That is true if something other than AGW is the driver of this change.
To bad that it is.
This summer may see first ice-free North Pole
- Thread starter sanctus
- Start date
That is true if something other than AGW is the driver of this change.
To bad that it is.
So....this Thread dates back from 2008. Was 2008 the year where the North
Pole was ice free? If not, has it happened in any summer since? I've been
kind'a busy, & missed it if it happened, but I'm curious.
Pole was ice free? If not, has it happened in any summer since? I've been
kind'a busy, & missed it if it happened, but I'm curious.
I wish my yard was ice free, freezing rain yesterday and -20C this morning...
I'll have to let my truck warm up for half an hour later today just to defrost the windows when I manage to open the door using a hair blower to defrost "them".
I will be doing my share to contribute to warming up the planet.
There were sheets of fire melting my asphalt driveway this morning and that's obviously the reason why AGW exists.
For the first time in recorded history?When you consider how old the earth is recorded history is just a fart in a windstorm.
At any rate,there will be another ice age,then tropical period,then another ice age.Not much you can do about it,thats the way mother earth rolls.
At any rate,there will be another ice age,then tropical period,then another ice age.Not much you can do about it,thats the way mother earth rolls.
So why not capitalize on the ignorance of others? It seems to work for advertisements. I'll be back after I go out into the pasture to chase down some free range eggs for brekkie.
This year in the arctic we went to greet someone flying and and the little frenchman shook his hand and then pointed at camp and said"Dis eeeze my camp" in a heavy french accent and the little innuit shook the guys hand and then spread his arms wide and in perfect english said "and this is my land"..
So now they will have more land to play on.
I will admit it is a very delicate balance going on in the arctic.permafrost keeps rain and meltwater from going anywhere but lakes and rivers and thats why spring time lasts about 1 week before most of the snow is gone in june.Summertime you cant see far off into the tundra either from the heat waves reflecting off the ground and it's 24 hour daylight then.
You can do major damage by just disturbing the insulating top layer of grass on the tundra,scratch it off and expose some black frozen dirt and in no time it will be a puddle,then a stream.
One good thing about no ice is maybe they can finally end the food and fuel shortages that plague the arctic as every year the supply barges get frozen in by late september.
I did my share of enviro damage in the arctic and I learned from it,I used that knowledge to win an award along with 2 other camp managers from the KIA or Kivallik Innuit Association for reclamation on some old exploration camps.
So now they will have more land to play on.
I will admit it is a very delicate balance going on in the arctic.permafrost keeps rain and meltwater from going anywhere but lakes and rivers and thats why spring time lasts about 1 week before most of the snow is gone in june.Summertime you cant see far off into the tundra either from the heat waves reflecting off the ground and it's 24 hour daylight then.
You can do major damage by just disturbing the insulating top layer of grass on the tundra,scratch it off and expose some black frozen dirt and in no time it will be a puddle,then a stream.
One good thing about no ice is maybe they can finally end the food and fuel shortages that plague the arctic as every year the supply barges get frozen in by late september.
I did my share of enviro damage in the arctic and I learned from it,I used that knowledge to win an award along with 2 other camp managers from the KIA or Kivallik Innuit Association for reclamation on some old exploration camps.
Last edited:
The thread is about an ice free North Pole...ice extent charts don't actually show the North Pole, but nice try anyways Walt. By the way it was a record year in the Arctic, for minimum ice volume and minimum total area.
No, June, and the scientist who made the announcement put the odds at 50-50. The event not happening doesn't mean the stated probability was wrong...
That 24 hour sunlight really kicks the hell out of the ice,I was on the Arctic mainland south of Cambridge bay for 6 months this year and back home in southern Alberta our summer was colder then theirs. When a weather pattern moves in it occasionally gets stuck there for a couple months,a nice high pressure area trapped and the Innuit dont mind,they will take every warm day they can get.
Like I said earlier though,it's a very delicate balance up there,hovering between freezing and thawing depending on how far north you go and a 1 degree change in temps will be very noticable.
It's also a huge area and theres really nothing you can do about it.Anyone whos flown over the Arctic can attest to that,it's freaking huge,thousands of miles of white and you can fly for hours without seeing a single trace of man or woman.There's barely any roads and communities are far and few inbetween.
I spent 6 years all over the arctic now and have never seen more then a couple of scientists go farther then the last town and then do their research on the net in the comfort of their hotel room while getting funded by a grant.
Lord know's theres plenty of graphs out there to put in your report.
But I never saw any drowning polar bears either,probably because they can swim....for days if need be.
So? The Arctic is huge. You could spend 6 years in many places and not see the work that is done by scientists...
Some scientists do rely on satellite data sets and some do not; it was a Canadian Scientist who reported on the "rotten" ice conditions that the satellites couldn't detect. He went out on the ice and did it the old fashioned way.
Ice is 'rotten' in the Beaufort Sea
What caught my attention was that the OP indicated that "this summer" might see the absence (ice free) North Pole. The OP was submitted in January of 2008.
My only point being that the headline (at the time) was sensational and, in retrospect, incorrect