Antarctic Ice Cap Melting Faster Than First Thought - USA/World

Monday January 14, 2008, 8:31 pm
Bad news for the environment and good news for us "alarmists", maybe now the denialists will finally stop talking about how the ice is not melting there, Thx Chrissy!!

Monday January 14, 2008, 8:31 pm
Bad news for the environment and good news for us "alarmists", maybe now the denialists will finally stop talking about how the ice is not melting there, Thx Chrissy!!

Monday January 14, 2008, 8:38 pm
The problem is it is BS.

http://www.dailytech.com/Antarctic+Ice+Levels+Hit+Record+High/article8871.htm
Blog: Science Antarctic Ice Levels Hit Record High


Satellite Observations of Antarctic Sea Ice, showing this year's record high. The sharp spikes are caused by seasonal variations. (Source: University of Illinois, Polar Research Group)

Antarctic sea ice coverage at a recorded record high. (Source: University of Illinois, The Cryosphere Today)
Highest amount seen since record-keeping began

Researchers at the University of Illinois are reporting a sharp increase in the total amount of sea ice in the Southern Hemisphere. Recent observations show the total ice area now at 16.26 million square kilometers -- the highest amount seen since record-keeping began, and up more than 8% over the past five years.

This corresponds with research conducted last year by the Cambridge Centre for Polar Observations, which found Antarctica ice sheets to be thickening and gaining mass. Global temperature data shows mainland Antarctica (all but the small Antarctic Peninsula) has cooled by up to 1F during the last fifty years, countering a warming trend that began at least as early as 1850.

David Bromwich, professor of atmospheric sciences at Ohio State University, says, "It's hard to see a global warming signal from the mainland of Antarctica right now".

As Antarctica sets historic highs, the Northern ice cap, however, has been on a steady decline, and this year reached a record low. According to the report, "The [Northern Hemisphere] sea ice area is currently at its historic minimum (2.92 million sq. km) representing a 27% drop in sea ice coverage compared to the previous (2005) record NH ice minimum."

Luckily, Arctic ice does not rest upon bedrock, and thus its melting does not affect world sea levels. However, the discrepancy is a difficult to explain by anthropogenic global warming models, which predict both polar regions to warm substantially.

The warming Arctic is expected to eventually open up gas and oil resources in the region, as well as a new sea trade route, saving up to 8,000 miles on cargo shipping between Asia and the rest of the world.

Monday January 14, 2008, 8:59 pm
I suppose you have to look at it from both sides, but to me the green house effects wins hands down, no question about it. In responce to your urls I have a few also. http://www.worldwatch.org/node/1673, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/02/AR2006030201712.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4228411.stm

Monday January 14, 2008, 9:14 pm
I my opinion there is a more deadly cncern involved with ice melt, especially if it turns out ot be correct. Remember viruses those lttle bitty things made up of 1 or 2 strands of RNA basically. The can be dormant(even thats not hte right word) inactive might be better for 10's of thousands of years in a "frozen" state and be activated by UV, radiation and/or a multitude of chemicals. If the theory is that the end of the ice age allowed man's evolution, that the ice caps cover verdant quantities of pre-history, then they might also cover these viruses. Since(or if) the ice is melting in the north I would be concerned that some very unfriendly bug might be laying there just waiting for the chance. Wouldn't that be ironic? SciFI ? Not really. Ice laid down 1000's of years ago could as easily encase dangerous organisms as any other medium.

Monday January 14, 2008, 11:59 pm
"The warming Arctic is expected to eventually open up gas and oil resources in the region, as well as a new sea trade route, saving up to 8,000 miles on cargo shipping between Asia and the rest of the world."

THIS IS WHAT THE IDEALISTS WANT THE WARMING FOR! Judy you are a dying breed as more and more people are realising that it is not BS.

Tuesday January 15, 2008, 12:18 am
Noted.

Tuesday January 15, 2008, 12:25 am
As a footnote, what you posted here judy, you have been posting for months, whereas this news item is CURRENT!

Tuesday January 15, 2008, 7:35 am
It has been a proven point that global warming is having an effect on the Arctic, I have read to many storie's on it and also how its effecting the Polar Bers also. So people need to have the right information and wake up to realaity thank you Chrissy N. noted

Tuesday January 15, 2008, 9:55 am
I know that I will never be able to convince those who are determined not to believe in global warming that it is real.
I, however, do believe that this is a crucial issue and that global warming is real and I will do whatever I can as an individual to take action and make responsible decisions in order to be part of the solution instead of part of the problem.
Noted with thanks, Chrissy.

Tuesday January 15, 2008, 4:38 pm
Before I comment let me state for the record that I have asked Michael W. permission to publish his thoughts on virus and melting ice caps.

For the first time ever on this planet a species is successful. Humans have food, free of predators, able to reproduce. In fact, we are too successful - we are altering the planet in our image. We eat too much, kill too much, destroy too much, reproduce too much.

We are finally doing something right, we are overdoing it. I am learning to live within my means - save money, live off the grid, eat less than six pounds of meat a year, buy electric car when able. I was considering hunting for food until today I read that deer has about forty percent meat compared to lamb at about eighty percent.

There have been recent changes in energy - it is now possible solar electricity cheaper than coal - this was posted here about a month ago. You can read it at http://www.enn.com/business/article/28057
Also, there is a company install solar electricity free. The company sells the electricity to the utility, and you pay the company for the electricity you use, so they make a profit. Go to http://renu.citizenre.com/

Tuesday January 15, 2008, 6:46 pm
For heaven sake. If something isn't true or is exagerated or the whole truth is not being told....then it doesn't matter how many time I post that information.
What "greenhouse effect"? The fact that the Antarctic is getting colder as the North Pole warms means the "greenhouse" effect has bugger all to do with it.

I do not endorse drilling in the Arctic, because it will ice up again...and then what. Melting happens every 70 years on average and then it gets cold again.

Tuesday January 15, 2008, 10:20 pm
Just because this is current news does not change the facts that Judy presents. Has anyone considered that this “current news” is being reported during the summer in Antarctica? If alarmists want something to worry about here is a bit of information for you: Solar scientist have accurately charted climate variations as far back as records will allow and they have shown a direct correlation between solar activity and changes in Earth’s climate. The current warming trend fits the pattern, but the bad news they are reporting is that the sun is entering into a period of low activity and they say that will result in a dramatic cool down that could start within 5 years and last for decades. The false ideas of wars being fought over water in a warmer climate are ridiculous. We have desalination technology to extract water from the sea. We have not yet developed the technology to grow crops under snow and ice which is what will be the case in the coming cool down according to the predictions of the solar scientist.

Wednesday January 16, 2008, 12:48 am
The article is very recent and the research is amongst the most up-to-date in this field. It takes into consideration seasonal fluctuations, local conditions, weather patterns, historical data, and so forth. It is very interesting to see how a very small minority of misinformed people tries to derail the debate with dubious arguments and research paid for by large oil companies and other anti-global warming groups. Their agendas are however easily exposed as we can see when analysing Judy Cross' arguments and methods. She has a pattern it seems of hijacking stories noted that goes against her anti-global warming beliefs by posting long articles in the comments section, and often throwing in for good measure irrelevant facts and out-dated research. Thus she hopes to confuse serious debate and concerns. Fortunately it is not working as can be seen by the many other comments posted here.

Wednesday January 16, 2008, 1:32 pm
I've been blocked from commenting...truth telling actually, by the poster above. that should tell you something

He calls it "hijacking". I call what he is doing censorship and propagandizing.

That this story is "recent" doesn't make it true. The Antarctic ice loss is only hapening on the Penninsula. the rest of the continent is gaining ice and getting colder.

Wednesday January 16, 2008, 11:02 pm
Gaias Son Aikj - is it a debate if only one side participates? Then it would be more like a seminar. Agree or disagree as long as there are comments attached to stories being posted hearing the other side is important otherwise its just propoganda.

Thursday January 17, 2008, 12:28 am
Michael,

Actually what Judy Cross is doing is propaganda and promoting dialogue. She is using other people's stories that have become popular stories to promote her own agenda by posting long tedious articles of often questionable repute. Furthermore, she throws already debunked theories, misinformation, and often outright fake science in with the articles. To use someone elses' stories to do this I find unethical and discourteous to the person who has spent time to find good and valuable stories for Care2's readers.

I especially take issue with the way she uses someone elses' popular story to promote her own long articles. If she wants these articles read she should submit them herself, and not use the comment section of popular stories to do so. The comments section is for leaving comments, not long articles. Furthermore, when these articles are going against the original articles' ideas and arguments, and moreover using faulty logic, misinformation and so forth, it is wrong and has nothing to do with open dialogue or hearing the other side.

As far as I know, the comments section is not for posting long articles, but rather for leaving relevant comments. I take issue with the way Juady Cross is indeed abusing the comments section.

Thursday January 17, 2008, 12:30 am

In the first sentence above I meant to write:

Actually what Judy Cross is doing is propaganda and NOT promoting dialogue.

Thursday January 17, 2008, 12:48 am
There is a condition though generally required for lucid applicable comment and that is an intellect that reflects affective dialogue. Even if its propaganda so what? Use the blocking system. Force stories to be presented under their own headings, if nobody notes it, they don't make the front page and with blocking others stories can't be used for propaganda. If everybody takes a few deep breaths you might find some comon ground. Maybe you find out she's more upset that, as a friend just put it " she might be more upset at Al Gore because he's corporate and .you can't do anything about global warming without limiting corporate globalization." Thats a decent point for debate eh? This issue will affect my children and grandchildren as well as anyone elses. I understand the need to strike while the iron is hot, but hysteria on either side will make for poor decisions
Verde!!!

Thursday January 17, 2008, 1:04 am
There is no hysteria here. The fact is that Judy C simply does not believe in global warming, her arguments often even denies the fact that global warming exists (pointing out it is regional, or that the time series are wrong, etc.), and she certainly does not even contemplate the possibility that it is human induced. Hence your statement that 'you can't do anything about global warming without limiting corporate globalization' will be a decent point of debate will not work in this case. Personally, as a sidenote, I think corportation is indeed one of the main culprits with regards to global warming.

If Judy C only could stick to facts herself and not throw in debunked theories, irrelevant facts and misinformation often in the form of long tedious articles, her contribution would actually have added value to the discussion.But as it stands, her contributions detracts from the issues and often confuse (on purpose) the readers. I therefore seriously question her agenda.

The point I make though is still highly relevant, and that is that Judy C is abusing the comments section to promote her own long articles and for propaganda purposes of her own. This I see as highly unethical practices. She should submit the stories herself and let the Care2 members decide if they are worthwhile to make the front page. Not use others' popular stories comment section to promote them.

Thursday January 17, 2008, 1:46 am
here I go again, seeing both sides of what has been happening in this thread. i can see that Judy does have her beliefs ... and she is welcome to them. I am quite happy for debate on this ... although i would prefer if it was done in a group rather than in a news thread ... but if it has to be done here, then post NEW "news", not "news" I saw her posting the middle of last year!

So having weighed this up while typing this out, the balance goes with Gaias this time Michael, sorry lol.

Thursday January 17, 2008, 1:57 am
noted and thanks again chrissy

Thursday January 17, 2008, 8:01 am
Crissy I have to compliment you on your sound insight..there is one way of disagreeing-- there is another in permanently throwing in roadblocks...yes debate is good when productive...in my small opinion Judy brings nothing new here ...her ideas have been proven wrong so long ago by serious open minded scientists...
and lets just assume that Global warming is in part a natural occurance..what is wrong in reducing carbon emissons .?????? nothing..right !

Thursday January 17, 2008, 12:03 pm
I didn't say I said. My point was that maybe you two had some common ground. the quotation mark addition were intended to point that it was a friends comment.. I agree the use of long drawn out stories posted in comments is not a valid way to carry on the discussion and that they should be carried to a group. That holds true regardless of the source. If a source is valid then the individual should post their own story. Many sources used in the above manner are yellow jouranlism at its finest and the Care2 community rapidly sees that and doesn't note the story and it goes no further. How many of her posts have made the front page? My point Gaias S is that you've made your point about Judy C so lets get on to discussion not castigation. Unless there is nothing further to discuss than Judy C? Betina puts it correctly and I always respect Chrissy's opinion and count both as friends. So I'm out of this discussion time for some sleep.
Verde!!

Thursday January 17, 2008, 9:57 pm
Betina, I have raised this point ... "lets just assume that Global warming is in part a natural occurrence..what is wrong in reducing carbon emissions .?????? nothing..right" ... before and get no response. I state again,. let's all assume that global warming is in fact part of the natural cycle. By limiting our emissions, we are helping to create clean air for the whole world ... that sounds good .... by becoming more 'green", by recycling we are using less land fill and by changing to energy efficient item s... light globes, shower heads, cars, whatever ... we are saving OURSELVES money and that has to be good!!!!!