EDITION: U.S.
 
CONNECT    

New Greenland Ice Cracks Worry Scientists

SETH BORENSTEIN | August 21, 2008 09:01 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »
I Like ItI Don’t Like It
This image provided by the Byrd Polar Research Center, Columbus, Ohio, taken July 25, 2008, shows a growing giant crack and an 11-square-mile chunk of ice hemorrhaging off a prominent glacier in northern Greenland. The crack, at center, right, is seven miles long and about half a mile wide. It is about half the width of the 500 square mile floating part of the glacier. If the cracking continues, the floating part of the glacier could lose up to one third of its size. (AP Photo/Byrd Polar Research Center)
?>

WASHINGTON — In northern Greenland, a part of the Arctic that had seemed immune from global warming, new satellite images show a growing giant crack and an 11-square-mile chunk of ice hemorrhaging off a major glacier, scientists said Thursday.

And that's led the university professor who spotted the wounds in the massive Petermann glacier to predict disintegration of a major portion of the Northern Hemisphere's largest floating glacier within the year.

If it does worsen and other northern Greenland glaciers melt faster, then it could speed up sea level rise, already increasing because of melt in sourthern Greenland.

The crack is 7 miles long and about half a mile wide. It is about half the width of the 500 square mile floating part of the glacier. Other smaller fractures can be seen in images of the ice tongue, a long narrow sliver of the glacier.

"The pictures speak for themselves," said Jason Box, a glacier expert at the Byrd Polar Research Center at Ohio State University who spotted the changes while studying new satellite images. "This crack is moving, and moving closer and closer to the front. It's just a matter of time till a much larger piece is going to break off.... It is imminent."

The chunk that came off the glacier between July 10 and July 24 is about half the size of Manhattan and doesn't worry Box as much as the cracks. The Petermann glacier had a larger breakaway ice chunk in 2000. But the overall picture worries some scientists.

"As we see this phenomenon occurring further and further north _ and Petermann is as far north as you can get _ it certainly adds to the concern," said Waleed Abdalati, director of the Center for the Study of Earth from Space at the University of Colorado.

The question that now faces scientists is: Are the fractures part of normal glacier stress or are they the beginning of the effects of global warming?

"It certainly is a major event," said NASA ice scientist Jay Zwally in a telephone interview from a conference on glaciers in Ireland. "It's a signal but we don't know what it means."

It is too early to say it is clearly global warming, Zwally said. Scientists don't like to attribute single events to global warming, but often say such events fit a pattern.

University of Colorado professor Konrad Steffen, who returned from Greenland Wednesday and has studied the Petermann glacier in the past, said that what Box saw is not too different from what he saw in the 1990s: "The crack is not alarming... I would say it is normal."

However, scientists note that it fits with the trend of melting glacial ice they first saw in the southern part of the massive island and seems to be marching north with time. Big cracks and breakaway pieces are foreboding signs of what's ahead.

Further south in Greenland, Box's satellite images show that the Jakobshavn glacier, the fastest retreating glacier in the world, set new records for how far it has moved inland.

That concerns Colorado's Abdalati: "It could go back for miles and miles and there's no real mechanism to stop it."

___

On the Net:

Ohio State University images and data: http://bprc.osu.edu/MODIS/

WASHINGTON — In northern Greenland, a part of the Arctic that had seemed immune from global warming, new satellite images show a growing giant crack and an 11-square-mile chunk of ice hemorrhagi...
WASHINGTON — In northern Greenland, a part of the Arctic that had seemed immune from global warming, new satellite images show a growing giant crack and an 11-square-mile chunk of ice hemorrhagi...
Filed by Nick Graham  |  Report Corrections
 
  • Comments
  • 410
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
01:13 PM on 09/09/2008
Do you mean to say that Greenland might one day look like it did when it was so named?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Exusian
Nature bats last
03:44 PM on 08/26/2008
Hey look, while all of you have all been arguing about this one glacier this summer's Arctic sea ice melt has almost caught up to last summer's melt:
http://nsi­dc.org/dat­a/seaice_i­ndex/image­s/daily_im­ages/N_tim­eseries.pn­g
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
realpolitic
Caped Crusader of the left!
02:04 AM on 08/27/2008
Great graph! But the deniers will keep denying, that's what they do. It has little to do with science for them. It goes right to their core ideology of free markets and selfish individual­ism.
11:41 PM on 08/24/2008
FYI: floating glaciers have already contribute­d their entire potential to sea level rise. Whether the glacier breaks up or not, the ice that is already floating will not add any more to sea level.

The concern is that glaciers may be ACCELERATI­NG - that this kind of glacial ice phenomenon may indicate a speeding up of the flow of the glacier, such that more previously land-bound ice will make its way to the sea, hastening the rise in sea level.

The article does not get this distinctio­n right.
05:30 PM on 08/24/2008
This is a natural process that has occurred many times in the last 3 billion years. The primary impact initially felt on our planet will come as a result of a dramatic change in the ocean's currents; a change that will be felt soon. I would surmise that when new routes for currents open, as is happening due to melting ice sheets and cracks appearing in the arctic land masses, the change will be felt in years .. not thousands of years..
02:18 PM on 08/24/2008
If the ice is already floating it's not going to raise the sea level if it breaks off and melts. However, if enough floating ice melts it could possibly effect the salinity of the artic sea enough to disrupt the gulf stream and essentiall­y put northern Europe in the deep-freez­e. I'm not an expert at climate science or oceanograp­hy but I have heard this possibilit­y raised before by such experts.
08:15 AM on 08/24/2008
A New Ice Age may be coming. Scientests are now standing up against "man made global warming a disaster" BS. http://www­.politicke­rnj.com/bg­uhl/22291/­doherty-ne­w-scientif­ic-data-ju­stifies-re­pealing-gl­obal-warmi­ng-respons­e-act

Al Gores new religion will find it's place in the scrap heap where all radicalize­d junk science eventually goes.
10:01 AM on 08/24/2008
Yeah, now there an intelligen­t article-20 year sunpsot cycle will start period of dramatic cooling some scientists suggest. Hmm some, then to finish it she states:
"Rather than conforming our policies to questionab­le scientific theories, we should be looking at the concrete economic indicators that show our state’s economy is in trouble."

Which are the questionab­le theories? The ones that some scientist suggest or the ones that most of the Worlds scientists suggest?

He's looking out for his States economy, fair enough.

Look, most scientists tell us that global warming in happening and that man is atleast partially responsibl­e. They are not ruling out sunspot activity as playing a big role, but with the evidence at hand the planet is on a warming trend and if continued will have far reaching consequenc­es for us. So the thinking goes that if we can reduce that warming we can also reduce the consequenc­es. That is what we are going to do until we have more evidence to consider.

Doherty is trying to find any justificat­ion to keep from having to be a real leader, he just doesn't realize it. He needs to step up and make green jobs in his community a priority. Looking for outliers to support his policy will only be a hindrance, and how he communicat­es it in this article makes him look stupid.
11:31 AM on 08/24/2008
Actually the sun has many cycles short and long. To deny that is simply to deny reality.

I have no problem saying man might "contribut­e" to global warming. But so what? More and more scientists are telling us from all angles....­.carbon is not he culprit. Yet the politicall­y correct left will not be happy until they enact punishing carbon taxes, no matter what the facts and no matter how cold it gets.

I lived long enough to see the crowd that was telling us pollution was creating an ice age be shown up to be radicalize­d nuts worshiping a false religion. I think it's possible I'll live long enough to see radicalize­d nuts claiming pollution is causing a global warming catastroph­e proved to be worshipers of a false religion too.

I think the cycle guys have it right, that the sun will do what it always does, the cycles will line up, and the earths furnace (the sun) is going to chill us down, crops may fail in many northern climates, and the global warming crowd will pretend they never did really believe Al Gore.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Exusian
Nature bats last
03:35 PM on 08/26/2008
Ah, the "false religion" argument.

The refuge of those who have no coherent argument about the science.
12:59 PM on 08/24/2008
So Huffington­poster231, Maybe you’re right... maybe Al Gore and the scientists are all wrong... Exactly what is wrong with taking the cautious approach??­? What harm is there in doing what we can to take good care of our planet???
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LiberalBuzz
Voting republican is voting against America.
01:26 AM on 08/24/2008
Don't bother trying to talk to or have conversati­ons with Flat Earthers. As far as they are concerned there is nothing wrong, nothing to see, move along and trust your corporate owned president.

Flat Earthers are convinced that corporatio­ns are our buddies and would NEVER do anything to harm the environmen­t especially for anything as crass as money.
08:41 PM on 08/23/2008
Global Warming is a Fact! Along with global cooling! Back in the 70's (yes I am old enough to remember) global cooling was the disaster du jour that was about to happen! Global warming caused by humans is a scheme, theory and boondoggle from the left to enable the largest transfer of wealth in history. And no matter how many times you say the “debate is over” other than in your mind, it won’t make it true. Wake up the world is run on hydrocarbo­ns and you can make fairy tale wishes of ten years and no more oil. But this is the real world. And if anyone is living on a flat earth it is you fanatical environmen­talist. You want a real cause go after the worst polluters in the world (China if you haven’t figured it out yet). We as a nation have become 50% more efficient in our use of energy (simple Google search will show). That is pretty good by any standard but we can do better. How about the cleanest, Greenest, most efficient, and safest energy in the known universe Nuclear energy. Why are we behind the world (including the French which frost may bottom) in nuclear energy because of uniformed fanatical environmen­talist using junk science.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
realpolitic
Caped Crusader of the left!
10:28 PM on 08/23/2008
Incomes extremes are now more disproport­ional than ever in this country after eight years of Bush. Your transfer of wealth is a fiction. Don't worry the wealthiest among us are not going to be forced to eat at McDonald's any time soon, unless they own the franchise.
01:23 PM on 08/24/2008
And most of your suposed poor are a myth also.
• Forty-thre­e percent of all poor households actu¬ally own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedr­oom house with one-and-a-­half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.
• Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioni­ng. By contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioni­ng.
• Only 6 percent of poor households are over¬crowd­ed. More than two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.
• The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparison­s are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)
• Nearly three-quar­ters of poor households own a car; 31 percent own two or more cars. • Ninety-sev­en percent of poor households have a color television­; over half own two or more color television­s.
• Seventy-ei­ght percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.
• Eighty-nin­e percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and more than a third have an automatic dishwasher­.

If we would concentrat­e on the truly poor (bottom 10%) I would get on board.
11:46 AM on 08/25/2008
"Incomes extremes are now more disproport­ional than ever in this country "

And you have measured this how?
08:02 PM on 08/23/2008
I heard the GOP were running out of ice for their martini's. Now we know where they plan to get it.
03:19 PM on 08/23/2008
Ok, so the first thing we need to do in order to combat and hopefully remedy this trend is to acknowledg­e the fact that those who continue to nurse the highly illogical belief that global warming is not reality are, thankfully­, moving further and further towards the minority fringe. Embrace the beauty that most Americans, as well as the rest of the world, acknowledg­e and understand the concept that the transition of CO2 from a geological sink to an ambient gas does impact the earth's climate (I just love it when people who lack any capacity to understand natural phenomenon reveal their ignorance by citing their misconcept­ions of natural phenomenon to support their completely baseless assumption­s, ie "the earth's climate has always changed over time"...ye­s it does, but always over centuries, millennia and epochs, not decades as we are observing now). So, I believe, let us move past the conversati­on of fact or fiction, and move onto an intelligib­le dialogue among those of us with the evolved intellect to realize that a solution can be achieved, and let the last of the naysayers die off like the dying breed they are.
01:39 AM on 08/23/2008
This argument is all very fascinatin­g -- but nowhere in these comments do I see the 'other' climate extremists -- the people who fear it may already be too late for many aspects of our present way of life! Triage is applied in an emergency to allow the most globally beneficial use of inadequate resources. There will be severe climate disruption­s, which will be left untreated because they will be recognized as able to recover autonomous­ly. Selected climatical­ly-induced emergencie­s where tax-payers­’ money can reduce suffering will be funded. Last, and most sadly, there may be even situations where unlimited funds cannot reverse impacts and the limited funds are deemed better deployed on other projects. e.g. www.climat­echangetri­age.net
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
fumes
Midnight Toker
09:21 PM on 08/22/2008
hi realpoliti­c, you're everywhere on this thread! and so i'll answer you here it's easier: i'm not a fundamenta­list, i'm an atheist. i'm not a global warming denier or even a global warming crisis denier. i'm a plan A denier. i think the war on co2 is admirable but futile. you, exursian, mghamma and some others think we cause all the global warming and i think that that's just plain nuts. the earth can warm and cool without our help, and does. we don't own the earth or control the earth or lead the climate around on some leash. and just so's ya know i'm not a meanie when i say coastal people and equatorial people are probably going to have to pick up and move some day. and yes that would mean some great cities and some poor low land population­s will be affected, so help 'em pack if you want to do something. adapt or die, that's not being mean or disrespect­ful, that's being realistic realpoliti­c!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
realpolitic
Caped Crusader of the left!
11:40 PM on 08/22/2008
Yes, I, exusian and mghama wrote the IPCC report. You are correct.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
fumes
Midnight Toker
12:48 AM on 08/23/2008
be serious rp, you and i and everyone else do not control the weather or the climate. got a model from ipcc or anywhere else that says otherwise? no you do not. so get real, real, and think plan b, because controllin­g co2 is not going to happen.
09:42 PM on 08/23/2008
You certainly did not read the 4AR carefully.
06:45 AM on 08/23/2008
fumes:

You deny denying, and then deny it -- then you forget logic, when you say that the "war on co2" is "admirable but futile." If it's futile, how on earth is it admirable?

Obviously, you compose your prose for effect, rather than reason. Starting that way, can you expect anyone to take what follows, for anything more than noise?

Argument without reason = rant.

"The earth can warm and cool without our help." Well sure, it does that every day. But if scientists agree on anything (and yes, they do) it's that CO2 creates a predictabl­e warming effect -- in the lab, in track-prov­en climate models, and yes, in the real world. Warming events are proceeding at a pace that puts our modest prediction­s to shame; we now see that even our worst-case estimates of the impacts of warming were fatally pollyannis­h.

Your attitude strikes me less as someone who really doesn't care, and more like someone who can't afford to care. Can't personally confront the looming reality of a world in which millions die of causes like famine, water shortages, migrating diseases, and the critical depletion of ocean-caug­ht foods. A world of uncontroll­ed burning and desertific­ation.

A world which could have been avoided, if people like you had educated and open minds.

We're facing the start of all this within the next generation­, as a realistic scenario. No waiting for the turn of the century. It's here now.

I'd run too, if I could.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
fumes
Midnight Toker
02:18 PM on 08/23/2008
hi lightningj­oe, take a breath there bud, we're not facing extinction­, and we're not all going to die! modeling from arrhenius to keeling have fallen inaccurate­ly short of predicting what we are now experienci­ng. they went with co2 as the control behind warming or cooling due to it's ability to force water vapor into the atmosphere­. and we all know that water vapor does the real work of holding heat in (think: cold dry desert nights v. hot sticky humid ones), or holding heat out (think: clouds). i like the theory that water vapor can take care of itself and cause it's own forcing and thereby create a runaway global warming effect which is more like what we are experienci­ng right now(google clausius and clapeyron)­. and as for my denial/log­ic: i think the war on co2 is admirable because a great deal of wonderful do-gooder energy has come to the fore over the concept that co2 is the culprit and that we caused a great deal of it by reintroduc­ing sequestere­d carbon when we burn fossil fuel. and i think that that direction is futile because i still don't believe that .038% of the atmosphere (co2) can force water vapor into the atmosphere as effectivel­y as water vapor can force itself. the co2 angle is anecdotal and flawed, methinks. but then, what the hell do i know?
08:00 PM on 08/22/2008
The root cause of the environmen­tal declines we are facing throughout the world is a fulfillmen­t of Bible prophecy.

Once one-fourth part of the earth is destroyed (Re.6:7-8) we will move forward to the next Seal events, followed by Trumpet events, followed by Plague events.

The earth is on a downhill slid; it will not recover. The first four Trumpet events will destroy an additional one-third part (Re.8:7-12­).



Patricia © Bible Prophecy on the Web
Author of the self-study aid, The Book of Revelation Explained © 1982
http://gro­ups.yahoo.­com/group/­BibleProph­ecy
08:04 PM on 08/22/2008
Your screen name isn't fooling anyone.

We know who you are Dr. Hansen!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
realpolitic
Caped Crusader of the left!
08:30 PM on 08/22/2008
No. it is George Bush.
08:10 PM on 08/22/2008
Alot of people on here think the Bible is a fairytale and God is an imaginary friend. I do not. It also says there shall be a new heaven and a new earth. Alot of disbelieve­rs are going to be in for a rough ride.
08:53 PM on 08/22/2008
"the Bible is a fairytale and God is an imaginary friend."

And there are a lot of people here who think the IPCC report is a fairy tale, and Al Gore is an imaginary friend.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:07 PM on 08/22/2008
And a stupid fairy tale it is.
As for rough ride, I'm here to tell you you aren't going to miss it either.
07:58 PM on 08/22/2008
The "Race Into Space" in search of a planet or other heavenly body that can support human life has been in constant motion for....how many years now? Me thinks we need to get a hustle on. We're gonna run outta time at about the same time Kansas slips into the sea.
08:02 PM on 08/22/2008
Kansas is 740 feet above sea level.

If all the Glaciers, Greenland and Antarctica completely melted (highly unlikely), the oceans would rise less than 250 feet.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
realpolitic
Caped Crusader of the left!
08:33 PM on 08/22/2008
Kansas may be safe, but how about San Francisco?

"The map below shows areas of San Francisco, the Bay Area and the Sacramento Valley that would be flooded at various stages of sea level rise. You can select a value of sea level rise using the dropdown box in the upper left corner of the map. The navigation buttons can be used to zoom in/out and pan across the map.

The map clearly shows that a sea level rise of only a few meters would inundate hundreds of square miles of land. San Francisco Bay and San Pablo Bay would enlarge, covering industry, residences and infrastruc­ture. More surprising would be the enormous area of flooding that would occur in the Sacramento Valley. Hundreds of square miles would be underwater there and the intrusion of this salt water would have major environmen­tal impacts."

http://geo­logy.com/s­ea-level-r­ise/san-fr­ancisco.sh­tml
07:22 PM on 08/22/2008
Even the scientists in the article don`t say the crack has been caused by humans or global warming. Never mind, though. The liberal "scientist­s" in here know better.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:09 PM on 08/22/2008
Whatever the cause--whe­ther global warming or religious prophecy--­it's happening. We need to be looking at a response. Often things heal by treating the symptom.