Arctic Ice at All-Time Low

John Roach

for National Geographic News

August 20, 2007:

There is less sea ice in the Arctic than ever before recorded, and the melting season isn't even over.

On Sunday the sea ice extent was measured at 1.93 million square miles (5.01 million square kilometers).

"It's continuing to go down at a rapid pace," said Mark Serreze, a senior scientist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colorado.

The previous minimum record—set on September 21, 2005—was 2.05 million square miles (5.32 million square kilometers).

By the end of this summer, scientists at the center say, Arctic sea ice may drop below 1.74 million square miles (4.5 million square kilometers).

Bruno Tremblay is an assistant professor of ocean and atmospheric sciences at McGill University in Montreal, Canada, who is planning a research cruise to the Russian Arctic in September.

In preparation for the trip, he has been observing updated maps of the sea ice extent, which show the quickly melting ice.

"I never thought it would go that low that fast," Tremblay said. "There's still a month of melting in front of us, and we're already past the record of 2005."

Tipping Point?

Sea ice—frozen, floating seawater—melts and refreezes with the seasons, but some of the ice persists year-round in the Arctic.

The current rate of sea ice melt is much faster than predicted by computer models of the global climate system.

Just last year the National Snow and Ice Data Center's Serreze said that the Arctic was "right on schedule" to be completely free of ice by 2070 at the soonest. He now thinks that day may arrive by 2030.--------------------------------------------------How to GO GREEN:

http://www.treehugger.com/gogreen.php

I don't see any point in this article. But you made your point clear with your "treehugger" website......

The writer of this article refers to summer with "the melting season". How the hell can I ever take this seriously?

the scientest still are not sure if this a caused by global warming or if its a naturally occuring cycle of world weather. granted global warming has caused a effect. how can you believe some one who is predicting the weather for the next 50 years who can not get it right for 1 week.. am really not sure where i stand on this issue but it does bother me because a lot of my favorite beachs will be under water if this continues..

It's amazing how ignorant people can be.

Interesting, that teacher works at the same University as me... Didn't know we had classes on ocean and atmospheric sciences at McGill, sounds interesting. I pretty much believe what he says. In Canada we leave so far north that we can really feel the effects of global warming. Our seasons are getting really weird and winter is shorter and milder every year. Scary...

Posted by trocks69 [ 23 August 2007 | 6:30AM ]

the scientest still are not sure if this a caused by global warming or if its a naturally occuring cycle of world weather. granted global warming has caused a effect. how can you believe some one who is predicting the weather for the next 50 years who can not get it right for 1 week.. am really not sure where i stand on this issue but it does bother me because a lot of my favorite beachs will be under water if this continues..>>.

no offense dearie but if you don't know the difference between climate and weather you should shut the **** up rather than parade your cluelessness.

scientists don't "know" anything fyi. the nature of science is such that you don't prove anything all you do is try like hell to DISprove an hypothesis. so far we know for sure that global waming is happening, anthropogenic forcings look highly likely as the major cause (but not "proven" per se, and there aren't any other convincing hypotheses on the table) and by the time we're "certain" it will be too late to do much.

fyi it's already too late to "stop" global warming but the damage can be mitigated if effective actions are taken. what actions will be effective? therein lies the real controversy IMO.

zeus have you read the study put out my them american goverment that took into account numerous scinetest and weather specialist. its well over 1500 pages . i did not read that dam thing i read the summary. it left me more confused then i was before i read it. i can perhaps get you a summary of the summary and that will confuse you. the one thing i did learn from it was they are pretty sure global warming is happening. they are not 100 percent sure that the changes we are seeing is caused by it. in other words we could be in a natural cycle of warming. i am not sure how old you are since you list 95 as your age. i can remeber when the scientist where saying we are heading to the next ice age. which was in the 70's. so now we are heading to a hot period 30 years latter..these people do not know what is going to happen period. they are trying to make a guess on faulty data. i can get you a list of books that will be pro and con the global warming debate. i have read several on both sides so i have no idea where to stand.

i do know global warming is the biggest money maker for so called charities right now. they make money preaching this crap. so they will not stop preaching it. wheather it is true are not is another matter.

try" vodoo science" for a good book. given money you can make any study look and say pretty much what you want.

i hate cold weather so a warmer climate is not going to bother me any. only ***** is it will destory the coral reefs i like..lol

TROCKS: it is a complicated topic. if you can't be troubled to take the time to try and understand it, everyone, including you, will be better off if you shut the **** up.

and yes i'm old enough to remember when the "scientists were saying we're headed into the next ice age." my parents subscribed to national geo and science etc at the time and guess what? that's not what "the scientists" were saying at all. "these people" are at least studying climate whereas you, on the other hand, know sweet **** all about it, yet seem to be insisting that your opinion should be given equal weight.

i have probably read more articles books and scientific journals this year than you have in your life. spare me the lecture, you haven't the faintest clue what you're talking about.

not trying to offend so don't take it personally please. just pointing out the obvious.

Any climate change study coming out of the administration is to be taken with a grain of salt. The bush administration has just been ordered by a federal judge to release a report that they have been conveniently sitting on for 2 years. All of the scientists DO agree. It's lobbying firms and so called research groups by big oil that have a different story distributed to the press. Look at startearth.com if you want to know more information. Each day I'm reviewing news, data and solutions that can make a change for that site. Feel free to contribute.

when the ice is all melt ... you are a woosie and you need a new whisky... *said by a modern illuminati, 2_unique_the_freak*

zeus when any one tells me this "will be better off if you shut the **** up. " i do take offense. i do not curse at people in real life or behind a key board. its just plain disrespectfull

in my first post i said i do not know where to stand. everything i have read has gone against each other. with solid facts backing both sides.

there is so much misinformation and propaganda out there on these subjects that i dont believe in much of any ones opinions are studies. you most likely have read more on scientific studies then i have the past year. i have been buried in work the past 7 years. 2600 hours to 3300 hour work years does not leave much time for serious study into something out side my field of work. much less my free time was spent with my family outside of work.

i have a intrest in global warming because it affects the oceans and coral reefs i love. but who and what to believe i am still looking into it. i refuse to believe your self proclaimed knowledge or anyone else until i do much more study into it my self. i do not blindy follow any leaders much less self proclaimed leaders.

trocks: there is so much disinformation and propaganda, and you're doing your best to spread it. that offends me a great deal. sorry if i offended you, but not really.

if you don't have time for serious study for something, why do you think anyone should take your opinion on it seriously?

and *i* didn't proclaim any knowledge. i merely proclaimed your lack thereof.

whatever

trocks69: "whatever"

now THERE'S an argument backed by facts and data *yawn*

Trocks wrote: - "Zeus have you read the study put out my them american goverment that took into account numerous scinetest and weather specialist. its well over 1500 pages . i did not read that dam thing i read the summary. it left me more confused then i was before i read it. i can perhaps get you a summary of the summary and that will confuse you. the one thing i did learn from it was they are pretty sure global warming is happening. they are not 100 percent sure that the changes we are seeing is caused by it. in other words we could be in a natural cycle of warming."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Right....That was the study that was edited by an oil industry lobbyist working for the Bush Administration. It was such a disgraceful tampering with the facts for the benefit of the oil industry that the administration had no choice but to fire him after it was revealed what he had done.

Of course, he just went back to the oil industry and made more money.

so the ice keeps melting. drink that damn whisky!!! what's so difficult? ask the freak how to pour those fluids down your throat.

*been waitin' soooooooo long for this junior... ))))))))))*