Polar Ice sets new minimum

[Gray-Wolf]

sadly we know nowt of the deep oceans where most of the currents sub ducting heat run. We know even less about the impact of these deep currents when they reach the north and south polar regions but the effects seem to be unmistakable.

Again, i would caution not to confuse 'ice extent' with 'ice volume' and obviously if volume reduces sea levels rise......and sea levels are on a bit of a spurt at the mo.

[NorthernRab]

What sort of effect would the melting of such glaciers have on the North Atlantic Current? Would it add to the potentially shocking problem, as we rarely hear about the effect of Antartica on this change.

Edit: Been doing a bit of research recently, seems Scotland, The Faroe Islands, Norway and Iceland will be affected most by such a change. A drop in 10'C in these countries, with a big change to the climate of France, Germany, England, Ireland, Wales, Denmark, Switzerland, North Italy and Belgium also.

Take today as an example, pull 10'C away from Scotland's temperatures and you have...

- 9'C as the daytime max in Inverness,

- 8'C as the daytime max in Aberdeen,

- 13'C as the daytime max in Braemar,

- 12'C as the daytime max in Lerwick.

Personally, I hope this change happens but wish that it is a lot less severe, say 2'C degrees away from our average temperatures.

Edited March 25, 2008 by NorthernRab

[Gray-Wolf]

A few articles outlining what we are to expect........

Sea ice builds in Arctic but scientists say it's likely to melt

Timmins Daily Press, 20 March 200

Arctic ice is melting away

eNews2.0, 19 March 2008

Arctic ice blanket at record low

Metro.co.uk (United Kingdom), 19 March 2008

Older Arctic sea ice is declining rapidly

DailyIndia.com, 19 March 2008

This article also appeared in the following sources:

Malaysia Sun, TheCheers.org (Estonia), and ThaiIndian.com (Thailand)

Arctic losing long-term, thicker ice coverage, scientists say

Bloomberg, 19 March 2008

Study warns: Arctic Ocean—from thick ice to endless pool

eFluxMedia, 19 March 2008

Perennial Arctic ice cover diminishing, officials say

Washington Post, 19 March 2008

This article also appeared in the following sources:

Health Sentinel, Free Internet Press, and China Post

Of ice and mendacity

Grist Magazine, 19 March 2008

Arctic ice cap still at risk: NASA

AFP, 19 March 2008

This article also appeared in the following sources:

TheSmartSet.com, Citizen.co.za (South Africa), Brisbane Times (Australia), Sydney Morning Herald (Australia), TheAge.com.au (Australia), Edmonton Journal (Canada), France24.com (France), RawStory.com, and iAfrica.com (South Africa)

NASA: Long term sea ice shrinks in Arctic

Trend News Agency (Azerbaijan), 19 March 2008

Thickest, oldest, and toughest sea ice around the North Pole melting

New York Daily News, 19 March 2008

NASA: Long-term sea ice shrinks in Arctic

EarthTimes.org, 19 March 2008

[Calrissian]

Yahoo: Wilkins ice shelf collapse ?

Hmm, what ya think of this Grey Wolf.

Maybe I've not read enough on here lately, but this seems like a new story.

Wilkins is a land based ice-shelf, the size of Northern Island, and they subtly suggest it might all go ?

You're all doomed, I tells ya

[snowsure]

I am having a slight problem regarding the use of glaciers as an indicator of climate change.

As ever, there is not a definitive answer (or consensus) on the net as to whether surging glaciers are caused by climate change. Their dramatic nature seems to transcend causal reasons. However we look for climatic responses and keep finding them! No suprise there then.

[eddie]

I was wondering if there are any undergound lakes that might drain into the Antarctic as the result of any warming?

When we were coming out of the last ice age it is speculated that the cause of the Younger Dryas period may have been caused by a large influx of fresh melt water that played havoc with ocean currents.

[Gray-Wolf]

I am having a slight problem regarding the use of glaciers as an indicator of climate change.

As ever, there is not a definitive answer (or consensus) on the net as to whether surging glaciers are caused by climate change. Their dramatic nature seems to transcend causal reasons. However we look for climatic responses and keep finding them! No suprise there then.

So, instead of looking for someone to tell you what's happening how's about hazarding a guess as to what might cause ice to melt?

[Gray-Wolf]

A chunk of Shelf ice the size of Northern Ireland is the latest bit of Antarctica to fail. Spotted on feb 28th the shelf was 'hanging by a thread' by March 8th with the resultant bergs covering 14,000sqkm of southern ocean [will they now class it as sea ice and get all 'whoopie do' about ice extents again I wonder?].

[pottyprof]

It's hard to tell whether Patrick J. Michaels is deliberately trying to confuse people or is just confused himself. The models predict more Antarctic sea ice and more snow on the Antarctic peninsula as a result greater precipitation with global warming, and more land ice loss as butressing ice melts in warmer seas. It's all consistant with theory though the speed of change keeps surprising folk.

Further reading at the BAS http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/press/press_re...ease.php?id=342

The problem here is the fact that the models are equipped with up-to-date observations and so in effect their output reflects those observations. Because the majority observers are looking at warming, then this increase in snowfall etc will fit the theory as the theory evolves and will therefore be consistent. The truth is that the models predicted the Antarctic ice to melt but now the theory is shifting to match observations and things are getting a little more complicated to explain. Is it consistent with AGW or natural cycles? We know of one natural cycle that is certainly ringing a few bells that would increase the area of sea ice in the area without increased precipitation. Confused? lol

[pottyprof]

So, instead of looking for someone to tell you what's happening how's about hazarding a guess as to what might cause ice to melt?

Salt?

[Chris Knight]

Salt?

Urea is supposed to be more eco-friendly, I believe

[Gray-Wolf]

Urea is supposed to be more eco-friendly, I believe

Only if yer' a fella and only as an accelerator on your compost.....

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

A chunk of Shelf ice the size of Northern Ireland is the latest bit of Antarctica to fail. Spotted on feb 28th the shelf was 'hanging by a thread' by March 8th with the resultant bergs covering 14,000sqkm of southern ocean [will they now class it as sea ice and get all 'whoopie do' about ice extents again I wonder?].

Latest 'massive' discharge is at most 0.004% of ice loss.....whoopie do! But the real story goes beyond that and makes any AGW claim even more scandalous. Oh and even by AGW scientists any sea level rise will be..................0

BFTP

Edited March 26, 2008 by BLAST FROM THE PAST

[Gray-Wolf]

Latest 'massive' discharge is at most 0.004% of ice loss.....whoopie do! But the real story goes beyond that and makes any AGW claim even more scandalous. Oh and even by AGW scientists any sea level rise will be..................0

BFTP

And this stable door opening = 0 horses...............BFTP, I feel you miss the point here. To keep it simple for you ,Wilkins was another 'door' holding back the ice beyond. The door is now open.

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

And this stable door opening = 0 horses...............BFTP, I feel you miss the point here. To keep it simple for you ,Wilkins was another 'door' holding back the ice beyond. The door is now open.

GW

You don't have to keep it simple thank you, I totally understand your posts but they are dangerously eroneous in their projections IMO and do not reflect the current situation. I think you should look at the rapid ice up going on down there...the cold is expanding rapidly with ice 'extent' extending rapidly. And before you go on about ice extent and thickness it has also been thickening for decades. The only ice 'loss' has been on the peninsula. No where else has seen any net ice loss....only gain. You are on the wrong gravy boat.

BFTP

Edited March 28, 2008 by BLAST FROM THE PAST

[millennia]

Yahoo: Wilkins ice shelf collapse ?

Hmm, what ya think of this Grey Wolf.

Maybe I've not read enough on here lately, but this seems like a new story.

Wilkins is a land based ice-shelf, the size of Northern Island, and they subtly suggest it might all go ?

You're all doomed, I tells ya

It's actually a SEA based shelf and it's ain't going anywhere this year at least as it's already refrozen with a full 6 months of Antarctic winter to go.

[Gray-Wolf]

Wilkins ,yesterday ,2pm

appears to now be just mush........would imply quite high sea temps.....for a southern autumn that is.

[bluecon]

And the Arctic is still extremely cold and more ice building all the time.

Still well below normal temps ib Canada.

I do believe it is the Sun and not a tiny amount of a harmless odourless gas that drives the warming on the Earth.

http://www.canadianweather.org/imagefetch....ints_metric.png

[Gray-Wolf]

It's actually a SEA based shelf and it's ain't going anywhere this year at least as it's already refrozen with a full 6 months of Antarctic winter to go.

" already re-frozen with a full 6 months of Antarctic Winter to go "

In these days of full global sat coverage you need be sure of your assertions lest you appear silly. The above image is from yesterday around 2pm and all I see is the 'mush' left from this 60ft thick shelf ice (rapidly melting as is shown) and no surrounding mass of sea ice freezing it in. This side of the peninsula no longer carries much ice over winter so I would very much doubt that it will become frozen in.

All that aside once Pine island glacier goes it will reveal a fabulous coastline (for anyone who knows the area that is........).

[snowsure]

So, instead of looking for someone to tell you what's happening how's about hazarding a guess as to what might cause ice to melt?

Erm? Why would I hazard a guess regarding such a change when far more learned people than me are trying to do just that.

So to turn it round, rather than hazarding a guess as to what is causing the ice to melt, why not look into the research regarding what is causing the ice to melt?

[Gray-Wolf]

You would think so wouldn't you? you'd also think that you'd focus on what most all of the science is saying is causing the changes across all of the Antarctic continent instead of pulling out mis/un-representative papers and holding them up as 'fact' wouldn't you? You'd think that the collective understanding of what is occurring at both poles would be easy for the uninitiated to fathom and the premise to be quite straightforward as well but sadly it would appear that some folk on here choose to obfuscate rather than face the uncomfortable facts.

It nark's me that so many [apparently] can believe in the destruction of the rainforest's, they can accept the desertification of sub-Saharan grassland by overgrazing by folks animals, they worry about the impact of plastics upon both the environment and its inhabitants but will not accept the impacts that the mega tonnages of pollutants we have lofted into the atmosphere is having.........

You can lead a horse to water............

[beng]

Talking of sea temperatures -

http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sst_anom.html

Current sea surface temp anomalies show much of the Antarctic coastline slightly below average, apart from to the west of peninsula which is above average (and has been for a few years now).

Edited April 1, 2008 by beng

[biffvernon]

How do they get to colour in a map like that? I mean, for the sea that fringes Antarctica you can't just drop a thermometer in the water. It's frozen.

[Admiral_Bobski]

How do they get to colour in a map like that? I mean, for the sea that fringes Antarctica you can't just drop a thermometer in the water. It's frozen.

This page from NOAA might help:

http://www.csc.noaa.gov/crs/cohab/hurricane/sst.htm

CB

[Gray-Wolf]

Talking of sea temperatures -

http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sst_anom.html

Current sea surface temp anomalies show much of the Antarctic coastline slightly below average, apart from to the west of peninsula which is above average (and has been for a few years now).

your link doesn't show the Antarctic coastline.

this one does and can be found here;

http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/PSB/EPS/SST/climo.html

I don't seem to be seeing what you are seeing though . I can see a huge blob of warm anoms to the west of the peninsula (and down the flank of S. America......not much evidence of La-Nina there) and the remnants of the 'Ross outflow' still showing on the shelf sea to the NE of Ross and to me the rest looks average or above average.

You'll need to let me see what you are seeing to understand Beng.

Edited April 1, 2008 by Gray-Wolf