http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/weather/06/27/north.pole.melting/index.html
(CNN) -- The North Pole may be briefly ice-free by September as global warming melts away Arctic sea ice, according to scientists from the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colorado.
Scientists say it's a 50-50 bet that the thin Arctic sea ice will completely melt away at the geographic North Pole.
Scientists say it's a 50-50 bet that the thin Arctic sea ice will completely melt away at the geographic North Pole.
"We kind of have an informal betting pool going around in our center and that betting pool is 'does the North Pole melt out this summer?' and it may well," said the center's senior research scientist, Mark Serreze.
It's a 50-50 bet that the thin Arctic sea ice, which was frozen in autumn, will completely melt away at the geographic North Pole, Serreze said.
The ice retreated to a record level in September when the Northwest Passage, the sea route through the Arctic Ocean, opened briefly for the first time in recorded history.
"What we've seen through the past few decades is the Arctic sea ice cover is becoming thinner and thinner as the system warms up," Serreze said.
Specific weather patterns will determine whether the North Pole's ice cover melts completely this summer, he said.
"Last year, we had sort of a perfect weather pattern to get rid of ice to open up that Northwest Passage," Serreze said. "This year, a different pattern can set up. so maybe we'll preserve some ice there. We're in a wait-and-see mode right now. We'll see what happens."
The brief lack of ice at the top of the globe will not bring any immediate consequences, he said.
"From the viewpoint of the science, the North Pole is just another point in the globe, but it does have this symbolic meaning," Serreze said. "There's supposed to be ice at the North Pole. The fact that we may not have any by the end of this summer could be quite a symbolic change."
Serreze said it's "just another indicator of the disappearing Arctic sea ice cover" but that it is happening so soon is "just astounding to me."
"Five years ago, to think that we'd even be talking about the possibility of the North Pole melting out in the summer, I would have never thought it," he said.
The melting, however, has been long seen as inevitable, he said.
"If you talked to me or other scientists just a few years ago, we were saying that we might lose all or most of the summer sea ice cover by anywhere from 2050 to 2100," Serreze said. "Then, recently, we kind of revised those estimates, maybe as early as 2030. Now, there's people out there saying it might be even before that. So, things are happening pretty quick up there."
Serreze said those who suggest that the Arctic meltdown is just part of a historic cycle are wrong.
"It's not cyclical at this point. I think we understand the physics behind this pretty well," he said. "We've known for at least 30 years, from our earliest climate models, that it's the Arctic where we'd see the first signs of global warming.
"It's a situation where we hate to say we told you so, but we told you so," he said.
Serreze said the Arctic sea ice will not be the same for decades.
"If we had a few cold years in a row, we could put sort of a temporary damper on it, but I think at this point going to an ice-free Arctic Ocean is inevitable," he said. "I don't think we can stop that now."
Reduced greenhouse gas emissions could "cool things down a bit," he said.
"It would recover fairly quickly, but it's just not going to happen for a while," he said. "I think we're committed at this point."
There are some positive aspects to the ice melting, he said. Ships could use the Northwest Passage to save time and energy by no longer having to travel through the Panama Canal or around Cape Horn.
"There's also, or course, oil at the bottom of the Arctic Ocean," he said. "Now, the irony of that is kind of clear, but the fact that we are opening up the Arctic Ocean does make it more accessible."
The U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center Web site, NSIDC.org, publishes a near-real-time image of the Arctic sea ice cover.
Replies
25
Beach Fanatic
I am beginning to think that even all scientists are now wearing partisan party labels in addition to their extensive scientific education and backgrounds--they are now divided into two camps: the Republican Scientists, and the Democratic Scientists (haven't heard from the Libertarian Scientists yet?).
Can this country not come together on anything without a partisan "label"...oil drilling Repubs. VS non oil drilling Dems., global warming Dems/global cooling Repubs, Repub Supreme Court justices VS Democratic Supreme Court justices.
Can we all just get along and approach things just as concerned U.S. Citizens again?
Can this country not come together on anything without a partisan "label"...oil drilling Repubs. VS non oil drilling Dems., global warming Dems/global cooling Repubs, Repub Supreme Court justices VS Democratic Supreme Court justices.
Can we all just get along and approach things just as concerned U.S. Citizens again?
Edited
Beach Lover
Come on now! Republican scientist? Is there such a thing?
Beach Fanatic
I am willing to bet good money that the Arctic will not be ice free anytime soon. Any takers? Even if it does, big deal. It has been estimated that if all the Arctic ice melted, it would cause only a four mm rise in sea level.
If GW explains the loss of Arctic ice, then pray tell, what explains the increased ice in Anarctica?
If GW explains the loss of Arctic ice, then pray tell, what explains the increased ice in Anarctica?
Beach Fanatic
Come on now! Republican scientist? Is there such a thing?
Ok Ok youre' right.... hmmm, come to think of it, I don't think there are really any Republican comedians either, except maybe Dennis Miller, but maybe he is a Libertarian comedian.
Edited
Beach Fanatic
Ok Ok youre' right.... hmmm, come to think of it, I don't think there are really any Republican comedians either, except maybe Dennis Miller, but maybe he is a Libertarian comedian.
Now, now....
Drew Carey is Republican as is Pat Sajak. Clint is a Libertarian and he is funny... Republicans in Hollywood have learned to keep a low profile. I will never forget when Pat Sajak was a guest on Larry King. King kept asking him over and over and over: so you are a Republican? It was almost like he was asking Sajak why he was cruel to animals. John O'Hurley is a Republican. There are a few more but it is true that Republicans are as rare in Hollywood as they seem to be in SoWal...
Beach Fanatic
Now, now....
Drew Carey is Republican as is Pat Sajak. Clint is a Libertarian and he is funny... Republicans in Hollywood have learned to keep a low profile. I will never forget when Pat Sajak was a guest on Larry King. King kept asking him over and over and over: so you are a Republican? It was almost like he was asking Sajak why he was cruel to animals. John O'Hurley is a Republican. There are a few more but it is true that Republicans are as rare in Hollywood as they seem to be in SoWal...
Drew Carey?..wow..he's cool, I love him......Pat Sajak
--uhmmm I dunno?
SWGB
Come on now! Republican scientist? Is there such a thing?
Yes, but no degree needed. The answer to everything is, "God did it"
Ok Ok youre' right.... hmmm, come to think of it, I don't think there are really any Republican comedians either, except maybe Dennis Miller, but maybe he is a Libertarian comedian.
No, Dennis Miller is just an idiot. :roll:
Skunky
Come on now! Republican scientist? Is there such a thing?Yes, and their consensus is that you should avoid political discourse until you are old enough to cast a ballot.
Beach Comber
Can we all just get along and approach things just as concerned U.S. Citizens again?
Judging from the messages that follow you do not really want us all to become "concerned citizens". The messages that follow indicate you appear to not respect any part of the other point of view. You seek total aggreement with your opinion, not compromise as a concerned citizen. So we are not a "concerned U. S. citizen" unless we apree with you. Moreover, those that do not aggree are limited in intelect to such an extent that they could never aspire to become a scientist.
My experience has led me to believe that you do not make a statement like that and IMMEDIATELY start belittling those you wish to join you as a concerned citizen.
Certtainly neither side will listen if you begin your argument by saying how dumb the other side is. I have no facts to back it up but I would guess that scientists are pretty well split between the right and left. I aggree that actors and intertainment folks are largely left but I would not take that as a point of pride.
Bottom line - compromise is most likely the way forward for this country but compromise is not getting everyone to move over to the left side of the aisle.
Limbaugh and Rather would never get anything accomplished... except for more polarization. The world is not an eighth grade playground where groups of people get together to support each other and belittle others. It is time for all of us to grow up.
Beach Fanatic
Bottom line - compromise is most likely the way forward for this country but compromise is not getting everyone to move over to the left side of the aisle.
Limbaugh and Rather would never get anything accomplished... except for more polarization. The world is not an eighth grade playground where groups of people get together to support each other and belittle others. It is time for all of us to grow up.
Respectfully submitted, if it a choice between these two in terms of compromise, then compromise should only occur more toward the left side of the aisle. But that is only my opinion.
I am sure there are many who have a deeply held respect and confidence in Rush Limbaugh.
Beach Comber
Respectfully submitted, if it a choice between these two in terms of compromise, then compromise should only occur more toward the left side of the aisle. But that is only my opinion.
I am sure there are many who have a deeply held respect and confidence in Rush Limbaugh.
I respect your opinion and you should feel right at home on this board. In my lifetime compromise usually leans toward the group with the most power. That is the way it should be. However, I have also noticed that extreme polarization and ridicule generate "lockdown" in government. Since we are not parlimentarian the lockdown can go on for some time.
I do not find Rush Limbaugh any more dispicable than Dan Rather. I am more upset with Rather because he diquised his extreme prejudice for so long on major network TV. Limbaugh never disquises anything except drug use.
I am not impressed with our quality of government. I do not think either party has particularly helped this country. I am happy to say that we are incredibly lucky that the basic system that runs this country allows us not to be held back by our pandering government. That system is not democracy but capitalizism.
One of the most diturbing new mantras is the railing against corporate America and american business in general. The portrait painted is that of a few old white guys in New York City sitting in a room deciding how to rape the invironment and oppress the poor. Supported of course by the CIA and the ghost of J. Edgar Hoover.
In actuality the success of american business has allowed most of us to be part of and enjoy that corporate structure. Our job security (lowest unemployment in the industrialized world), retirement funds, mortgages, food supply(best and least expensive in the world) and most of the things that make this a great place to live are not the product of government but are produced despite government regulation and harrassment.
Just my opinion and I'm sticking to it until I change it.
Banned
Come on now! Republican scientist? Is there such a thing?
Republicans are too busy waging a war on science with ideas such as creationism. They are essentially trying to swift boat science. Look at Ben Stein for example.
SoWal Insider
while you argue over ideology, the fact is that there is not much difference between either party
Beach Fanatic
while you argue over ideology, the fact is that there is not much difference between either partyIf you really believe this, and Obama is elected, wait until his first Supreme Court appointee and the first decision after the appointment and then I'll ask you again about party differences. BTW, I think there are plenty of differences between the parties, not only in ideology but in operational aspects as well. The problems cannot be blamed entirely on the executive branch since Congress has done nothing of substance since the last National election. On second, thought maybe you are right about not much difference in parties, at least as far as Congress is concerned.
Beach Fanatic
Now, now....
Drew Carey is Republican as is Pat Sajak. Clint is a Libertarian and he is funny... Republicans in Hollywood have learned to keep a low profile. I will never forget when Pat Sajak was a guest on Larry King. King kept asking him over and over and over: so you are a Republican? It was almost like he was asking Sajak why he was cruel to animals. John O'Hurley is a Republican. There are a few more but it is true that Republicans are as rare in Hollywood as they seem to be in SoWal...
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"I never thought I was a libertarian until I picked up Reason magazine and realized I agree with everything they had printed.." -- Drew Carey in Time (August 9, 2007)[/FONT]
SoWal Insider
Republicans are too busy waging a war on science with ideas such as creationism. They are essentially trying to swift boat science. Look at Ben Stein for example.
A backlash caused by liberals corrupting the education system with their own personal idealism. If the education system wasn't so heavily influenced this would not be happening.
Beach Fanatic
A backlash caused by liberals corrupting the education system with their own personal idealism. If the education system wasn't so heavily influenced this would not be happening.
Can you list a couple of examples of this for clarification, aside from school prayer ? Thanks.
Edited
Banned
A backlash caused by liberals corrupting the education system with their own personal idealism. If the education system wasn't so heavily influenced this would not be happening.
I'm not sure what you are referring to, but it sounds like out of spite the Republican mantra has become "Exterminate all Rational Thought".
Skunky
Republicans are too busy waging a war on science with ideas such as creationism. They are essentially trying to swift boat science. Look at Ben Stein for example.
And while we are at it, can somebody please tell the libs to stop having a hissy fit if we don't incorporate Al Gore's climatology into the kindergarten through 12th grade curriculum?
hmmmm......can't remember
I still think of this thread every time someone brings up global warming.
Edited
SWGB
And while we are at it, can somebody please tell the libs to stop having a hissy fit if we don't incorporate Al Gore's climatology into the kindergarten through 12th grade curriculum?
No problem here, so long as the neocons stop shoving "intelligent design" down our throats. ;-)
Skunky
No problem here, so long as the neocons stop shoving "intelligent design" down our throats. ;-)Relax, I don't think the neocons have that much sway over the N.E.A. By the way, if I understand intelligent design correctly, it doesn't need to be 'taught', it is a concept that many (including myself) ponder when studying biology at the most basic level.
SWGB
Relax, I don't think the neocons have that much sway over the N.E.A. By the way, if I understand intelligent design correctly, it doesn't need to be 'taught', it is a concept that many (including myself) ponder when studying biology at the most basic level.
I agree that it is a concept, therefore it should not be presented as a scientific theory as there is no science to back it up. I get a little disturbed when two opposites like science and religion start getting mixed. No matter how hard you shake the water and vinegar it will still seperate itself.
Skunky
I agree that it is a concept, therefore it should not be presented as a scientific theory as there is no science to back it up. I get a little disturbed when two opposites like science and religion start getting mixed. No matter how hard you shake the water and vinegar it will still seperate itself.
It is actually a theory, but it is pseudoscience at the core. I believe in evolution, but it is hard for my brain to accept that total randomness resulted in our being here at this point. Cellular physiology is a miracle that we take for granted.
Banned
It is actually a theory, but it is pseudoscience at the core. I believe in evolution, but it is hard for my brain to accept that total randomness resulted in our being here at this point. Cellular physiology is a miracle that we take for granted.
I find it hard to accept that anything could exist at all, so I just play along. ;-)
Checking your forum account
Please wait while we verify your forum account.