Vast cracks appear in Arctic ice (

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Dramatic evidence of the break-up of the Arctic ice-cap has emerged from research during an expedition by the Canadian military.

Scientists travelling with the troops found major new fractures during an assessment of the state of giant ice shelves in Canada's far north.

The team found a network of cracks that stretched for more than 10 miles (16km) on Ward Hunt, the area's largest shelf.

The fate of the vast ice blocks is seen as a key indicator of climate change.

One of the expedition's scientists, Derek Mueller of Trent University, Ontario, told me: "I was astonished to see these new cracks.

"It means the ice shelf is disintegrating, the pieces are pinned together like a jigsaw but could float away," Dr Mueller explained.

According to another scientist on the expedition, Dr Luke Copland of the University of Ottawa, the new cracks fit into a pattern of change in the Arctic.

"We're seeing very dramatic changes; from the retreat of the glaciers, to the melting of the sea ice.

"We had 23% less (sea ice) last year than we've ever had, and what's happening to the ice shelves is part of that picture."

When ice shelves break apart, they drift offshore into the ocean as "ice islands", transforming the very geography of the coastline.

Last year, I was part of a BBC team that joined Dr Mueller and Dr Copland as they carried out the first research on Ayles Ice Island, an iceberg the size of Manhattan.

It has since split into two, each vast chunk of ice now 400 miles (640km) south of its original position.

The rapid changes in the Arctic have reignited disputes over territory.

The Canadian military's expedition was billed as a "sovereignty patrol", the lines of snowmobiles flying Canadian flags in a display of control.

After the record Arctic melting last year, all eyes are now on what happens to the sea ice this summer.

Although its maximum extent last winter was slightly greater than the year before, it was still below the long-term average.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7417123.stm

[GaryC 7]

Small hint, it's spring. Ice melts when it turns to spring.

[Nagishkaw 510]

Blame Algore.

[Sheriff Uling 3]

Small hint, it's spring. Ice melts when it turns to spring.

Let's just hope that McCain melts away...

[Ban Hammer 13,358]

sell your land in florida

[Peikko 1,575]

Hint @ Gary, some ice doesn't melt no matter what time of year it is - well, up until now that is.

"Ice more than two years old now makes up about 30% of all the ice in the Arctic, down from 60% two decades ago.

The shrinking of Arctic ice has global implications, as its white surface reflects solar energy back into space whereas the open ocean absorbs it.

Long March

March is the month when the Arctic ice usually reaches its largest extent, as the dark winter nears its end.

Nasa's data shows the area covered by ice is roughly the same as it was last year; but this masks a significant change.

"Although this March the area is slightly larger than last March, the area of [thick] perennial ice has reached an all time low," said Seelye Martin, manager of the Cryospheric Sciences Program at Nasa headquarters in Washington DC.

"

Link

Edited May 24, 2008 by Purple_Hibiscus

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Small hint, it's spring. Ice melts when it turns to spring.

You better tell them Canadians. Seems they are unaware of the effects of the seasons.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Small hint, it's spring. Ice melts when it turns to spring.

You better tell them Canadians. Seems they are unaware of the effects of the seasons.

Gary can't hear you...

[cmartyn 0]

Some people deny that GW is caused by human activity. That’s understandable and you could probably convince me of that. But what’s striking is that many people also deny that global warming exists at all. The shrinking icecaps are not caused by global warming they are caused by spring? #######.. You can convince me that human activity has no causal effect on the earth's climate. You can convince me that temperature fluctuations occur naturally over time. But you can't convince me that it’s not warmer on average now than it was 25 years ago. That’s just crazy talk. Look at the 5 year moving average here. Was it some left wing loony tune thermometer that recorded the temps? I know, the media is all owned by lefties and these temps are polls of CNN weatherman or something. Get real.

Edited May 25, 2008 by cmartyn

[GaryC 7]

Some people deny that GW is caused by human activity. That’s understandable and you could probably convince me of that. But what’s striking is that many people also deny that global warming exists at all. The shrinking icecaps are not caused by global warming they are caused by spring? #######.. You can convince me that human activity has no causal effect on the earth's climate. You can convince me that temperature fluctuations occur naturally over time. But you can't convince me that it’s not warmer on average now than it was 25 years ago. That’s just crazy talk. Look at the 5 year moving average here. Was it some left wing loony tune thermometer that recorded the temps? I know, the media is all owned by lefties and these temps are polls of CNN weatherman or something. Get real.

Take a good look at that graph you posted. For the last 5 years the temps have stayed the same or gone down. Where is the GW now?

[cmartyn 0]

So you are convinced that the trend has reversed? Ok, but considering that spike in the chart around 99, I wouldn't be so sure. But at least we have an arguable datapoint. Either the temperature is rising or it is not. I think there is a bit more evidence that it is but we shall see.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

[GaryC 7]

So you are convinced that the trend has reversed? Ok, but considering that spike in the chart around 99, I wouldn't be so sure. But at least we have an arguable datapoint. Either the temperature is rising or it is not. I think there is a bit more evidence that it is but we shall see.

It's still to soon to call it a "climate change" as Mav points out but it is a trend that, if it continues, will spell an end to GW.

[GaryC 7]

That chart also shows an average drop in temps from the high in 98. You may also look to see that for 40 years from 1940 to 1980 the temps also held steady while we were in the middle of our highest output of CO2. The fact remains that CO2 levels and temperatures do not line up.

[Chuckles 0]

140 years may seem like a long time, but its not. I realize we cannot compare any other data. I also have to wonder about the veracity of the data pre-1960.

Simply put, there is not enough data to make a scientific conclusion. I would expect 1000 years ago the oceans where much warmer then they are today by historical accounts of the people that lived that long ago (i.e. naming of Greenland etc.), but it is not scientific proof. Just like that chart is not.