Ice Bridge Ruptures In Antarctic (VIDEO)

An ice bridge linking a shelf of ice the size of Jamaica to two islands in Antarctica has snapped.

Scientists say the collapse could mean the Wilkins Ice Shelf is of the brink of breaking away, and provides further evidence or rapid change in the region.

Read full story here.

-OR-

Watch the video report below.

Comments

[Richard2]

Is the Wilkins ice shelf a climate change issue or a seasonal issue? For an alternative take on this news story, please check out:

http://appinsys.com/globalwarming/antarcticwilkinsiceshelf.htm

[Richard2]

It is nice to see some attention given to the Antarctic region. The more significant event is the current level of Antarctic sea ice, which is over a million sq. kilometers above the 1979-2000 average, and is currently moving further above the 1979-2000 average.

The ice bridge broke in Antarctica; it didn't melt. That's what ice does, it fractures, it moves, it floats on water.

[StanlyManly]

Father Paul Mayer wants you to believe that Carbon Tax and Population Control is God's Will.

[Nooooorm]

When the quality of your data is this poor and it takes "puzzled readers" to correct the problem, it is easy to understand why so many "climate scientists" agree that AGW is happening.

Garbage in.. garbage out.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601110&sid=aIe9swvOqwIY

Feb. 20 (Bloomberg) -- A glitch in satellite sensors caused scientists to underestimate the extent of Arctic sea ice by 500,000 square kilometers (193,000 square miles), a California- size area, the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center said.

The error, due to a problem called “sensor drift,” began in early January and caused a slowly growing underestimation of sea ice extent until mid-February. That’s when “puzzled readers” alerted the NSIDC about data showing ice-covered areas as stretches of open ocean, the Boulder, Colorado-based group said on its Web site.

[elizlucinda]

Okay everyone...keep using all those plastic bags at the grocery store and driving those big gas guzzling cars and using those gas powered lawn mowers. I know...what's the big deal about an ice bridge breaking and floating around?

[StanlyManly]

Exactly.

However, other factors like the cost of those items has a lot more relevant impact on our lives.

BTW, plastic bags take a lot less energy to create, and recycling of those bags has increased.

[Paxhope]

I've become aware this year, from reading Derrick Jensen and others, that we are rapidly headed toward eco-collapse. Unsustainability is just that. CA taking more water than is being replaced is just one example. A conservative ecology scholar I spoke with recently said that he thinks we have less than 10 years and that it probably is unavoidable at this point. In other words, we're f**ked. Be prepared to fight for food and water and medicines.

[StanlyManly]

I guess we'll have to build an ark and put 2 of every animal on it.

Also, remember the "Y2K bug"? Yeah. Y2K. I said it. Wanna fight about it? Anyway, you might remember similar prophecies centering around that "crisis" as well. Sadly, I was in the IT industry at the time, and bought into the propaganda that was in every magazine and every news report.

Keep going back and you'll see plenty of "crisis" that were supposed to end the world as we know it. World Hunger, Rain Forests, AIDS, Ice Ages, Pollution, Miniature Black Holes...

[jwcmass]

I may not be a scientist, but I know a thing or two about logical thinking.

You're using a clever rhetorical trick here, includong real, ongoing catastrophes, such as world humger, and the destruction of rainforests, and AIDS, and Pollution, with something ludicrous, like miniature black holes (from the super-collider no doubt) in order to make the real events look silly.

Except they are not silly to the people affected by them, even if theyhaven't crossed YOUR path., and you choose to go through your life like a horse with blinders on-- tunnel vision style, seeing what you want to see.

Right NOW every day on this planet 40,000 children die from diarhhea -- from polluted drinking water--which could, with minimal money from the developed world, be fixed, and which could be treated very cheaply with IV saline --to prevent dehydration.

That's 15 million children every YEAR.

That's not little black holes or gamma ray bursts or collisions withasteroids--that's reality NOW.

These "crises" that you dismiss with a wave of your hand are the suffering cries of your brothers and sisters, of your fellow human beings.

There's nothing funny about it.

So if your dismissing CURRENT problems, I guess it doesn't really surprise me that you would not concern yourself with a problem that could ruin the lives of other human beings (that you don't know --or care about )

As I said, we have already suffered the first human casualties -- the war (and genocide) in Darfur.

[mickeydougal]

What's your point about Y2K? For nearly 5 years prior to Y2K, massive effort was made to prevent problems. Maybe your particular branch of IT was wasteful and unnecessary, but most of the effort and money was well-spent. A lot of potential problems were averted because of forward-thinking people who decided to take a proactive approach. And there were still problems that did creep in because people in IT had dropped the ball and not seen them in time. Maybe these were caused people in IT, who "bought into the propaganda," instead of doing their jobs.

[archtoplee]

Some freezing ice breaks off an the Wilkins ice shelf. So what? I'm sure it's not the first time that has happened. Today it was snowing in Atlanta, Georgia and snoow flakes were flying around the city of Macon, Georgia which is even further south. How often does snow fall in Macon in April?

Your premise is that man is causing the ice to break off some Antarctic shelf. Big deal. Was anyone hurt as a result of that totally natural occurence? Was a seal caught off guard and glumped on the noggin due to my driving my 40 foot long RV to the Oregon coast? My RV had nothing to do with it. Co2 is a naturally occuring gas that comes out of the bottom of the oceans whenever the sunrays heat it up. Co2 is what plants need to live on and we need the animals that eat plants to survive. We breath out Co2. Plants love the C02 that blows out of my RV. Look if you want to stop breathing that's your business, but it won't keep the ice from breaking away like its done for who knows how long down there in Antartica.

Too many experts like the Founder of the Weather Channel think Global warming is junk science. Defend important things and worry about human rights and forget about the theories of junk scientists.

[MinasTirith]

Here's the thing...

When the ice melts at the poles... particularly the North Pole, it floods the ocean in the area with fresh water.

Fresh Water may well be currently contributing to (And appears to have contributed to the Younger Dryas period, when it was cold enough such that it snowed in Europe in June) the slowing of the Atlantic Conveyor. If this occurs such that it slows or stops (Due to the fact that fresh water does not sink when cold like salt water does; and this sinking of water near the pole and resurfacing of said water near the equator, causes it to warm, flow north, and likely contributes to warm(er) than otherwise anticipated weather in Europe and indeed, some portions of the northern hemisphere).

This action may well sink us into a period of colder weather, at least for portions of the northern hemisphere including Europe.

But not to worry, this cold snap, which appears to have came about in as little as a decade based on fossil and ice core records, only lasted about 1,300 years or so. ;-)

While climate change is indeed occurring, and I don't doubt the evidence that points to it as being man made (There is no record of this kind of increase in CO2 anywhere in the data), it may end up triggering a cooling period if the conveyor shuts down.

[jwcmass]

My whole point is that the whole thing is so comples that when it comes to change-- we don't really know.what will happen.

We DO know that stability in the climate is good--it's allowed us to build our modern civilization.

We DON'T know if that will be sustainable with an unstable climate. We've thrown a wrench in the engine to see what will happen. Not a good idea.

We're basically running a planetwide experiment to see what happens when you dump all this CO2 into the atmosphere (rapidly) --We probably won't like the results.

[Senseimilla]

Yeah, I mean, the climate was so stable when man first came over the Bering Strait that there was a ice bridge between here and russia...

Oh wait...

[SOLERSO68]

Holy guacamole!!! nothings says global warming like an iceberg the size of jamaica floatin around the S. Atlantic

[Tommygun264]

The term "Global Warming" is incorrect. It is the continued use of this phrase that allows the deniers, both those who are intentionally deceptive and those who are just willfully ignorant, to scoff every time there is a cold snap. "Global Climate Change" is more accurate in that we are experiencing increasingly severe short-term swings in weather patterns as well as gradual, long-term warming. The mainstream corporate media and even many prominent environmentalists and scientists have passively supported this public misunderstanding, more due to laziness than anything else. We all need to not only start using the more accurate term ourselves, but go out of our way to educate and correct people whenever anyone else uses the term "Global Warming".

[Senseimilla]

Backpedal much?

[Tommygun264]

Not nearly as much as the deniers - I'm just advocating the use of more precise terminology, whereas the deniers change their entire premise every time science disproves the latest theory they have built around the most trivial of inconsistencies.

[bynddrvn5]

At what point will people stop denying that global warming is occuring? Seriously, how freaking hot do you like it! Insanity!

Don't worry, global warming only will effect people on this planet!

[jwcmass]

Perhaps when there is a firestorm in California, like the one in Australia recently, that tragically took so many lives.

Or perhaps when So California literally runs out of water (they are using more than is replenished, so the day of reckoning is not far off).

It's sad that it takes a crisis to get people's attention.

[fumes]

so cal has been on artificial life support since stealing water from the colorado river..

they don't belong there!!

their ''day of reckoning'' is long overdue..

[StanlyManly]

There are "firestorms" in California all the time, as well as other areas in the western US. I used to be part of a wildland fire crew way back in the day.

Funny thing though, today we know that it was our constant fire "prevention" that basically turned our lands into tinderboxes by not allowing the dead underbrush to be burned away on a somewhat regular basis. Natural wildfires are a healthy part of our ecosystem. So theres one example of mankind trying to "save" nature by suppressing a natural cycle and causing far more harm in the long run.

Oh, and the Australian fires were started by arsonists.

[emstrem]

Why get your panties in a bunch over it? The Continental plates are still shifting, so one day New York will probably be where Australia is again anyways, man is not going to stop it. For all the talk of global warming (which has happened numerous times in the planets history), why don't you hear too much about all of the geologists who are predicting another ice age? The Al Gore fear mongers speak in exaggerations and half truths. Has anybody dug into how much money Al Gore's company's have made off of this sky is falling global warming farce? Follow the money, and you will get a clearer picture of things.

You sheeple need to quit following the flow and swim upstream, do some digging on your own before your so quick to follow. I'm not sure if the facts are out there because both sides have their experts to refute the other, but you should do some digging and take it all in and above all remember...FOLLOW THE MONEY!!

[jwcmass]

Look, forget Al Gore. Also forget what those scientist funded by the oil and coal companies are telling you (as you said Follow the Money).

You make a good comparison when talking about the tectonic plates. Those move at about the same speed as your fingernails grow. We are talking geological time.

You and I (and our children's children's children---etc) will long be gone before the North American Plate meets another plate.

What SHOULD concern you, especially if you have children (because this is really going to impact them, probably a lot sooner than we think--every time these climatologists find out something new, like the reeding glaciers, or break up of ice sheets in Greenland or Antarctica--they are UNDER predicting the rate--i.e. it's happenning FASTER than they predicted, not slower.

The problem with the pace of change is that it puts stresses on the ecosystem that it may not be able to handle.

When you get a chance, Google "the Great Dying" -- It's about the largest mass extinction event in our planet's history--about 256 million years ago--it almost wiped out all multi-cellular life.

It was caused by extremely rapid global warming (obvious not human caused-- it was a series of supervolcanic eruptions in Siberia that released huge amounts of greenhouse gases).

The change in climate and extinctions all happened in about two human generations-- a blink of an eye in geological time.

[StanlyManly]

So you are saying we should be careful of volcanoes. Gotcha. However, are you sure it was global warming, and not, you know, an atmosphere filled with sufur dioxide and ash that blocked out the sun?

[Tommygun264]

So you advocate total inaction and compare those who want to take action to sheep. Nice double-speak. Did you learn that one from Reynolds tobacco or Exxon/Mobile?

[Factbeacon]

OH NOES! THE ICE! IT IS MELTING! REPENT! BEG GODFATHER GORE TO SAVE US!

Lets be proactive. If you people say carbon emissions cause the ice in my scotch to melt, then close all coal burners and replace them with nuclear power plants. They have NO CARBON EMISSIONS and are 100% SAFE!! The USA has never had a meltdown, even on our 40 year old reactors. With enough processing and support, we can recycle almost 60% of the wasted U238. A ban placed almost 30 years ago says we cannot recycle even 1% of it. France and Russia recycled 40% or so last year alone.

Also, Antarctica isn't going to thaw. If it did, the entire world would resemble the movie "Water World", and I haven't seen the sea levels go up more than a centimeter. Big flipping deal. Ice bridges, like people bridges, are equally susceptible to GRAVITY, hence them BREAKING! Al Gore flies a private Gulfstream Jet and burns more oil than a factory.

[jwcmass]

You know it's interesting , many of the climate scientists thought Antarctica would be more resistant to global warming (because it is surrounded bya belt of cold ocean current--which they thought would "insulate" the continent somewhat, at least during the initial stages of climate change.

What this (and other large breakoffs) is showing is that not even Antarctica is isolated, and it too is heating up.

I think you are confusing the Arctic ice sheet, which, since it is floating on the ocean, won't raise the ocean level if it melts (although there ARE big problems if it does, which it may do in less than 30 years, which is stunningly fast-- this would probably speed up the warming that we may not be able to stop it--it would certainly take decades for us to "reverse" it-- and meanwhile the ecosystem, on which we ARE dependent, could be severely damaged--to the point of a mass extinction event).

But the sea levels ARE rising--some Pacific Island nations are already threatened. And the key here isn't the Arctic (not directly) but the Greenland Ice Sheet, and Antartica--which we are finding out, are melting much faster than we previously thought.

And when you look at a map of global population, and realize how close most of us live to sea level, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that we'd have major problems (although Water World is just a movie--)

[StanlyManly]

Ladies and Gentleman... Al Gore.

[Richard2]

Dimly remember in the mid 1950s, a naturalist brought a travel film about Iceland to the high school in our town. The highlight of the film was the stunning scene of massive chunks of ice breaking off and falling into the sea. Seems this process has been occurring for many thousands of years in the natural world.

[gladiator777]

We are doomed, my god this have never happened before, ice melting nooooo. The cavemen that were around when the last great ice age ended must have been so angry and mad that they caused the earth to warm up. Or maybe it was the evil industrialists who went back in time and spewed gases into the air. Wake up guys, even if we didn't exist this stuff would be happening, thinking that were the sole culprit for this warming and that nature is playing no part makes me laugh so hard every time I see articles like this.

[jwcmass]

What I don't think you are understanding and what is the "human" factor in all this (there was just another story today that the Arctic sea ice is the thinnest we've ever seen it going into sprig and summer, meaning much of it could completely melt-- that's a problem for all sorts of reasons, the biggest of which is that it causes the oceans to absorb even more heat, rather than reflecting it back to space.)--is the SPEED with which all this is happenning, and with which many species may not be able to adapt.

That's what has scientists concerned--not the change, but the speed of the change--which many be unprecedented in the earth's climatological history. And it's possible WE may not be able to adapt.

Remeber our civilization is built on agriculture, and many areas that are the breadbaskets of the world, may undergo climate shifts that may make them no longer fit for agriculture.

Also as glaciers disappear, drinking water for large numbers of people (billions) will also disappear.

And as sea levels rise, whloe masses of people will have to move, (or we'll have to spend trilllions on levies)

All this could trigger wars (the usual outcome when there are such things as famine, and migrations) also disease (like malaria) breaking out in places where it had never occurred before.

Just something to consider, while you are laughing. Darfur is alrady the first war of climate change (real thigh slapper, huh?)

[StanlyManly]

That crazy speed! 1.8 whole millimeters of sea rise per year! Run for the hills!

Oddly enough, some people in tropical climates get this wierd water from heaven called rain.

Just make sure those people that move inland to get away from the rising sea levels move in far enough to avoid the effects of tsunamis and hurricanes too. But look out for tornados when you do get inland, and flooding.. crazy stuff.

I seem to recall a few wars happening before "global warming", too.

[Joseph Upton]

My BIG problem with Al Gore and his followers is when they say "the debate is over." At that moment, they show themselves for the nut jobs they are.

[Atac]

There is hardly any debate among people who actually study global climate change.

The average citizen just wishes it weren't so. It's like saying the earth being round is up for debate. just because your opinion differs doesn't mean it's founded on science.

If the vast majority of the scientific community says that carbon emissions are leading to increase in global temperatures, especially in the arctic and antarctic regions, then why is there a big debate?

There's a debate because people can't face the magnitude of what we have to change in order to reverse what we've caused. I simply don't know why we shouldn't TRY to reduce carbon emissions since even if there is a "debate", then you acknowledge that man-induced global warming COULD be true. If its' even possible, we have the responsibility to do whatever we can to reverse the trends.

[StanlyManly]

The problem is "the average citizen" thinks of themselves as "the vast majority of the scientific community".

There is no majority rule in science. You are contradicting yourself. You cannot claim to have any understanding of sciene and back it up with a "victory by majority" stance. You also cannot claim that your anectdotal view on "popular opinion" is even correct.

In other words, you are the problem.

[jwcmass]

Look,it seems here that many are having a problem looking at this issue clearly because they have a dislike for Al Gore. So take Gore out of this. He's a politician, not a scientist.

When you make the satement that "THEY say 'the debate is over'" we need to calrify who the "they" is and what "debate" we are talking about.

If you are talking about climatologists, the scientists who study the climate , I think we can say that "they" are pretty certain that the Earth is warming, and doing so at a rate faster than it has in past climatactic shifts.

I think MOST of them are fairly certain that this is due to human activity (though after a point, natural forces get involved and speed up the warming even more--things like the melting of the permafrost in Siberia, which would release large amouonts of methane, a more efficient greenhouse gas than CO2).

What these scientists are NOT certain about is HOW fast everything is happening, what the long-term effects would be (although they can make some models ) and how fast we can stop or reverse it.


By theway, the one area where scientists have had a tendency to be wrong is in their predictions for how fast the ice at the poles and glaciers would melt. It's been happenning FASTER than they expected, not slower.

[StanlyManly]

So substitute the word "climatologists" for the word "they" and your argument instantly transforms from heresay to fact.

Awesome. At least, thats what climatologists say.