NEWS: Arctic thawing more than twice as fast as rest of the world.

We have all heard about the new movie which will be on all theaters this coming weekend "The Day After Tomorrow." But is there any new information that corroborates that rapid climate change is happening and on its way?

 

Report: Rapid arctic thaw portends warming
"OSLO, Norway (Reuters) -- Global warming is hitting the Arctic more than twice as fast as the rest of the planet in what may be a portent of wider, catastrophic changes, the chairman of an eight-nation study said Monday.

"There is dramatic climate change happening in the Arctic right now ... about 2 to 3 times the pace of the whole globe," said Robert Corell, chairman of the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, an 1,800-page report to be handed to ministers in Iceland in November."

It seems that everyday we keep getting more information that does corroborates that rapid climate change is a reality and happening as we speak.

Related News

Environment & Global Warming

Fast Arctic thaw portends global warming




[edit on 12-6-2004 by Nerdling]

Searching on the net I found another NOAA site, but unless I missed it there is no link in the main NOAA site to this one. The site is the "National Climatic Data Center on Abrupt Climate Change". This site has a lot of information about past abrupt climate changes and the possibility of having one in the future.

This is what it says on the first page of that website.

" The paleoclimate record shows rapid and dramatic changes in climate have occurred in the past on global and regional scales. Here's what we know and what we don't know about the causes and effects of these changes. "

Excerpted from.
www.ncdc.noaa.gov...

" One of the best studied examples of abrupt change occurred as the Earth's climate was changing from a cold glacial to a warmer interglacial state. During a brief period lasting about a century, temperatures in most of the Northern Hemisphere rapidly returned to near-glacial conditions, stayed there for over 1,000 years in a time called the Younger Dryas (named after a small Arctic flower,) then about 11,500 years ago quickly warmed again. In some places, the abrupt changes may have been as large as 10�C, and may have occurred over a decade. "

Excerpted from.
www.ncdc.noaa.gov...

There are times when the links don't want to load, you just have to keep on trying and will eventually get to them.

This is the part that is most interesting and that seems to warn us of what might be in the near future for us.

" Why did the thermohaline circulation change abruptly?

The Younger Dryas occurred during the transition from the last glacial period into the present interglacial (the Holocene). During this time, the continental ice sheets were rapidly melting. A pulse of this meltwater flowing into the North Atlantic (Figure 8) reduced the salinity and density of the surface ocean, causing a reduction in the rate of deepwater formation. As deepwater formation slowed, less warm water flowed north from the tropics and the North Atlantic became colder. Eventually, the meltwater flux slowed and other changes occurred, causing deepwater formation to increase. "

Excerpted from.
www.ncdc.noaa.gov...

" Recent Periods of Abrupt Climate Change
While smaller than abrupt changes during the last ice age, a number of abrupt shifts have been recorded since the glaciers receded. This post-glacial period, known as the Holocene, covers the last 11,500 years. Some rapid changes have arrived as prolonged periods of drought, and have been implicated in the collapse of early human civilizations.

Excerpted from.
www.ncdc.noaa.gov...

This site seems to be there for anyone who is looking for the right information to find it, but it surely is not painting a very bright future if the changes we are seeing nowadays are leading us to another abrupt climate change period like the ones we had in the past.

[edit on 12-6-2004 by Muaddib]

Originally posted by Muaddib

The Younger Dryas occurred during the transition from the last glacial period into the present interglacial (the Holocene). During this time, the continental ice sheets were rapidly melting. A pulse of this meltwater flowing into the North Atlantic (Figure 8) reduced the salinity and density of the surface ocean, causing a reduction in the rate of deepwater formation. As deepwater formation slowed, less warm water flowed north from the tropics and the North Atlantic became colder. Eventually, the meltwater flux slowed and other changes occurred, causing deepwater formation to increase. "

I remember reading of this effect about 15 years ago and want to point out that not only can radical climate change occur, but also that the nutrients brought up from the south by the gulf stream will be severely reduced in one of the worlds most productive fisheries.

I saw the movie The Day After Tomorrow last night. It was very good. It seemed to be a little far fetched though. I don't see this happening in my liftime, perhaps the lifetime of my grandchildren or great grandchildren. Obvious something needs to be done now about global warming. Over population of the earth is a major factor in this I believe, but what can you do, kill off half of the population?

kaos I greatly respect your opinion but unless you are 90 or in poor health or have bad luck I think you will see the abrupt change in your lifetime. If the change hasn't already started.

It's already started one of my teachers told me that the worlds oceans are rising at 5cm per year due to polar ice caps melting. Its becoming more too

Btw Muad... good post.

Hockey.... What I remember reading about the time of the last glacial maximum is that the sea level was over 100 feet lower than today. It might have even been 300+ feet lower. I don't recall the numbers. But it was in the 3 figure range. So at a minimum the levels have gone up 100 feet. Im not gonna sweat 5cm. Building on a coast is a risk. You run the risk of floods, hurricanes, tital waves, etc.

And then we have articles like the following where other scientists in effect say, "Melting ice? Not unusual."

It's happened numerous times before before and there's still no proof of anthropogenic contributions. And believe it or not, humanity has survived! (I think)

Article: Greenland and Global Warming

Pardon me if I'm not alarmed.

Well, a professor of MIT saying something like "the Gulf Stream's existence is a consequence of the large-scale wind system over the North Atlantic Ocean, and of the nature of fluid motions on a rotating planet. which I excerpted from the link you provided....does not give him much credence

This professor doesn't even point out that the major cause to the North Atlantic current is mostly the cyclic transfer of warm water from the Equator and cold water from the Arctic. It is true that winds do help the current, but I don't see an MIT professor not even considering that the world is mostly water and the oceans are one of the major, if not the major, causes for wind patterns and climate in general...

Sorry if I don't even believe one word from a professor who doesn't know enough about the North Atlantic current...

Also it is worth to notice that in the same statement this suposed MIT professor says,
" The occurrence of a climate state without the Gulf Stream any time soon -- within tens of millions of years -- has a probability of little more than zero." I would then have to assume that this MIT professor has not seen the evidence that points to the fact that in the past we had abrupt climate changes some in less than a decade.

If that was all this professor said about the North Atlantic current he doesn't seem to be talking about the main cause for the existance of the conveyor belt.

[edit on 16-6-2004 by Muaddib]

Agreed Muad. Winds will have SOME impact but thats about it. Wind patterns change as the high and low pressure systems move about. But even as this happens the current remains steady. A persistant weather pattern can impact the route a bit but nothing too major. Im sure the rotation of the planet has some impact but again its not the driving force. Without the water balance being maintained by just the right salinity level and temperature level the current can't flow. You can have all the wind currents you want but if that water can't sink up around northern Europe the river of water shuts down or changes to a location where the water can sink. Hasn't this guy read the first thing on how the Atlantic water sinks? The reduction in flow and the changing salinity has been well documented. I thought MIT was supposed to be a reputable university.

Edit: Its like a hurricane. The rotation of the earth and the trade winds help get the tropical systems going. You can have the warmest water in the world. But unless the storm can evacuate the air out the top center of the storm the thing will choke and die out. Same with the current. It needs that sinking system to evacuate the water so new water can move in.

[edit on 16-6-2004 by Indy]

I did a search on this professor and he should know better than to say that the "North Atlantic current is safe as long as the winds are still up and the Earth rotates"..... which is pretty much what he says on that article. The forces behind the North Atlantic conveyor belt are more complex than that, have been proven and its known to have changed abruptly in the past, but yet this professor is saying "it is highly unlikely to happen within tens of millions of years"..... There is something fishy about his statement because it has been proven to be the contrary by many other scientists.

[edit on 16-6-2004 by Muaddib]

Yet another report on the problem of climate change.


Scientists Sound Warning on Climate Change

I'd love to see some other work this character has done. I'd be willing to bet that he has done work on global warming and his predictions are one that says how hot we will be for centuries and that if he admits to a failing current that he'd be undermining his own work. He has to cover his rear even if it means making statements that are completely rediculous.

Originally posted by Indy
I'd love to see some other work this character has done....

Okay.....
MIT Program in Atmospheres, Oceans, and Climate

Carl Wunsch's home page

Lecturer at Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences

Bottom Topography as a Control Parameter in an Ocean Circulation Model

Carl Wunsch's Theory as to how planet rotation and atmospheric currents have a major impact on ocean currents:
Thermohaline Loops, Stommel Box Models, and Sandstr�m�s Theorem


[edit on 17-6-2004 by Outland]

Thanks Outland. I haven't had the chance to dive into the articles yet but based on the titles of them he seems set in his ways. A common sense approach to the matter will tell you he may be 25% right in the matter. Wind will have an impact on water. BUT if you notice the currents stay steady no matter what the current weather pattern is. Whether it be a sharp negative or positive phase in the arctic oscillation the circulation remains constant. The fact that there isn't a major reroute of the current during shifts in weather patterns pretty much proves his theory wrong. Wind currents may paint over the main flow of water but they will not change the path. As systems move across the Atlantic they subject the same area to winds of different directions. An extended pattern will do nothing more than make the current smudge. Picture rubbing your finger across a line of wet paint. You will brush it to the side a bit. Thats about it. Once the pattern lets up the current resumes as always.