North Pole An 'Island' For First Time In History

Daily Mail:

The North Pole has become an island for the first time in human history.

Startling satellite pictures taken three days ago show that melting ice has opened up the fabled North-West and North-East Passages - making it possible to sail around the Arctic ice cap.

The opening of the passages has been eagerly awaited by shipping companies which hope they will be able to cut thousands of miles off their routes.

Read the whole story: Daily Mail

Comments

[mpeachhead]

I'm not trying to start controversy, just ask a question. I read a very good book earlier this year about the discovery and eventually successful navigation of the North West passage. It took many voyages, culminating in the famously unsuccessful Franklin expedition in the 1850s, which reduced the sailors to cannibalism. However, it was navigated successfully for the first time in 1905. Doesn't this article imply that no one has ever sailed through it?

It melts almost every year according to the book I read. McClure almost made it through in 1850. Like Franklin, ice seized his ship, and he was forced to winter there, but he could see the water on the other side before he turned around. What's with the contradiction here?

[Exusian]

No, the article points out that this is the first recorded year that both the NW passage through Canadian waters AND the NE passage north of Siberia are open simultaneously. Both have been open before, just not at the same time.

Oh, and the time span recorded is much longer than the satellite era (since 1979).

[BlackbirdHighway]

Until modern ice breakers, all of these expeditions got through by being frozen in the ice and waiting until the it finally released them. I'm not sure how that's called "navigation".

Modern ice breakers get through because they are large, heavily armored, and very high powered. Even still, when they encounter a pressure ridge they may have to back up and then ram it many times to finally break through.

What we're talking about is entirely different; being able to sail right through without encountering any ice at all, at least during the summer months. That has never been possible before in recorded human history.

[Exusian]

Not true, Blackbird, the NW passage has been navigated in a single season many times by unreinforced craft since the 1940s, as has the NE passage. What is a first is both being capable of being navigated in the same season at the same time.

[Exusian]

And for those quibbling about the Arctic ice sheet being attached to Greenland, it isn't:
http://www.iup.uni-bremen.de:8084/amsr/arctic_AMSRE_visual.png

Although it's still not possible to sail around the north coast of Greeenland, the above map and satellite photos clearly show that the ice sheet is currently NOT attached to the coast.

[Exusian]

Here's a hi-res satellite photo from NASA:
http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/realtime/single.php?2008246/crefl1_143.A2008246143500-2008246144000.4km.jpg

Set the pixel resolution to 1km or better yet, 500m, and it's clear that currently Greenland can be circumnavigated.

[Exusian]

Why worry about melting Arctic ice sheets?

Because the warming is also causing Arctic seabed methane hydrates to begin to melt:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,547976,00.html
and
http://www.iarc.uaf.edu/highlights/2006/arctic_ocean_methane/index.php

These hydrates are estimated to contain 540 billion tonnes (540 Gt) of methane. By comparison, that's more fossil carbon than human activity has emitted to the atmosphere since the beginning of the industrial revolution (over 300 Gt).

This is one of the "tipping points" climatologiists have been warning about. It's supposed to happen in the future, but we're already starting to measure it.

This is not good news.

[twgbonehead]

It's good news for the GWDeniers -

"See, global warming isn't caused by man, it's caused by the natural forces of Arctic seabed methane hydrates, which were around long before the industrial revolution!"

Can I copyright that and charge royalties?

[walk0nwalls]

I see the crowd insisting this is a hoax and a lie is out in full force. It's sad that this impending catastrophe will be laid at their feet.

[larry278]

What will Gov Palin & Mr Putin do with the opportunities for Alaska & Russia when the NE & NW passages are open?

[csavage]

Hannibal crossed over into Europe by way of the Alps on elephants...that is recorded history.
We didn't have anyone "recording" history in the Arctic at the time, but it doesn't take a big leap to figure that, if the glacial ice in the Alps was gone, there probably was either none or very little Arctic ice.

There is no reason to believe that the ice cap survives the period between ice ages, in fact, the reason there's oil in that area to begin with is the average water temperature there, at one time, reached 72 degrees...

BTW, the period of no sunspot activity is called the Maunder minimum. It occurred during the time known as the Little Ice Age, of which we are emerging now-1300-1600 AD.

By the way, I'm probably more of a lefty than most here, I just know believe in buying this global warming claptrap without a little research into it, and there's none....

[Exusian]

And yet during the recent La Nina and the current minimum in the sunspot cycle we get the two largest Arctic ice melts yet recorded.

Nah, there's no research behind global warming. Not that you'd know if there there were or were not since it's obvious you haven't looked for any.

"I'm probably more of a lefty than most here"

I doubt it. But hey, never let facts get in the way of expressing a perfectly ignorant opinion.

[demfriend]

I think the more evidence of global warming that happens the more people are denying it is real and that the magic openngs for ships to carry through the north pole region isn't a wonderful thing but a sin that we are going to have children and grandchildren who will see the results of the earth changes in not good ways. The amount of ice melting will someday have only pictures of/movies of what once was covered in ice and islands because the ocean will be higher will be gone. Even areas of the US will find the higher level of water costing significant land masses to be covered by the ocean all will impact those who are young. But as long as we have what we want and can do as we want the price will be someone elses to pay even if it's our own childrens children. I don't care if it's man made or just nature or both if we can slow down the process then will we help those children? By ignoring it and not changing then the price paid will be theirs.

[johnnyjust]

When you use the word "denier" for people who disagree with an unproven idea, it's difficult to take anything you say following seriously.

Less lemmingspeak, please. And go easy on the "I read it online" silliness. PuffPost is online, doncha' know?

[BlackbirdHighway]

Well then, what is the proper term? I mean, the scientists tell us they are 95% certain about it and these people come along with no contrary evidence of their own and claim it isn't true. Instead they complain that scientists are liberal, that it's a hoax, (without any evidence of that), or they cite a 30 year old Newsweek article (not at all a science magazine, not even close).

Denier looks like the right term, at least until and unless they come up with some factual statements to back up their claims.

Over and over, I see the deniers claim that the world has cooled since 1998. Like all of their arguments, that is completely false; there is enormous evidence that it has not. Frankly, it is simply a lie and they hope that by repeating it enough people will believe it. That's not a discussion, that's a propaganda campaign. Deniers is the right term.

[johnnyjust]

Gee, you've convinced me.

[Exusian]

So exactly what term would you use to describe those who deny observed and measurable reality?

And just for the record, science, unlike mathematics, does not deal in proof.

So indeed, less lemmingspeak when talking about science, please, and go easy on the "I read it online" silliness.

[Agentlady007]

Imagine the fish for the first time looking into the sky?

[BannedInBoston]

"The opening of the passages has been eagerly awaited by shipping companies which hope they will be able to cut thousands of miles off their routes."

It's an ill wind (so to speak) that blows no one some good....

[JRandomPoster]

So - now watch as the climate change deniers now switch to how great climate change is, because we have a northwest passage. Of course, they'll continue to trash the environment, foul our own nest, drive their SUV's, not recycle, etc. as the situation with our diminishing resources continues to worsen.

[fumes]

say j, r u saying that no good can come from global warming? just curious...

[MourningDude]

Meanwhile the sun went an entire month without a single sunspot for the first time in 100 years.

If this continues, we are more likely to enter a mini ice age than catastrophic global warming.

But hey, keep buying those carbon credits. Their Big Al's primary source of income these days, and he has that huge mansion to power.

[BlackbirdHighway]

You deniers are starting to sound like the homeless people who wander around mumbling gibberish.

"mumble-bl­ah-mumble-­Sunspots! mumble-bla­h-mumble-I­ce Age!"

Nobody but your fellow deniers are listening anymore, so you aren't convincing anyone. Not even close.

[holyhandgrenaid]

He isn't wrong... hes just also not right...

Just trying to play fair, thats all

[LITU]

That reeks of cycle.

Back on planet earth:

Depending upon where you live, you may get to experience a sort of ice age, as precipitation patterns change in the northern hemisphere, as a result of the desalination of the Atlantic currents.

You're not really in denial - you're just really st u pid.

[B-Dog]

Do big corporate energy interests pay your salary?

[BannedInBoston]

Naw, he's paid on a per post basis....

[Tommygun264]

Gosh, all the evidence is against your hair-brained theory, but I'm sure you're well educated on such matters, so you must be correct. What degrees to you hold and from where?

[LITU]

The deniers will never get it.

You can't destroy 85% of the world's forests, spew millions of tons of small-particulate matter into the atmosphere, dump toxic waste into fresh water or the oceans, and still claim to have no impact on weather patterns. The whole argument reeks of insanity.

Who gives a rat's to what extent the patterns are natural, if one accepts that the (above) is relational. A prudent person doesn't wait until the storm before preparing.

Fear-based logic (of the capitalist kind that denies human responsibility) is not logic at all.

[Gasparilla]

I agree that destruction of forests is probably contributing. Trees do not hold heat after sundown like asphalt and cement do. The deniers just ...... deny science.

[darthdarcy]

It's those "liberal satellites", that's the ticket..!

Yeah those liberal satellites are causing all the problems..!

[TimmySlagle]

strange.

The picture appears to show that the ice cap is still attached to Greenland.

[Paul]

Ahem, Greenland is also an island....

[TimmySlagle]

So is North America

[Exusian]

Sorry timmy, not since the isthmas of Panama closed aprox 4.6 million years ago.

But hey, never let facts get in the way of expressing a perfectly ignorant opinion.

[BannedInBoston]

I think that's what's meant. You'd still have to sail around the southern tip of Greenland to do the circumnavi­gation....

[TimmySlagle]

Then the headline should have read:

Greenland an island for the first time in history.

[Exusian]

Just when you thought that timmy's comments could not possible get more inane.

[rfshunt]

Strange - how often wrong headed things are in postings of yours that begin with the word strange.

Here's one of your previous pronouncements on the arctic ice cap:

"Strange. Because according to people who srttudy this sort of thing: "Arctic sea ice extent on July 16 stood at 8.91 million square kilometers (3.44 square miles). While extent was below the 1979 to 2000 average of 9.91 square kilometers (3.83 million square miles), it was 1.05 million square kilometers (0.41 million square miles) above the value for July 16, 2007"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/30/canadian-ice-shelf-loses_n_115777.html?page=3&show_comment_id=14418135#comment_14418135

Of course, your "people who study these things" turned out to be a wrong-headed journalist who had to tuck his tail between his legs and recant every word.

"it is clear that the NSIDC graph is correct, and that 2008 Arctic ice is barely 10% above last year - just as NSIDC had stated."

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08/15/goddard_arctic_ice_mystery/ - scroll to the bottom

strange

[rfshunt]

I just noticed that I mistook that post of yours for others that I've seen citing that Register article as evidence that the arctic ice loss had reversed.

Your link showed arctic conditions in mid summer - which in fact had more ice than that time the previous year - my mistake

Although you still took that as an indication that there would ultimately be less ice loss this year. I guess the melting caught up to last year, didn't it.

[Tommygun264]

Strange:

You don't realize that Greenland is an island.