding drama as it's happening,'' he said. ''What we're seeing is this overall warming of the Arctic in response to greenhouse gases. There's still some naysayers out there, but I think at this point they are grasping at straws.''
Some climate models suggest the waters of the Far North will retain summer ice cover by the end of this century, but at least one new paper has forecast the Arctic could be ice-free in summertime within two decades.

• 1
• 2
• next page

 

[Greg]

I do not want to start a pissing war, but anyone who does not believe that the Earth is warming up, has their head buried in the sand.

I'm not specifically disputing this.

The loss of polar ice, the melting of subtropical glaciers, and the melting of permafrost are not predicitions they are occuring right now, and will so for the foreseable future.

I'm not disputing this either. However, the four items you listed as eventual results of this apparent melting are indeed just predictions.

 

[loafer89]

Glaciers melting at record rate

It's been a warm summer in Norway, and that's sped up the shrinking process that already had hit the country's glaciers. Experts say the glaciers are breaking up and literally running away at a record tempo this summer.

The Briksdal Glacier is one of Norway's most popular tourist attractions, and here's how it looked in 2001.
PHOTO: NVE

Here's a photo of the Briksdal Glacier last summer. New measurements set to be taken in September are expected to show that the glacier has shrunk even more.
PHOTO: NVE

The melting of the glaciers will make them more dangerous, experts warn, adding that some may even disappear entirely within the next 50 years.
The glacial runoff, meanwhile, is filling up the local rivers they feed. The river tied to the glacial Nigardsbreen, part of the Jostedals glacier in the county of Sogn og Fjordane, has been recorded as having 50 percent more water in it than normal.
"Never before has there been such a large difference in the rivers coming off glaciers and those that aren't fed by glaciers," Rune Engeset of the Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (Norges vassdrags- og energidirektorat, NVE) told newspaper Aftenposten.
"Tourists on board the cruiseships ask why there's so much water in some rivers while others are almost dry," he noted. The answer lies in the extremely warm and unusually dry summer over most of southern Norway, and especially in the mountains.
The Vosso river system, for example, has no links to glaciers and its reservoirs now hold only half the amount of water in a normal year.
This summer marks the third time in the last six years that scientists are registering a considerable reduction in the glaciers. Measurements taken in Jotunheimen, in the mountains of western Norway, at Svartisen and in West Finnmark show that the snows that fell last winter have disappeared quickly. Only at Svartisen were larges areas of the glacier still covered with the past winter's snow.
Engeset expects temperatures to keep rising, leading to more glacial melting. The uncertainty is tied to how much snow may fall this winter.
Aftenposten English Web Desk
Nina Berglund
Email this article Print this article
Most tipped

Most read

 

[loafer89]

water > features > melting glaciers threaten world's water supplies
Melting glaciers threaten world's water supplies

[SIZE=-2]Posted: 27 Jul 2006[/SIZE]

Climate change and falling water tables are having a dramatic effect on the world’s water resources. And the rapid melting of the planet's glaciers is making the problem even more serious, writes Satu Hassi, a Member of the European Parliament.

A few years ago, I read an article on mountains. It began by saying that we consider mountains to be something very robust, something that lasts forever, at least in human timescales. But in fact, mountains belong to some of the most vulnerable ecosystems in the world because mountain glaciers are rapidly melting.

Half the world’s population depends on rivers with mountain glaciers as their freshwater source.

Himalayan glaciers feed seven great Asian rivers - the Ganges, Indus, Brahmaputra, Salween, Mekong, Yangtze and Huang He - ensuring a year-round water supply for two billion people.

But the Himalayan glaciers are retreating fast. Recently the Chinese academy of sciences announced that the Tibetan glaciers are shrinking by seven per cent every year, which means that these great glaciers will halve every decade.

Each year, the loss of ice is equivalent to the annual flow of the Yellow river. In the Ganges alone, this loss of glacier melt water could reduce July-September flows by two thirds, causing water shortages for 500 million people and 35 per cent of India’s irrigated land.

In South America, in the dry Andes, glacial melt water contributes more to river flow than rainfall, even during the rainy season.
​

 

[loafer89]

North Cascades: Glacier Retreat<B>
NORTH CASCADE GLACIER CLIMATE PROJECT <DIV align=center>Mauri S. Pelto, Director NCGCP
Nichols College, Dudley, MA 01571 Peltoms@nichols.eduSnowpack Snowpack charts
Ice Worms
Mountain Goats New
Ice Worm ChartsMass Balance Mass balance Data Set
Terminus Behavior Terminus Data Set
Glacier Runoff Glacier runoff charts
Updated 4/4/06<H3>
Terminus Behavior

North Cascade glacier retreat is rapid and ubiquitous. All 47 monitored glaciers are currently undergoing a significant retreat or have disappeared in the case of three of them. Four of the glacier Lewis Glacier, Milk Lake Glacier, Mt. David Glacier and North Arm Whitechuck Glacier have disappeared. This retreat on eight Mount Baker glaciers since 1984, that were advancing in 1975 ,averages 340 m. The data indicate broad regional continuity in glacial response to climate. The rate of retreat increased from 1992-1998 and again in 2003-2005. On each glacier the terminus location is surveyed from a fixed benchmark location beyond the terminus. The terminus is also located utilizing differential GPS to determine location to within a few feet. Glaciers are not just retreating at the terminus, lateral and even retreat at the head of the glacier can also be substantial.
Terminus Data
Glacier Disequilibrium:
here is no evidence that North Cascade glaciers are close to equilibrium. Their ongoing thinning indicates that all of the glaciers will continue to retreat in the foreseeable future. In cases where the thinning is substantial along the entire length of the glacier, than no point of equilibrium can be achieved with present climate and the glacier is unlikely to survive. This is the case on 10 of 12 glaciers where we have mapped the changes in glacier thickness.

Columbia Glacier retreat 1985-2003.Easton Glacier retreat 1985-2003.

Lower Curtis Glacier retreat 1985-2003.Boulder Glacier retreat 1985-2003.

This rapid glacier retreat is evident in the reduced stream flow and increased runoff in the area. In the long run glacial retreat causes less runoff to be available which in turn reduces overall water supply. The recent change in climate is directly effecting the glaciers. The increases in temperature is causing the retreat of the glaciers to increase at a rate that is effecting the streamflow and runoff in the area. Data of specific retreat is shown below. The Lewis Glacier at left melted completely in 1993
Different glaciers respond at various rates depending on their characteristics. This is evident in the differing behavior during this century. With three different glacier types.1) Retreat from the Little Ice Age (LIA) to approximately 1950 followed by a period of advance from 1950-1976, and then retreat since 1976. 2) Rapid retreat from the LIA to approximately 1950, slow retreat or equilibrium from 1950-1976, and moderate to rapid retreat since 1976. 3) Continuous retreat from the LIA to the present. These types reflect different physical characteristics. Regardless of type all glaciers are now retreating. Detailed research report.
A glacier that illustrates the glacier retreat is the Lynch Glacier below which initially fills the lake basin in 1978, then retreats to the margin of the lake in 1985 and then retreats upslope from the lake by 1994.
Other glaciers have fared even worse Whitechuck Glacier in particular has suffered, with the north half of the glacier completely melting away (see Death of a glacier). Variations in other specific glaciers are seen in the Changes in glaciers through time photographic series.

Left, Lynch Glacier in 1978 when it still filled Pea Soup Lake. Above, Lynch Glacier in 1985 having just retreated from the lake. The dots indicate measurement sites for mass balance. Below, Lynch Glacier in 1998 having retreated fully from Pea Soup Lake.

The Foss Glacier at left with the 1985 margin illustrated in red. This glacier has lost half of its area in just 20 years.

Glacier Changes through Time photographic Series




<SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'"><B>TYPE 1

 

[riverc0il]

I'm not disputing this either. However, the four items you listed as eventual results of this apparent melting are indeed just predictions.

so much of science is a set of theoretical predictions. in the absence of being able to conduct hard research, scientists look at observable data and make predictions based on the information available. just because it is a prediction does not mean there is not data to support the prediction, predictions can have a very high probability if backed up by legit science and data. should we ignore potential future developments until they happen because they are only predictions?

 

[Marc]

so much of science is a set of theoretical predictions. in the absence of being able to conduct hard research, scientists look at observable data and make predictions based on the information available. just because it is a prediction does not mean there is not data to support the prediction, predictions can have a very high probability if backed up by legit science and data. should we ignore potential future developments until they happen because they are only predictions?

I predict Jessica Alba will be my girlfriend.

 

[riverc0il]

like i said, predictions have to be backed up by legit science and data....

 

[andyzee]

I predict Jessica Alba will be my girlfriend.

Dude, stay the F away from my women. Damn, even my wife knows that's my gal!

 

[loafer89]

The documented and continual loss of summer sea ice at the North Pole has me worried alot because of it's potential to alter the climate and the enviornment for alot of marine/human life that depends on the ice to survive.

The latest predicitions are for the ice to be gone during the summer by 2020, this would be catastophic for the polar bear population, as well as for seals/walrusus that the Inuit people of the north hunt for food.

I have read of predictions that Greenland could be free of ice by 2100, while Antartica would probably retain at least some ice for quite a while into the future.

Some good will come out of a warming planet, the Northwest Passage will become navigable during the summer. The growing season will be extended by several days/weeks in northern areas and plant/forest life will establish itself in areas that are now just barren.

 

[ctenidae]

Some good will come out of a warming planet, the Northwest Passage will become navigable during the summer. The growing season will be extended by several days/weeks in northern areas and plant/forest life will establish itself in areas that are now just barren.

Downside is that the Sahara will spread north and south and the tropics will get wider and hotter in the middle. While I feel bad for the polar bears, my biggest worry on ice cap melting is the potential effect on ocean currents of having all that fresh water dumped in. Of course, one potential effect is the shutting down of the Gulf Stream, which could lead to a re-freezing of the north, so the polar bears will be happy. Unfortunately, it'll just be cold up here with little moisture brought up from the tropics, so the skiiers won't like it much.

 

[loafer89]

What is amazing to me is just how fast climate change can occur and how fragile the "stable" climate that we have really is. Research on Upper Fremont Glacier in Wyoming shows that the Little Ice Age ended a span of less than 10 years:



The potential to use ice cores from alpine glaciers in the midlatitudes to reconstruct paleoclimatic records has not been widely recognized. Although excellent paleoclimatic records exist for the polar regions, paleoclimatic ice core records are not common from midlatitude locations. An ice core removed from the Upper Fremont Glacier in Wyoming provides evidence for abrupt climate change during the mid-1800s. Volcanic events (Krakatau and Tambora) identified from electrical conductivity measurements (ECM) and isotopic and chemical data from the Upper Fremont Glacier were reexamined to confirm and refine previous chronological estimates of the ice core. At a depth of 152 m the refined age-depth profile shows good agreement (1736{+-}10 A.D.) with the{sup 14}C age date (1729{+-}95 A.D.). The{delta}{sup 18}O profile of the Upper Fremont Glacier (UFG) ice core indicates a change in climate known as the Little Ice Age (LIA). However, the sampling interval for{delta}{sup 18}O is sufficiently large (20 cm) such that it is difficult to pinpoint the LIA termination on the basis of{delta}{sup 18}O data alone. Other research has shown that changes in the{delta}{sup 18}O variance are generally coincident with changes in ECM variance. The ECM data set contains over 125,000 data points at a resolution of 1 data point per millimeter of ice core. A 999-point running average of the ECM data set and results from f tests indicates that the variance of the ECM data decreases significantly at about 108 m. At this depth, the age-depth profile predicts an age of 1845 A.D. Results indicate the termination of the LIA was abrupt with a major climatic shift to warmer temperatures around 1845 A.D. and continuing to present day. Prediction limits (error bars) calculated for the profile ages are{+-}10 years (90% confidence level). Thus a conservative estimate for the time taken to complete the LIA climatic shift to present-day climate is about 10 years, suggesting the LIA termination in alpine regions of central North America may have occurred on a relatively short (decadal) timescale. (c) 2000 American Geophysical Union.