Posted on 12/12/2006 8:13:39 AM PST by cogitator
The worrying shrinkage of Arctic sea ice could accelerate dramatically in coming decades, leaving the planet's most northerly ocean virtually devoid of ice in summer by 2040, according to a study published on Tuesday.
The paper, which appeared in the US journal Geophysical Research Letters, mainly points the finger at greenhouse-gas emissions.
It warned that if carbon pollution continues to increase at present rates, the Arctic's normal cycle of freezing and thawing faces catastrophic disruption.
A simulation run by scientists at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and Canada's McGill University predicted that the area covered by ice in September -- before new ice begins to form each year -- could shrink from about 5.9 million square kilometres to 1.9 million sq. kms. (2.3 million to 770,000 sq. miles) within a decade.
By 2040, "only a small amount of perennial sea ice" would remain along the north coasts of Greenland and Canada in summer, NCAR said in a press release.
In winter, ice thickness would be reduced from about 3.5 metres (about 12 feet) to less than a metre (three feet).
"We have already witnessed major losses in sea ice, but our research suggests that the decrease over the next few decades could be far more dramatic than anything that has happened so far," said NCAR scientist and lead author of the study, Marika Holland.
Greenhouse gases trap the Sun's heat, gradually forcing up Earth's surface temperature.
But several peripheral factors could also account for such a rapid meltdown.
Open water absorbs more sunlight than ice, accelerating the rate of warming and leading to more ice loss. In addition, global climate change is likely to drive warmer ocean currents into the Arctic region.
"This is a positive feedback loop with dramatic implications for the entire Arctic region," Holland said.
The shrinkage of the Arctic ice cap is viewed with alarm by scientists, as it appears to perturb important ocean currents elsewhere, notably the Gulf Stream, which gives western Europe its balmy climate.
It also threatens animals such as polar bears and seals that depend on ice -- as well as Inuits and other native peoples who hunt these animals and have to travel on thinner ice in this quest.
There are geopolitical implications, too, as Canada, Russia and the United States jockey to claim rights over transpolar passages that open up within their newly ice-free waters.
In September, European scientists unveiled satellite images from late August showing that perennial sea ice -- thick ice that is normally present year-round and is not affected by the Arctic summer -- had disappeared over an area bigger than the British Isles.
The study released Tuesday concludes that reduced rates of greenhouse gas emissions could slow the ice loss. "Our research indicates that society can still minimize the impacts on Artic ice," Holland said.
Based on the OISM Petition? You'd be right!
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/
The tempature of the earth is getting hotter. I believe man has influenced it to some degree but I think it is so slight it doesn't matter. My belief based on science is that we are simply in a natural cyclical pattern of warmer weather.
Last I heard, there were several thousand skeptics. However, I don't think all of them were climate scientists.
Last time I looked, the those supporting Global Warming were not all climate scientists either, quite the contrary.
However, hard science demands testing of hypothesis to destruction. It's not a popularity contest or matter of opinion. Consensus and ‘the science is settled’ mantra are attempts to protect a theory, a political gambit, not the continuous cycle of questioning, testing and the confirmation of results by independent research required of the scientific method.
One should never confuse what is known of the physics of climate theory, with what we don't know about water atmospheric feedbacks and computer models, upon which, the case for anthropogenic global warming wholly depends.
He admitted no such thing. He said that any data gathered from such a satellite is open to interpretation. True enough. There is no need to resort to personal insults. I find that folks who do that tend to have less faith in their own arguments concerning the issue under discussion. Unfortunately, this is too often a tactic of the "Progressives" as they like to call themselves these days. Notice I didn't apply the dreaded L word to you since that would be as bad as calling you a moron or worse. Besides, how would I know?
Cogitator has asserted that the scientific community is in united lockstep on the issue of global warming and I disagree. Let's say he's mostly correct. Just like most of the scientific community agreed at one time that the earth was FLAT. Both Global Warming and Fossil Fuels are simply theories. It's been accepted as gospel because for decades the CLAMs (Congressional Left; Academics & Media elite) have allowed only that theory entrance into the marketplace of ideas. It's taught at all levels of the school system, university and etc. It's all that is discussed in the msm and of course the Congressional lefties are hell bent on preventing anybody from sinking any new wells anywhere there might actually be enough oil to disprove their theory.
Thanks, I do my part, and no longer drive.
""We have already witnessed major losses in sea ice"
Yeah right. Man caused it by an increase in temp by less than a degree.
Finally! I didn't think I was ever gonna get to finish that article. This whole week has been one big train wreck. Thank God it's Friday. whew.
You were right; I found it quite interesting. The part about the Drake equation reminded me of an essay I read many years ago: "Extraterrestrial Intelligence and the Interdict Hypothesis" by Martyn J. Fogg, published in the November 88 issue of Analog. As best I recall, a computer programmed to model the formation of the universe was fed the Drake equation and the results of the simulation was that the galaxy should be teeming with life. The question then shifts from "Is there life elsewhere?" to "where is everybody?" Of course, the whole exercise requires one to hold the belief that, at some point along the way, life springs from non-life (cough, cough). Anyway, Crichton points out that one of the possible solutions to the Drake equation is "zero" (ie, no life elsewhere). I can't help but wonder if the aforementioned computer simulation would have ever returned such a result. If it did, they'd probably chalk it up as a bug or something. lol!
Thanks for posting that. It really made my week.
You're welcome. If you liked that, you may want to read more of his stuff when you get a chance. Well worth the time. bttt
http://www.crichton-official.com/speeches/index.html
Michael Crichton Speeches
"Fear, Complexity, Environmental Management in the 21st Century"
Washington Center for Complexity and Public Policy, Washington, D.C.
November 6, 2005
"Testimony of Michael Crichton before the United States Senate"
Committee on Environment and Public Works, Washington, D.C.
September 28, 2005
"The Impossibility of Prediction"
National Press Club, Washington, D.C.
Janaury 25, 2005
"Science Policy in the 21st Century"
Joint Session AEI-Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C.
January 25, 2005
"Environmentalism as Religion"
Commonwealth Club, San Francisco, CA
September 15, 2003
"Aliens Cause Global Warming"
California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA
January 17, 2003
"Why Speculate?"
International Leadership Forum, La Jolla, CA
April 26, 2002
"Ritual Abuse, Hot Air, and Missed Opportunities: Science Views Media"
American Assoc. for the Advancement of Science, Anaheim, CA
January 25, 1999
"Mediasaurus: The Decline of Conventional Media"
National Press Club, Washington D.C.
April 7, 1993
Or was that only for aerosols not based on chlorofluorocarbons?
i hope the whole east coast becomes like florida. the cold is getting to me.
Washington Warming to Southern Plants
"In a revised map of "hardiness zones" -- bands of similar temperatures where similar trees are likely to grow in winter -- the foundation reclassified the entire Washington area in the same zone as parts of North Carolina and Texas. In 1990, the region was on the border of northern and southern growing zones, but a foundation official said that has changed after 15 years of balmy winter weather."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.