Scientists: Arctic getting warmer, melting

[Amelia]

Scientists: Arctic getting warmer, melting

CNN.com

November 17, 2006

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Signs of warming continue in the Arctic with a decline in sea ice, an increase in shrubs growing on the tundra and rising worries about the Greenland ice sheet.

"There have been regional warming periods before. Now we're seeing Arctic-wide changes," James Overland, an oceanographer at the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory in Washington state, said Thursday.

For each of the last five years it was at least 1 degree Celsius (1.8 F) above average over the entire Arctic over the entire year, he said.

The new "State of the Arctic" analysis, released by the U.S. government's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, also reports an increase in northward movement of warmer water through the Bering Strait in 2001-2004, which might be a factor in continuing reduction of sea ice.

During that time there were record lows in sea ice coverage in the region, Overland said. This year there was more normal coverage in the Bering area but a record low on the Atlantic side of the Arctic.

In the past when such a shift occurred, there would have been no net loss of ice overall, just a change in where there was a smaller amount, but now there is both the shift and an overall net loss of ice, he said.

Indeed, the report said Arctic sea ice coverage last March was the lowest in winter since measurements by satellite began.

Jacqueline A. Richter-Menge of the Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory in New Hampshire, said the sea ice decline is now being observed in both winter and summer.

The study was designed to assess the overall impact of climate change in the Arctic and will be updated annually. It was compiled by researchers from the United States, Canada France, Germany, Poland, Norway, Sweden and Russia, she said.

In addition, 2007 has been designated the International Year of the Arctic and that will be marked by intense scientific study of the region.

There have been many changes over the Arctic land areas also, said Vladimir E. Romanovsky, a professor at the geophysical institute of the University of Alaska.

These include changes in vegetation, river discharge into the Arctic Ocean, glaciers and permafrost.

The tundra is becoming greener with the growth of more shrubs, he said, which is causing problems in some areas as herds of reindeer migrate.

At the same time, there is some decrease in the greening of the northern forest areas, probably due to drought. The glaciers are continuing to shrink and river discharge into the Arctic Ocean is rising, Romanovsky said.

There has been a significant warming of the permafrost over the last 30 years, he said.

Much of the damage to the permafrost soil can be blamed on human construction activities and fires, he said, but in many areas this frozen ground is close to the melting point and could soon begin to thaw.

Overland said the changes are affecting wildlife in the Arctic, with those living in the middle levels of the ocean, like pollock, seeming to do well, while those on the surface ice or the sea floor, such as walrus or crabs, not coping so well.

"We're seeing a lot of indicators of climate change in the Arctic, and that may be an indicator for change in other parts of the world," he said.

Most of the heating from sun comes to the equator and subequatorial regions, and a lot of heat leaves by radiation from the Arctic, he explained.

"The temperature difference between the Arctic and equator drives all of our weather," Overland said. If the Arctic should warm up and that difference be reduced, weather could change, though people remain unsure what the changes would be.

[olger]

If that don't work, they can always change it to "another" ice age. They seem pretty flexible, these scientists. :)

[Bravus]

There's none so blind as he who will not see

[Neil D]

There's none so blind as he who will not see

It is down right depressing, ain't it?

[olger]

"Global warming" is the hoax of the new millenium. It could be suggested that those who trumpet the radical environmentalist fervor are demonstrating a rare form of amblyopia themselves.

"warm" regards,

olger

[Neil D]

"Global warming" is the hoax of the new millenium. It could be suggested that those who trumpet the radical environmentalist fervor are demonstrating a rare form of amblyopia themselves.

"warm" regards,

olger

So, the fact that the polar ice caps melting, and those of the glaciers in the high mountains are disappearing, the fact of islands are slowing sinking below the surface, higher recorded numbers of hurricanes and those that come into existance come with greater forces, the fact of greater temperature extremes in the temperate zones, and the greater numbers of flooding and draught areas....None of these trends is convincing enough for you...?

Tell me, when will you believe that the earth is warming? When water is around your waist or over your head?

[olger]

"In 10-years the oceans will all be dead" Ted Danson, 1988.

olger

[Bravus]

Not even going to worry about arguing this one. The evidence is massive and overwhelming, the scientific consensus is likewise massive and overwhelming. My original comment stands.

[Amelia]

Oregon coast "dead zone" is bigger than ever before

Thursday, August 10, 2006

By AARON WEISS and VINCE PATTON

kgw.com

The "dead zone" off Oregon's coast is back -- larger, thicker, and more lethal than ever.

For the fifth year in a row, scientists have witnessed thousands of sea creatures dying in the Pacific Ocean.

This year, the dead zone covers 1,200 square miles, according to Oregon State University marine ecologist Jane Lubchenco.

On Tuesday, Lubchenco's team witnessed crabs dying by the thousands.

OSU scientists found thousands of dead and dying crabs in the "dead zone" off the Oregon coast.

"There are no fish down there that we could see," Lubchenco said. "This is an area where we have measured chronically low oxygen."

Scientists found almost no oxygen in the water there. According to OSU marine ecologist Francis Chan, "we're only half-a-step away from zero -- or the absence of oxygen."

The dead zone now ranges from Florence to Lincoln city, and for the first time, there's another pocket off Washington's Olympic Peninsula.

While other ocean dead zones have been caused by pollution, scientists say they're not sure what's causing the current die-off. The leading theory: global warming.

"What we're seeing is absolutely consistent with predictions for climate change," Lubchenco said, "but we cannot say for sure that's what causing it."

As the dead zone becomes a regular occurrence, researchers say it points to a fundamental shift in marine conditions and ocean behavior.

OSU researchers are now working on new models to allow scientists to predict when the dead zones will occur.

[there buster]

Quote:

the scientific consensus is likewise massive and overwhelming

Quote:

Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had.

Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period.

In addition, let me remind you that the track record of the consensus is nothing to be proud of. Let's review a few cases.

In past centuries, the greatest killer of women was fever following childbirth . One woman in six died of this fever. In 1795, Alexander Gordon of Aberdeen suggested that the fevers were infectious processes, and he was able to cure them. The consensus said no. In 1843, Oliver Wendell Holmes claimed puerperal fever was contagious, and presented compellng evidence. The consensus said no. In 1849, Semmelweiss demonstrated that sanitary techniques virtually eliminated puerperal fever in hospitals under his management. The consensus said he was a Jew, ignored him, and dismissed him from his post. There was in fact no agreement on puerperal fever until the start of the twentieth century. Thus the consensus took one hundred and twenty five years to arrive at the right conclusion despite the efforts of the prominent "skeptics" around the world, skeptics who were demeaned and ignored. And despite the constant ongoing deaths of women.

There is no shortage of other examples. In the 1920s in America, tens of thousands of people, mostly poor, were dying of a disease called pellagra. The consensus of scientists said it was infectious, and what was necessary was to find the "pellagra germ." The US government asked a brilliant young investigator, Dr. Joseph Goldberger, to find the cause. Goldberger concluded that diet was the crucial factor. The consensus remained wedded to the germ theory. Goldberger demonstrated that he could induce the disease through diet. He demonstrated that the disease was not infectious by injecting the blood of a pellagra patient into himself, and his assistant. They and other volunteers swabbed their noses with swabs from pellagra patients, and swallowed capsules containing scabs from pellagra rashes in what were called "Goldberger's filth parties." Nobody contracted pellagra. The consensus continued to disagree with him. There was, in addition, a social factor-southern States disliked the idea of poor diet as the cause, because it meant that social reform was required. They continued to deny it until the 1920s. Result-despite a twentieth century epidemic, the consensus took years to see the light.

Probably every schoolchild notices that South America and Africa seem to fit together rather snugly, and Alfred Wegener proposed, in 1912, that the continents had in fact drifted apart. The consensus sneered at continental drift for fifty years. The theory was most vigorously denied by the great names of geology-until 1961, when it began to seem as if the sea floors were spreading. The result: it took the consensus fifty years to acknowledge what any schoolchild sees.

And shall we go on? The examples can be multiplied endlessly. Jenner and smallpox, Pasteur and germ theory. Saccharine, margarine, repressed memory, fiber and colon cancer, hormone replacement therap6y…the list of consensus errors goes on and on.

Finally, I would remind you to notice where the claim of consensus is invoked. Consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough. Nobody says the consensus of scientists agrees that E=mc2. Nobody says the consensus is that the sun is 93 million miles away.

Michael Crichton

[Neil D]

"In 10-years the oceans will all be dead" Ted Danson, 1988.

Ted Danson (born Edward Bridge Danson III on December 29, 1947 in San Diego, California) is an American actor.

Danson is most notable for his television work, and specifically, for his role as central character Sam Malone in the sitcom Cheers.....Danson is a long time environmental advocate.

In addition to knowledge gleaned from his father's academic pursuits, Danson's interest in environmental concerns was ignited when he was twelve years old....Danson's interest in environmentalism continued over the years, and he began to be concerned, in particular, with the state of the world's oceans. In the 1980s, he was a contributing founder of the American Oceans Campaigns, now referred to as Oceana, and Danson is still a board member.

An Actor, who grew up with an enviormentalist father, is quoted as an authoritative authority on the ocean....? me thinks there is something wrong with this scenerio.....

[olger]

NeilD saith; "An Actor, who grew up with an enviormentalist father, is quoted as an authoritative authority on the ocean....? me thinks there is something wrong with this scenerio....."

Me thinks so too.

regards,

olger

[Amelia]

Warm weather wrecks bears' winter slumber

Wed Nov 15,2006

Reuters Limited

Insomniac bears are roaming the forests of southwestern Siberia scaring local people as the weather stays too warm for the animals to fall into their usual winter slumber.

The furry mammals escape harsh winters by going to sleep in October-November for around six months, but in the snowless Kemerovo region where the weather is unseasonably warm, bears have no desire yet to hibernate.

"Due to weather conditions, bears didn't go into the winter sleep in time," said Tatiana Maslova, chief expert at a regional environmental agency in the city of Kemerovo, about 3,500 km (2,190 miles) southeast of Moscow.

"Our teams are making sure there is no damage to farming and to local residents," she told Reuters on Wednesday, adding that every patch of land is watched by a specially assigned inspector.

To survive the prolonged winter rest, bears have to put on extra body fat -- up to 180 kg (396 pounds) -- and so spend the preceding months devouring as much food as they can find.

"At the moment there is enough fodder, so they are not wreaking any havoc," Maslova said.

Hunters, out in the woods stalking birds and hares now that the hunting season is open, need protection from restless bears the most, she added.

"We have observers who ensure there are no attacks on hunters."

Bears den in dry places usually covered by snow, and wet weather makes finding a suitable "bedroom" for the winter difficult.

Russian media reported that in the Kemerovo region and other areas, normally cold and snowy by now, there are fresh buds on trees and some flowers have blossomed for the second time this year.

[Amelia]

Global warming already killing species, analysis says

November 21, 2006

The Associated press

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Animal and plant species have begun dying off or changing sooner than predicted because of global warming, a review of hundreds of research studies contends.

These fast-moving adaptations come as a surprise even to biologists and ecologists because they are occurring so rapidly.

At least 70 species of frogs, mostly mountain-dwellers that had nowhere to go to escape the creeping heat, have gone extinct because of climate change, the analysis says. It also reports that between 100 and 200 other cold-dependent animal species, such as penguins and polar bears are in deep trouble.

"We are finally seeing species going extinct," said University of Texas biologist Camille Parmesan, author of the study. "Now we've got the evidence. It's here. It's real. This is not just biologists' intuition. It's what's happening."

Her review of 866 scientific studies is summed up in the journal Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics.

Parmesan reports seeing trends of animal populations moving northward if they can, of species adapting slightly because of climate change, of plants blooming earlier, and of an increase in pests and parasites.

Parmesan and others have been predicting such changes for years, but even she was surprised to find evidence that it's already happening; she figured it would be another decade away.

Just five years ago biologists, though not complacent, figured the harmful biological effects of global warming were much farther down the road, said Douglas Futuyma, professor of ecology and evolution at the State University of New York in Stony Brook.

"I feel as though we are staring crisis in the face," Futuyma said. "It's not just down the road somewhere. It is just hurtling toward us. Anyone who is 10 years old right now is going to be facing a very different and frightening world by the time that they are 50 or 60."

While over the past several years studies have shown problems with certain species, animal populations or geographic areas, Parmesan's is the first comprehensive analysis showing the big picture of global-warming induced changes, said Chris Thomas, a professor of conservation biology at the University of York in England.

While it's impossible to prove conclusively the changes are the result of global warming, the evidence is so strong and other supportable explanations are lacking, Thomas said, so it is "statistically virtually impossible that these are just chance observations."

The most noticeable changes in plants and animals have to do with earlier springs, Parmesan said. The best example can be seen in earlier cherry blossoms and grape harvests and in 65 British bird species that in general are laying their first eggs nearly nine days earlier than 35 years ago.

Parmesan said she worries most about the cold-adapted species, such as emperor penguins that have dropped from 300 breeding pairs to just nine in the western Antarctic Peninsula, or polar bears, which are dropping in numbers and weight in the Arctic.

The cold-dependent species on mountaintops have nowhere to go, which is why two-thirds of a certain grouping of frog species have already gone extinct, Parmesan said.

Populations of animals that adapt better to warmth or can move and live farther north are adapting better than other populations in the same species, Parmesan said.

[Bravus]

Wish I could link the excellent animation one of my colleagues at NASA made. I'll have a look. It shows that there are temparature anomalies both above and below normal, and that's what would be expected, but the trend on balance and over time is toward warming. It's a misconception to think that the entire surface of the globe will warm up... it's correct that some areas will get colder.

[Bravus]

Get it from this page: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/animations/

[Dottie]

So, is florida going to get hotter?? I hope not, but coooler would be nice. In fact, it was almost 15 degrees below normal last week. :)

[Bravus]

The main consequence for Florida will be more and bigger hurricanes... sorry.