Ice shelf collapse!
 

Incredibly sizable ice cube, well, more an irregular polygon I guess
if you want to click over, there is a pretty cool photo
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/03/25/antarctic.ice/index.html
or just read it
(CNN) -- Some 220 square miles of ice has collapsed in Antarctica and an ice shelf about the size of Connecticut is "hanging by a thread," the British Antarctic Survey said Tuesday, blaming global warming.


Scientists say the size of the threatened shelf is about 5,571 square miles.

1 of 2 "We are in for a lot more events like this," said professor Ted Scambos, a glaciologist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center at the University of Colorado at Boulder.

Scambos alerted the British Antarctic Survey after he noticed part of the Wilkins ice shelf disintegrating on February 28, when he was looking at NASA satellite images.

Late February marks the end of summer at the South Pole and is the time when such events are most likely, he said. Watch aerial footage of the area »

"The amazing thing was, we saw it within hours of it beginning, in between the morning and the afternoon pictures of that day," Scambos said of the large chunk that broke away on February 28.

The Wilkins ice shelf lost about 6 percent of its surface a decade ago, the British Antarctic Survey said in a statement on its Web site

Another 220 square miles -- including the chunk that Scambos spotted -- had splintered from the ice shelf as of March 8, the group said.

Don't Miss
Planet in peril
Giant sea creatures found in Antarctic search
U.N.: Glaciers shrinking at record rate
"As of mid-March, only a narrow strip of shelf ice was protecting several thousand kilometers of potential further breakup," the group said.

Scambos' center put the size of the threatened shelf at about 5,282 square miles, comparable to the state of Connecticut, or about half the area of Scotland.

Once Scambos called the British Antarctic Survey, the group sent an aircraft on a reconnaissance mission to examine the extent of the breakout.

"We flew along the main crack and observed the sheer scale of movement from the breakage," said Jim Eliott, according to the group's Web site.

"Big hefty chunks of ice, the size of small houses, look as though they've been thrown around like rubble -- it's like an explosion," he said.

"Wilkins is the largest ice shelf on the Antarctic Peninsula yet to be threatened," David Vaughan of the British Antarctic Survey said, according to the Web site.

"I didn't expect to see things happen this quickly. The ice shelf is hanging by a thread -- we'll know in the next few days or weeks what its fate will be."

Ice shelves are floating ice sheets attached to the coast. Because they are already floating, their collapse does not have any effect on sea levels, according to the Cambridge-based British Antarctic Survey.

Scambos said the ice shelf is not currently on the path of the increasingly popular tourist ships that travel from South America to Antarctica. But some plants and animals may have to adapt to the collapse.

"Wildlife will be impacted, but they are pretty adept at dealing with a topsy-turvy world," he said. "The ecosystem is pretty resilient."

Several ice shelves -- Prince Gustav Channel, Larsen Inlet, Larsen A, Larsen B, Wordie, Muller and Jones -- have collapsed in the past three decades, the British Antarctic Survey said.

Larsen B, a 1,254-square-mile ice shelf, comparable in size to the U.S. state of Rhode Island, collapsed in 2002, the group said.

Scientists say the western Antarctic peninsula -- the piece of the continent that stretches toward South America -- has warmed more than any other place on Earth over the past 50 years, rising by 0.9 degrees Fahrenheit each decade.

Scambos said the poles will be the leading edge of what's happening in the rest of the world as global warming continues.

"Even though they seem far away, changes in the polar regions could have an impact on both hemispheres, with sea level rise and changes in climate patterns," he said.

News of the Wilkins ice shelf's impending break-up came less than two weeks after the United Nation's Environment Program reported that the world's glaciers are melting away and that they show "record" losses.


"Data from close to 30 reference glaciers in nine mountain ranges indicate that between the years 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 the average rate of melting and thinning more than doubled," the UNEP said on March 16.

The most severe glacial shrinking occurred in Europe, with Norway's Breidalblikkbrea glacier, the UNEP said. That glacier thinned by about 10 feet in 2006, compared with less than a foot the year before, it said. E-mail to a friend

CNN's Marsha Walton contributed to this report.

Of course global warming is a known fallacy? :rolleyes:

Duct tape it...


KT

Cool, I'm going to buy some future beach front property in Ventura about a mile inland.

This, personally, you can do zilch about. How about being more concerned about your wife's migraines?

Tsunami possibility?

wait wait. ... let me see if I have this right. The antartic has been melting thru the summer? Really?!?! ...220 square miles of 5,405,430 sq mi of ice may break free. . . .and you say that summer has just ended there. Really?!?!

So let me get this straight, a decade ago, this area lost 6% of it's ice shelf due to the same kind of event as of Feb. 28. Well in 1998, I did'nt see any problems anywhere from this BIG event, nobody drowned, Miami is still there, NY is still there and no species lost their lives. But then, 10 years ago we did'nt have Al Gore to tell us all of this and get more of our money to help save his planet.

no, but the sun probably has more to do with it than that Diesel guy, or Henry Ford or any other person or group of people you care to suggest
no good, it was floating before it broke off, no net gain in sea level:mad:
not that I heard, but interesting idea, but it was floating already

wait a minute guys, I am on your team, I just thought it was a cool picture.

Since it's already floating in the water------ you can figure it out I think.

Global warming is a fact, as measured by actual global temperature averages.

The "man-made" aspect is the part that is conjecture- some believe that it is caused by man, others believe that natural phenomena are to blame.

This is what I think escapes a lot of people- the area of true debate is in the cause.

Yup. And there are some who don't believe the research that shows that 80 percent of women fake their orgasms about 80 percent of the time.

You just have to get over your preconceptions.

If global warming is increasing at such a great rate, why does it seem like every temp record we break was from the late 1800's or early 1900's. the article states this happens all the time. Ice melts, doesn't it?:)

John Hoffmeister, president of Shell Oil said on Charlie Rose (3/25) human efforts have undoubtedly exacerbated global warming. Pretty strong words coming from a higher-up in a major energy company.

That's obvious. Now we just need all humans to stop using air conditioners and internal combustion engines, destroy pesky methane-producing cattle, and discontinue the use of fire to cook food. Then, we will will eliminate our effect to global warming. Al Gore would want it that way.

that'd make a lotta ice cubes.

As this is accepted as gospel truth in many places (like the home of Shell Oil) - he pretty much has too. It is pure PR and who knows what he really thinks.

Nothing to see here, please move along.

Once again, the problem is multiplier effect. Too much pollution per individual, times 6,000,000,000. Per day. Every day.

Overpopulation once again.

Bush is to blame.

The term is loyal Bushies.

REPORT BY E.P.A. LEAVES OUT DATA ON CLIMATE CHANGE
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C07EED81138F93AA25755C0A9659C8B 63
By ANDREW C. REVKIN WITH KATHARINE Q. SEELYE
Published: June 19, 2003
Sometimes doing nothing is a fault.

Governance by neglect...............a repeating story.

That's just with you.

Well, this (PPOT) is the place to get these dangers assessed. We have guys here who know more than the scientists about such things. For example, much of the scientific world is still wondering whether humans are impacting global temperatures. I guess it will take a while for then to hear that some PPOT guys have already solved that puzzle. As it turns out, it is all just a liberal scare tactic.

It may be melting in Antarctica, but here in Massachusetts, I'll take some goddamn warming and soon. Forecast for snow again Friday.

Light snow / flurries, but still.

Supe is right. After all how could any of us dare to compete with Al Gore's cred's?

See, Supe, the problem for the fear-mongers, is logic. Logic is not on their side; and on so many levels. They are PUSHING a belief. THey have NOTHING solid to back-up their position. Yet, they insist that we must change or else...

I can't help but think of the times when guys of centuries past (who new an eclipse was coming) would make demands, insist that their demands be met else they would blot the sun from the sky.

So. . . How is this Gloabal warming thing different? ..I mean, other than the problem of the threat not actually materializing (getting colder, not warmer)

In fact yes they are, as they should be. But as you say - they are still wondering...

The thing is - the broad populations and chattering classes of many places are convinced that this is upon us - and they believe this with victorian certitude.

So - if you are selling to these groups (shell oil) or pandering to these groups (politicians) and are looking to sell more of what you sell, and have regulations bent in your favor or you are looking for more political power - yes, yes - you are going to go along, damning modern man and all his greed and contraptions!! It is not a liberal tactic, just a tactic the liberals use very well..

You just don't catch on. It's not about facts. It's about how you feel!:cool:

its all because of PENGUIN FARTS!


now the real test of global warming is if once again lil ol arizona continues to break summer heat temps.

or is it just la nina or el nino??????


hmmm .............seems to me some tree ring studies by da NAU FORESTRY DEPT. indicates a very large drought wayyy back when that had consequences for all da indian tribes here in da southwest. ie. mesa verde, canyon de chelly, and the salt river indian tribes to name a few that mysteriously vanished from their dwellings.

This is truly hilarious. Conservatives (During the GWB "administration") telling a liberal that politicians use fear to push their agendas. Sincerely, this is funny schit.

It's more accurate to call it the New Liberal Religion.

libslam?

Yep. Definitely a pot calling the kettle black situation.

clearly

So you think that an eclipse . . .er, global warming is more of a threat than terrorists? ...I've seen a whole lot more evidence of terrorism than by global warming.

Riiiiight..... I'm wondering if we've gotten to the point where we accept that perhaps a conservative, and maybe even a liberal, might both understand that fear is a very effective political tool. Well, either way.....

We've got terrorism and global warming. I guess fear SHOULD be used to motivate people to address terrorism but global warming is not sufficiently scary. The consequences of global warming do not present sufficient danger? Your guy's scare tactics are more appropriate than my guy's scare tactics?

No, global warming is not sufficiently scary. In fact because it is not even close to being a reality the "Global Warming" guys started a campaign to change the label to "Climate change." It's like the big event fizzled out, so they have to position for global cooling --wait, it it 1980 again?-- Or, maybe it could be warming . . either way they are covered now with "Climate Change."

But all of that aside, there exists the "what are you going to do about it?" Q.

Terrorism: we can and are handling it.

Earth's temp: uhm, yeah, let's control the ball o'fussion in the sky. ...because you sure as hell are not going to change this planet's temp with "carbon credits."

I honestly believe you know a lot of stuff, Island. For example, I believe you know about one or two events in our planet's history that virtually exterminated life here. Those were, as you are aware, temperature and climate change events.

And about this "We don't know the mechanism of temperature change and even if we did, maybe we'd still be helpless" attempt to stifle the discussion. You've been taught to ask questions. Should I expect you to be this dismissive? Why am I, a labor relations consultant, curious while you are not?

First of all:

There is no one statistic that viably says we are containing terrorism. What terrorism? Which type of terrorism? Nuclear, economic, environmental terrorism? There are many forms of terrorism, not just the exploding type that you wrap your arms around as "terrorism that is contained" -- which it's not. Look at Iran. Look at Russia. Look at Venezuela. Are they "contained?" Look at the violence erupting (again) in Iraq - not that Iraq was even a terrorist state.

Secondly,

in regard to global warming - the real terrorism - 30 yrs. was the last statistic I saw that was given to the Brazilian rain forest's time limit due to global warming and deforestation. Again, because of the medicinal ingredients that come from the rain forest, and how much oxygen it supplies earth, bodes well to see where true terror lies once those resources are gone.

You ask what will be done about it? Who knows. Global warming is a much more complicated threat than the threat in whose head one fires a bullet and calls it "containment."

hmmm, Supe ... why do you 'go personal' ...oh right; lack of counter arguments.

My point was, and is, we are not going to avoid 'climate change' via "carbon credits." ..."carbon credits" would not have kept the dinasours from extinction. --please counter or concede that point.

What ever happened to global cooling? I just awoke from a coma since 1968, and now I am confused. :confused:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling